[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1

Page: << < ..678910.. > >> Showing page 10 of 11
Author
Robin Kelly [Roland]
Genuinely Swell Guy
  • Total Posts : 571
  • Joined: 2003/11/07 10:04:44
  • Status: offline
Re:Simple questions for Noel and Brandon 2010/12/13 14:43:28 (permalink)
Merging with the other Narrow console thread as this is way off topic from the OP post.

Robin

That's my blog
Omnia illa et ante fiebant, Omnia illa et rursus fient.
RajahP
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 98
  • Joined: 2010/05/12 06:38:58
  • Status: offline
Re:Simple questions for Noel and Brandon 2010/12/13 15:26:26 (permalink)
Robin Kelly [Cakewalk
]

We hear you, right now that's all the info I can give. Just because a thread is active and we have not jumped in does not mean we are not reading and/or discussing feedback internally.

When there is appropriate info to post we will.

Regards,

Robin


Thanks Robin for responding.. Wanting to upgrade from Studio 8.5 to X1 Producer 'soon'.. Hope Cakewalk can reassure me that this Narrow Strip issue will be handled 'soon'. Thanks.
cake2010
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 83
  • Joined: 2010/06/18 11:55:00
  • Status: offline
Narrow Strip - New idea 2010/12/13 15:44:11 (permalink)
Hi all,
 
here´s the idea I came up with for the new Narrow Channel Strip. Good for setting up a lot of channel levels quickly and every channel also open wide version (or ProChannel) to the right side. 
 
If it has some usefulness I hope the Bakers could implement some of it for the Patch. (the strip really is supposed to come outside of the dock like that but the shadow of the opened wide channel is optional coding).
 
Note: I´m not a graphics designer so please be gentle..  also the image has obvious errors due to copy/paste job)
 
 
post edited by cake2010 - 2010/12/14 12:55:14
Robin Kelly [Roland]
Genuinely Swell Guy
  • Total Posts : 571
  • Joined: 2003/11/07 10:04:44
  • Status: offline
[Consolidated] Console View - Narrow strips 2010/12/13 16:21:51 (permalink)
We have been trying to consolidate all the threads that are popping up. This actually makes it easier for us to see your feedback and experiences. I have merged all the narrow strip threads into this thread.

Robin

That's my blog
Omnia illa et ante fiebant, Omnia illa et rursus fient.
chrisharbin
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1852
  • Joined: 2010/02/26 19:06:23
  • Status: offline
Re:[Consolidated] Console View - Narrow strips 2010/12/13 16:32:24 (permalink)
"by your command" heheehehe

i7 860/MSI mobo/8GB ram/win7x64ultimate/X2/profire 610/oxygen 61/running 48k currently.
ADM3
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 30
  • Joined: 2010/02/02 12:21:48
  • Status: offline
Re:X1 Narrow Console - My Dream 2010/12/13 17:01:04 (permalink)
n0rd


Is it perfect? - No
I'm just dreaming out aloud - nothing more, nothing less.


 
I just wanted to throw my support behind this concept. All of the functionality we are used to AND the new X1 look. I really like the vertical/horzontal scrolling idea as well.
Great job N0rd!
 
I'm not a programmer but it doesn't seem that most of this would be too difficult to implement. It seems as though the only function that Cakewalk would have to ADD, would be the eq graphical representation for the Pro Channel EQ (very important to me) and the horizontal/vertical scrolling bit. The rest of it would be assigning existing code to new buttons, knobs, keystrokes, and mouse clicks. Then again, things are rarely as easy as they seem.
chrisharbin
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1852
  • Joined: 2010/02/26 19:06:23
  • Status: offline
Re:X1 Narrow Console - My Dream 2010/12/13 17:03:31 (permalink)
^^^^^
+1 again

i7 860/MSI mobo/8GB ram/win7x64ultimate/X2/profire 610/oxygen 61/running 48k currently.
ampfixer
Max Output Level: -20 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5508
  • Joined: 2010/12/12 20:11:50
  • Location: Ontario
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/13 17:25:24 (permalink)
I'm new and likely not really well informed about this, but I don't see the issue with narrow track views in the console. If the cursor hovers over any of these one letter labels the entire name or desired info pops up right away. I was just at a music store looking at an old 24 trk board. It's like 4 1/2 ft wide! That's a lot of monitors. If my 24" monitor doesn't hold enough console strips I can run my video into my Sony 42" hi-def rig.

