eratu
Max Output Level: -46.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2856
- Joined: 2007/01/27 22:08:32
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/14 23:24:19
(permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk
]
Cakewalk could combine the Edit Filter with Automation Lanes! Now THAT would be awesome :-)
More stuff is always awesome from a user's viewpoint. However if you had to trade between this and 5 other arguably more useful features, would you and other users really feel the same way about asking for this? Thats the point I'm making here. Everything is possible in software but it all comes with a development cost so cost benefit analysis is important to keep in mind.
Good point, and yes, the price may be high for lanes, but I think at least a number who have responded in this thread alone would say it is probably worth it... (not to mention the workflow list signers) And while we're at the price issue, more than a few people have mentioned +1 on more video support too. <hint hint>
Our current implementation of the edit filter with envelopes is unique and and space efficient, but certainly not half baked. Try using lanes on a laptop with less space and see how far you get with editing! Im pretty sure you will have a lot more clicking than with our approach.
Agreed, on small screens this will be a trade-off to some degree... <humor mode activated> however, due to the jumbo button and font sizes of the new X1 interface, we'll have issues running on smaller screens anyway, right? </end humor mode> ;) All gentle kidding aside, I think the screensize issue with lanes dissolves away since it's usually focused editing that is taking place with that many lanes, and, case in point, I use Reaper, Cubase and Live on laptops and haven't had an issue with lanes taking up too much space. I think in practice, the lanes do pay for their screen real estate with ample benefits. And if we have to trade other features for the price of lanes, I'll trade 5 plugins for 5 lanes. ;)
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/14 23:27:03
(permalink)
I will submit that sequencers and automation just sorta seem made for each other.
Exploit it.
|
Jose7822
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10031
- Joined: 2005/11/07 18:59:54
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/14 23:56:30
(permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk
]
Cakewalk could combine the Edit Filter with Automation Lanes! Now THAT would be awesome :-)
More stuff is always awesome from a user's viewpoint. However if you had to trade between this and 5 other arguably more useful features, would you and other users really feel the same way about asking for this? Thats the point I'm making here. Everything is possible in software but it all comes with a development cost so cost benefit analysis is important to keep in mind.
Our current implementation of the edit filter with envelopes is unique and and space efficient, but certainly not half baked. Try using lanes on a laptop with less space and see how far you get with editing! Im pretty sure you will have a lot more clicking than with our approach.
It depends on what you call "arguably more useful features". But again, I rather have ONE really well implemented feature than 5 OK ones. BTW, I wouldn't and didn't call the Edit Filter half-baked as it does function well even outside of automation. However, the Edit Filter is not a better solution to Envelope Lanes for the reasons I've already meantioned above. It's a step closer though, and I appreciate that. The thing is that Automation is an essential feature of any DAW, which is why I feel that Cakewalk, being one of the BIG boys among DAWs, needs to step it up a little more in this area. I can always get a replacement for ANY FX that comes bundle in SONAR from a 3rd party vendor, but I can NEVER get better automation (unless I move to another DAW, which I rather not). This is why I feel Cakewalk needs to keep focus on improving the core functionalities of a DAW (better Automation, Score Editor, Video Scoring, ACT, Audio Snap, Audio Engine, etc). The FX and Instruments are nice, but these are all replaceables. My 2 cents.
Intel Q9400 2.66 GHz 8 GB of RAM @ 800 Mhz ATI Radeon HD 3650 Windows 7 Professional (SP1) x64 Cubase 6.03 x64 Sonar PE 8.5.3 x64 RME FireFace 400 Frontier Design Alpha Track Studio Logic VMK-188 Plus http://www.youtube.com/user/SonarHD
|
Scott Lee
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1120
- Joined: 2003/11/13 23:13:38
- Location: Hollywood, California
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/14 23:59:55
(permalink)
Hi All, I agree with Noel that the single lane idea is far superior to a multi expanding lane. I do not think the system is in a perfect state as of yet though and believe a bit more GUI interaction on which effect is being worked on would really help on the confusion. My idea? Below are two screenshots to show you what I had in mind. REMEMBER RIGHT CLICK ON PHOTO, SELECT "VIEW IMAGE" TO SEE A CLEAR LARGE VERSION. CLICK AGAIN TO ZOOM IN.  A closer LOOK.  I'd like to see COLORED tabs representing each envelope matching the nodes, text of the effect we are working on, and a HIGHLIGHTED box showing again which evelope is active. You can still "SHIFT CLICK" nodes as we can today, but also click the TABS to switch activity or focus of desired evelope to work on. I believe this would still keep noels single lane idea in tact but yet help in the confusion of navigating between the different effects. PS. OPPS I just realized I mixed up the colors vs the effects with my quick photoshop job. Im sure you get the idea though. I meant PAN and VOLUME Best,
post edited by Scott Lee - 2010/12/15 04:25:38
|
noiseboy
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 419
- Joined: 2007/01/24 08:57:16
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 01:58:10
(permalink)
Another thanks to Eratu for this thread... finally something really worth following!
