What will they throw in this time to tempt us? Will it be another synth that takes up 2GB of space? IS that really a rompler than a synth? Maybe it will be Vista only. I think this will be my last version of Sonar. It's great for midi but at $179 a year and $225 if you skip a version gets to be expensive. With each version the track window seems to get more clutered. Cubase and Sonar stand out because they have a staff view. If you don't use it there seems to be a lot more competition. One of the interesting things Mackie has done is with the release of Tracktion 3 they offered Trackion 2 for $29. If you didn't want all of the 3rd party apps in the ultimate bundle you could get the Tracktion 3 app for $69. If you buy the FL Studio download from Image Line you get lifetime updates on their app and all included synths. I'm starting to learn this app and it has a lot more feature than you think. Their support is quite good since they are answered in their forums. The annoying thing is that FL also installs istelf as a VST and every app you open chokes on scanning it the 1st time. I just can't get into Cubase no matter how many times I've installed the LE version. It has a way of monitoring your ASIO drivers and sends a popup window when you aren't even using it. As for Reaper, I will begin to learn how to use this app eventually. It lacks a lot in midi but it will not go ignored. I think this program has been updated 6 times in 2 months. It's very stable and easy on the CPU. I like the small footprint and be able to lunch it from a flash drive. Others I've tried, Ableton Lite Live-I open it up and then ?????. I can't stand the GUI. Samplitude Studio-they have their own vocabulary with things like VIP project. It's a confusing piece of software. EnergyXT- Another small app with big features. You can use it as a modular environment. That is kind of cool since you could make your own Amplitube out of connecting various plugins.
I'm still using Sonar 4.0.2 and it will probably be fine for me for ever. "kitekrazy" <> wrote in message news:zVz2k.4100$... > What will they throw in this time to tempt us? Will it be another synth that takes up 2GB of space? IS that really a rompler > than a synth? > > Maybe it will be Vista only. > > I think this will be my last version of Sonar. It's great for midi but at $179 a year and $225 if you skip a version gets to be > expensive. With each version the track window seems to get more clutered. > > Cubase and Sonar stand out because they have a staff view. If you don't use it there seems to be a lot more competition. > > One of the interesting things Mackie has done is with the release of Tracktion 3 they offered Trackion 2 for $29. If you didn't > want all of the 3rd party apps in the ultimate bundle you could get the Tracktion 3 app for $69. > > If you buy the FL Studio download from Image Line you get lifetime updates on their app and all included synths. I'm starting to > learn this app and it has a lot more feature than you think. Their support is quite good since they are answered in their forums. > The annoying thing is that FL also installs istelf as a VST and every app you open chokes on scanning it the 1st time. > > I just can't get into Cubase no matter how many times I've installed the LE version. It has a way of monitoring your ASIO drivers > and sends a popup window when you aren't even using it. > > As for Reaper, I will begin to learn how to use this app eventually. It lacks a lot in midi but it will not go ignored. I think > this program has been updated 6 times in 2 months. It's very stable and easy on the CPU. I like the small footprint and be able to > lunch it from a flash drive. > > Others I've tried, > > Ableton Lite Live-I open it up and then ?????. I can't stand the GUI. > > Samplitude Studio-they have their own vocabulary with things like VIP project. It's a confusing piece of software. > > EnergyXT- Another small app with big features. You can use it as a modular environment. That is kind of cool since you could make > your own Amplitube out of connecting various plugins. >
Steve Karl wrote: > I'm still using Sonar 4.0.2 and it will probably be fine for me for ever. > > > I could probably get along fine with Sonar 2.2 XL and DirectXer. It had such a clean look and not the "Goth" look like now.
"kitekrazy" <> wrote in message news:CkA2k.4610$... > Steve Karl wrote: >> I'm still using Sonar 4.0.2 and it will probably be fine for me for ever. >> >> >> > > I could probably get along fine with Sonar 2.2 XL and DirectXer. It had such a clean look and not the "Goth" look like now. I'll bet it's a lot more CPU effecient also.
