stevec

Absolutely! Tho I think this would rate as an improvement as opposed to a fix (for me)...

 
Ditto, Keni.  The "T0" issue seems to be fixed in 2a, and aside from some random copy/paste weirdness I'm really hoping for lane enhancements more than anything.  And though it doesn't seem to get mentioned often, I'd like to see the same size enhancement for automation lanes too for better flexibility.
 
 
 
Hehehehe...   I said size enhancement.  
 

Absolutely...

Tho I don't use the automation lanes, they should be able to be zoomed as large small as is possible on the screen...

Is the size enhancement a plugin? ;-)

Keni

SteveStrummerUK


 
I much preferred Layers, and for most of the reasons others have mentioned above. 

But for the way I work, the big deal-breaker for me is the lack of a 'Rebuild Layers' type function.
 
 Here's a copy of a post I made in another thread, detailing my reasons:
 

---

 
For me, the most important factor is the 'why' I use Lanes or Layers, as opposed to using separate tracks.

And sadly, for the way I work, the single most important feature for me is no longer in Lanes, but I used it a lot in Layers, and that is the Rebuild function.

Let me explain why.
 
Lets assume I'm recording a 32 bar guitar solo. Unless it's a passage I know off by heart, there's a good chance that it's not going to get laid down successfully in one take. Therefore I'm going to have to do some comping at some stage. My approach may be dissimilar to how some of you might accomplish this. I know some like to record the whole solo a number of times and then use comping to piece together the best parts, and I know some like to punch record to correct the parts they might have misplayed.
 
My modus operandi is slightly different. If I know I'm going to struggle to play the whole passage, I'll break it up into comfortable phrases and record them separately. Comping then allows me to trim and edit each clip as I assemble the jigsaw that is the complete solo. The most convenient method of doing this for me is to use Lanes or Layers (especially as in most of my templates, I have my tracks already set up with pre-assigned Pro Channel and VST effects, as well as panning, levels etc).
 
In the interest of keeping the project 'tidy' and easier to manage, the Rebuild feature is ideal for my purposes. As I delete bits and pieces off the individual clips I've recorded, rebuilding the track does this for me.
 
Here's an example of how the same solo looks in X2 Lanes and X1 Layers after comping.
 
In X2 Lanes:
 

 
 
Even when I now trim off the unwanted muted parts I'm still stuck with the same amount of Lanes:
 

 
 
Contrast this with the same project in X1.
 
Even before I trim off the muted parts, Rebuild gives me a much tidier view of the track:
 

 
 
And once I do trim them off, I end up with this:
 
 
  
  
  

---

  
  
  
  
 
 
 

Hi Steve...

I too work much as you do... Some little differences but I often use looping to allow me to explore possibilities and then comp together the best portions of these ideas.... Lanes make this a lot more of a drudgery than Layers did in ever way...

I must point out tho, that I don't have to end up with all those Lanes you show. Once it's been trimmed down I would move them manually to a single Lane.... So in the end I have a single Lane, but it must be done manually... (No Rebuild command)

I am so uncomfortable with the way Lanes uses screen space it's beyond words at the moment... I think I'm losing my internet this morning so I'm a bit on edge...

Keni

STinGA


Hey Keni,

Sorry to report mate but lanes working as advertised with loop recording.  

I've recorded about 20 takes this morning with lanes open and closed and there are still no empty lanes.  For me this problem completely disappeared with the X2a update.

Sorry I cant be more helpful.

Thanks for trying...

I'm glad it's working for you at least...

Keni

joegab


I have a particular strange problem with lanes:
sometimes I get 2 lanes named T1, one empty, and one with my recordings.
Well, if I try to delete the T1 empty lane, the one with clips inside will be deleted.... grrr.

Workaround found moving clips to another lane .....

Not a good deal...

Giorgio

Hi Giorgio...

<ouch>... That's even worse than mine...  I get the blank lanes but I can delete them...

Keni

fooman


I agree with Steve.
Screen real-estate is kinda important. Having overlapped parts all along 10 lanes/tracks is wonky.

It seems we should have went the other way, start with take lanes and moved to layers haha

Hi fooman...

Yeah, I know how you feel, except that I feel we already had a good thing and in the spirit of solving some of it's problematic details, we got it replaced with a new method that for many of us is not as good....

The screen is our biggest connection to the work... Even more so with touchscreen... so while things need to be big enuf for clumsy finger touches, some of us need more detailed work than my fingers will allow for these on-screen edits...

An example to me is that when I use touchscreen and try to do something that requires microscoping, I must zoom way more than with the more pinpoint touch of the mouse...

Keni

I'm not sure how you took my comments, but to be clear: I agree with you ;)

joegab


I have a particular strange problem with lanes:
sometimes I get 2 lanes named T1, one empty, and one with my recordings.
Well, if I try to delete the T1 empty lane, the one with clips inside will be deleted.... grrr.