I'm passing on X1, but will jump when a few more refinements and features are in place... unless someone else gets there first! Video support an obvious +1 for me.
The other thing that sounds very important from Eratu's description is in seeing most information in collapsed mode. This, for me, was something I didn't get on with in my brief flirtation with Cubase and was a strong reason to pass on it. I couldn't customise that view enough, and couldn't read the track names properly when collapsed. If someone can point me to the mockup someone did here on one of the 1,000 threads of good use of X1 real estate in collapsed mode, I'd be grateful.
And another thanks to the Cakewalk folks for responding publicly here... as someone else said, it gives me hope for forums!
|
chrisharbin
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1852
- Joined: 2010/02/26 19:06:23
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 02:34:48
(permalink)
So far, I like the automation. Lanes are fine, and I use reaper allot, but I like the clean way sonar does it too.
i7 860/MSI mobo/8GB ram/win7x64ultimate/X2/profire 610/oxygen 61/running 48k currently.
|
cmusicmaker
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2328
- Joined: 2004/01/18 08:21:47
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 03:20:25
(permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk
]
But that would make the existing Track layers a "huge pig" as well no? They exist in X1 currently and one can easily show / hide with a simple command "Show Layers".
There is a fundamental difference to the layers argument. You have to show multiple layers to comp audio since there is no other way to edit overlapping layers or slip edit them. Also you need control over per layer mute controls etc all the time while comping. The same constraint doesn't really apply to envelopes editing since the comp paradigm doesn't apply there.
Ok...but the space automation layers would take up (key functionality compared to Track layers aside) would be similar. Show / Hide for both should also work the same way. The "pig" reference was a bit of banter Noel...which you appeared to have taken the right way... (I hope):-P By the way way I am a big fan of Track layers in Sonar. They do seem like an interesting mirror for the representation of automation layers. Also it's great to see you bakers getting involved in discussions like this. This is the reason why Cakewalk are easily one of my favourite devs. :-)
|
cmusicmaker
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2328
- Joined: 2004/01/18 08:21:47
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 03:36:31
(permalink)
Scott Lee
Hi All,
I agree with Noel that the single lane idea is far superior to a multi expanding lane. I do not think the system is in a perfect state as of yet though and believe a bit more GUI interaction on which effect is being worked on would really help on the confusion. My idea? Below are two screenshots to show you what I had in mind.
A closer LOOK.
I'd like to see COLORED tabs representing each envelope matching the nodes, text of the effect we are working on, and a HIGHLIGHTED box showing again which evelope is active. You can still "SHIFT CLICK" nodes as we can today, but also click the TABS to switch activity or focus of desired evelope to work on.
I believe this would still keep noels single lane idea in tact but yet help in the confusion of navigating between the different effects.
PS. OPPS I just realized I mixed up the colors vs the effects with my quick photoshop job. Im sure you get the idea though.
