I've been frustrated by the lack of ability to start a song prior to the 1st bar - for lead ins, etc. And also I like the way some other programs use Markers to highlight sections of of a song. 

The solution here, allows for starting a song with a lead in bar, and by utilizing these markers there's no having to do math adjustments. Just click on the section you are working in to loop it! 

I hope this may be of help to others as well. 

http://gearandguitars.blogspot.com/2012/09/sonar-x1-0-bar-and-markers-problem.html

Just start your song atr measure 2 or 3 or 4.
If you want a lead in, then use the metronomes pre-count.

Hey CJ - 

Thanks. The problem with the count in is that you can't record it. So if you want one or two beats to preceded the downbeat of the first note of the first measure the only way to do so is by starting Bar 1, on Bar 2... 

Once you start on Bar 2, (as Bar 1) than you constantly have to do corrective math on Bar/Measure counts to adjust for always being 1 Bar off... In my experience this becomes tedious. It would be great if Sonar had the ability to start recording on Bar 0, or Bar -1... but it doesn't. 

So the example I've provided I believe to be an elegant work-a-round solution that allows for the lead in prior to Bar 1, and also shows a nice graphic element for the easy navigation of parts of a song. 

I hope this helps others who have also faced the same frustration that I have. 

The other problem with relying on the count in is that many songwriters call the "intro" the "intro" and start counting measures when the song actually kicks in.

So a count it isn't really a solution. It is just a count in.

It would be so much more fun to be able to speak with a songwriter (or band) about their chart and then glance at Cakewalk's timeline and have the numbers on the timeline match up with what the Song writer (or band) is thinking and speaking of.


best regards,
mike

song still starts at <>1 so math is still required... this is a (very) well know minor but irritating issue and has been requested for a fix many times by many folks... someday hopefully!

The other problem with relying on the count in is that many songwriters call the "intro" the "intro" and start counting measures when the song actually kicks in.

 
I bow to your experience, Mike, but I have never understood the reasoning for demading (wanting) the ability to start a song before it actually starts.
Certainly this is all about counting measures and loops, because I am quite certain that I was never able to start recording on tape before the tape started! Nor could I do a "pre" stripe beginning before the midi sync stripe was down.
 
Yes, I guess, it would be nice not to have to do any "work" (like putting markers in the right places, also rather impractical on tape!) while recording (or rolling out loops) but this escapes me (and i am pretty reasonable, just ask!)
 
Brian

Stone House Studios

The other problem with relying on the count in is that many songwriters call the "intro" the "intro" and start counting measures when the song actually kicks in.

 
I bow to your experience, Mike, but I have never understood the reasoning for demading (wanting) the ability to start a song before it actually starts.
Certainly this is all about counting measures and loops, because I am quite certain that I was never able to start recording on tape before the tape started! Nor could I do a "pre" stripe beginning before the midi sync stripe was down.
 
Yes, I guess, it would be nice not to have to do any "work" (like putting markers in the right places, also rather impractical on tape!) while recording (or rolling out loops) but this escapes me (and i am pretty reasonable, just ask!)
 
Brian

Hey Brian - 

I'm with Mike on this one. I hear you about how it's irrelevant from the perspective of a tape workflow, but many people using computers are not working from that perspective and it doesn't make sense for their workflow, genre, etc. 

I understand that there were not markers on tape, but we're not using tape - we're using a computer. So to make excuses for lacking a feature like this because it's not relevant to tape would mean dismissing every other feature not relevant to a tape workflow. I think everyone can agree that'd be a little silly (no disrespect intended). 


Also, because we are working on a DAW many people end up referencing monitors, even if just on playback in the control room. It really shouldn't be that much of an issue to have a sliding reference point so that the bar/measure you are on, actually corresponds to the bar/measure of the song! 


All this being said, I'm happy with the work-a-round presented and hope that it helps others here who have experienced the same frustrations that I have in this regard. 


thanks!

It really shouldn't be that much of an issue to have a sliding reference point so that the bar/measure you are on, actually corresponds to the bar/measure of the song!

 
The tape analogies are about how you can't begin before you start - I guess I just find that amusing.
 
It is interesting how dependent we have become on our eyes for something that we experience through our ears, now that you mention it!
 
Brian

Stone House Studios

The other problem with relying on the count in is that many songwriters call the "intro" the "intro" and start counting measures when the song actually kicks in.

 
I bow to your experience, Mike, but I have never understood the reasoning for demading (wanting) the ability to start a song before it actually starts.
Certainly this is all about counting measures and loops, because I am quite certain that I was never able to start recording on tape before the tape started! Nor could I do a "pre" stripe beginning before the midi sync stripe was down.
 
Yes, I guess, it would be nice not to have to do any "work" (like putting markers in the right places, also rather impractical on tape!) while recording (or rolling out loops) but this escapes me (and i am pretty reasonable, just ask!)
 
Brian

Maybe you just use samples on your timeline?

I use and enjoy markers.

I use the M:B:T on the timeline and it's simply less fun to put a marker, named 1 for the first measure ,on a timeline right where, for example, the number 8 is prominently displayed.

It slows down my interactions with the artist. My interest is in using Cakewalk as a tool to facilitate making my guests feel comfortable ad at ease. I'd rather spend time speaking with them about music instead of taking a moment to do simple arithmetic in my head when it's pretty obvious that the computer should be able to do it.

If a musician says "I'd like to listen to something at measure 15" the easiest, quickest, and most enjoyable way to check it out would be if measure 15 was where the time line has the number 15 displayed.


best regards,
mike

Stone House Studios

It really shouldn't be that much of an issue to have a sliding reference point so that the bar/measure you are on, actually corresponds to the bar/measure of the song!

 
The tape analogies are about how you can't begin before you start - I guess I just find that amusing.
 
It is interesting how dependent we have become on our eyes for something that we experience through our ears, now that you mention it!
 
Brian

before tape there was:



:-)