I'm more concerned about actual problems or non funtioning features at this pointm and there are many to address. The GUI is flakey and using 8.5.3 projects in X1 is far from painless. I suspect the December release will generate a much needed cash infusion and make the year end numbers look better to Roland.

I eagerly await a couple of much needed patches.
Jose7822
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 10031
  • Joined: 2005/11/07 18:59:54
  • Location: United States
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/13 17:41:58 (permalink)
ampfixer


I'm new and likely not really well informed about this, but I don't see the issue with narrow track views in the console. If the cursor hovers over any of these one letter labels the entire name or desired info pops up right away.

Imagine doing that on a 12 song album, each with ~40 to 50 tracks.  That's too much time wasted identifying tracks.
 
BTW, that's a project I'm working on as we speak (not a made up example).  If you don't use the CV then this won't bug you at all, obviously.

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
cake2010
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 83
  • Joined: 2010/06/18 11:55:00
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/13 17:51:34 (permalink)
btw, here´s one channel 1:1 to see the narrowness.
I just like to have lot of channels visible.
But yeah, Nord´s vision is great.

Jose7822
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 10031
  • Joined: 2005/11/07 18:59:54
  • Location: United States
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/13 18:39:53 (permalink)
Good ideas cake2010!

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
guitartrek
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2842
  • Joined: 2006/02/26 12:37:57
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/13 19:20:39 (permalink)
You guys have a lot of great ideas.  I bet the Bakers have a few options already mocked up and reviewing (fully functional).  I can't wait to see the final product.
guitartrek
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2842
  • Joined: 2006/02/26 12:37:57
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 11:16:55 (permalink)
Panning Knob verses old Pan control on Narrow Tracks:

I was working with X1 last night and realized how much faster I can see Pan's with the new Knob style rather than the old way.  In an instance I can get a feel for where everything is panned.   The old way, I'd always hover with the mouse to see the actual pan setting.   I think the human Eye / brain can make a judgment on the Angle of the line of the knob much faster than old style.  I know some people have said they think the old style is better, and the new knob takes up more space, but to me the knob style is superior when checking pans.

Just wanted to throw that out there.
SongCraft
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3902
  • Joined: 2007/09/19 17:54:46
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 11:36:37 (permalink)
cake2010


btw, here´s one channel 1:1 to see the narrowness.
I just like to have lot of channels visible.
But yeah, Nord´s vision is great.




Nice! That's more practical for narrow view.  I like:

. The 2 Rows for track naming. (Option: text and background color changeable)
. The Track Number above in it's own space
. Numerical values separated in their own space (no more overylay issue)
. The fader pointer >  actually works well, shows more precise position.

Minor crits:  The fader pointer needs to be a little larger to give us more area to click n drag, or add a small fader-handle to the left-side of the pointer.   Add numerical values to the right side of the meter.

-

 
 
cake2010
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 83
  • Joined: 2010/06/18 11:55:00
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 11:59:27 (permalink)
 
Thanks Songcraft.
 
SongCraft

Minor crits:  The fader pointer needs to be a little larger to give us more area to click n drag...
My idea was that the whole meter area (including the pointer + most of the grey area) is clickable and the pointer is just a pointer.

 
Jim Kalinowski
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 296
  • Joined: 2003/12/13 22:28:04
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 12:06:03 (permalink)
Since we're offering suggestions for improvements to the CV:

After spending a couple of hours with X1, I've noticed that the MIDI activity "light" at the top of the MIDI meter in a MIDI channel strip is colored red, the same color as a clip overload.  At first I thought, "Why do I have a bunch of tracks clipping?"  Then I realized this was MIDI activity.

Related to this, it seems that in the new CV, it's harder to distinguish between MIDI and audio strips - they look a lot more alike in X1.  I suggest that there be more of a difference between them (in 8.5, the MIDI meters were colored white and were solid, even if you used segmented meters).

Jim
SongCraft
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3902
  • Joined: 2007/09/19 17:54:46
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 12:11:35 (permalink)
cake2010


 
Thanks Songcraft.
 
