jb101
@ekral - But you have given feedback on your experience of using a program that you neither use or own - don't you think that's odd?

I own X2, I think that it is the same product, but bundled with additional effects/loops/synthts/tools. Most questions were really just about X2. 
 
OK, so sorry guys :)

Hi, Karl. Yeah I used to get a little stressed when I first showed because I didn't know the ebb and flow of the forum and the company as well as not really having much time to really dig into the program personally. Now though I'm a little more familiarized with some of the weirdness that goes on here, have MUCH more hands on experience with the program (so I can tell when people are pointing out legit stuff and when they are not) and now am about mid way through an entire release cycle so I can understand the company itself a little better.
 
Really without the cooler heads and insightful folks such as yourself I'd probably be freaking out a little more but with everything I've seen, learned and done in the past year I'm pretty comfortable with what's happening. Could things be better? Sure but I don't think I'd be anywhere NEAR as far along with what I want to do if I had chosen a different DAW.
 
Keep on a rockin'.
 
;-)

ekral

jb101
@ekral - But you have given feedback on your experience of using a program that you neither use or own - don't you think that's odd?

I own X2, I think that it is the same product, but bundled with additional effects/loops/synthts/tools. Most questions were really just about X2. 
 
OK, so sorry guys :)

For what it's worth I think you should have a say as well. You are an X2 user and have access and insight to the core functionality of the program. That seems more important than the frilly dillies and doodads. Cheers.

FastBikerBoy
I wouldn't worry too much Beepster.
 
There are those that seem to spend their life poring over financial figures and making 1 plus 1 equal 5, don't own the program and show a complete ignorance of how it actually works - hence their frustration with it. I get the feeling that that type of person are actually "willing" things to go wrong for Cakewalk just so they can then say "Told you so"
 
Then of course there are those that actually use it, point out where it can be improved and have a vested interest in seeing a continuation of the improvements and consequently continued CW success.
 
I'm sure the latter will be happier than the former.
 
No point getting worked up about it, it's a computer program. Life's too short to get over excited about a load of 1's and 0's.

Well put!

So many of you saw the survey...great. What did you think of the tips included in the emails. We used to do that a long time ago and everything seemed to move towards video but we thought we'd bring back web-based tips. Feel like i'm hijacking the thread but since we are asking. Here are the two we've done so far in case you didn't get the email:
 
http://www.cakewalk.com/Support/kb/reader.aspx/2007013309
 
http://www.cakewalk.com/Support/kb/reader.aspx/2007013308
 
If you have any suggestions for future tips, let me know too.
 
Thanks, 
 
Andrew

Now that I've taken the survey I get why it was specific to those that own X2 Producer... for all the reasons already stated.   Granted, some parts were more about X2 in general, but the Producer stuff was certainly there and I can see how it fit into the equation. 
 
That said, maybe a more general survey at some point would be good too, just to see where folks in general are in CW land.  However, I don't see that being anywhere near as concise or relevant as this survey was in regards to X2.  I think this just may have been the best CW survey I've taken - it was obviously thought out and intended to get usable feedback on how their flagship app is doing out there in the real world.
 

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk]
... What did you think of the tips included in the emails. We used to do that a long time ago and everything seemed to move towards video but we thought we'd bring back web-based tips.  ...

I like the web-based format, with the combination of text, graphics and sound clips. And I suppose you could include video clips as appropriate. In some ways, I find this format makes it easier to go back and forth and focus on the parts I'm most interested in -- compared to a straight video presentation.
 
It does seem a bit "buried" down in the KB though. Seems like the tips should be more visible like Cake TV.
 

groovey1

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk]
... What did you think of the tips included in the emails. We used to do that a long time ago and everything seemed to move towards video but we thought we'd bring back web-based tips.  ...

 
It does seem a bit "buried" down in the KB though. Seems like the tips should be more visible like Cake TV.
 

I was thinking the same thing. Maybe add a library section to SONAR U for the KB articles in addition to the Cake TV video links.

groovey1

Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk]
... What did you think of the tips included in the emails. We used to do that a long time ago and everything seemed to move towards video but we thought we'd bring back web-based tips.  ...

I like the web-based format, with the combination of text, graphics and sound clips. And I suppose you could include video clips as appropriate. In some ways, I find this format makes it easier to go back and forth and focus on the parts I'm most interested in -- compared to a straight video presentation.
 
It does seem a bit "buried" down in the KB though. Seems like the tips should be more visible like Cake TV.
 

I agree. I think when we have more, we'll open create a section on the X2 pages called tips. Let's get a few more in there and we'll do that. 

The tips are solid.
 
I wouldn't use a PC for live effects on guitar but considering I don't have a MIDI pedalboard to manipulate effects while recording (and would rather focus on just playing the part) I could map TH2 to my padKontrol and use the pads to change banks or maybe set things to boost things incrementally as the song gets more hectic while using the knobs as wah/volume controls. This I would do after recording as a write automation session then edit the envelopes as necessary. Sure it could be done with a mouse or drawn in with envelopes but guitar effects benefit for raw feel and the pK is certainly more of an instrument than a simple data input device. Already kind of had an idea in place for that but having it spelled out on how to do it with TH2 is helpful. Should save some bumbling.
 
I've recently done an in depth study about subtractive EQ (well EQing in general) and made elaborate notes on the subject but having those ProChannel specific reference diagrams will be far more useful than trying to duplicate my notes simply from dry text alone. If I didn't know about EQing principles though I could see that being a good kick in the pants to do things properly.
 
As far as future tuts... I would REALLY like to see audiosnap videos. Like tons of them from all angles. Time correction. Beat matching. Creative uses. Rendering principles. Whatever. I've realized that this feature is crazy powerful and can fix things that would have been considered beyond hope/repair before. Everything I've seen so far has covered the basics but I could spend hours watching and learning how to mess with that feature.
 
Also the Loop Constructor. I haven't dug into that much yet so maybe it's simpler than it looks and/or I'm overlooking some material on site but it intimidates me and I'd like to figure out what the heck it can and cannot do.
 
But yes... thank you for the tip sheets. The vast knowledge base is another reason I chose Cakewalk.
 
/2cents.