I meant PAN and VOLUME
Best,
Nice idea but...that idea IMO is not as visually effective as having separate lanes. I think also there is no need for the current Edit Filter / Shift Click process to be "superior" ( I don't think that is what what Noel was trying to say). The Edit Filter has it's uses which are very clear and highly useful, but beyond three envelopes I would easily prefer lanes as Eratu and Jose e.t.c have commented. Your idea is nice but if you have more envelopes than space on the bottom of the clip to show the tabs for them, the idea stops working. One could have more than three envelopes on a short clip with too small a space to see the tabs to identify the envelopes that are in use on that track. Nice idea but IMO no substitution for Automation lanes. Also I see no reason why Automation lanes and the Edit Filter cannot co - exist. I don't see Automation lanes as some kind of outright replacement for the Edit Filter. Indeed I would still find the Edit Filter useful for managing 1-3 envelopes. But As Eratu pointed out, add Clip Automation into the mix and Automation Lanes simply remain the best way forward for managing that much Automation data. I am totally open to the idea that something better could be cooked up by the bakers or even suggested here on this forum..why not? But with more than 3 envelopes on a track...Automation Lanes are still the best option. Key word there is "Option". I would think that Cakewalk would surely keep the Edit Filter (I would want them to) but add Automation lanes as an option. Everybody wins. One approach does not have to be "superior"to the other. IMO there is nothing to prove there :-)
post edited by cmusicmaker - 2010/12/15 03:38:07
|
mgh
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8594
- Joined: 2007/05/10 05:15:56
- Location: betwixt and between
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 03:54:16
(permalink)
so maybe the answer lies with both of the solutions? the current implementation of envelopes continues, however there is an option, as with track layers, to explode the envelopes into different lanes? best of both worlds?
|
mgh
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8594
- Joined: 2007/05/10 05:15:56
- Location: betwixt and between
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 03:55:58
(permalink)
i see that is pretty much what you have put C, but the forum software won't allow me to edit posts...grrrr...anyhow, that seems an elegant solution...
|
cmusicmaker
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2328
- Joined: 2004/01/18 08:21:47
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 04:10:34
(permalink)
Yeah mgh, that's it really...users would then have more choice. Sonar in some cases already offers more than one way to do certain things. So considering the very high level of importance Automation carries in a DAW surely there can also be more than one way (optionally) to manage more than 2 or 3 envelopes. No one needs to compromise / lose / sacrifice anything with the addition of Automation lanes. :-)
|
cmusicmaker
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2328
- Joined: 2004/01/18 08:21:47
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 04:24:05
(permalink)
eratu
Good point, and yes, the price may be high for lanes, but I think at least a number who have responded in this thread alone would say it is probably worth it... (not to mention the workflow list signers) N o doubt there are many more creative and highly useful features to be added to Sonar which I look forward to but I agree, I think adding lanes would be worth it. Well worth it. I think in practice, the lanes do pay for their screen real estate with ample benefits. Yes. The Existing Track Layers are a very good example of this IMO. They will take up more space in use, but I would never trade Track Layers to get the space they use back as they provide additional work - flow benefits. Also (@ Noel) I think we all agree that Edit Filters really are Space Efficient. They certainly offer a much needed easier way to work with envelopes *now*. No question about that but there is room for further improvement IMO for managing higher counts of Automation parameters.
|
Scott Lee
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1120
- Joined: 2003/11/13 23:13:38
- Location: Hollywood, California
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 04:32:12
(permalink)
cmusicmaker, True, but I also agree with noel that vertical space is very precious and expanding lanes isn't optimal. I also thought it would be nice to be able to "RIGHT CLICK" on a tab and change the effect for that particular envelope. The tabs could also have a "x-ray" type feature to where only when you mouse over they light up and reside below an active lane hovering over another track. The tabs would really help identify which envelope you are tracking not only by color, but name representation. While I love the shift click on other envelopes while darkened in the background, its hard to distinguish which is which. The COLORED TABS would solve that issue. Best,
post edited by Scott Lee - 2010/12/15 05:24:54
|
subtlearts
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2200
- Joined: 2006/01/10 05:59:21
- Location: Berlin
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 05:11:15
(permalink)
I have to say that eratu's idea for an envelope management dialog box that allows more rapid, precise control over which envelopes(s) are visible, editable, active or whatever seems like a really useful addition that would convey many of the benefits of lanes but likely at a significantly smaller cost in both screen real estate and, perhaps more pertinently, in development resources.
I'm not against lanes at all and I see the benefits but if it represents a trade-off that CW are not currently willing or able to implement, this would seem to be a simple and useful compromise that could possibly even fit into the X1 dev cycle (as opposed to waiting for X2 or whatever, which would likely be the case with a 'bigger' feature like full lane implementation).
