trtzbass
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 150
- Joined: 2014/01/01 13:30:07
- Location: London
- Status: offline
A case against monthly upgrades
Hey fellow SPLATters, hope you're all well and happy.
I have been mulling over this for quite a while and I'm kinda ready to bring my thoughts to your attention and invite a constructive debate.
Before I start explaining my idea, I want to say that of course all my opinions are subjective and offered as a contribution to help making Sonar a better software.
I admit that this post was triggered by the slightly underwhelming update this month.
A bit about me so you know where I'm coming from. I am a very active independent producer / songwriter from London. One of my main gigs is to coach and develop artists that bring me their ideas; on top of that I also do E - sessions and write with major label artists. I own and use Sonar as well as Cubase, S1, Pro Tools, DP9, Bitwig, Samplitude, Reaper and I get to know and interact with Logic and Live workflows because of clients or studios where I go and work. I use all those daws and, spoiler alert, they all have strong points and huge weaknesses, no exception. Me, I'd very much like to use SONAR 100% of the time.
Its core functions are great, the Skylight interface is a beautiful place to work in and, kill me for saying that, it just sounds better. I have mixed the same tune in Sonar, Cubase, Samplitude and S1 and Sonar sounded better. I had a few producer friends doing a blind test and they all concurred.
Now coming to the main topic
I used to enjoy the monthly updates because, as a fellow forum dweller said, it's like Christmas every month. Having said that I appreciate how having a deadline puts the Bakers under pressure to be delivering something at the end of the month.
Now, because of my familiarity with a number of new generation DAWs, I would like to offer an insight on what IN MY OPINION would make Sonar a more modern DAW and a palatable product for the new generation of up and coming producers. I am not inviting you to change your mind, I am just sharing my thoughts
All the new generation DAWs have a few shared traits that make me perceive them as "flexible" and "modern".
in no specific order:
Vectorial sizable GUI, with skinned menus and option windows (so they don't look like system windows, in short)
Advanced time stretching facilities (no need to bounce; simpler multi - track workflow)
In the flow workflow (ability to do as many operations as possible without having to stop playback)
Non - destructive quantisation
Retrospective MIDI recording, Audio pre - record (having an audio buffer that records a few seconds before you hit REC)
I don't know if any of these features are on the Bakers' "to do" list, but that's kinda beside the point, this is not a wish - list post (if it was I would ask to fix the Score Editor and have the Tempo / time signature track in the main window)
My point is that it's fair to believe that any of those upgrades to Sonar would mean to gut the sofware and re - build part of its code to accommodate the new feature. It's also fair to say that such an operation would take way more than one month to be implemented. I am sure the Bakers have great things in mind for my favourite DAW but I am not sure the monthly update thing would allow them to fully feel free to get their hands dirty and evolve the program past the DAW 1.0 status. And if they are doing that, I'd rather them concentrate on it than having to implement something they can achieve in a 30 days work cycle and keep the bigger stuff in the background.
All I'm saying is: I'd rather wait for the juicy stuff. Then again, maybe it's just me and my expectations which are indeed my own.
I think the Bakers are doing a great job to keep their promises and some of the updates were truly useful, BTW
What do you all think?
Jordan Brown - he tried to play bass www.jordanbrown.co.uk twitter.com/trtzbass trgmachine.bandcamp.com
|
THambrecht
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
- Total Posts : 867
- Joined: 2010/12/10 06:42:03
- Location: Germany
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 13:58:36
(permalink)
Thank you.
I think Cakewalk is also working on complex updates. For example "Ripple editing" was something like that, where they have certainly worked for many months. Sometimes we get a monthly update with smaller improvements, and then with big improvements, where they have worked very long time.
This year Cakewalk doesn't tell us anymore on which improvements they are working. So they are not under pressure. So they can work on great functions a half year and bring as monthly updates with fixes or smaller improvements, which are made alongside.
I'm sure that they are testing and planning long-term functions where they need many months of work. But at the same time they work on smaller improvements.
I guess they work safely on ten things at the same time with several people.
