ch.huey
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 33
- Joined: 2016/01/23 09:57:09
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 01:08:28
(permalink)
Toddskins
RTA
The dictionary definition of music is 'Rhythmic Noise', so however you get to the end result is valid.
Whatever works for you. The rest is subjective.
That is not the definition, and I groan over what dictionary you chose to nab that falsity from. It's apparent that even dictionary companies are being politicized.
The true definition is: Music - Melody or harmony; any succession of sounds so modulated as to please the ear, or any combination of simultaneous sounds in accordance of harmony. An aesthetic art form of sound produced in a continuum of time consisting of 1) Beat, 2) Rhythm, 3) Melody, and 4) Harmony.
Such a shame that people now think noise is music! It's not.
You might say, in a figure of speech, that some type of news is music to your ears, but that is just a figure of speech. Unfortunately, unschooled people actually believe the brainwashing they have received, and are not able to call things as they are.
Yes, it is unfortunate when unschooled people think they know more than they do and open their mouths. All those falsities simply make one want to swoon. Fortunately a true, good constitutional will restore one's good humors. Another suggestion for Bandlab - the ability to generate pink noise for audio calibration instead of having to import it from another program. I use Audacity to generate the pink noise for calibrating monitors with a decibel meter, but it would be nice if I could generate pink noise (or any other) inside Sonar itself. I haven't been able to find the option, if it is there (where, if it is?!?!?). This would reduce the probability of human error (or import settings overlooked in the preferences that change who knows what) while importing the pink noise from an outside program, weighting issues etc.
|
abacab
Max Output Level: -30.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4464
- Joined: 2014/12/31 19:34:07
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 01:13:52
(permalink)
Kamikaze
abacab
Kamikaze
IMO this is what BandLab needs to do...
<snip>
Some very good points made here! The focus on the core skillsets of Sonar is a must.
Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording
If it isn't something that Sonar can do as well, or better than the competition, cut it out. Harsh, but necessary to avoid a jack of all trades mediocrity. Sonar needs a strong identity to appeal to the future uninitiated DAW users, or else the competition will win.
As far as the Matrix is concerned. Nice idea, but Live can do it better, so just let it go.
Same with chord tracks. It's a nice idea, but Cubase can do it already. It hasn't happened in Sonar yet, so just let the feature request go in peace.
Notation? Get a dedicated notation program. Studio One and Live are both successful without a notation view.
Trim the weeds, and focus on areas that are the strongest!
Making Sonar clearly better than the competition at "Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording" is a very difficult and unlikely task. At best it can only be seen to be 'as good as'. So if it's 'as good as' why choose it. It's as good as Cubase, but cubase has Chord Tracks and hasn't been passed from company to company and was closed down at one point. Chord Tracks will most likely become the norm as ARA2 is adoptied but more DAWs and it's one of it's attributes. So Studio One will probably have one soon as they are a key Melodyne partner. When Extract tempo was created, so many Sonar users were saying 'we want it, Studio One has it'. Melodyne is now part of my tool box, and I'm choosing the DAWs that are capable of utilizing it to the full.
Sonar needs to re-build a reputation and gain new customers, it has to be a clear option compared to the leaders. stripping it back will not do this.
Ableton users wanting to progress onto a fully fledged DAW have no reason to choose Sonar over the top 3 DAWs. Things like the 64 pad controllers are becoming more common and many will see that as a way into music. Sonar should be breaking new customer grounds.
This is a BandLab Product now, and easy Song Writing is the ethos of BandLap. Chord Tracks and Matrix view are tools for easy song writing. I don't know, but maybe BandLab already do use a chord track. BandLab are also interested in the Educational Market and Notation is valuable to this, and schools are a great way to introduce to a new customer base.
With all the sample libraries now, and the interest in gaming music and film scores. Orchestration is bigger than ever and growing. And Notation users wanting to move onto a fully fledge DAW will want this option in the DAW, otherwise 'Why pick Sonar'.
Making Sonar great at just Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording, won't win new customers, and stripping it back will lose existing customers. It may suit you needs but I think it's a plan for failure. I can't see it being BandLabs vision.
I was only trying to present some arguments for avoiding the 'jack of all trades' position that you presented: Kamikaze
Sonar should not be a Jack of all trades, master of none. But it should be a Master of some and Jack and of a few. A master of Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording. Which I think it's close to, only hindered by stability issues. By your circular logic, you will end up right back where you started from if you were to include everything you just mentioned.. The only other option instead may be to abandon 'Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording' as its primary mission. That will surely upset the old timers (like me). But I fail to see how 'doing it all' can be a successful business model. There must be difficult choices ahead. None of these suggestions 'suits my needs', whatever that is supposed to mean. I already use several tools, and am not invested in one size fits all solutions. Merely looking at this as a way for Sonar to survive market forces and avoid the potential for failure again if it doesn't seize the attention of the next generation. It will have to change to be successful, no matter how good, bad, or ugly that becomes...
DAW: CbB; Sonar Platinum, and others ...
|
iRelevant
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 430
- Joined: 2017/10/25 21:14:48
- Location: Norway
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 01:22:31
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby ch.huey 2018/03/16 01:48:56
abacab
Kamikaze
IMO this is what BandLab needs to do...
