Dappa1


ProjectM why do you use it. It serves no purpose. Obviously you can see where you need to make that take again. If it's vocals set the time line to intro your self whilst recording. If you then sing or  play it will record that part anyway!!!

I don't know????????

Serves no purpose? How often do you record precise and challenging instrumental or vocal tracks? Sometimes you get a great take with one or two small mistakes. It can be excruciating to get another full take that sounds the same or as good, especially if it's a longer take like a 2 minute guitar solo. Punch-in will allow you to fix a gaff extremely easy and there is no cut/paste nonsense involved. You simply play along with the original take and it will grab and fix that one small piece which could be a second or less in length. It's seamless if done correctly and you never know it happened, it just feels like you were playing/singing along with the other take.
 
It may serve no purpose to you but punching-in is a vital and time-honoured tradition.

Dappa1


ProjectM why do you use it. It serves no purpose. Obviously you can see where you need to make that take again. If it's vocals set the time line to intro your self whilst recording. If you then sing or  play it will record that part anyway!!!

I don't know????????

Of course it serves a purpose, and I've hardly met a recording engineer who doesn't use a feature like this at some point.
 
Say I'm doing six tracks of harmony vocals in a chrous. I set up the punch in and punch out part, set now time a bar or so before punch in and hit record. Do the part until it's good, arm the next track and work on that. Repeat until done. Move the punch times to the next part and do the same. It's nice and tidy.
 
Not to mention if I need to replace a bar that I either decide to change or need to fix - regardless of instrument - then I can play along with the part and Sonar punch in and out and all I need to think about is playing the part.
 
Then of course it's the whole fix the little bits when doing laybacks or ADR or whatever for broadcast material where Sonar is synced up to a Digibeta, Multitrack recorder or something like that.
 
Trust me, the punch in punch out is not as ridiculous as you may think because you are not using it.

I tried it once or twice> I just had to let it go and work in the time honoured way. Maybe cos its something that you dont need to use so often.

But then again if it works for you then its all good but for me. I just hit record and do away with the part recorded in error. tsk Simples!

Stoones: that would be just wasting time in the studio. You need to learn how to utilize your time better.

konradh


Mod Bod, Just saw your comment about Sonar adding "me too" features.  I see it a little differently.

There are various types of users (and some of these overlap):
• Self-contained writers-producers
• Producers who record bands
• Producers of loop-based dance music
• TV/Film composers
• Songwriters
• Users who depend on or prefer virtual instruments or in-the-box mixing
• Those with a good deal of external gear
• Studio-based users
• Portable laptop recordists

If a DAW specialized in providing a solution for just one or a few of these groups, the DAW market would become very fragmented.  Every time a producer or writer took a new direction or wanted to try something new, he or she would have to buy, configure, and learn a new tool.

For example, there a people here who vehemently argue how pointless a Staff View while I, on the other hand, cannot imagine composing in a PRV or Matrix view—but I do not want Cakewalk to drop support of the PRV or Matrix views just because I don't use them often right now.

To your point about support and development costs, if a function has few users, then I doubt it has many bug reports or requirements to handle.

Best post on this thread.


There are so many things I could say but it also occurred to me that I have asked for features that I found useful in other DAWs. CW has implemented some of them. Is that a "me too" situation?


Can any one user use every feature in Sonar? My question is why worry about it? 


I look at it as its there when you find you need it. You may never use it but if its not there and you do need it what then?


There are many that only use Sonar as a tape recorder. Does that mean they are missing something? Are they limiting themselves? Do they really need X1 Producer? If they don't why did they buy it?


There are lots of things I have not used in Sonar but I have found that things I thought I would never need became essential under the right circumstances.

To me X1 has a lot of things that could be added and others that could be upgraded. I don't think there will ever be a point when CW is done putting features into their DAW.


If one sees it as "I don't need it therefore I wont want anyone else to have it" do we really think that is a good way to interact with our fellow forum members?


I want X1 to appeal to the broadest user base possible. For me that will insure a healthy CW.  


I'm also not too sure that proclaiming pride in never using a feature is a sign of wisdom or intellect but rather a very narrow minded view about a very powerful software program. Perhaps a lack of curiosity too.


This is just another perspective.  


 

John

I'm also not too sure that proclaiming pride in never using a feature is a sign of wisdom or intellect but rather a very narrow minded view about a very powerful software program. Perhaps a lack of curiosity too. 

I wish I had a Gold, Silver or Bronze Medal for this.. but I don't.  I wish I could show up at your local pub and buy a round of brews for this, but I cant. Therefore, on behalf of all the users on Cakewalk.com, I'd like to present you with this silly meme; for a post well done!

It's not wise to not use a feature that some one else has used. The wise thing would be to use it erm why John?

Why should I be curious to use something that I used before and I am happy to use that function in a way that works for me? I am struggling to see your logic Spock!

Dappa1


I tried it once or twice> I just had to let it go and work in the time honoured way. Maybe cos its something that you dont need to use so often.

But then again if it works for you then its all good but for me. I just hit record and do away with the part recorded in error. tsk Simples!

FWIW - I do that too

ProjectM

"it's possible in X1". :)

Dappa1


Stoones: that would be just wasting time in the studio. You need to learn how to utilize your time better.

Unh, OK. You might want to better educate yourself on the subject before making such comments.
 
I initially learned about punching-in while working as a session player (guitarist and backup vocals with co-writing credits on two songs) , in a studio no less, for a band engineered and produced by Nick Blagona:
http://www.discogs.com/artist/Nick+Blagona#t=Credits_Technical&q=&p=1
 
Post up your resume and it'll give me a better idea whose opinon I should consider as more valid for my needs.