Audio-Pre-Record +1
We digitize tapes, vinyl, dat, md ... in broadcast and studio quality for publishers, public institutions and individuals.4 x Intel Quad-CPU, 4GHz Sonar Platinum (Windows 10 - 64Bit) and 14 computers for recording tapes, vinyl ...
4 x RME Fireface 800, 2 x Roland Octa Capture and 4 x Roland Quad Capture, Focusrite .... Studer A80, RP99, EMT948 ...
(Germany) http://www.hambrecht.de
|
trtzbass
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 150
- Joined: 2014/01/01 13:30:07
- Location: London
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 14:06:39
(permalink)
THambrecht
Thank you.
I think Cakewalk is also working on complex updates. For example "Ripple editing" was something like that, where they have certainly worked for many months. Sometimes we get a monthly update with smaller improvements, and then with big improvements, where they have worked very long time.
This year Cakewalk doesn't tell us anymore on which improvements they are working. So they are not under pressure. So they can work on great functions a half year and bring as monthly updates with fixes or smaller improvements, which are made alongside.
I'm sure that they are testing and planning long-term functions where they need many months of work. But at the same time they work on smaller improvements.
I guess they work safely on ten things at the same time with several people.
Audio-Pre-Record +1
That's a very good point, cheers; I have observed my own behaviour (I must have refreshed the forum page at least 40 times the other day to see if they dropped the update) and at the same time I saw how people in the forum started questioning whether the update was going to happen or not, etc... I imagine that must put some kind of pressure on the developers, hence my question. I wonder if they feel compelled to have to deliver every month and if that takes time / resources from the developement of more radical upgrades
Jordan Brown - he tried to play bass www.jordanbrown.co.uk twitter.com/trtzbass trgmachine.bandcamp.com
|
paulo
Max Output Level: -13 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6218
- Joined: 2007/01/30 05:06:57
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 14:13:04
(permalink)
Personally I'd rather they spent all their time fixing what is known to be broken than spending it on things that aren't, like fiddling with menus like they have in the last couple of updates.
Have to admit that I'm struggling to understand the concept of, or use for, a pre-recording recording. How would it know when to start if you haven't told it that you want to record yet and what useful content would you capture if it did ?
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 14:30:02
(permalink)
trtzbass
I am not sure the monthly update thing would allow them to fully feel free to get their hands dirty and evolve the program past the DAW 1.0 status. And if they are doing that, I'd rather them concentrate on it than having to implement something they can achieve in a 30 days work cycle and keep the bigger stuff in the background.
All I'm saying is: I'd rather wait for the juicy stuff. Then again, maybe it's just me and my expectations which are indeed my own.
Many of the updates have taken months to do; they don't have to be completed within a 30-day cycle. Generally if there's a "light" update, it means that other things are happening in the background that are either in development or "not yet ready for prime time." You'll also notice that some of the bigger updates are rolled out in stages. For example when Ripple Editing appeared it was mostly for audio. A later update added MIDI. The PRV updates also occurred as consecutive updates, as did comping. Finally, the updates that involve speed improvements may not have the "sex appeal" of new features, but my understanding is that some are relatively time-consuming because they affect multiple areas of the program, which means significant QC efforts. These kind of improvements tend to fly "under the radar" until the day comes when you need to, say, clone a track 30 times and you realize it happened in the blink of an eye.
I have mixed the same tune in Sonar, Cubase, Samplitude and S1 and Sonar sounded better. I had a few producer friends doing a blind test and they all concurred.
Not to derail the thread, but I too use multiple programs in the course of my gig, and obviously I prefer SONAR. I've heard several people who use multiple programs say they think SONAR sounds better. You mentioned mixing as sounding better, but do you find that also translates to the final two-track mix?
|
trtzbass
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 150
- Joined: 2014/01/01 13:30:07
- Location: London
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 14:39:11
(permalink)
paulo
Personally I'd rather they spent all their time fixing what is known to be broken than spending it on things that aren't, like fiddling with menus like they have in the last couple of updates.
Have to admit that I'm struggling to understand the concept of, or use for, a pre-recording recording. How would it know when to start if you haven't told it that you want to record yet and what useful content would you capture if it did ?