<snip>
Some very good points made here! The focus on the core skillsets of Sonar is a must.
Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording
If it isn't something that Sonar can do as well, or better than the competition, cut it out. Harsh, but necessary to avoid a jack of all trades mediocrity. Sonar needs a strong identity to appeal to the future uninitiated DAW users, or else the competition will win.
There is nothing wrong with being a Jack of all trades, with the current contemporary environment maybe this is an advantage for this DAWs. You don't need to be the master in all, good enough and working as intended will do for me. I think it is a bad idea to start chopping things out, then you start loosing backwards compatibility for legacy projects ... as well as some of the current user base. For me as a fairly recent user, the DAW seems to have a well thought out design overall ... however, it struck me that the menu system where initially difficult to comprehend; as a newbie ... I also struggled with mastering something as simple as track routing and the mixer. I initially spent about one hour getting sound out of the system ... I don't recall exactly what it was ... but remember it was something unbelievable trivial. I would put down a focus group of people unfamiliar with the DAW and see what obstacles they could identify, and then streamline the userinterface based on that assessment. To me it seem like the current one heavily presumes prior knowledge and familiarity with earlier versions. Something I for different reasons don't have. I also think more time an resources need to be spent making what IS more robust and efficient. XP compatibility would be a nice dream, to me that is a seal of quality ... one which seem to quickly be removed in the name of efficiency to get out of trouble with the code. Then again, maybe it is just my imagination.
|
Earwax
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 242
- Joined: 2004/01/08 01:58:06
- Location: Southern California
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 01:30:06
(permalink)
ch.huey
Earwax
ch.huey
Thank you but I'm not a lover of long posts myself, I mostly find them a pain in the rear.
You’re joking, right? You have 4 posts. They’re ALL long!!
I can promise you this will be short.
ch.huey
- I DON'T FEEL SCREWED THAT I LIKELY WON'T HAVE LIFETIME UGPRADES/ROLLING UPDATES ANYMORE THAT I PAID $399 FOR. ... Again I blame Gibson for what seems like a crass attempt to milk... I'll stop there but you get my point. Glad Sonar is away from Gibson, even if it won't be the same program as I bought into.
 Can we PLEASE, once and for all, dispel the myth that Gibson came up with the “Lifetime Updates” idea? They didn’t. Cakewalk came up with the Lifetime Updates, not Gibson. Don’t believe it? Ask Noel Borthwick or Craig Anderton.
Yes, except that I never said Gibson came up with the idea of lifetime updates. I blame Gibson for being such a poorly run company that Cakewalk, a company that has been around for decades and I had faith in to buy lifetime upgrades, shut down due to Gibson being a poorly run company. If you disagree with that, please drink some chamomile tea and have a good cry. Perhaps find a kitten and pet it. Or if whatever severe crisis you seem to be having is more existential in nature, find a priest, and pet him.
You are aware I am indeed a man, but not made of straw, yes? So you can go find an immobile human shaped form to argue with that has the holes exactly where you want to poke it with your pitchfork elsewhere, as I have no desire to be prodded by you.
ch.huey
I talked to a friend a while back, and she told me ... (blah blah removed, sigh)
I find this incredibly hard to believe. How did he think the loops he was using were made?? Is he blessed with magical thinking? Did you actually have a conversation with him about his thoughts on musical creation, or with his mom? What program could he possibly have used that would magically close his mind to the reality of, oh I don’t know…, who made the loops he was using, and how they were made? He’s never heard of a recording studio?
I’m not picking on you. I just found your posts……………interesting
I find the future possibilities of the flagship BLDAW to be utterly fascinating. I can’t wait to see what the BandLab team cooks up.
I certainly don't find you as interesting as you seem to find yourself.
Thank you for your suggestions, though, to Bandlab on what they can do to make your experience of the program better, instead of nitpicking on minutiae that no one cares about from a post several pages ago.
Since that was my bigger point about why arguing over loops doesn't matter and it's far more important to suggest positive improvements instead of being someone who sits there nit picking pointless issues like an armchair philosopher. Also why I'm not going to argue about loops with you.
That short enough for you? I apologize if it is too brief, as I'm enjoying all the other people who are actually posting constructive comments about what they would like Bandlab to know to devote more time to this response. My sincerest apologies.
Not short enough. Hysterically funny though. I’m sure you are a man, just not a very good marksman – the arrows all missed. I have no idea why my post drew such ire – a fascinating indulgence in self-absorption perhaps? It’s of no real consequence. It’s just a bit odd that a grownup would respond with such venomous petulance to a casual observation that was in no way attacking or insulting. Grow up.
Pain - the absence of things hoped for, the evidence of catastrophes unforeseen.
|
ch.huey
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 33
- Joined: 2016/01/23 09:57:09
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 01:48:16
(permalink)
earwax
Not short enough.
Hysterically funny though. I’m sure you are a man, just not a very good marksman – the arrows all missed. I have no idea why my post drew such ire – a fascinating indulgence in self-absorption perhaps? It’s of no real consequence. It’s just a bit odd that a grownup would respond with such venomous petulance to a casual observation that was in no way attacking or insulting.
Grow up.