Again, I don't have X1 currently so I don't know exactly how this differs from what's there already (the edit focus dialog?) but if eratu's suggesting it I guess that means there's some meaningful difference, and it makes good sense to me. Anyone else?
|
millzy
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
- Total Posts : 890
- Joined: 2005/01/28 20:32:51
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 05:14:56
(permalink)
Sorry, carry on!
post edited by millzy - 2010/12/15 05:17:15
Millzy i7 3770K, 16gb ram, Samsung EVO SSD, 2 x WD drives, RME Babyface, Win 10 (x64), Cakewalk by Bandlab, heaps of other stuff.
|
cmusicmaker
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2328
- Joined: 2004/01/18 08:21:47
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 05:44:03
(permalink)
Jose7822
I still think Automation Lanes are much better than anything I've seen so far. The reason I say this is because even Eratu's enhanced Edit Filter requires too much clicking. Automation Lanes, on the other hand, requires one click to hide/show the lanes and you're off to edit whatever you need to edit, done! No Shift-clicking, or selecting from a drop-down menu, or clicking multiple options to hide/show envelopes. It's all readily available and with minimal clicking. Yes IMO a single click on a "Show Automation layers" command or button, is all that would be needed to Show / Hide any number of Automation layers on a track. I am not sure it could be any easier than that. The command could be added to the existing "Layers" Drop down commands...  What about the "Show Layers" right click command and the "Track Layers" button on tracks, how would they work with Automation lanes? There is a Track Layers button on each track. I would suggest modifying that Tooltip to Show "Audio / MIDI Track Layers" instead of "Track Layers"  ...so one does not assume it will show any track layers present on a track (Automation and Audio / MIDI Layers at the same time which I assume most users would prefer to *not* be the default behaviour of that button) The same modification could be suggested for the "Show Layers" command on the track right click menu...  That menu above could have the "Show Automation Layers" command added to it as well to easily differentiate between layer types and ensure Automation lanes will not take up any additional vertical space, as they would in this scenario only be visible instead of Audio / MIDI Track Layers at any given time. That way vertical space usage would be no more than it is in X1 currently with Track layers, and as it has already been for at least a few versions of Sonar in the past. Automation lanes could simply replace the vertical space used by Track Layers not add to it.
A good example of what I mean is when you have a track where there are several envelopes with the exact same shape, but you only need to edit one of them. In this case, SHIFT+Clicking will obviously not work, so I'd have to open the Edit Filter's drop-down menu to find the envelope I want to edit. However, using Automation Lanes on the same example would find me working on any given envelope with a single click. Not a single click per envelope. A single click, period! Automation Lanes would also get rid of the spaghetti clutter problem mentioned earlier. That is a really *great* example. RE: vertical space. As Eratu mentioned, there's virtually no loss of vertical space when using Lanes. Don't need them? Just click to hide them and you gain all your vertical space back. Really that is *exactly* how I see it as well. Even for users who have no use for Automation lanes if they do not want to use them they would never even see Automation lanes unless the specifically clicked on a command to show/ hide them. Otherwise the feature would be effectively invisible to them.
post edited by cmusicmaker - 2010/12/15 08:02:28
|
Prunesquallor
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 20
- Joined: 2009/03/09 10:00:05
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 05:49:13
(permalink)
mgh
so maybe the answer lies with both of the solutions? the current implementation of envelopes continues, however there is an option, as with track layers, to explode the envelopes into different lanes? best of both worlds?
Yes! Really, automation's too important for compromize, and Cakewalk should take the opportunity to become a market leader in this respect. Eratu and Jose have pointed out that there are occasions when you do need to see all lanes at once.
There should be a zoom option (right click?) to explode to see all lanes when necessary and then collapse to reclaim vertical screen space. I can't see any drawback for an expand/collapse option for power users who want it.
|
frankandfree
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 447
- Joined: 2008/04/26 11:56:32
- Location: Norddeutschland
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 05:50:14
(permalink)
Allocating dev time is of course always a delicate topic, but I can't see how screen real estate is an argument when both methods can be used, switched and combined with ease. There is a third alternative possible which can help (albeit not with lots of envelopes, but very enjoyable with up to say five or six curves which already make for a good plate of spaghetti when displayed over each other): As soon as the track is high enough some unnamed competitor can show the envelopes in separate rows but still above the media lane. So you have spaghetti with a small track height, but heightening it as soon as each envelope can be displayed with some minimum pixels of height it switches to show them one below the other and you can edit them without fuzz.  Again, this is not to brag with the competitor's abilities, but to present an alternative to consider which somehow combines the best of both worlds. I created that situation in a rush, so this particular edit might be very easy with Sonar X1's facilities, but you get the picture. It comes in very handy with not too many, but unlucky overlapping curves where selecting a particular one is not so comfortable.