The Pre record buffer captures the few seconds before you press the record button, meaning the software is permanently in record mode and attaches let's say an extra 5 seconds to whatever it is you are recording. Kinda like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_WocJDHtsII can tell you when that has been useful to me. I was recording a guitarist's solo. Dude feels inspired and decides to play this super badass run before the punch in point. Now, because I was using a DAW with that feature, I could simply grab the left boundary of the audio clip and there it was. Another situation: Sometimes singers want to reherarse a section of a tune. I normally record everything, but in an 8 hour session several things happen. In that specific situation, my singer did this fabulous ad lib no one was expecting, just when the executive producer decided he wanted to discuss a part so I was distracted. As soon as I heard her, I pressed record but of course missed the first three second of it. Again, the pre record buffer saved the situation and I had her full performance down. It is a little feature that I find useful more often than not
Jordan Brown - he tried to play bass www.jordanbrown.co.uk twitter.com/trtzbass trgmachine.bandcamp.com
|
pwalpwal
Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3249
- Joined: 2015/01/17 03:52:50
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 14:40:07
(permalink)
trtzbass
Vectorial sizable GUI,
don't hold your breath - if that was ever going to happen, skylight was the opportunity
|
trtzbass
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 150
- Joined: 2014/01/01 13:30:07
- Location: London
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 14:49:22
(permalink)
Anderton
trtzbass
I am not sure the monthly update thing would allow them to fully feel free to get their hands dirty and evolve the program past the DAW 1.0 status. And if they are doing that, I'd rather them concentrate on it than having to implement something they can achieve in a 30 days work cycle and keep the bigger stuff in the background.
All I'm saying is: I'd rather wait for the juicy stuff. Then again, maybe it's just me and my expectations which are indeed my own.
Many of the updates have taken months to do; they don't have to be completed within a 30-day cycle. Generally if there's a "light" update, it means that other things are happening in the background that are either in development or "not yet ready for prime time."
You'll also notice that some of the bigger updates are rolled out in stages. For example when Ripple Editing appeared it was mostly for audio. A later update added MIDI. The PRV updates also occurred as consecutive updates, as did comping. Finally, the updates that involve speed improvements may not have the "sex appeal" of new features, but my understanding is that some are relatively time-consuming because they affect multiple areas of the program, which means significant QC efforts. These kind of improvements tend to fly "under the radar" until the day comes when you need to, say, clone a track 30 times and you realize it happened in the blink of an eye.
I have mixed the same tune in Sonar, Cubase, Samplitude and S1 and Sonar sounded better. I had a few producer friends doing a blind test and they all concurred.
Not to derail the thread, but I too use multiple programs in the course of my gig, and obviously I prefer SONAR. I've heard several people who use multiple programs say they think SONAR sounds better. You mentioned mixing as sounding better, but do you find that also translates to the final two-track mix?
Hey Craig, thanks for participating, it's a real pleasure meeting you (even if it's just 'in digital') I welcome your insight and thank you for that; I truly am in two minds regarding the topic and I'm trying to form an opinion. RE: sound hell yes! Definitely. Now I know many might disagree with me saying all DAWs sound the same, etc; I can tell you my SPLAT mixdown was a little bit wider with a bit more "space" between the instrument and a slightly tighter bass response. The mix was ever so slightly more "in your face" Yes the pan law setting was the same for all the DAWs. Might be placebo effect, but not for four different unbiased pro producers here in London. I am only sorry I deleted the mixdowns as it was a couple years ago.
Jordan Brown - he tried to play bass www.jordanbrown.co.uk twitter.com/trtzbass trgmachine.bandcamp.com
|
frankjcc
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 383
- Joined: 2004/08/29 08:13:06
- Location: Chicago, IL
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 14:51:37
(permalink)
paulo
Have to admit that I'm struggling to understand the concept of, or use for, a pre-recording recording. How would it know when to start if you haven't told it that you want to record yet and what useful content would you capture if it did ?