You have not drawn ire. You chose to open your mouth regarding something I said that was already addressed and put to bed, repeatedly, and I responded that you should be more focused on contributing toward suggestions on future development. You are creating unnecessary posts that could occlude the real, important ones that people are making regarding actual concerns about actual suggestions regarding the future of software. That was me being polite before, and attempting a modicum of humor to try to not become adversarial. This is the not polite version as I find I have little tolerance for you: Put up and contribute, or shut up. Your posts draws a response and this is the last one you will get from me, but it is making the company who does not have infinite time have to wade through a very large number of posts lacking substance like yours. So contribute, or remain silent. I'm not your nanny so this is the last time I will say it. I genuinely hope you put up because I want the best program they can make and despite finding you obnoxious, you may have some good ideas. I welcome good ideas from anyone. Then everyone else can decide who is interested in fascinating indulges of self-absorption if you post again displaying your self-congratulating behavior, or your genuine suggestions for a better program presented in a straight-forward manner. Either way, I don't have time for this, and I doubt Bandlab does either.
|
iRelevant
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 430
- Joined: 2017/10/25 21:14:48
- Location: Norway
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 03:10:46
(permalink)
michael diemer
I wasn't disparaging loops. I just thought it was a rather humorous statement that they represented a higher level of abstraction.
Of course, it makes a difference if the loops are your own creation, or you just downloaded them from some repository.
I glad you found it humorous, but I think we have a different understanding of the concepts of abstraction. When your working with loops vs creating them, you are working less detailed ... and from that perspective more abstract. At a higher level of abstraction in my book. It's not a value statement.
|
cparmerlee
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1153
- Joined: 2013/06/25 22:14:42
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 03:42:22
(permalink)
iRelevant
michael diemer
I wasn't disparaging loops. I just thought it was a rather humorous statement that they represented a higher level of abstraction.
Of course, it makes a difference if the loops are your own creation, or you just downloaded them from some repository.
I glad you found it humorous, but I think we have a different understanding of the concepts of abstraction.
When your working with loops vs creating them, you are working less detailed ... and from that perspective more abstract. At a higher level of abstraction in my book. It's not a value statement.
That is also how I would use the term "abstraction." You can create your own lines (and loops if you like). This is the most detailed level (and of course you can manually tweak many aspects of the MIDI, so that is even more detailed, I guess. Using a pre-fab loop is higher level or more abstract. Instead of creating your own funk beat, you choose from 100 different funky drum patterns. That is more abstract than creating your own loops. And of course, you can always dive into the loop and customize it, but the pre-fab loop gets you going more quickly. In my case, I often start by generating MIDI from Band-in-a-box. In that case, you operate at the harmony and style level. I can choose from among thousands of styles. This is more abstract than loops because it creates a complete arrangement in minutes for starters. And again, I can dive down whenever I want to. Sometimes I end up replacing virtually all of the BIAB content in the final product. Other times, a big percentage of the BIAB MIDI remains. Either way, working at a more abstract level can get faster results (and for me, better results.)
DAW: SONAR Platinum Audio I/F: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 gen2
OS: Windows 10 64-bit CPU: Haswell 4790 4.0 GHz, 4 core, 8 thread Memory: 16 GB Video: GTX-760Ti
Storage: Sandisk SSD 500GB for active projects. ReadyNAS 20 TB for long-term storagesonocrafters.com
|
kitekrazy1
Max Output Level: -40 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3524
- Joined: 2014/08/02 17:52:51
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 04:35:47
(permalink)
abacab
Kamikaze
IMO this is what BandLab needs to do...
<snip>
Some very good points made here! The focus on the core skillsets of Sonar is a must.
Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording
If it isn't something that Sonar can do as well, or better than the competition, cut it out. Harsh, but necessary to avoid a jack of all trades mediocrity. Sonar needs a strong identity to appeal to the future uninitiated DAW users, or else the competition will win.
As far as the Matrix is concerned. Nice idea, but Live can do it better, so just let it go.
Same with chord tracks. It's a nice idea, but Cubase can do it already. It hasn't happened in Sonar yet, so just let the feature request go in peace.
Notation? Get a dedicated notation program. Studio One and Live are both successful without a notation view.
Trim the weeds, and focus on areas that are the strongest!
Love the ignorance here. So many former Cakewalkers found a similar program called Cubase. You can google it for the truth. A notation program is more for publishing. For some complex stuff people who read the dots still need to view what they are writing. Film composers rarely use Studio One or Live. Reaper was great without a staff view but they decided to add it.
Sonar Platinum, W7 Pro 32GB Ram, Intel i7 4790, AsRock Z97 Pro 4, NVidia 750ti, AP2496 Sonar Platinum, W7 Pro, 16GB Ram, AMD FX 6300, Gigabyte GA 970 -UD3 P, nVidia 9800GT, Guitar Port, Terratec EWX 2496
|
kitekrazy1
Max Output Level: -40 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3524
- Joined: 2014/08/02 17:52:51
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 04:39:59
(permalink)
Leadfoot
I believe Hendrix experimented with them as well.
When Van Halen last toured do you think they lugged around a synth just for Jump. It was a loop.