"kitekrazy" <> wrote in message news:zVz2k.4100$... > What will they throw in this time to tempt us? Will it be another synth > that takes up 2GB of space? IS that really a rompler than a synth? ..... > Cubase and Sonar stand out because they have a staff view. If you don't > use it there seems to be a lot more competition. My personal hope for a next version of SONAR is a major league revamp of Staff View. For me, the limitiations in this area are SONAR's biggest weakness. In fact, that limitation got me looking closely at the Cubase 4 specs when it was announced, and drooling a bit at some of their notation enhancements that were at least an order of magnitude beyond what one could reasonably expect from a first significant round of SONAR Staff View enhancements given how far behind SONAR is in that area. However, to date, I've never really taken to Cubase (I do have Cubase LE, and have used it a bit for experimentation, but have never really managed to do anything useful with it), so the thought of switching just because SONAR is so limited in the notation department, when it is only a minority of my stuff that absolutely needs better notation capabilities (I do use SONAR's notation for some purposes, such as reviewing parts, but that is about as far as it goes; when I actually need to initially create something with notation, I'm forced to go to my dedicated notation program), doesn't really make a lot of sense. The other thing I'd really like to see in SONAR is a dramatic streamlining of the user interface to create consistency between views. For example, the same keystrokes should select the same cursors in all views, rather than having different ones for the same cursor in different views. I can't tell you how many "user errors" that sort of thing has spawned when I'm trying to do something in one view or the other, and using whichever keystroke I'd use in the view I use the most, but don't happen to be in that view at the moment. Also, things like still having no right click capability in the Synth Rack to insert a new synth, when we're already at SONAR 7 (so you can't just write it off to having run out of time to insert such a minor capability whose lack provokes heaps of repeated user errors because everything else in SONAR has the capability, as does pretty much everything else in Windows), are just inexcusable! Of course, I guess it's hard to get people pay for cleaning things up, and some might even complain that they have to relearn the UI because their favorite keystroke that's still around from CWPA days changed. Almost makes me want to consider Logic and a Mac. ;-) Ouch!!! (Sorry, just had to bite my tongue for having said that.) Oh yeah, another thing is previewing of MIDI loops through softsynths in the project. Something we've been asking for at least since MIDI loops have been available, and which has been in Project5 from V1.0. Another thing that seems inexcusable to me, and which makes MIDI loops virtually useless, unless you happen to have a softsynth, like EZ Drummer, or some other facility (e.g. EZ Player), that provides the capability within the context in which you need it at any given moment. But it definitely is getting harder and harder to imagine what SONAR-level enhancements would be compelling enough to cause the "must have" syndrome for upgrade bucks. And that does tend to make the plug-ins they include all the more important to justifying the upgrade. Of course, the more plug-ins we get, the harder it becomes for a new plug-in to tantalize, too. I will say the phase coherent multiband compressor from SONAR 7 Producer is one that I'm finding myself using on almost every project these days. Might have said the same for the phase coherent EQ, too, if I hadn't already had PSP Neon HR. As for the others, at least some notation is a must have for me, so anything without integrated notation is definitely a non-starter as a general purpose DAW, though perhaps it might suit some special purpose like mastering or messing around with loops. I suppose, though, that, in this day and age, the number of people who read and write music, and actually prefer notation as a way of looking at things, is getting smaller and smaller. Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic =======================================
In news:zVz2k.4100$ the killer robot kitekrazy <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... > What will they throw in this time to tempt us? Will it be another > synth that takes up 2GB of space? IS that really a rompler than a synth? Cake would have to re-write (or buy/license from Justin) the audio engine to at least match Reaper's for me to get back on board. I've always thought that Sonar's audio engine was not very efficient, like how if you loop a section to rehearse a part, it not only doesn't smoothly go from the end of the loop to the beginning, but may gap, snap, pop, and/or crash. I have zero need for a staff view or printing sheet music, and the midi recording that I do is done straight up the same way as I do audio. Press record and play some stuff, so I don't need much more than a simple piano roll for making mino modifications (like killing fat fingered notes). When I first started using Cake's products, I was heavily into midi, with most of my parts done as midi, and only a vocal and occasional guitar as the audio tracks. Nowadays