At first I didn't see the practical reasons either, until I remembered the time I was punching in manually and I was daydreaming and cut the 1st word clean in half. Or how about when you are just playing around and you do something you know you can't do again, by the time you think I wish I could have recorded that, push REC EDIT: This actually sounds like a really nice feature to have, Start warming up on your instrument, trying to find an idea for a new song, and when something sparks, hit the footswitch to start recording. EDIT: 2 just looked to see if I was going to invent the usb footswitch, not a chance. But I was thinking we could use two foot switches, one for good talent on the right, when you press softly, it pre-records the whole warm up performance, and the one on the left, with bad talent, when you stomp it, it deletes all tracks and shuts the computer down.
Sonar platinum (life) Scarlett 18i20 2nd gen Intel i7 7700k 4.2ghz 16gig ram Geforce GTX 550 ti Win 10 Pro 64
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 14:55:32
(permalink)
trtzbass
I truly am in two minds regarding the topic and I'm trying to form an opinion. Well there are always features and bug fixes happening in parallel, so there's no real reason not to release the "simple" stuff when it's ready (and at least something's always ready during any given month). There are some people who don't update every month, but prefer to update every quarter or whatever, perhaps because they don't want to be bothered with updating for something they don't feel is crucial to what they do. They're willing to wait until something they really need comes along, and then they update everything at once.
|
AllanH
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 406
- Joined: 2015/07/01 09:09:04
- Location: Central Coast California, USA
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 14:57:14
(permalink)
In the long-term it's a very effective development model to only support the "current release". Having to support legacy releases on new operating systems is time consuming and does not further the product. With limited staff, I think the currently model makes a lot of sense.
From my end-user perspective, Cakewalk seems to deliver a nice mix of fixes and features monthly. I'm actually impressed and very happy with Sonar and where they are taking it.
Sonar Platinum, EWHO/D, Spitfire, Miroslav, Pianoteq, ...., Kurzweil.
|
trtzbass
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 150
- Joined: 2014/01/01 13:30:07
- Location: London
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 15:24:47
(permalink)
Anderton
trtzbass
I truly am in two minds regarding the topic and I'm trying to form an opinion.
Well there are always features and bug fixes happening in parallel, so there's no real reason not to release the "simple" stuff when it's ready (and at least something's always ready during any given month).
I see what you're saying, but that's where my question comes from; and again I admit it all boils down to my personal preference. As the kind of user I am I would prefer to see workflow enhancements over anything else. From what you are saying the team works at two speeds, the quick one to release the 'simple' stuff and a more paced one that works on the 'big' stuff. I like the latter better, and I'd much prefer if all the efforts were directed to the 'big' team; In your terms my questions would be: do the developers feel compelled to have to keep outputting 'simple' because of user base pressure? Ripple edit was a great, great feature that immensely enhanced my workflow. Could I have had received it a month earlier if they (possibly) didn't have to fulfill the monthly update pledge? Having said all that, it's their company and they have a road map and fair enough. All we can do is discuss for the pleasure of it!
Jordan Brown - he tried to play bass www.jordanbrown.co.uk twitter.com/trtzbass trgmachine.bandcamp.com
|
trtzbass
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 150
- Joined: 2014/01/01 13:30:07
- Location: London
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 15:26:50
(permalink)
AllanH
In the long-term it's a very effective development model to only support the "current release". Having to support legacy releases on new operating systems is time consuming and does not further the product. With limited staff, I think the currently model makes a lot of sense.
From my end-user perspective, Cakewalk seems to deliver a nice mix of fixes and features monthly. I'm actually impressed and very happy with Sonar and where they are taking it.
that's good stuff then and it's great that's working for you. And I think we are saying the same thing: if you keep the legacy code, the software does not evolve
Jordan Brown - he tried to play bass www.jordanbrown.co.uk twitter.com/trtzbass trgmachine.bandcamp.com
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 15:35:28
(permalink)
trtzbass
Ripple edit was a great, great feature that immensely enhanced my workflow. Could I have had received it a month earlier if they (possibly) didn't have to fulfill the monthly update pledge?