Sonar Platinum, W7 Pro 32GB Ram, Intel i7 4790, AsRock Z97 Pro 4, NVidia 750ti, AP2496 Sonar Platinum, W7 Pro, 16GB Ram, AMD FX 6300, Gigabyte GA 970 -UD3 P, nVidia 9800GT, Guitar Port, Terratec EWX 2496
|
Kamikaze
Max Output Level: -45 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3013
- Joined: 2015/01/15 21:38:59
- Location: Da Nang, Vietnam
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 04:48:11
(permalink)
abacab
By your circular logic, you will end up right back where you started from if you were to include everything you just mentioned.. The only other option instead may be to abandon 'Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording' as its primary mission. That will surely upset the old timers (like me). But I fail to see how 'doing it all' can be a successful business model. There must be difficult choices ahead.
None of these suggestions 'suits my needs', whatever that is supposed to mean. I already use several tools, and am not invested in one size fits all solutions. Merely looking at this as a way for Sonar to survive market forces and avoid the potential for failure again if it doesn't seize the attention of the next generation. It will have to change to be successful, no matter how good, bad, or ugly that becomes...
It's only circular logic if you think that's why it failed the first time. I don't believe that was the reason it failed. I don't think that we need to abandon anything really. The development of 'Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording' has kind of leveled off with features, it's just about improving workflow, ease of use and stability. I don't much demand for changes in the sequencing and arranging, ripple editing was the last big change. recording options look good a flexible. And the mixer had Aux tracks. Some options with having tracks and busses in their old folder instead of busses all together in the console view, some more flexible FX routing for parallel and multiband processing . But really I don't see any major changes needed to be up their with the other DAws as it is. But I don't striping it back as appealing to the next generation, just the opposite. Matrix view paprticualry could be something to draw to the next generatio. Staff veiw can't have been a case of spreading themsleves too thinly, as they didn't do anything on it for 10 year and is a function that ore dates Sonar in the Cakewalk days. It's a great tool in arranging and sequencing so only makes thoese too areas more competitive, not less. And being they have agreed a plan with Overture's developer to fix it, it seems a no brainer to me to dothat and appeal to, those who can read (translate), those who want to arrange Orachestral music, the Education Sector and those that have been asking for it to be developed for the last ten years. Sorry if the 'suits your needs' comment came of as snide, it wasn't my intention. I just meant if the stuff you saw as needing to be trimmed back was not stuff you used.
|
cparmerlee
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1153
- Joined: 2013/06/25 22:14:42
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 04:55:09
(permalink)
kitekrazy1
A notation program is more for publishing. For some complex stuff people who read the dots still need to view what they are writing. Film composers rarely use Studio One or Live.
Two different worlds: Composers for high budget films generally write for studio orchestras. They certainly do not use the notation feature of any DAW, at least not for the music they give the orchestra. But part of the sound track might be composed and/or produced in a DAW. Composers for lower budget films (art films, shorts, and such) will almost always work in a DAW, to my knowledge. Almost all the people doing scores for Hollywood (TV and film) study at USC Thornton. You might be interested in the curriculum: http://catalogue.usc.edu/...=1670&returnto=305 But there is a whole universe of other programming now that isn't "Big Hollywood" (HBO, Netflix, and international films), and one would expect DAW-based scoring to be more common there.
DAW: SONAR Platinum Audio I/F: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 gen2
OS: Windows 10 64-bit CPU: Haswell 4790 4.0 GHz, 4 core, 8 thread Memory: 16 GB Video: GTX-760Ti
Storage: Sandisk SSD 500GB for active projects. ReadyNAS 20 TB for long-term storagesonocrafters.com
|
michael diemer
Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1128
- Joined: 2013/05/24 18:54:50
- Location: Maine, USA
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 05:02:17
(permalink)
iRelevant
michael diemer
I wasn't disparaging loops. I just thought it was a rather humorous statement that they represented a higher level of abstraction.
Of course, it makes a difference if the loops are your own creation, or you just downloaded them from some repository.
I glad you found it humorous, but I think we have a different understanding of the concepts of abstraction.
When your working with loops vs creating them, you are working less detailed ... and from that perspective more abstract. At a higher level of abstraction in my book. It's not a value statement.
Got it. Sorry if I seem to have misunderstimated you.
michael diemer Intel Quad Core i7-3770 Ivy Bridge 32 GB ram 1TB Western Digital Black X2 Microsoft Windows 7 Pro 64 UR22 interface Bandlab Cakewalk/Sonar 8.5 Studio GPO-EWQLSO Gold-Vienna SP ED-Cinematic Strings 2
|
ch.huey
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 33
- Joined: 2016/01/23 09:57:09
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 05:18:12
(permalink)
cparmerlee
iRelevant
michael diemer
I wasn't disparaging loops. I just thought it was a rather humorous statement that they represented a higher level of abstraction.
Of course, it makes a difference if the loops are your own creation, or you just downloaded them from some repository.
I glad you found it humorous, but I think we have a different understanding of the concepts of abstraction.
When your working with loops vs creating them, you are working less detailed ... and from that perspective more abstract. At a higher level of abstraction in my book. It's not a value statement.
That is also how I would use the term "abstraction."
You can create your own lines (and loops if you like). This is the most detailed level (and of course you can manually tweak many aspects of the MIDI, so that is even more detailed, I guess.