|
cmusicmaker
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2328
- Joined: 2004/01/18 08:21:47
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 06:42:19
(permalink)
Scott Lee
cmusicmaker,
True, but I also agree with noel that vertical space is very precious and expanding lanes isn't optimal.
Expanding lanes would not take up any more space than the existing track layers already take up as they could be shown instead of Audio / MIDI track layers at any given time. See my post above. So there would be no extra space taken up at all vs what we currently have with Track Layers in X1 today and any previous version of Sonar that offer Track layers :-) I also thought it would be nice to be able to "RIGHT CLICK" on a tab and change the effect for that particular envelope. The tabs could also have a "x-ray" type feature to where only when you mouse over they light up and reside below an active lane hovering over another track. The tabs would really help identify which envelope you are tracking not only by color, but name representation. While I love the shift click on other envelopes while darkened in the background, its hard to distinguish which is which. The COLORED TABS would solve that issue.
Best,
I do think it's a nice idea but bear in mind there are hit points that are needed when working with clips (with the Smart Tool for example) so adding tabs to clips could complicate that as there is not really any more space for something like tabs without making the hit point for certain clip actions even smaller than it is now....(not too small currently but small enough) ;-)  ...maybe it could work somehow but I think most users would not be too happy to have that precious space for clip actions reduced further IMO. Even if you have a track fully zoomed in...you are still losing precious clip action hitpoint space. Again if the clip is shorter than the available space to show the tabs for active parameters for that track, then the idea you suggested does not work surely, as you will have some tabs that will simply not be visible :-) With lanes one can always see what parameters are in use...all the time with tracks zoomed in or out as they are fully independent of any clip length. tbh I think the Inspector would incorporate your idea better but IMO that is another nice optional way to manage automation data but not a replacement for automation lanes IMO. The Track button could house a Header for Automation in the Track Properties drop down box...  ...and one could use that to select different active parameters . Problem with that is, it is still not as fast a single click "Show all Layers" command. :-) One would still need to keep going back and forth between the Inspector and tracks to mange one envelope at a time (way too many additional clicks). So still IMO Automation lanes remains the best solution to manage more than 2 or 3 parameters in Sonar X1 (IMHO). ;-) Another reason to add Automation lanes to X1... Automation lanes also open the door to the possibility of editing more than one envelope at the same time... for instance envelopes that appear (are active) at the same place on the time line could be drag selected across different lanes and then one could cut, copy, paste or edit the position of multiple nodes across Automation lanes at the same time with one move should a user wish to. But that is not the primary reason for my interest in Lanes still its an interesting extra door opened there. :-P
|
Supercomposer
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 259
- Joined: 2010/05/27 05:11:09
- Location: In a Lear-Jet above you
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 06:57:24
(permalink)
 Hm.. posting how cool the audio editing in Reaper is won´t really help increase the customer base...
ME is the Supercomposer, and all your base are belong to us (Yes, I mean Germany) System Spec: CPU 2x X7560 Xeon 16-Core, 48 GIG Ram Kingston, Intel with Supermicro Workstation MP Boards, RME HDSPe, PNY Quadro 6000
|
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk Staff
- Total Posts : 6475
- Joined: 2003/11/03 17:22:50
- Location: Boston, MA, USA
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 07:39:53
(permalink)
It depends on what you call "arguably more useful features".
ahem how about next generation comping, take management, asset management and engine routing improvements. To me all of those with benefit a LOT more users than this one feature. And don't say I want all of that plus this since it won't happen :) In case its not clear I'm not questioning that lanes have some benefits visually and some folks like that paradigm. I'm questioning priorities in the evolution of this product. I personally see other areas that would benefit the overall application more than this one since with X1 envelope editing is very usable and a huge improvement from earlier versions. But thats just me!
post edited by Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk] - 2010/12/15 07:46:35
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 07:56:07
(permalink)
mike_mccue
I can answer that:
Throw out Step Sequencer, Beatscape, Pro Channel, Dimension Pro.. don't even fix the bass library... and make us the best freaking DAW on the planet.