If Cakewalk prioritized something as being the only update worth doing, it would likely happen faster. But not everyone uses SONAR the same way. Probably some people would have preferred that Ripple Editing be put on hold so they could get an improved PRV if they work a lot with MIDI, or comping with Melodyne clips if they work a lot with vocals, happening earlier. It's all a balancing act between resources, user expectations, bug fixes, and new features. The balance will never be perfect for everyone, but the only way that can change is if SONAR acquires more new users to increase the resources part of the balance.
|
trtzbass
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 150
- Joined: 2014/01/01 13:30:07
- Location: London
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 15:58:35
(permalink)
Anderton
trtzbass
Ripple edit was a great, great feature that immensely enhanced my workflow. Could I have had received it a month earlier if they (possibly) didn't have to fulfill the monthly update pledge?
If Cakewalk prioritized something as being the only update worth doing, it would likely happen faster. But not everyone uses SONAR the same way. Probably some people would have preferred that Ripple Editing be put on hold so they could get an improved PRV if they work a lot with MIDI, or comping with Melodyne clips if they work a lot with vocals, happening earlier. It's all a balancing act between resources, user expectations, bug fixes, and new features. The balance will never be perfect for everyone, but the only way that can change is if SONAR acquires more new users to increase the resources part of the balance.
I cannot possibly fault anything you said. All I can humbly put on the plate then is my list of what I personally think would make Sonar palatable to a new generation of users, which is in my original post. I might add an upgrade of the matrix page to match the workflow of Live / Bitwig. My experience on the field with the up and coming songwriters is that a big (worrying?) number of them accepts that paradigm as their main workflow. It makes less sense to me because I'm old and see an arrangement in a linear fashion. If I had to develop a new DAW now, my money would be on that kind of workflow, even tho I have almost no use for it!
Jordan Brown - he tried to play bass www.jordanbrown.co.uk twitter.com/trtzbass trgmachine.bandcamp.com
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 16:52:43
(permalink)
trtzbass
All I can humbly put on the plate then is my list of what I personally think would make Sonar palatable to a new generation of users, which is in my original post.
I might add an upgrade of the matrix page to match the workflow of Live / Bitwig. My experience on the field with the up and coming songwriters is that a big (worrying?) number of them accepts that paradigm as their main workflow.
It makes less sense to me because I'm old and see an arrangement in a linear fashion. I agree 100%, and have submitted several suggestions to Cakewalk on this very subject. To quantify, I think a lot of the newer paradigms are oriented toward composers, while programs like SONAR, Pro Tools, etc. have their roots with players. IMHO no program has successfully wedded the two methods of working seamlessly - I'd love to see SONAR become that program!
|
trtzbass
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 150
- Joined: 2014/01/01 13:30:07
- Location: London
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 18:34:14
(permalink)
Anderton
trtzbass
All I can humbly put on the plate then is my list of what I personally think would make Sonar palatable to a new generation of users, which is in my original post.
I might add an upgrade of the matrix page to match the workflow of Live / Bitwig. My experience on the field with the up and coming songwriters is that a big (worrying?) number of them accepts that paradigm as their main workflow.
It makes less sense to me because I'm old and see an arrangement in a linear fashion.
I agree 100%, and have submitted several suggestions to Cakewalk on this very subject. To quantify, I think a lot of the newer paradigms are oriented toward composers, while programs like SONAR, Pro Tools, etc. have their roots with players. IMHO no program has successfully wedded the two methods of working seamlessly - I'd love to see SONAR become that program!
That sounds like a great plan! Real pleasure talking to you
Jordan Brown - he tried to play bass www.jordanbrown.co.uk twitter.com/trtzbass trgmachine.bandcamp.com
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 18:57:04
(permalink)
trtzbass
And I think we are saying the same thing: if you keep the legacy code, the software does not evolve
Although there are definite advantages to a "build-things-from-the-ground up" approach, software like SONAR is modular. Something like ARA integration can work with existing code (I'm frankly surprised that more DAWs haven't done it). Also I think the speed improvements that you've been seeing lately come from replacing sections of old code. Fundamental changes do take a while, though...Ripple Editing is a case in point. I suspect the more radical a change (e.g., scalable graphics), the more time it would take. But really, I know nothing about code other than at one point, I was able to bounce pixels around on a Commodore-64's screen  . So I get to make requests while being blissfully ignorant of the consequences. When I wrote the manual for Ableton Live 2 I asked to make the Solo button be recordable as part of a performance. I figured that would be easy. Instead, I was told it was just about impossible because it was always intended to be a diagnostic tool in the studio, not a live performance feature. When I've asked Noel about the feasibility of certain features, sometimes something I assume is super-complex he does in a day, but then he tells me something I assume is simple would take months of development. I'm glad my responsibility is restricted to using (and occasionally abusing) software .
|
Audioicon
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 349
- Joined: 2016/06/13 23:25:25
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 19:13:44
(permalink)
Make it lean and Stable.