SongCraft

Minor crits:  The fader pointer needs to be a little larger to give us more area to click n drag...
My idea was that the whole meter area (including the pointer + most of the grey area) is clickable and the pointer is just a pointer.
 
That's cool! I like that idea. Best thing about the design is; simple, looks very clean and uncluttered ;)



 
 
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6518
  • Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 12:21:52 (permalink)
Jim Kalinowski


Since we're offering suggestions for improvements to the CV:

After spending a couple of hours with X1, I've noticed that the MIDI activity "light" at the top of the MIDI meter in a MIDI channel strip is colored red, the same color as a clip overload.  At first I thought, "Why do I have a bunch of tracks clipping?"  Then I realized this was MIDI activity.

Related to this, it seems that in the new CV, it's harder to distinguish between MIDI and audio strips - they look a lot more alike in X1.  I suggest that there be more of a difference between them (in 8.5, the MIDI meters were colored white and were solid, even if you used segmented meters).

Jim

Hi, Jim - Good feedback, both of your points.  I had a fairly active thread going on this annoying "in the red" effect on MIDI strips, but this Forum moves super fast and topics get buried quickly.  Here's that thread:

http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=2154678

And you are spot on about the MIDI and Audio strips looking too much alike.  It's slowing me down to constantly be checking--hmm, now wait a minute, what flavor is this strip?

RB


Sonar X3e Studio
Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller
Alesis i|O2 interface
Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz
8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64
with dual monitors
Frank Haas
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2490
  • Joined: 2005/01/14 06:32:54
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 12:24:31 (permalink)
I didn't read through the 10 pages, so sorry if it has been mentioned before..
in narrow-mode you could place the volume-faders over or under the meters.
make the meters and faders selectable/visible from the menu like all the other elements.
then you could be able to kind of build a meter-bridge as well..
SongCraft
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3902
  • Joined: 2007/09/19 17:54:46
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 13:01:57 (permalink)
What about a totally different design;  Instead of thin narrow channel strips that is so typical of hardware mixer,

. Have square boxed areas 8x8 boxed (channels) giving us 64 channels visible on one little monitor without ever having to scroll. Yet still be able to view all meters, track names, vol, pan, sends, routing, FX, EQ, ProChannel.

A few things such as the EQ Graph and Pro Channel can be expanded 'from minimized' allowing more closeup detail for editing ~ the toggle between minimized to expand are keybindable of course, without compromise in minimized view at least the parameters and graphs are still quite visible.

A totally innovative more practical UI design that be more suitable, functional in the software environment. Before anyone starts freaking out about my suggesting I would like to see a image example.

Like I said before;  Trying to get a 'Hardware' mixer into a software UI environment is the problem because obviously with hardware mixers you can see all track whereas a software UI mixer is severely limited in that regard.  That said; I've used hardware mixers since the 1970's, give me the real thing 128 channel 'Hardware' mixer and I'm happy :)

-

 
 
SongCraft
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3902
  • Joined: 2007/09/19 17:54:46
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 17:53:21 (permalink)
SongCraft


What about a totally different design;  Instead of thin narrow channel strips that is so typical of hardware mixer,

. Have square boxed areas 8x8 boxed (channels) giving us 64 channels visible on one little monitor without ever having to scroll. Yet still be able to view all meters, track names, vol, pan, sends, routing, FX, EQ, ProChannel.

A few things such as the EQ Graph and Pro Channel can be expanded 'from minimized' allowing more closeup detail for editing ~ the toggle between minimized to expand are keybindable of course, without compromise in minimized view at least the parameters and graphs are still quite visible.

A totally innovative more practical UI design that be more suitable, functional in the software environment. Before anyone starts freaking out about my suggesting I would like to see a image example.

Like I said before;  Trying to get a 'Hardware' mixer into a software UI environment is the problem because obviously with hardware mixers you can see all track whereas a software UI mixer is severely limited in that regard.  That said; I've used hardware mixers since the 1970's, give me the real thing 128 channel 'Hardware' mixer and I'm happy :)

-
OK Here it is.....

Just out of curiosity I wanted to see what the CV would look like in a totally different layout.