DAWs have envelopes... make us the best envelope tools on the planet.
Leave a space for instruments and efx plugins and stay focused on your DAW.
very best regards,
mike
How does throwing away stuff that already exists save development resources?
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 08:03:43
(permalink)
I've found myself puzzled by The Cult Of Automation Lanes of late, as if lanes are a thing in and of themselves that we must have.
I see it more like: automation is a thing, and it's important to have a solution for editing automation data easily.
Automation Lanes are one of many possible solutions. The track height thing above is another, the edit filter in X1 is another. I can't see it much matters which one, as long as they all make it easy to get the job done.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
Solafide
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 41
- Joined: 2010/04/20 17:04:15
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 08:07:02
(permalink)
I for one would far rather next generation comping, take management, asset management and engine routing improvements - before lanes! Actually I have grown to really like how automation is handled in x1 (this was my one of my biggest frustrations with 8.5) . I think it could be improved with some of the ideas mentioned, but I would not want to sacrifice the things you listed above for lanes.
post edited by Solafide - 2010/12/15 08:09:04
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 08:15:27
(permalink)
"ahem how about next generation comping, take management, asset management and engine routing improvements. To me all of those with benefit a LOT more users than this one feature.
And don't say I want all of that plus this since it won't happen :) In case its not clear I'm not questioning that lanes have some benefits visually and some folks like that paradigm. I'm questioning priorities in the evolution of this product. I personally see other areas that would benefit the overall application more than this one since with X1 envelope editing is very usable and a huge improvement from earlier versions. But thats just me! "
Next generation comping???
With Cakewalk's track record Cakewalk should be concentrating on getting the first generation stuff working 100%.
I honestly don't trust Cakewalk to do an adequate job on next generation anything.
The next few years will be an opportunity to repair the reputation Cakewalk has made for itself. Cakewalk suffers from a reputation for rolling out highly hyped feature sets that are both incomplete in their scope of imagination and incomplete in their implementation.
Cakewalk shouldn't require petitioning on the part of the customer to see the wisdom in implementing envelopes as well or better than all the competition has done.
Envelopes are a excellent example of how Cakewalk rolled out a feature, "envelopes", and then abandoned a commitment to even address the problems with Cakewalk's implementation of envelopes. Envelopes were inadequate the first year Cakewalk introduced envelopes and no improvement has been offered since that time.
We've waited for a decade while Cakewalk did not address obvious issues.
Cakewalk can control their reputation for the good just as they have done so for the bad. Simply do what needs to be done.
Work on the DAW ignore everything else.
When Cakewalk gets all that done I will be eager to learn about Next Gen comping.
very best regards,
mike
PS I know some folks here think I am being a hard nosed jerk... but In my mind what I am doing is providing CONTENT for the employees of Cakewalk to take to the leadership so that management can clearly see what the user base is thinking.
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 08:20:46
(permalink)
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
mgh
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8594
- Joined: 2007/05/10 05:15:56
- Location: betwixt and between
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 08:21:44
(permalink)
i agree Mike - focus on fixing/improving automation, v-vocal, audiosnap and general timeline misbehaviour - of which the new edit filter seems a first step - before (or at least alongside) going for the next generation of whatever.
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 08:22:10
(permalink)
mike_mccue
PS I know some folks here think I am being a hard nosed jerk... but In my mind what I am doing is providing CONTENT for the employees of Cakewalk to take to the leadership so that management can clearly see what the user base is thinking.
Well, slow down there, cowboy. This is what YOU are thinking. You aren't "the user base".
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 08:24:29
(permalink)
BTW: comping strikes me as a fairly core feature.
To argue that the existing features should be improved first and foremost, while arguing in the same post against improving comping (an existing feature) is kind of odd.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
mgh
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8594
- Joined: 2007/05/10 05:15:56
- Location: betwixt and between
- Status: offline
Re:An honest, sincere take on SONAR X1 from a long-time Cakewalk supporter
2010/12/15 08:24:55
(permalink)
John - are you like Mike's evil twin brother? 
|