it's the exact opposite, so I am much more impressed with superior audio performance than I am with midi features. Cake has in the last three years gone more and more towards a model of re- selling the same pig, but with new lipstick. The core differences from Sonar 4/5/6/7 are slight, once you strip away whatever 3rd party junk came with any given version. In all the versions of Sonar they have never made the UI scalable, and have made visual components way too freeking big. I think they have a multi-monitor mindset that they can't seem to think outside of. The console view is huge, as if they expect for you to put it on it's own monitor. I installed both Sonar 5 and Reaper onto my little tiny Eee PC laptop. You can see from the following screen caps how Sonar's console view hogs up the entire screen and then some, where Reaper with it's 100% scalable and skinnable GUI interface fits the console on the bottom (docked) and still has room for track view on half the screen. http://members.cox.net/spambaconandspam/EeeSonar.jpg http://members.cox.net/spambaconandspam/EeeReaper.jpg The tiny footprint and lower system requirements make Reaper play quite nicely on my micro sized laptop. Cake is going to have to break out of this cycle of making a few minor modifications to their core code, slapping on some 3rd party softsynths and plugins (and even trialware BS) most of which are usually only ok if that, and then calling it a new release. -- Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email ________ ____ / ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____ / / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \ / /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ / \____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
"Glennbo" <> wrote in message news:Xns9AB69967E6B3DBrownShoesDontMakeIt@69.28.186.120... > In news:zVz2k.4100$ the killer robot kitekrazy > <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship > cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... > >> What will they throw in this time to tempt us? Will it be another >> synth that takes up 2GB of space? IS that really a rompler than a synth? > > Cake would have to re-write (or buy/license from Justin) the audio engine > to at least match Reaper's for me to get back on board. I've always > thought that Sonar's audio engine was not very efficient, like how if you > loop a section to rehearse a part, it not only doesn't smoothly go from the > end of the loop to the beginning, but may gap, snap, pop, and/or crash. Smooth looping is/was never a problem for me in Versions 3 and 4 even with 60 or more audio tracks, but I agree ... Cake lost the eye towards performance and effeciency wayyyyyyyy back. > > I have zero need for a staff view or printing sheet music, and the midi > recording that I do is done straight up the same way as I do audio. I rarely need it but I'd never expect cake to even come clost to Sibelius. I got Sib. Version 4 on a great deal last year. And it's amazing. My brother Greg does full orchestral Scores in Sib. 4 and 5 and it prints so good that it's scarey. >Press > record and play some stuff, so I don't need much more than a simple piano > roll for making mino modifications (like killing fat fingered notes). When > I first started using Cake's products, I was heavily into midi, with most > of my parts done as midi, and only a vocal and occasional guitar as the > audio tracks. Nowadays it's the exact opposite, so I am much more > impressed with superior audio performance than I am with midi features. > > Cake has in the last three years gone more and more towards a model of re- > selling the same pig, but with new lipstick. ROFL The core differences from > Sonar 4/5/6/7 are slight, once you strip away whatever 3rd party junk came > with any given version. In all the versions of Sonar they have never made > the UI scalable, and have made visual components way too freeking big. I > think they have a multi-monitor mindset that they can't seem to think > outside of. The console view is huge, as if they expect for you to put it > on it's own monitor. > > I installed both Sonar 5 and Reaper onto my little tiny Eee PC laptop. You > can see from the following screen caps how Sonar's console view hogs up the > entire screen and then some, where Reaper with it's 100% scalable and > skinnable GUI interface fits the console on the bottom (docked) and still > has room for track view on half the screen. > > http://members.cox.net/spambaconandspam/EeeSonar.jpg > http://members.cox.net/spambaconandspam/EeeReaper.jpg > > The tiny footprint and lower system requirements make Reaper play quite > nicely on my micro sized laptop. Cake is going to have to break out of > this cycle of making a few minor modifications to their core code, slapping > on some 3rd party softsynths and plugins (and even trialware BS) most of > which are usually only ok if that, and then calling it a new release. > > -- > Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email > ________ ____ > / ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____ > / / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \ > / /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ / > \____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo > Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits > Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