  Single Channel Example:



Very clear, easy to read!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------


To see full-size image with 30 channels: Click Here

Totally different concept of the CV, an 'Alternative' optional view.  Put a whole new meaning on 'Stack' mode LOL!!

The Pro Channel can be expanded by clicking on it.   The FX-bin Green = active whereas Gray = inactive.   Sorry I may have left out other widgets (parameters) but IMO I would love to see full customization; display what you want to see and place anywhere by hold/drag when in customize mode!


-




 
 
cake2010
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 83
  • Joined: 2010/06/18 11:55:00
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 18:34:37 (permalink)
@SongCraft: Looks informative, but IMHO not sure if it´s easy to read when there´s 30 channels.

But I totally agree that we should forget the hardware look and consept, and invent something more convenient. Best and useful ideas are usually very simple and possibilities with software are endless... 
mgh
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 8594
  • Joined: 2007/05/10 05:15:56
  • Location: betwixt and between
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 18:52:02 (permalink)
As an alternative alternative, it'd be cool to have stem docking (or a sub mix console view); so you have yer multidock thing, and in it you can have tracks 2,3,4,5 and buss 1 (say guitars) in one small space (grouped, maybe) in one window, then tracks 6,7,8, buss 2 (violins) in another, 9,10,11, buss 3 (violas) in another;...

Memorare debut album 'Philistine' available now http://blackwoodproductio...philistine-digipack-cd
SongCraft
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3902
  • Joined: 2007/09/19 17:54:46
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 19:35:16 (permalink)
cake2010


@SongCraft: Looks informative, but IMHO not sure if it´s easy to read when there´s 30 channels.

But I totally agree that we should forget the hardware look and consept, and invent something more convenient. Best and useful ideas are usually very simple and possibilities with software are endless... 

Yes agree, forget the 'hardware' look and concept because what's more important is 'convenience' and 'efficiency' of workflow. 

And....

. Customization of 'Mixer Chn Layout' ~ I would like to see all elements in mixer channels 'fully customizable' using a simple lock/unlock modes;  in unlock mode the ability to click on any element in a mixer channel and drag/place it wherever one wants and to show/hide any element, thereby making the mixer channel layout fully customizable.

. Customization of 'Track Titles', background color, font type and color,  with the ability to select a group of channels for simultaneous customization for example; same color background for identifying Drum Kit tracks.

. Customize 'Button Size' (small, med, large)

. Customize 'Font Size' (small, med, large)

. and again; '2 Rows' for 'Track Names' would be ideal.  I love that concept, it allows for much better description of track titles and when I load a very old project I'll be able to see what is what without much guess work....  Oh look it's  'Jimi Hendrix -- Solo Guitar'  whoo hoo LOL!!

At the moment Track Naming is severely limited due to the nature (hardware) design of the mixer channel strips (severely limited horizontal space)!  The 'Boxed/Stacked' design allows for much more informative detail and available space for Track Names and Routing Names.....



-


 
 
SongCraft
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3902
  • Joined: 2007/09/19 17:54:46
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 19:37:26 (permalink)
mgh


As an alternative alternative, it'd be cool to have stem docking (or a sub mix console view); so you have yer multidock thing, and in it you can have tracks 2,3,4,5 and buss 1 (say guitars) in one small space (grouped, maybe) in one window, then tracks 6,7,8, buss 2 (violins) in another, 9,10,11, buss 3 (violas) in another;...

Yes, as an alternative, alternative view (option)! I think that would be cool.

That's a nice idea for managing the CV in Multidock! I like it :)


 
 
cake2010
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 83
  • Joined: 2010/06/18 11:55:00
  • Status: offline
Re:Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/14 19:55:22 (permalink)
@mgh and Songcraft: useful ideas!
mistrbigg
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7
  • Joined: 2010/12/07 16:47:17
  • Status: offline
Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/16 01:49:01 (permalink)
hmm. the narrow strips view in x1 is WAAYYY better than in 8.5.3. IMHO  you just have to read the dang manual.

ive seen a lot of responses to people complaining about how they mix 60 channels of audio (as an example) and have to have the strips narrow which i understand, but, if you use sonar that way.. you are more than likely using a mouse to adjust parameters, and unless you guys have something i dont, like some new cool multi mouse thingy (i want one! hehe), you can only REALLY do that one track at a time (unless you are grouping tracks, in which case i would HIGHLY suggest just adding a stereo or surround buss)

the phase is still there guys, the arm parameter is still there guys, the plot is still there guys, the ins and outs are still there guys, in addition to a gain control now at the top. now it is setup at least in producer, in the pro channel which is FAR better sounding than any of the previous eq's, unless you have the ssl's like i do, and even then, i am finding the prochannel to be better because it sounds AWESOME, the tube sat absolutely kills on vocals, and this is a SOUND RECORDING program.