For me those are the two biggest priority.
Sonar has greatly improved and mature over the years. As far as upgrades monthly, I am a traditionalist, I don't need all the features. But others might.
|
bitman
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4105
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:11:54
- Location: Keystone Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 19:43:41
(permalink)
I don't know didily poo but with the "late" early release and the hush hush that led up to it that fueled speculation that we're really gonna get a good lookin pony this month then, thud, makes me think that whatever they were really cookin up (an arrangement window perhaps?) didn't prove to be ready so maybe next month.
When they announced monthly updates I thought " that's nuts", but I like it and, I knew that I would.
The reason I said arrangement window is that is the top of the pops in terms of popularity and votes over
in the Bakery.
|
mettelus
Max Output Level: -22 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5321
- Joined: 2005/08/05 03:19:25
- Location: Maryland, USA
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 21:48:16
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Cactus Music 2017/09/05 21:46:39
For folks who have limited time to work at a DAW each month, I think most prefer to use the DAW than to read/research changes that have occurred. It seems like that overhead on the user is taken for granted. I have often wondered how many get a 2-hour window to use a DAW each weekend but come away with less achieved than intended.
ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), i7-8700k, 16GB RAM, GTX-1070Ti, Win 10 Pro, Saffire PRO 24 DSP, A-300 PRO, plus numerous gadgets and gizmos that make or manipulate sound in some way.
|
BobF
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8124
- Joined: 2003/11/05 18:43:11
- Location: Missouri - USA
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/03 23:05:09
(permalink)
There is zero requirement to update every month/release. If you don't want to be arsed with dealing with them, then choose an interval that works for you.
Bob -- Angels are crying because truth has died ...Illegitimi non carborundum --Studio One Pro / i7-6700@3.80GHZ, 32GB Win 10 Pro x64 Roland FA06, LX61+, Fishman Tripleplay, FaderPort, US-16x08 + ARC2.5/Event PS8s Waves Gold/IKM Max/Nomad Factory IS3/K11U
|
soens
Max Output Level: -23.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5154
- Joined: 2005/09/16 03:19:55
- Location: Location: Location
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/04 01:52:01
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Cactus Music 2017/09/05 21:47:22
That's what I thought. As one who only gets a few hours now and then to use Sonar I choose not to update every time. Problem is, I find and report a hiccup or annoyance in "my" version that's already obsolete by a month or two only to get told to update before complaining about it. Monthly updates are fine but there is no win-win between productive use time and problem solving.
|
Leee
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 783
- Joined: 2004/12/21 11:31:00
- Location: The Great NorthWest
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/04 02:13:24
(permalink)
I've been saying this for a long time and in many various posts here. Some people are just getting too spoiled by these monthly updates and have come to expect great big shiny new features every single month, without even giving much thought to the amount of work that goes into producing an update EVERY single month, for years at a time.
I'd be happy with updates every 6 months. But it's not like they are putting out monthly updates just for the sake of doing it. Each update has something valuable, like a fix or minor tweaks. Not every update is going to be "an early Christmas" for everyone. All I have to say is thank you Bakers, your hard work is most appreciated, by at least some of us.
Lee Shapirowww.soundclick.com/leeshapiro Welcome BandLab and thank you for giving Cakewalk and Sonar a new lease on life.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/04 04:46:53
(permalink)
soens
That's what I thought. As one who only gets a few hours now and then to use Sonar I choose not to update every time. Problem is, I find and report a hiccup or annoyance in "my" version that's already obsolete by a month or two only to get told to update before complaining about it. Monthly updates are fine but there is no win-win between productive use time and problem solving.