Workaround found moving clips to another lane .....

Not a good deal...

Giorgio

Hello Giorgio


This is EXACTLY the problem I described in another thread here:
http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=2745484

I uploaded a video that demonstrates this exact problem:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwsfmG2On6k

fooman


I'm not sure how you took my comments, but to be clear: I agree with you ;)

Hi fooman...
 
I thought that was the case.  Thanks for verifying it tho...
 
I've been searching for a DAW that allows layered audio on a track and accesses it in some manner other than Lanes...
 
This was actually a big reason that kept me away from ProT as I disliked the Lanes experience. Cakewalk offered an alternative which worked well for me. Now Cakewalk has followed the crowd and dropped their' unique operation...
 
It's a very hard decision, but I'm being pushed away from Sonar more and more with time... I don't relish the idea of learning all the ins and outs of a new DAW after 20 some odd years with Cakewalk, but many of the decisions they've been making in the last few years have not been to my liking and I've managed to work with them to have the many wonderful features that I love with Sonar... but it's getting increasingly difficult and I'm "bleary-eyed" from trying to find a way to live with it.
 
I will always manage to make music regardless of which software I use or even going back to tape! ;-)
 
But this is a big issue for me.... How the DAW usues the screen. this is the "language" that the computer and I have in common and when the language barrier becomes too great, communication is interrupted... <sigh>...
 
I don't say this as a threat as there's no one to threaten. Cakewalk would lose my sales along with many of my clients and students as I would probably draw them with me to whatever new system I decide works well for me... Probably wouldn't amount to a row of beans for Cakewalk's sales... and I truly do not wish to do this.... It's a decision I will make if/when the time actually arrives (hopefully not!) It took me almost a year before I recomended X1 to any of my clients... and even then it was with reserve...
 
I've loved Cakewalk and their' products ever since I started with Cakewalk For Windows 1.0 running under Windows 3.1. I feel as if I'm "family" with so many years involvement...
 
Here's hoping The Bakers rise to the occassion and find some solution(s) that will make this work for "both camps"...
 
I am currently very sad, but continuing to work on music until they pry the tools out of my dead hands! ;-)
 
Keni
 

Lanes not too important for me, but someone loyal to cakewalk for 20 years at least deserves some yes or no answers from the bakers as to whether this will be addressed in x2b, at least via a PM. Whilst not critical to my workflow, I do understand the frustration with the lanes thing and seems a logical step forward  to address these issues as well as prioritising them for the more loyal long term customers.  

Development should always have an element of democracy to it , especially involving long term loyal customers (of which i am neither).

I dont see much of it on here apar from bug reporting, which is not the same thing as contributing to a development strategy.

Good luck keni, i hope you get a positive answer soon. Dont take "we will see what we can do"  as an answer, thats much worse than a "no" in my book and probably fairer to everyone involved. At least then you can make a definitive choice. I do hope you get what you are looking for.

Cheers.
Swiller.

SteveStrummerUK :

I much preferred Layers, and for most of the reasons others have mentioned above.  But for the way I work, the big deal-breaker for me is the lack of a 'Rebuild Layers' type function.   

Here's a copy of a post I made in another thread, detailing my reasons:     

For me, the most important factor is the 'why' I use Lanes or Layers, as opposed to using separate tracks. And sadly, for the way I work, the single most important feature for me is no longer in Lanes, but I used it a lot in Layers, and that is the Rebuild function. Let me explain why.   Lets assume I'm recording a 32 bar guitar solo. Unless it's a passage I know off by heart, there's a good chance that it's not going to get laid down successfully in one take. Therefore I'm going to have to do some comping at some stage. My approach may be dissimilar to how some of you might accomplish this. I know some like to record the whole solo a number of times and then use comping to piece together the best parts, and I know some like to punch record to correct the parts they might have misplayed.   

My modus operandi is slightly different. If I know I'm going to struggle to play the whole passage, I'll break it up into comfortable phrases and record them separately. Comping then allows me to trim and edit each clip as I assemble the jigsaw that is the complete solo. The most convenient method of doing this for me is to use Lanes or Layers (especially as in most of my templates, I have my tracks already set up with pre-assigned Pro Channel and VST effects, as well as panning, levels etc).   In the interest of keeping the project 'tidy' and easier to manage, the Rebuild feature is ideal for my purposes. As I delete bits and pieces off the individual clips I've recorded, rebuilding the track does this for me.

Steve


This is brilliantly explained, along with images that make your point very well**.  
This clearly shows the workflow difference and impact, which pretty much makes one of the cases for layers and why it was so important to many of us.  I understand that not everyone is impacted by the loss of layers, but for me the analogy would be getting touch screen functionality at the expense of mouse/keyboard access.  Yes, the impact is that much for some of us...

**note:  I didn't copy your images in my response to avoid too much duplication of them, but they can be seen back here: http://forum.cakewalk.com/fb.ashx?m=2749131