"Glennbo" <> wrote in message news:Xns9AB69967E6B3DBrownShoesDontMakeIt@69.28.186.120... > In news:zVz2k.4100$ the killer robot kitekrazy > <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship > cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... > >> What will they throw in this time to tempt us? Will it be another >> synth that takes up 2GB of space? IS that really a rompler than a synth? > > Cake would have to re-write (or buy/license from Justin) the audio engine > to at least match Reaper's for me to get back on board. I've always > thought that Sonar's audio engine was not very efficient, like how if you > loop a section to rehearse a part, it not only doesn't smoothly go from the > end of the loop to the beginning, but may gap, snap, pop, and/or crash. > > I have zero need for a staff view or printing sheet music, and the midi > recording that I do is done straight up the same way as I do audio. Press > record and play some stuff, so I don't need much more than a simple piano > roll for making mino modifications (like killing fat fingered notes). When > I first started using Cake's products, I was heavily into midi, with most > of my parts done as midi, and only a vocal and occasional guitar as the > audio tracks. Nowadays it's the exact opposite, so I am much more > impressed with superior audio performance than I am with midi features. > > Cake has in the last three years gone more and more towards a model of re- > selling the same pig, but with new lipstick. The core differences from > Sonar 4/5/6/7 are slight, once you strip away whatever 3rd party junk came > with any given version. In all the versions of Sonar they have never made > the UI scalable, and have made visual components way too freeking big. I > think they have a multi-monitor mindset that they can't seem to think > outside of. The console view is huge, as if they expect for you to put it > on it's own monitor. > > I installed both Sonar 5 and Reaper onto my little tiny Eee PC laptop. You > can see from the following screen caps how Sonar's console view hogs up the > entire screen and then some, where Reaper with it's 100% scalable and > skinnable GUI interface fits the console on the bottom (docked) and still > has room for track view on half the screen. > > http://members.cox.net/spambaconandspam/EeeSonar.jpg > http://members.cox.net/spambaconandspam/EeeReaper.jpg > The way to do this right is to make those aspects of the window resizeable by dragging the same way the track view ( meters when horizontal ) can be resized by moving the center bar. These guys might be programmers but they're definately not visionary about it. > The tiny footprint and lower system requirements make Reaper play quite > nicely on my micro sized laptop. Cake is going to have to break out of > this cycle of making a few minor modifications to their core code, slapping > on some 3rd party softsynths and plugins (and even trialware BS) most of > which are usually only ok if that, and then calling it a new release. > > -- > Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email > ________ ____ > / ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____ > / / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \ > / /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ / > \____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo > Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits > Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
"Glennbo" <> wrote in message news:Xns9AB69967E6B3DBrownShoesDontMakeIt@69.28.186.120... > In news:zVz2k.4100$ the killer robot > kitekrazy > <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship > cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... > Cake is going to have to break out of > this cycle of making a few minor modifications to their core code, > slapping > on some 3rd party softsynths and plugins (and even trialware BS) most of > which are usually only ok if that, and then calling it a new release. > Word
In news: the killer robot "Rick Paul" <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... >> Cubase and Sonar stand out because they have a staff view. If you >> don't use it there seems to be a lot more competition. > > My personal hope for a next version of SONAR is a major league revamp > of Staff View. What do you actually use staff view for? Are you printing lead sheets for other musicians to use, or are you printing out for copyright purposes? Or are you using it to plant notes on the staff like a musical typewriter? Staff view doesn't do much for my guitar parts, bass parts, vocal parts, etc. For me, it would only do something with my drum parts on most songs. > The other thing I'd really like to see in SONAR is a dramatic > streamlining of the user interface to create consistency between > views. Scalable views and skinable views is what I wanna see. Sonar's UI is HUGE and non scalable. > Oh yeah, another thing is previewing of MIDI loops through softsynths > in the project. Loops aren't anything I really care about, but a rock solid audio engine that is so screaming and stable that you can arm and disarm tracks for recording while the song is playing, without producing any pops or clicks. A smaller footprint in memory is something I'd like to see as well. Sonar takes forever to load, and isn't portable like Reaper, where you can run it from