Thread

The unrivaled, non-aliasing Expression Engine™, exclusive to Cakewalk Instruments, is at the heart of their unparalleled sound quality and capabilities for creative expression. Expression Engine provides rich resampling and synthesis, while simultaneously giving access to extended performance characteristics of sound programs.

Expression Engine is a multifunctional engine, providing capabilities for several types of synthesis under one hood, including multisample rendering, wavetable synthesis, REX playback and manipulation, waveguide synthesis, and an extensive DSP library of effects.

Like all digital instruments, Expression Engine’s audio engine relies on extensive audio resampling in order to generate musical instrument sounds. Expression Engine’s resampling leads the industry in clean, anti-aliased real-time sound production for multisample audio playback. (Aliasing is unfavorable digital distortion inherent in the process of resampling).

Expression Engine’s wavetable synthesis provides a resampling technique, which comes even closer to anti-aliasing perfection than multisample rendering. Wavetable synthesis utilizes a single, inaudible, one-cycle waveform, and through analysis and resampling, synthesizes this sound across the entire MIDI key-range. This process is similar in some respects to the propagation of simple waveforms found in analog modes of synthesis.

In addition, Expression Engine provides waveguide synthesis, a form of physical modeling that simulates the properties of real acoustic environments.

http://www.cakewalk.com/Press/ExpressionEngine.asp

...Expression Engine provides waveguide synthesis, a form of physical modeling that simulates the properties of real acoustic environments.

Trademarks are such a wonderful thing.

So they’ve trademarked it?

Sarcasm. It doesn’t look as though anyone has trademarked anything.

It’s probably much ado over not much, since the two EE’s are fully unrelated. Interesting, though.

Sarcasm. It doesn’t look as though anyone has trademarked anything.

Well, actually…

I stand corrected. I was blinded by the little circle with the “R” stuck inside.

Trademarks, especially Registered, can get very specific about what ‘territory’ is owned, allowing multiple entities to use similar marks/names/etc., so I don’t see much conflict with Cakewalk.

Remember the iPhone? Prior to Apple’s launch of the iPhone, the trademark was with Cisco, but poorly worded and more poorly protected, which left a huge opening for Apple.

yes, which led to a lawsuit
Cisco Sues Apple

For which Apple settled. Not the best reference me thinks 😊

For which Apple settled.

“Settled” is a bit misleading since Cisco ended up, in actuality, “losing” the name recognition battle as well as the potential of their trademark. Apple won that battle because Cisco didn’t protect their trademark.

ugh… the point is the had to pay money because they infringed on an existing trademark which is a bad example of how closely trademarks can be. lol

If by poorly protected you mean apple paying them money to use it, i guess that’s OK, but the result is an example of exactly how well protected it was.

i’m also a little suprised at your statement of ‘misleading’ because settling is precisely what Apple did, and how you can determine who won or lost with not even half the information of the settlement is beyond me. They sued. apple was forced to settle, cisco won.

The brief announcement made no reference to any financial agreement, nor did it specify how the two companies might work together. Representatives for Apple and Cisco declined to comment further, citing confidentiality restrictions

for all we know apple is paying cisco for every single sale.

Money went from Apple to Cisco?

lol wow.. just wow….......

I think I’m done with this topic. it’s bordering on ridiculous

Agreed.

The point of the ‘trademark’ issue is basic. Whether registered or the more generic TM, there needs to be sufficient detail as to what the trademark covers. Cisco, by almost all counts, did not do a good job protecting their version of the iPhone trademark, which allowed Apple to effectively take ownership of the trademarked ‘brand.’ There was an agreement, yes, but Cisco lost and it’s unlikely they gained much, if anything at all, in monetary compensation.

Regarding Expression Engine, even if both are registered (as EE is) and trademarked appropriately, there still could be confusion in the market place, allowing one entity or the other to attempt to extend the parameters of the trademark. That happens all the time. I don’t see much confusion between EE and Cakewalk, though, but some lawyer might.

Cakewalk’s is two words…

And that would make a difference how, exactly? They’d still be “confusingly similar”. The only way to coexist before the law, as it were, is to have been granted for different areas. A “UNIX” fire extinguisher is fine, while we already got an OS by that name 😊

I am coming out with Expression Motor, top that all!  Maybe even “Conveying Force”, then I will use EE as my code base and make lots of money. This sounded like a really good plan at first but I am still trying to grasp the light bulb moment.  Also thinking now at how many geeks would be coming out at the wood work at me, it’s too monstrous a thought, I digress.