I know i sound like a dick when i say this, but i just dont care anymore.  These programs (DAWS) are supposed to, to my knowledge, facilitate SOUND.  although i respect non musicians, non REAL producers, and non Engineers that call themselves such as Good, sometimes great or even incredible TECHNICIANS, they ARE NOT REAL MUSICIANS OR PRODUCERS.  not worse because of this, just different.  in many many ways i believe this is the true main reason the music industry is now focused not on music but on marketing (because technology has allowed EVERYONE with a computer and a good internet connection to have access to these recording softwares and music and such) and why it is so hard, though possible to find what more than 80 percent or so of people would agree is GOOD MUSIC.   i read the main "do you use the cv in sonar" thread nearly all the way through and was honestly saddened that so few people even use the cv anymore.  it shows me the technicians are no longer focused so much on shaping sound of real playing, then mixing it, as much as they are programming in sounds that are already performed, sampled, or played by what i personally would consider a real musician.

Sonar to me, is set up more like a real console environment with midi and Software instrumentation as an addition, rather than a midi and design program set up with the audio music as an addition.  it is because of this i use it, i go from tape to sonar x1 and the results so far have been fantastic, radio ready, when the MUSIC is good.  pushing buttons and tapping akai midi controllers definitely take skill, and i'm not knocking it, but calling it making music isn't what it is, its more creating an artistic expression, which in itself is valued the same to me but NOT THE SAME.

back on topic. i think most will find if you read the manual, and learn it, it isnt hard to figure out the console view at all.  and i for one appreciate the effort by cakewalk put forth to obviously make it more like a physical mixing console rather than a fake TOY.  the ONLY problem i have found i cant seem to fix is being able to shift busses around...i like my master bus on the right, not the left and i bus like crazy (most of my mixes have 15 or so mix busses such as drum splines sent to a master drum buss, then massaged, or multiple bass track sources run to one buss, or guitars done similarly or lead vocals, done in multiple takes, ran to one buss, while the backings are ran to another, all the while having the master buss set up with analyzers and bit meters to monitor what the heck is REALLY going on, which is something i am POSITIVE few users do anymore as i am a mastering engineer by profession and now receive SLAMMED mixes ALL the time)

i know a lot of you out there do do this, and im not talkin to you all, i am talking to what i feel is the majority when i say, READ THE DAMN MANUAL, USE THE SOFTWARE, PUSH SOME BUTTONS, FIGURE IT OUT, and most importantly HAVE A LITTLE PATIENCE. 
SongCraft
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3902
  • Joined: 2007/09/19 17:54:46
  • Status: offline
Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/16 03:45:45 (permalink)
mistrbigg


hmm. the narrow strips view in x1 is WAAYYY better than in 8.5.3. IMHO  you just have to read the dang manual.

ive seen a lot of responses to people complaining about how they mix 60 channels of audio (as an example) and have to have the strips narrow which i understand, but, if you use sonar that way.. you are more than likely using a mouse to adjust parameters, and unless you guys have something i dont, like some new cool multi mouse thingy (i want one! hehe), you can only REALLY do that one track at a time (unless you are grouping tracks, in which case i would HIGHLY suggest just adding a stereo or surround buss)

the phase is still there guys, the arm parameter is still there guys, the plot is still there guys, the ins and outs are still there guys, in addition to a gain control now at the top. now it is setup at least in producer, in the pro channel which is FAR better sounding than any of the previous eq's, unless you have the ssl's like i do, and even then, i am finding the prochannel to be better because it sounds AWESOME, the tube sat absolutely kills on vocals, and this is a SOUND RECORDING program.