a flash drive. > But it definitely is getting harder and harder to imagine what > SONAR-level enhancements would be compelling enough to cause the "must > have" syndrome for upgrade bucks. And that does tend to make the > plug-ins they include all the more important to justifying the > upgrade. I'd prefer for them to blow off the bundling of 3rd party plugins, as I already have all the plugins I need and want, with the exception of Superior Drummer 2.0, which is ordered but not delivered yet. If I want a plugin, I'll spend the cash to get a really well made plugin. Cake seems to think "more is better", even when the "more" is just a bunch of fluffy crap. They need to actually do some heavy lifting with the core code of Sonar to make any upgrade really be an upgrade IMHO. -- Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email ________ ____ / ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____ / / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \ / /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ / \____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
"Glennbo" <> wrote in message news:Xns9AB69C3166228BrownShoesDontMakeIt@69.28.186.120... > In news: the killer robot > "Rick Paul" <> grabbed the controls of the > spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... >They need to actually do some heavy lifting with the core code of > Sonar to make any upgrade really be an upgrade IMHO. That's the only way I'll ever get back onboard. More effeciency and with an eye towards fixing all the video production problems and missing necessities that even an entry level user like me ( in video ) is aware of. Someone is gonna get smart .... Cake will fix Video or Sony will add Midi to Vegas. If Sony added midi to Vegas they'd take over totally in a lot of places.
Re: Gotta put this on my list Figure out how to sync. Sonar to a Vegas (running on an other machine) master clock using MidiOverLan. That would be an awesome farm animal hybred.
In news:0XB2k.111$7A1.28@trndny04 the killer robot "Steve Karl" <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... >> Cake would have to re-write (or buy/license from Justin) the audio >> engine to at least match Reaper's for me to get back on board. I've >> always thought that Sonar's audio engine was not very efficient, like >> how if you loop a section to rehearse a part, it not only doesn't >> smoothly go from the end of the loop to the beginning, but may gap, >> snap, pop, and/or crash. > > Smooth looping is/was never a problem for me in Versions 3 and 4 even > with 60 or more audio tracks, but I agree ... Cake lost the eye > towards performance and effeciency wayyyyyyyy back. Looping has always been flakey for me, as far back as I can remember. It's gotten worse now that I run 1.5ms latency. In fact, I quit trusting looping all together, as it frequently does stoopid stuff, like the now pointer going past the loop point, never looping, with the counter still running, and then Sonar won't respond to any key or mouse click. >> I have zero need for a staff view or printing sheet music, and the >> midi recording that I do is done straight up the same way as I do >> audio. > > I rarely need it but I'd never expect cake to even come clost to > Sibelius. I got Sib. Version 4 on a great deal last year. And it's > amazing. My brother Greg does full orchestral Scores in Sib. 4 and 5 > and it prints so good that it's scarey. If I needed score printing, I would have no problem buying a 3rd party app. I don't expect for Sonar or Reaper or any DAW to do freeking everything. For me, a DAW that is rock solid and extremely efficient at recording audio is the number one top thing I look at. The second is it's ability to record midi accurately and exactly as played. Editing of audio comes third, and editing of midi comes fourth. -- Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email ________ ____ / ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____ / / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \ / /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ / \____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
In news:wZB2k.3818$LN.3438@trndny03 the killer robot "Steve Karl" <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... >> Cake has in the last three years gone more and more towards a model >> of re- selling the same pig, but with new lipstick. The core >> differences from Sonar 4/5/6/7 are slight, once you strip away >> whatever 3rd party junk came with any given version. In all the >> versions of Sonar they have never made the UI scalable, and have made >> visual components way too freeking big. I think they have a >> multi-monitor mindset that they can't seem to think outside of. The >> console view is huge, as if they expect for you to put it on it's own >> monitor. >> >> I installed both Sonar 5 and Reaper onto my little tiny Eee PC >> laptop. You can see from the following screen caps how Sonar's >> console view hogs up the entire screen and then some, where Reaper >> with it's 100% scalable and skinnable GUI interface fits the console >> on the bottom (docked) and still has room for track view on half the >> screen. >> >> http://members.cox.net/spambaconandspam/EeeSonar.jpg >> http://members.cox.net/spambaconandspam/EeeReaper.jpg >> > > > The way to do this right is to make those aspects of the window > resizeable