Using a pre-fab loop is higher level or more abstract. Instead of creating your own funk beat, you choose from 100 different funky drum patterns. That is more abstract than creating your own loops. And of course, you can always dive into the loop and customize it, but the pre-fab loop gets you going more quickly.
In my case, I often start by generating MIDI from Band-in-a-box. In that case, you operate at the harmony and style level. I can choose from among thousands of styles. This is more abstract than loops because it creates a complete arrangement in minutes for starters. And again, I can dive down whenever I want to. Sometimes I end up replacing virtually all of the BIAB content in the final product. Other times, a big percentage of the BIAB MIDI remains. Either way, working at a more abstract level can get faster results (and for me, better results.)
cparmerlee - I had to read this a few times to get to the point where I think I understand what you mean. It is about as far away from how I operate as I can imagine, not necessarily by choice but from habit and routine. I'm always open to new ways of approaching things. To reiterate, I am not opposed to looping at all, but to lack of creativity I find in those who use it without personalizing, and after reading your post I think I might be ignorant of a way to use loops creatively, or to spur it in myself. If I'm getting you, you're thinking more in terms of what, and I apologize for how esoteric this might sound but it's the only thing I can think of, you're working less from the concrete physical reality, and more from the Platonic eidos, the ideal non-material world, where you don't have to decide on anything specific (just Chair, not a red chair with 17" legs, just Chair) or invent any novel forms, or rhythms, but you can choose from an idealized palette of styles, rhythms, harmonies etc, going from the generic to the individual and concrete? Band in a box or the loops in Sonar are simply placeholders, or sources of inspiration for where your mind could lead you, until you whittle it down to your own personal choice. I have very little experience with BIAB and have never approached it the way you have. I think abstract is not the best word for that because of the connotation in fine arts for 'abstract painting' meaning non-representational, as in splotches of paint, but to be honest, I can't think of a good word for it offhand. If I could ask you though, do you approach it with the same mentality that the technology is a way of using what you know, and acting like a thesaurus, or are you exploring things you wouldn't have thought of on your own, like browsing a dictionary for new words? In other words, is it more streamlining thinking 'well, I'll use the AABA 32 bar jazz structure, and the I vi IV V doowop changes, the same instruments Coltrane used on xx album with alto, tenor, bari drums, piano and bass' - all of which you already know and are using the technology to find faster, or is it more like you don't know all the styles you use and may find a new style/rhythm/chord progression and you then use the technology to expand into areas you'd not have thought of without the external inspiration, but then utilize in a more personalized way? I always start from scratch, if anything I might program in my own drum loop but often it's just playing against a click and constructing from a floor plan in my head, but what you're saying does sound kind of like the mental process I go through in composition (relying on forms from songs I know, progressions from styles of music, rhythmic vocabulary), but all drawn from a mental resource, my own 'database' in my head, but one that is no means all my individual creation but drawn from studying the works of others. In other words, I am by no means entirely original, I just keep a lot upstairs in my library to reference when starting. They're all patterns that start out as idealized patterns (verse chorus verse, jazz AABA, sonata form etc), then become more and more individualized to my project I'm working on, which is the process of writing music for me, and often end up not at all like what I began with. I just in the past had the benefit of a band in a room to say 'play this, no try that, no try this, ok that works now add this....', not in a box. That doesn't sound entirely dissimilar from what you described. Definitely less flatulence from the band though. You use technological tools as your 'database', or something like that, in a similar way or am I misunderstanding? I have largely ignored the samples folder in the browser window of Sonar because I don't see the point if I'm going to just replace it, but now I'm wondering if that is a bit of myopia on my part, and I'm wondering if or what Bandlab's perspective might bring to the Sonar platform as a synthesis of prefab loops/progressions that becomes part of the creative process in your head and in the program while you record, instead of using the recording process to capture what is already formed in your head. I still wait until I've got the bar lengths down before I record because I really, really hate having to edit 2 bars of audio out with 7 instruments laid down. I don't think anyone creates from scratch, but using premade loops from what I hear often becomes a crutch instead of a tool, so I dislike it but don't invalidate its usage. In theory I truly don't see the different between a looped funk beat and a 32 bar structure in theory. I just see the limitations that the former is concrete, and the latter is an 'abstraction' in my head. From my perspective it's more work to deal with what you're referring to as an abstraction (which to my mind is actually already realized and concrete, like a recording of a musical score, as opposed to a musical score itself which leaves performer interpretation open), to individualize it so it doesn't sound like everyone else who has the database they bought online, than to just start by playing a rhythm in on a midi keyboard and creating my own loop to refine into a real drum part as I lay down more of the tracks individually. I'm curious about your process and if you could elaborate I'd appreciate as it is very unfamiliar to me.
|
cparmerlee
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1153
- Joined: 2013/06/25 22:14:42
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 05:53:43
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby ch.huey 2018/03/16 22:31:16
ch.huey
If I'm getting you, you're thinking more in terms of what, and I apologize for how esoteric this might sound but it's the only thing I can think of, you're working less from the concrete physical reality, and more from the Platonic eidos, the ideal non-material world, where you don't have to decide on anything specific (just Chair, not a red chair with 17" legs, just Chair) or invent any novel forms, or rhythms, but you can choose from an idealized palette of styles, rhythms, harmonies etc, going from the generic to the individual and concrete? Band in a box or the loops in Sonar are simply placeholders, or sources of inspiration for where your mind could lead you, until you whittle it down to your own personal choice. I have very little experience with BIAB and have never approached it the way you have.