I know i sound like a dick when i say this, but i just dont care anymore.  These programs (DAWS) are supposed to, to my knowledge, facilitate SOUND.  although i respect non musicians, non REAL producers, and non Engineers that call themselves such as Good, sometimes great or even incredible TECHNICIANS, they ARE NOT REAL MUSICIANS OR PRODUCERS.  not worse because of this, just different.  in many many ways i believe this is the true main reason the music industry is now focused not on music but on marketing (because technology has allowed EVERYONE with a computer and a good internet connection to have access to these recording softwares and music and such) and why it is so hard, though possible to find what more than 80 percent or so of people would agree is GOOD MUSIC.   i read the main "do you use the cv in sonar" thread nearly all the way through and was honestly saddened that so few people even use the cv anymore.  it shows me the technicians are no longer focused so much on shaping sound of real playing, then mixing it, as much as they are programming in sounds that are already performed, sampled, or played by what i personally would consider a real musician.

Sonar to me, is set up more like a real console environment with midi and Software instrumentation as an addition, rather than a midi and design program set up with the audio music as an addition.  it is because of this i use it, i go from tape to sonar x1 and the results so far have been fantastic, radio ready, when the MUSIC is good.  pushing buttons and tapping akai midi controllers definitely take skill, and i'm not knocking it, but calling it making music isn't what it is, its more creating an artistic expression, which in itself is valued the same to me but NOT THE SAME.

back on topic. i think most will find if you read the manual, and learn it, it isnt hard to figure out the console view at all.  and i for one appreciate the effort by cakewalk put forth to obviously make it more like a physical mixing console rather than a fake TOY.  the ONLY problem i have found i cant seem to fix is being able to shift busses around...i like my master bus on the right, not the left and i bus like crazy (most of my mixes have 15 or so mix busses such as drum splines sent to a master drum buss, then massaged, or multiple bass track sources run to one buss, or guitars done similarly or lead vocals, done in multiple takes, ran to one buss, while the backings are ran to another, all the while having the master buss set up with analyzers and bit meters to monitor what the heck is REALLY going on, which is something i am POSITIVE few users do anymore as i am a mastering engineer by profession and now receive SLAMMED mixes ALL the time)

i know a lot of you out there do do this, and im not talkin to you all, i am talking to what i feel is the majority when i say, READ THE DAMN MANUAL, USE THE SOFTWARE, PUSH SOME BUTTONS, FIGURE IT OUT, and most importantly HAVE A LITTLE PATIENCE. 

You didn't acknowledge there are various flaws and bugs in CV here's just a few examples..... one letter for track names, overlapping numerical values, can't reorder in CV, occasionally with old projects loaded where pan is 10% reads incorrectly at 0%, ProChn inline CV bugs. {phew} Anyway I have confidence that Cakewalk will see to most of that in the next update due very soon

You need to understand that Cakewalk values 'Customer Feedback' - 'Suggestions', there's been a lot of valuable contributions from a lot of us for which I'm sure Cakewalk appreciates.

---------------------


I like this following quote because it makes sense:

Mike Trujillo [Cakewalk]
without negative comments we would have no idea what the user community is experiencing that can be fixed or made better. It's when passion turns to anger and hostility towards other folks and their opinions that things turn south. Then it's just destructive and serves no purpose to the greater good.


-

 
 
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6783
  • Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
  • Status: offline
Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/16 03:58:05 (permalink)
I don't think anyone could sensibly argue that the narrow strips mode isn't a mess. Wide mode looks fine, so in that sense, sure, you can say the console view design is fundamentally fine, but for anyone who wants / needs the narrow view, that doesn't help them.

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
pbk
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 49
  • Joined: 2009/08/31 02:27:00
  • Location: Miami, FL, USA
  • Status: offline
Re:[Consolidated] Console view narrow strips Sonar 8.5.3 vs. X1 2010/12/16 04:27:59 (permalink)
John T


I don't think anyone could sensibly argue that the narrow strips mode isn't a mess. Wide mode looks fine, so in that sense, sure, you can say the console view design is fundamentally fine, but for anyone who wants / needs the narrow view, that doesn't help them.


Word.

What is really sad is that the strips were not perfect but usable before. Now narrow strips are broken. Frequently sacrificing functionality for form is a bad idea.
Page: << < ..678910.. > >> Showing page 10 of 11
Jump to:
© 2020 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1