Consider that if there's a new feature, you don't have to use it. If there's a bug that's fixed in a subsequent update, then download the update for the bug fix and ignore the rest. You don't have to use Smart Swipe, Ripple Editing, etc. You can do things the way you've always done them. Granted, there are times when something changes - e.g., the keyboard shortcut used for stretching - but those are described in the eZine. The eZine may be 60 pages but all you need to read is the section about the updates, which takes only a few minutes. Another thing to consider is that several of the new features do save time, for example ripple editing if you know how to use it. If you have limited time, spending 20 minutes learning which features are of use to you could end up saving you hours and hours over the course of a year. There are still people on 8.5.3 and they believe it's the best SONAR ever because it does what they want. They don't realize what they're missing in Platinum or even X3 ("Melodyne? What's that?"), but it doesn't matter if they can do what they want to do. I think some people take the whole update thing way too seriously. You have a choice now, you didn't before: either you were stuck with the program you had, bugs and all, forever or you had to endure a big yearly update with the subsequent fixes dribbling in over months. Given the way software, operating systems, and computers work, I think the current model is a major improvement. (Those who want a predictable, capable environment that never changes should seriously consider some of the all-in-one studios - e.g., TASCAM, Zoom, etc. Computer-based recording is not necessarily a solution for everyone.)
|
Shambler
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 783
- Joined: 2010/07/06 05:20:19
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/04 06:53:13
(permalink)
Some great points eloquently put, thanks.
Retrospective record, yes I miss this from Cubase...it worked for Midi too and I seem to remember it wasn't just for a few seconds before hitting record either?, it was basically always in record mode, very useful.
SONAR Platypus on Win10 64bit. Studio One Pro / Cubase Pro 9.5...just in case. 8GB i7-2600 3.4GHz Gigabyte Z68XP-UD3P Geforce GTX970 Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 2nd Gen Prophet 12/Rev 2/Virus Snow Zebra2/DIVA/NI Komplete 10
|
kennywtelejazz
Max Output Level: -3.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7151
- Joined: 2005/10/22 06:27:02
- Location: The Planet Tele..X..
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/04 10:12:19
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby John 2017/09/05 00:37:12
My 2 cents , I live in a society full of mediocrity . Mediocrity is about as high as many people and organizations are willing to raise the top rung of the attainment bar of aspiration too. As folks used to say the thing about misery, let me rephrase the words to " Mediocrity Loves Company " Now Cakewalk comes along after many years of operating under a set of company standards that they have kept very close to the vest . FWIW, I admire people that can keep a tight lip...same goes for a company . Cakewalk then decides to break away from a traditional yearly upgrade cycle . Not only did the company break away from a traditional yearly upgrade cycle . In the process of instituting change , Cakewalk not only reinvented itself , Cakewalk decided to change the way the game is played and how they do business . Cakewalk offered subscription pricing where you get to keep the software well before other companies . They Created more Cakewalk brand top quality plugs . Cakewalk added much hipper 3 rd party content , + a number of other things that could fill out this incomplete partial list ... For now , I want to keep this post to the monthly SONAR program updates ... I happen to fall into the camp of SONAR users that Loves getting the new monthly SONAR program upgrades . For the record I have no problem admitting to some of the program upgrades that have been out for a while are some of the new features and workflow in SONAR that I am learning ... What may be new to me in SONAR may be old news to you ....SO WHAT  We are talking about movement , the movement of energy combined with the knowledge to harness that energy and put it to constructive use . This energy can be harnessed to overcome inertia and personal creative stagnation . I honestly think that what Cakewalk has done with new monthly SONAR program upgrades was to raise the bar so high that it would almost be impossible for a dedicated "casual home " SONAR user like me to fully comprehend the amount of hard work and sweat that went into each monthly SONAR upgrade cycle behind the scenes ... You know what cracks me up and also gives me a case of the giggles ? Cakewalk has actually out upgraded and out updated Reaper in the past 5 or 6 months ....  