Yes, something like that. I do a variety of different kinds of projects. I do a lot of live recording where I use the DAW after the show to produce videos, demo tapes or whatever. These are not intended to be studio quality, but under the right recording conditions, it is possible to come close sometimes. For those projects, it is 100% WAVs, so looping, BIAB and all that is not a factor at all. I do quite a bit of arranging. I typically do that in Finale. If the arrangement is of a pop or jazz nature, I will usually begin in BIAB to lock down the major harmonic choices, song form, and overall style. And in most cases, I'll also pull the BIAB MIDI directly into Finale so that I have a carpet to work on. In the course of developing the arrangement, I will typically replace a good part of the BIAB material. The project may never go to a DAW, but if the client wants a high quality rendering, I will take the final Finale material through its "Human Playback" processing, which adds some MIDI nuances, and then pull all that MIDI into DAW tracks for the final rendering. I do many smallish projects with an educational purpose. For those, I am happy to use loops if that makes sense. And I quite often take BIAB into the DAW. The point is rapid development, and iterative development. I work better if I can hear the music taking shape. I don't know that any of the Bandlab capabilities will fit what I do, but I am always interested in "macro level" ways of working for higher productivity. ch.huey
If I could ask you though, do you approach it with the same mentality that the technology is a way of using what you know, and acting like a thesaurus, or are you exploring things you wouldn't have thought of on your own, like browsing a dictionary for new words? In other words, is it more streamlining thinking 'well, I'll use the AABA 32 bar jazz structure, and the I vi IV V doowop changes, the same instruments Coltrane used on xx album with alto, tenor, bari drums, piano and bass' - all of which you already know and are using the technology to find faster, or is it more like you don't know all the styles you use and may find a new style/rhythm/chord progression and you then use the technology to expand into areas you'd not have thought of without the external inspiration, but then utilize in a more personalized way?
I'm not sure how to answer that exactly. When arranging, I generally have a particular ensemble and a particular groove in mind before starting. If I don't find a BIAB style that is exactly the groove I was looking for I will usually pick something that is in the ballpark, realizing that I am likely to replace much of the BIAB output before I get done. I just feel that I am more productive when I am evolving an arrangement iteratively. I don't like working from scratch. My mind is not wired that way. I should point out that my notated arrangements are always performed by humans, so I don't necessarily have to get everything sounding perfect in the rendering unless that is what the client really wants. I think I am a lot different from most folks here in that regard. I think most SONAR users really intend to get a completely polished product each time. As far as whether it is more like a thesaurus or a dictionary, I'll just say that there are probably 3000 distinct styles available in BIAB. I am sure I have heard music in just about all of those styles sometime in my life. And if I had to carefully craft that exact style from scratch, I could do it, but it would take a long time. When it comes down to it, I usually end up simplifying the MIDI that I import from BIAB. But that is mainly because BIAB is mostly oriented toward trios, quartets, and quintets (plus a soloist). I usually write for much larger ensembles, so the rhythm section needs to be simplified to avoid clutter.
DAW: SONAR Platinum Audio I/F: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 gen2
OS: Windows 10 64-bit CPU: Haswell 4790 4.0 GHz, 4 core, 8 thread Memory: 16 GB Video: GTX-760Ti
Storage: Sandisk SSD 500GB for active projects. ReadyNAS 20 TB for long-term storagesonocrafters.com
|
Earwax
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 242
- Joined: 2004/01/08 01:58:06
- Location: Southern California
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 10:58:54
(permalink)
ch.huey
You have not drawn ire..
No? Then why this… ch.huey
This is the not polite version as I find I have little tolerance for you:
Or this…….. ch.huey
Put up and contribute, or shut up.
Or this…… ch.huey
So contribute, or remain silent. I'm not your nanny so this is the last time I will say it.
Or this….. ch.huey
…and despite finding you obnoxious…...
Ohh boy… ch.huey
….you may have some good ideas. I welcome good ideas from anyone.
Gee…thanks… I think…. ch.huey
Either way, I don't have time for this,
Apparently, you do ch.huey
…and I doubt Bandlab does either.
Given that I’ve heretofore posted significantly less verbiage in this admittedly silly back and forth, I suggest you reassess your contribution to others time wasted. ch.huey
That was me being polite before, and attempting a modicum of humor to try to not become adversarial.
That, kind sir, is exactly what I was trying to do in my initial response to your posts. Make a light comment about the irony of your dislike for lengthy posts, versus your propensity to make them. Did ya happen to notice the laughing emoticons? My other posted response regarding your friend’s son was actually quite germane to the topic at hand. Part of this thread has to do with the marketing of the new Bandlab DAW to younger generations of musically inclined individuals, and their willingness to accept said DAW as a tool they could and would use. What features will be included in the new product in general, as well as to reel in new users. How will those features be used? In developing the new products, what mindsets will BandLab and company have to appeal to in order to make their DAW attractive to younger generations? Your friend’s son was a case in point. I gathered from your post that he was an instrumentalist (bass player), who was invested at that time in producing music in a way that did not involve playing his instrument of choice. The thing that struck me was when you said ch.huey
I asked if he ever sat down with an instrument, wrote music and lyrics, figured out an arrangement, then used his software as a tool to record his composition, revise it and then improve it. He hadn't. I guess it hadn't occured to him that he could do that, or that anyone ever did that at any point.
