John Sayers Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 oops I meant to say SONAR! http://www.cakewalk.com/Products/SR/SR1.html I suppose this is Cakewalk 10? Live direct x and all. ------------------ Cheers John Studio Design Site: http://www.lis.net.au/~johnsay/Acoustics This message has been edited by John Sayers on 01-18-2001 at 08:04 PM Studio Design Forum Studios Under Construction Home Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinisen Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 Originally posted by John Sayers: oops I meant to say SONAR! http://www.cakewalk.com/Products/SR/SR1.html I suppose this is Cakewalk 10? Live direct x and all. looks great, ACID looping in a digital audio sequencer??? hmmm! -Trinisen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinopop Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 Man, I'm drooling. Finally, DirectX instruments! Now the VST guys don't get to have all the fun. I wonder if the licensed the looping technology from Sonic Foundry or developed their own. My enthusiasm is only tempered by the thought of having to go through the dot-zero version and patch hell that inevitably follows a major new release. (I cried real tears over some of the takes I lost in the Great Picture File Fiasco of 9.0 http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/frown.gif ) Hopefully QA will be better this time around cause I'm not going to be able to resist upgrading immediately. (Just gotta remember to back up first http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gif ) -Layne - Layne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinisen Posted January 20, 2001 Share Posted January 20, 2001 Originally posted by dinopop: Man, I'm drooling. I wonder if the licensed the looping technology from Sonic Foundry or developed their own. I read somewhere on their forum that they built their own looping technology. Just saw a press release with all the companies that are supporting DXi - even Reaktor... I'm definitely upgrading -Trinisen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alndln Posted January 21, 2001 Share Posted January 21, 2001 Iv'e been using VST Instruments in Cakewalk for the last year or so via FX-Pansions Dir-x to VST adapter,plus I have acid.I also don't have any desire to use Win Me or Win 2k(recommended for Sonus)since WDM drivers will work with Win 98 SE.I was hoping for something along the lines of the True to Tape feature on Cubase 5. Oh well. "A Robot Playing Trumpet Blows" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinisen Posted January 21, 2001 Share Posted January 21, 2001 Originally posted by Alndln@hotmail.com: Iv'e been using VST Instruments in Cakewalk for the last year or so via FX-Pansions Dir-x to VST adapter,plus I have acid.I also don't have any desire to use Win Me or Win 2k(recommended for Sonus)since WDM drivers will work with Win 98 SE.I was hoping for something along the lines of the True to Tape feature on Cubase 5. Oh well. TrueTape is nice, but it's basically the same thing as applying Magneto in Cubase or FX2-TapeSim in Cakewalk -Trinisen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alndln Posted January 21, 2001 Share Posted January 21, 2001 It is not the same at all.True tape is used at the the recording stage allowing much hotter signals thus exanding the headroom not possible with digital recording on the PC before.My brother uses Cubase so I've seen this feature in action and to my surprise it works very well.Maybe the new feature of live input in Sonus and Magneto will achieve similar results but somehow I doubt it. "A Robot Playing Trumpet Blows" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinisen Posted January 21, 2001 Share Posted January 21, 2001 Originally posted by Alndln@hotmail.com: It is not the same at all.True tape is used at the the recording stage allowing much hotter signals thus exanding the headroom not possible with digital recording on the PC before.My brother uses Cubase so I've seen this feature in action and to my surprise it works very well.Maybe the new feature of live input in Sonus and Magneto will achieve similar results but somehow I doubt it. I disagree, headroom is related to 16 vs 24 bit. TrueTape is basically applying Magneto destructively to your audio. It's a well marketed term but practically I don't think it's a good idea. by the way the new product from Cakewalk is called SONAR not Sonus. Trinisen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinopop Posted January 21, 2001 Share Posted January 21, 2001 Originally posted by Trinisen: I disagree, headroom is related to 16 vs 24 bit. TrueTape is basically applying Magneto destructively to your audio. It's a well marketed term but practically I don't think it's a good idea. I'm with you on this one. Anything I do to my in-bound signal I want to do in the analogue realm. Once it's converted to digital I'd prefer to save off that raw data then tweak it later at will. The same algorithms are applied whether the audio is coming from your digital inputs or from your hard drive. Just with the latter you can punt if you don't like the results. - Layne - Layne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alndln Posted January 22, 2001 Share Posted January 22, 2001 Having used both and "hearing" the difference I disagree with you both.First of all True to Tape operates at 32 bit,second at the recording stage we were able to clip the the levels with no digital distortion,just more "noticable" hearoom.I have Magneto and really wish it had the same effect.You should try the Demo and then report wether you think it's the "same as Magneto". "A Robot Playing Trumpet Blows" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinisen Posted January 22, 2001 Share Posted January 22, 2001 Originally posted by Alndln@hotmail.com: Having used both and "hearing" the difference I disagree with you both.First of all True to Tape operates at 32 bit,second at the recording stage we were able to clip the the levels with no digital distortion,just more "noticable" hearoom.I have Magneto and really wish it had the same effect.You should try the Demo and then report wether you think it's the "same as Magneto". no point, if you're happy about TrueTape that's great, enjoy it. I continue to be intrigued by SONAR Trinisen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 I think one of the coolest things about Sonar is that it looks a lot better than Cakewalk did. I also like the way they handled volume and panning. Also they did do their own looping algorithm. I believe all these "stretch tempo at will" concepts have their roots in ReCycle, which as far as I know was the first program to slice digital audio into pieces, then trigger them closer together or further apart to change tempo. As to true tape - I have to say that while conceptually it's like Magneto, in practice it's much better implemented. But I think you can get much of the same effect but judicious use of a tube preamp while tracking. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinisen Posted January 23, 2001 Share Posted January 23, 2001 did you listen any of those DXi synthesizers? How'd they sound? Trinisen This message has been edited by Trinisen on 01-23-2001 at 03:28 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jomag2000yahoo.com Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Originally posted by Trinisen: did you listen any of those DXi synthesizers? How'd they sound? Trinisen They sounded really good.You have to tweak the buffer setting (as in ReaKtor).I never heard the Tassman before the show, and that had some SUB!! bass,and a good emulation of the Moog ,plus they RENDER to an audio file. You dont have to plug an analog cord out to in as you have to do with your computer's midi/Soundfonts.I cant wait to use the Live synth on my laptop.I've got tons of soundfonts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted January 29, 2001 Share Posted January 29, 2001 I believe that one characteristic of the DXi instruments is that they're not limited to the usual MIDI resolution. This could mean things like filters that don't zipper...that would be cool. Also, I don't think you HAVE to have Windows 2000 or Me, you need them only if you want to use the WDM drivers. Admittedly they're better and all that, but the whole wavepipe thing they did in 9.0 wasn't too shabby. I could live with that level of performance, for sure. I assume they still have the AVI window in there too... Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinisen Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Anderton: I believe that one characteristic of the DXi instruments is that they're not limited to the usual MIDI resolution. This could mean things like filters that don't zipper...that would be cool. Very nice, thanks for the information. Trinisen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alndln Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 I just found out that there will be a new version of FX-Pansions Dir-x to VST adapter built in to the program which will let you acsess VST instruments directly as opposed to the old routine which means you can use your exsisting VSTI collection,now I'm interested. "A Robot Playing Trumpet Blows" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Triny Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Alndln@hotmail.com: I just found out that there will be a new version of FX-Pansions Dir-x to VST adapter built in to the program which will let you acsess VST instruments directly as opposed to the old routine which means you can use your exsisting VSTI collection,now I'm interested. plus there are are lot of the same vendors on board with DXi http://www.cakewalk.com/press/PR-DXi.htm -david abraham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salyphus Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Well, it wouldn't take much to improve on CakeWalk, IMHO http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/tongue.gif Will it be a serious professional contender? I'll believe it when I see it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinisen Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Sal Orlando: Well, it wouldn't take much to improve on CakeWalk, IMHO http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/tongue.gif Will it be a serious professional contender? I'll believe it when I see it... who cares about "professional" this industry is so infatuated about image. the cakewalk stuff works very well for me. Trinisen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Cobelas Posted February 1, 2001 Share Posted February 1, 2001 Originally posted by Sal Orlando: Well, it wouldn't take much to improve on CakeWalk, IMHO http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/tongue.gif Will it be a serious professional contender? I'll believe it when I see it... What is a serious professional contender? Or, since I think that nobody with the slightest idea of the music business can say that Cakewalk is not a serious contender, what or who is a professional? Pro musicians with project studios? Small semipro studios? Full scale operations? A tool is a tool is a tool. Next time I see a post with a snicker and the p-word in a gear wars mood, I think I´ll puke... Anyway, Sal, since I´ve seen some posts of yours about McCoy Tyner, and I´m pretty sure that you are not a technohead brat making trance with a cracked copy of Cubase VST, all your sins will be forgiven from my side...:-) Have fun JoseC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salyphus Posted February 2, 2001 Share Posted February 2, 2001 Sorry guys, nothing personal. I will definitely reserve judgement on the new version, but the last time I tried to use it ( a couple of versions ago, admittedly) it was a total joke. That's not to say you can't get good results out of it, but a professional wouldn't have time to deal with that crap. And as far as I know, this is echoed by reality. How many pros do you know who use CakeWalk? I don't know any, and I do actually work in the industry. Anyway, don't take my point backwards. I'm not saying you can't be a pro if you use it, just that most pros don't, because it isn't in the same leauge as pro software like Logic, Cubase, Digital Performer, and ProTools. People choose CakeWalk because it is cheap, but professionals aren't concerned with that aspect at all. Perhaps this will change, I don't know... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alndln Posted February 2, 2001 Share Posted February 2, 2001 I have been "Pro"in this industry for many years and use Cakewalk.So does Jon Anderson(yes)and plenty of other "Pro's" that I know personally.While it may not have quite as many bells and whistles as Cubase&Logic it works flawlessly without crashes and without overly ambitious and poorley written code.It also works flawlessly with Gigasampler(Industry standard)something not possible with Cubase or Logic without a lot of reconfiguring.I was considering Cubase but I'll either wait until version r.05 or until it actually works or use Sonar,something that probably will "work"as I have much work to get done. "A Robot Playing Trumpet Blows" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Triny Posted February 2, 2001 Share Posted February 2, 2001 Originally posted by Sal Orlando: Anyway, don't take my point backwards. I'm not saying you can't be a pro if you use it, just that most pros don't, because it isn't in the same leauge as pro software like Logic, Cubase, Digital Performer, and ProTools. People choose CakeWalk because it is cheap, but professionals aren't concerned with that aspect at all. This kind of nonsensical argument is old and boring. And for goodness sake the moderator of this very board uses CWPA9 (among other products) are you saying he's not a pro?? goodness. -david abraham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salyphus Posted February 2, 2001 Share Posted February 2, 2001 David, why did you quote my post and then ignore what I said? Please reread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Triny Posted February 2, 2001 Share Posted February 2, 2001 Originally posted by Sal Orlando: David, why did you quote my post and then ignore what I said? Please reread. What I think your saying is that CWPA is not suitable for pro use? (don't agree) and that most people buy CWPA because it's cheap? (unsubstantiated) If I've misinterpreted your message I sincerely apologize. -david abraham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted February 2, 2001 Share Posted February 2, 2001 >>People choose CakeWalk because it is cheap, but professionals aren't concerned with that aspect at all.<< I chose Cakewalk to do an audio for video project because at the time, quite frankly, it was the only program that was stable and predictable enough for me to make the deadline. The AVI integration is superb, and the audio engine in PA9 is great. You don't have problems like the cursor jumping just because you've added lots of tracks. However, companies ebb and flow, and there have been some revs that weren't as good as others. 7 was bitchin', but 8 had some major flaws. In fact, I had not installed 9 because of the problems I had with 8. I installed 9 only because I was desperate; I'm glad I did. Since then, I've also used Cakewalk to compose two movie themes and another industrial video. Again, time and robustness was of the essence, and PA9 came through. I do use Cubase for applications where it's most suited, and I've used Logic as well for several projects done with Europeans. The idea is to use the right tool for the right job. Cakewalk need make no excuses, and Sonar looks like a pretty big deal. The only question, of course, is how bug-free such a major upgrade can be when it first comes out of the chute. Certainly, Cubase and Logic have stumbled in that regard as well; it's an inevitable aspect of producing complex programs. But Cakewalk has been good about posting fixes very soon after any problems are discovered. Bottom line is this: Cakewalk is the Volvo of music software. It doesn't look particularly cool or turn heads when you drive down the street, but it starts when you turn the ignition, it's safe, and it's efficient. There's definitely room for that type of program in the world. Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salyphus Posted February 2, 2001 Share Posted February 2, 2001 Originally posted by Anderton: I chose Cakewalk to do an audio for video project because at the time, quite frankly, it was the only program that was stable and predictable enough for me to make the deadline. The AVI integration is superb, and the audio engine in PA9 is great. You don't have problems like the cursor jumping just because you've added lots of tracks. Should I take this to mean that you haven't tried Digital Performer then, Craig? If not you really should. In my experience it has been phenomenally stable, robust, intuitive, and powerful. I can't recommend it highly enough. BTW, I should clarify that I would never judge someone's professionalism based on their tools. The results are what ultimately matter. To each his own http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Sayers Posted February 2, 2001 Author Share Posted February 2, 2001 Craig - Thanks for changing the tile of the thread and spelling Sonar correctly - you would not believe the number of times I've seen people refer to it as Sonus on other forums..... sorry Cakewalk. cheers john Studio Design Forum Studios Under Construction Home Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike O Posted February 2, 2001 Share Posted February 2, 2001 "it's an inevitable aspect of producing complex programs. But Cakewalk has been good about posting fixes very soon after any problems are discovered." Craig- Very well put. I have had these same experiences as far as "ebb and flow of product" goes. I do however have a problem with your statement: "bugs being an inevitable part of complex programs". The more we as customers and users adopt this attitude the more we allow vendor/mfgs to market and "deliver" shoddy work. It DOES NOT have to be this way. Champion those vendors that do not market junk. Expose those who do. Have you ever apologized to consumers of your product because the music delivered was "so complex and therefore I made lots of mistakes"? Why do we apply one set of values to virtually every other product except software marketed direct to consumers? BTW/off thread: Do I recall you wrote an article manny years ago re: buiding a double tank reverb from a PAIA kit? If so thanks! At the time not many of us could afford special rooms, or the digital reverbs that were starting to appear. My how things have changed.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.