by dragging the same way the track view ( meters when > horizontal ) can be resized by moving the center bar. These guys might > be programmers but they're definately not visionary about it. Hell, if I were to implement scaling, I'd do it where you hold down CTRL, and then scroll your mouse wheel until the desired size of objects was reached. With Reaper, you have to get into it's preferences, and then type in a value, like for instance on my micro laptop I put in 80% While it's great that it can even do it, it would be even better if you could see it as it scales. I had to try a bunch of different values in Reaper before deciding to go with 80% -- Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email ________ ____ / ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____ / / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \ / /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ / \____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
Re: Gotta put this on my list In news:kmC2k.115$7A1.15@trndny04 the killer robot "Steve Karl" <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... > Figure out how to sync. Sonar to a Vegas (running on an other machine) > master clock using MidiOverLan. That would be an awesome farm animal > hybred. For me, if a DAW can import a video, only to use as a point of reference, then it's good enough. I've used Sonar to create the final video before, mixing the audio and video together into a single compressed file, like an AVI, but I really prefer to use the DAW for creating the sound only these days, then I pull the original video into Vegas, and pull the audio only that was created in the DAW into Vegas, and then using Vegas with it's superior video capabilities to create my final file. That exactly how I created the little short video I did last night. I recorded the video of me playing the Stratocoustic using the capture program that comes with Vegas, then I imported that video (which had high quality audio of the guitar) into Reaper, added the bass and the drums, then exported as a WAV file, just the stereo audio track. Then I fired up Vegas, loaded the video, deleted it's audio, then dragged and dropped the stereo audio file I created in Reaper. -- Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email ________ ____ / ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____ / / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \ / /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ / \____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
Re: Gotta put this on my list "Glennbo" <> wrote in message news:Xns9AB6A201DC496BrownShoesDontMakeIt@69.28.186.120... > In news:kmC2k.115$7A1.15@trndny04 the killer robot "Steve Karl" > <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship > cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... > >> Figure out how to sync. Sonar to a Vegas (running on an other machine) >> master clock using MidiOverLan. That would be an awesome farm animal >> hybred. > > For me, if a DAW can import a video, only to use as a point of reference, > then it's good enough. I've used Sonar to create the final video before, > mixing the audio and video together into a single compressed file, like > an AVI, but I really prefer to use the DAW for creating the sound only > these days, then I pull the original video into Vegas, and pull the audio > only that was created in the DAW into Vegas, and then using Vegas with > it's superior video capabilities to create my final file. That exactly > how I created the little short video I did last night. I recorded the > video of me playing the Stratocoustic using the capture program that > comes with Vegas, then I imported that video (which had high quality > audio of the guitar) into Reaper, added the bass and the drums, then > exported as a WAV file, just the stereo audio track. Then I fired up > Vegas, loaded the video, deleted it's audio, then dragged and dropped the > stereo audio file I created in Reaper. Makes sense. Similar to my work flow. It's really cool that you did the gutar first! > > -- > Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email > ________ ____ > / ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____ > / / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \ > / /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ / > \____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo > Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits > Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
"Glennbo" <> wrote in message news:Xns9AB6A053DC56BBrownShoesDontMakeIt@69.28.186.120... > In news:wZB2k.3818$LN.3438@trndny03 the killer robot "Steve Karl" > <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship > cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... > >>> Cake has in the last three years gone more and more towards a model >>> of re- selling the same pig, but with new lipstick. The core >>> differences from Sonar 4/5/6/7 are slight, once you strip away >>> whatever 3rd party junk came with any given version. In all the >>> versions of Sonar they have never made the UI scalable, and have made >>> visual components way too freeking big. I think they have a >>> multi-monitor mindset that they can't seem to think outside of. The >>> console view is huge, as if they expect for you to put it on it's own >>> monitor. >>> >>> I