who would have thought that one could ever happen or could even be possible ? OK I respect the monthly upgrade cycle . I will tell you why ... A number of months back I was talking with a SONAR user that has successfully placed their music with some television programs and films . A few of the key points this person had shared with me were " to never give up" . Always keep working at the music because people quit all the time way to early when they could have just rode it out and gotten someplace if they just kept working at it . That one I have been able to use at least w my guitar playing ... Where he really got me was , he felt that it was very important to be able to work within a deadline .. He insisted that working within a deadline and meeting it was the mark of a true professional in the music bizz . I'm pretty sure there happens to be a few members here that have that ability and know exactly what it means to be a pro on that level and meet all sorts of deadlines ... as a guitarist / sideman . I have been there when I was younger ...to date , not yet as a SONAR user  I'm not giving up though ...  Whats my point ? Look at how wonderful this all is once a person removes the whole personal "what's in it for me attitude" . Cakewalk has stepped out with their "Game Time Play" in the past couple of years in leaps and bounds ... As a SONAR user , I can feel the power of The growth and evolution of SONAR that has been very exciting and consistent . I'm in Awe that Cakewalk can meet these type of deadlines .... I tip my hat to Cakewalk in respect , Kenny
|
MANTRASKY
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 170
- Joined: 2009/01/31 18:11:40
- Location: Cleveland, Ohio
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/04 11:25:46
(permalink)
A Lean and yet Complex program would be nice where Lock-Ups, Freeze don't exist maybe in a perfect world, for me Sonar has been extremely stable and most of the time I don't use "All Updates".
Rock Solid Performance so far.
|
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk Staff
- Total Posts : 6475
- Joined: 2003/11/03 17:22:50
- Location: Boston, MA, USA
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/04 12:29:48
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby pwalpwal 2017/09/04 14:28:03
pwalpwal
trtzbass
Vectorial sizable GUI,
don't hold your breath - if that was ever going to happen, skylight was the opportunity
You might just be surprised then. There is an ongoing project to modernize and improve the UI which will happen in phases. There are always multi-month background tasks in addition to what you see in the monthly releases. This year there have been several ongoing parallel projects that you will see the effects of in the coming months. Regarding the monthly updates policy - they allow us to be more responsive but its not all we do. There is longer term development that happens on an independent branch of the code. As and when long term features get ready they are released as an update so its not like they are being rushed to meet an arbitrary monthly schedule.
|
35mm
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1105
- Joined: 2008/12/09 08:21:44
- Location: Devon, UK
- Status: offline
Re: A case against monthly upgrades
2017/09/04 14:17:55
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Anderton 2017/09/04 15:13:14
To the OP,
I don't think you understand how software development works. You seem to be under the impression that the bakers are scrabbling around all month trying to come up with that month's update. That isn't the case. They use a versioning system such as git, which uses branches. One of those branches is the production branch which is what you end up using, but there is also a master branch and lots of development branches coming off that. What gets released in the production branch at the end of the month is a culmination of stuff that's been in development and testing for months. Behind the scenes, developers will be working on all sorts of stuff, trying out new ideas many of which may never see the light of day, fixing bugs etc.
Something else that modern software companies use is an agile development method e.g. scrum. That's too complicated to go into here, but in essence, it involves splitting everything into manageable chunks, assigning each chunk to a developer and assigning a time span to that. Then holding regular meetings to assess the progress of each thing. This all breaks down to make everything manageable and highly productive. And here's the big thing. A monthly release fits into the agile method perfectly! So monthly releases are so much more efficient all round and result in much higher quality.
Monthly releases are also more efficient for us users for similar reasons. It means that we don't have to cope with getting our heads around a major new release that suddenly changes the whole landscape and has to be re-learned all in one go. Instead, we get bite size changes each month which are far easier to understand and integrate into our workflows. If a release introduces a new bug, that bug can be fixed and rolled out much quicker without having to wait a year for the next major release or fiddling about with messy patches.
There are users who dislike the monthly release model, but perhaps if they understood a little about software development they would understand that it is a much better system all round. It's worth remembering that much of the Sonar you will be using in June 2018 exists in a branch now that bakers have access to and that makes our current version of Sonar look dated! They are constantly working in the future so that we can be up to date today and monthly releases mean that we are even more up to date - by about 11 months!
Splat, Win 10 64bit and all sorts of musical odds and sods collected over the years, but still missing a lot of my old analogue stuff I sold off years ago.
|