The reason I asked if you got that impression of his musical awareness directly from him, or from a discussion with his mom, is that I just can’t imagine sitting and chatting with a kid about music, only to have him tell me he’s not aware of the songwriting process you described. He may not like that process, or know how it works, or even know how to approach it, but to be totally unaware of it? Sounds like a great teaching moment to me. This brings me to one of the things I would love to see Bandlab do with the Bandlab DAW product. - Develop it in such a way that it can become a teaching tool at any level. That would mean, of course, the continuation of a family of products, not just a flagship product. Anyone just starting out, or simply not wishing to do more than most basic recording/beat-making tasks, does not need “Sonar Platinum Revisited”. Sonar Home Studio, for example, encompasses the compositional paradigm you described, but also supports the “let’s just create stuff” process so prevalent today. Actually, the “let’s just create stuff” drive has always been there. It’s just that now, people have the tools to do it in a more fun-filled and meaningful way. So, develop the product line with educational levels in mind, and never lose the “fun” factor, at any level. Also,
- For those “seasoned” users of “current” Sonar products who are quite comfortable with the more traditional paradigm, and feel compelled to continue using Sonar in its current state – give them the activation key that will allow them to continue using their current product ad infinitum. The upgrade to the new product is a very nice gesture, but if there is a paradigm shift in how the product works, some might choose to stay with the current product. Make sure they retain that option in a way that they are comfortable with. Servers die – activation keys are less vulnerable. And,
- Integration with the Cloud – I’m not a “Cloud” lover, but I can see its obvious benefits. BandLab is firmly on the inside with this. I’d love to see what they come up with. And,
- Gapless audio engine – enough said.
- Stability – the ability to handle projects of virtually any size without crashing, and the ability to recover from crashes gracefully…very gracefully.
- Loops and Beats – I don’t use them; I make them (I play drums, keyboards, and Chapman Stick). My daughter uses them, and loves doing it. As a singer (solo and in a choral group) and guitar player (the lessons weren’t cheap), she collaborates with other young musicians, sharing music files, adding musical parts. She’s involved in many sides of music, not as a career, but as a part of life. She finds loops and beats indispensable, whether created by her, her friends, or canned. She is not a “just sit at home alone in your bedroom” music-producing kind of person, even though she does do that as well. I am most excited about her eagerness to interact with other people musically. I know there are tons of young people out there who feel the same way she does. I told her about BandLab. She said it sounded cool, and she might check it out.
I’m a huge admirer of Frank Zappa myself. I was in a band in high school in New York in the late 60s that attempted (at times quite badly I might add) to play Mothers of Invention music. We also played stuff by the Fugs, but that’s another story. Zappa’s metamorphosis from the 60’s outlier rock guitarist to consummate composer of the early 90’s is amazing. I especially loved his willingness to experiment with, well, just about anything musically. I would hope that the new products BandLab comes out with will inspire people’s creativity and willingness to experiment, at all levels. I guess we’ll see.
Pain - the absence of things hoped for, the evidence of catastrophes unforeseen.
|
abacab
Max Output Level: -30.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4464
- Joined: 2014/12/31 19:34:07
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 13:15:52
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Kamikaze 2018/03/16 13:33:21
Kamikaze
Sorry if the 'suits your needs' comment came of as snide, it wasn't my intention. I just meant if the stuff you saw as needing to be trimmed back was not stuff you used.
No problem. I do use the stuff. I use the best tools that meet my needs, wherever I find them. I was just using examples of some feature implementations in Sonar that have been ignored for years, despite repeated feature requests. My point was that I fear Sonar may fail again if it doesn't proceed with a laser focus on the new goal. Whatever the goal is, it can't be everything to everybody, no matter how 'right', or appealing that may be. The 'trimming back' of certain features was only a suggestion to cultivate a core skill set of 'essentials' that can be marketed successfully. That will be defined by BandLab. Where will they start? They will do what they have to do to make ago of it. When 'new Sonar' is released, that will probably generate a forum thread longer and more emotionally heated than this one. Who will feel that they were not listened to then? It would be great to have all features in Sonar improved to world class ability, and cater to all current and future users needs. But is that realistic? At some point the feature creep and scope creep would make the project financially undesirable, and it will get buried again. I really hope that does not happen.
DAW: CbB; Sonar Platinum, and others ...
|
cparmerlee
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1153
- Joined: 2013/06/25 22:14:42
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 14:16:59
(permalink)
Earwax
Loops and Beats – I don’t use them; I make them (I play drums, keyboards, and Chapman Stick). My daughter uses them, and loves doing it. As a singer (solo and in a choral group) and guitar player (the lessons weren’t cheap), she collaborates with other young musicians, sharing music files, adding musical parts. She’s involved in many sides of music, not as a career, but as a part of life. She finds loops and beats indispensable, whether created by her, her friends, or canned. She is not a “just sit at home alone in your bedroom” music-producing kind of person, even though she does do that as well. I am most excited about her eagerness to interact with other people musically. I know there are tons of young people out there who feel the same way she does. I told her about BandLab. She said it sounded cool, and she might check it out.