installed both Sonar 5 and Reaper onto my little tiny Eee PC >>> laptop. You can see from the following screen caps how Sonar's >>> console view hogs up the entire screen and then some, where Reaper >>> with it's 100% scalable and skinnable GUI interface fits the console >>> on the bottom (docked) and still has room for track view on half the >>> screen. >>> >>> http://members.cox.net/spambaconandspam/EeeSonar.jpg >>> http://members.cox.net/spambaconandspam/EeeReaper.jpg >>> >> >> >> The way to do this right is to make those aspects of the window >> resizeable by dragging the same way the track view ( meters when >> horizontal ) can be resized by moving the center bar. These guys might >> be programmers but they're definately not visionary about it. > > Hell, if I were to implement scaling, I'd do it where you hold down CTRL, > and then scroll your mouse wheel until the desired size of objects was > reached. Yea. Now that's a great idea. Very similar to how Blender zooms in and out. With Reaper, you have to get into it's preferences, and then type > in a value, like for instance on my micro laptop I put in 80% While it's > great that it can even do it, it would be even better if you could see it > as it scales. I had to try a bunch of different values in Reaper before > deciding to go with 80% > > > -- > Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email > ________ ____ > / ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____ > / / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \ > / /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ / > \____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo > Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits > Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
Re: Gotta put this on my list In news:3ZC2k.206$n9.43@trndny01 the killer robot "Steve Karl" <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... >>> Figure out how to sync. Sonar to a Vegas (running on an other >>> machine) master clock using MidiOverLan. That would be an awesome >>> farm animal hybred. >> >> For me, if a DAW can import a video, only to use as a point of >> reference, then it's good enough. I've used Sonar to create the >> final video before, mixing the audio and video together into a single >> compressed file, like an AVI, but I really prefer to use the DAW for >> creating the sound only these days, then I pull the original video >> into Vegas, and pull the audio only that was created in the DAW into >> Vegas, and then using Vegas with it's superior video capabilities to >> create my final file. That exactly how I created the little short >> video I did last night. I recorded the video of me playing the >> Stratocoustic using the capture program that comes with Vegas, then I >> imported that video (which had high quality audio of the guitar) into >> Reaper, added the bass and the drums, then exported as a WAV file, >> just the stereo audio track. Then I fired up Vegas, loaded the >> video, deleted it's audio, then dragged and dropped the stereo audio >> file I created in Reaper. > > Makes sense. Similar to my work flow. > It's really cool that you did the gutar first! I wish I had played to a click or something though, because there is one point in the music where the timing sorta hesitates due to my fingers not getting planted into the proper positions quick enough. It made it more tricky when adding the bass and drums. -- Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to Reply by email ________ ____ / ____/ /__ ____ ____ / __ )____ / / __/ / _ \/ __ \/ __ \/ __ / __ \ / /_/ / / __/ / / / / / / /_/ / /_/ / \____/_/\___/_/ /_/_/ /_/_____/\____/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Glennbo http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/jambits Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/ThePseudonyms
Rick Paul wrote: > "kitekrazy" <> wrote in message > news:zVz2k.4100$... >> What will they throw in this time to tempt us? Will it be another synth >> that takes up 2GB of space? IS that really a rompler than a synth? > .... >> Cubase and Sonar stand out because they have a staff view. If you don't >> use it there seems to be a lot more competition. > > My personal hope for a next version of SONAR is a major league revamp of > Staff View.< How many versions of Sonar have you held your breath on that?
"Glennbo" <> wrote in message news:Xns9AB69967E6B3DBrownShoesDontMakeIt@69.28.186.120... > thought that Sonar's audio engine was not very efficient, like how if you > loop a section to rehearse a part, it not only doesn't smoothly go from > the > end of the loop to the beginning, but may gap, snap, pop, and/or crash. I haven't seen that problem in SONAR in a long time. Perhaps V5? Definitely isn't a problem I've seen in S7, and I use the looping pretty frequently, especially when tracking vocal parts so I can just hit Record once, then track a bunch of takes of singing the complete song (or just a section if doing BGVs) so as to avoid having to shift from singer mode to engineer mode and back. > I have zero need for a staff view or printing sheet music, and the midi That's cuz you're a drummer. ;-) Sorry, couldn't resist. Rick -- ======================================= Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: www.RickPaul.info MySpace: www.myspace.com/rickpaulmusic =======================================