I am probably stating the obvious when I say that the direction Bandlab is going blurs the definition of “just sit at home alone in your bedroom”, as people all over the world can be doing exactly that while collaborating on a bigger project. I have always seen music as something that draws people (musicians and audiences) together physically. And I think physical connectedness remains a good thing. But it isn't the only way. There are many people I will never meet face to face and it is interesting to think I might collaborate with them on something in the future.
DAW: SONAR Platinum Audio I/F: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 gen2
OS: Windows 10 64-bit CPU: Haswell 4790 4.0 GHz, 4 core, 8 thread Memory: 16 GB Video: GTX-760Ti
Storage: Sandisk SSD 500GB for active projects. ReadyNAS 20 TB for long-term storagesonocrafters.com
|
iRelevant
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 430
- Joined: 2017/10/25 21:14:48
- Location: Norway
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 14:43:22
(permalink)
michael diemer
iRelevant
michael diemer
I wasn't disparaging loops. I just thought it was a rather humorous statement that they represented a higher level of abstraction.
Of course, it makes a difference if the loops are your own creation, or you just downloaded them from some repository.
I glad you found it humorous, but I think we have a different understanding of the concepts of abstraction.
When your working with loops vs creating them, you are working less detailed ... and from that perspective more abstract. At a higher level of abstraction in my book. It's not a value statement.
Got it. Sorry if I seem to have misunderstimated you.
No problem, I'm not touchy :) I'm more concerned about a negative vibe against loop based material on the forum in general. If we look forward and hope to welcome new members, it won't feel very inviting to people just starting out with music if the general attitude is that loop based music, isn't really "music", unless you handcrafted them yourself. These days with electronic music being the entry point into music for many, I think it is important to keep an open mind. Even people with musical talent and and a desire to express themselves as an individual, is likely to start out from loop based material. I guess quite a few of them quickly find out that it doesn't give the same level of expression to play a gitar emulator on an ipad vs. the real thing ... but it might take a while before they realise that. If you look around "real" music shops are dying like flies at the moment, here Meng and BandLab seems to be a counter force.
|
abacab
Max Output Level: -30.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4464
- Joined: 2014/12/31 19:34:07
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 15:28:21
(permalink)
iRelevant
I'm more concerned about a negative vibe against loop based material on the forum in general. If we look forward and hope to welcome new members, it won't feel very inviting to people just starting out with music if the general attitude is that loop based music, isn't really "music", unless you handcrafted them yourself. These days with electronic music being the entry point into music for many, I think it is important to keep an open mind. Even people with musical talent and and a desire to express themselves as an individual, is likely to start out from loop based material. I guess quite a few of them quickly find out that it doesn't give the same level of expression to play a gitar emulator on an ipad vs. the real thing ... but it might take a while before they realise that. If you look around "real" music shops are dying like flies at the moment, here Meng and BandLab seems to be a counter force.
I think respect for others is the key here. No 'attitudes' should be a requirement if BandLab is going to pull this thing together. I think that both groups can learn from each other if minds are open. It's a two way street.
DAW: CbB; Sonar Platinum, and others ...
|
marled
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 251
- Joined: 2015/01/22 04:50:52
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 18:55:04
(permalink)
Earwax
- ...
- For those “seasoned” users of “current” Sonar products who are quite comfortable with the more traditional paradigm, and feel compelled to continue using Sonar in its current state – give them the activation key that will allow them to continue using their current product ad infinitum. The upgrade to the new product is a very nice gesture, but if there is a paradigm shift in how the product works, some might choose to stay with the current product. Make sure they retain that option in a way that they are comfortable with. Servers die – activation keys are less vulnerable. And,
- Integration with the Cloud – I’m not a “Cloud” lover, but I can see its obvious benefits.
+++1! I really like how you describe the probable "reality" for many "seasoned" Sonar users (and not seasoned, like me). Point 3 about the cloud integration: The same is valid for me and presumably for a lot of other Sonar users, too. abacab
When 'new Sonar' is released, that will probably generate a forum thread longer and more emotionally heated than this one.
I am convinced that if point 2 of Earwax (above) is realized, then the thread will not be so long and the emotions are probably not going so hot! abacab
iRelevant
I'm more concerned about a negative vibe against loop based material on the forum in general. ...
I think respect for others is the key here. No 'attitudes' should be a requirement if BandLab is going to pull this thing together. I think that both groups can learn from each other if minds are open. It's a two way street.
I totally agree with you, although I usually do not like songs mostly constructed of loops! Respect for all musicians and their creations is the right attitude!
... many years before ...
|
Wookiee
Rrrrugh arah-ah-woof?
- Total Posts : 13306
- Joined: 2007/01/16 06:19:43
- Location: Akahaocwora - Village Yoh Kay
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 18:55:28
(permalink)
Can we bring this back to the origins of this thread which is a Hello from the new peeps in charge, not a discussion on the direction of SONAR or TDPKAS. Thanks.
post edited by Wookiee - 2018/03/18 14:36:27
Life is not about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.
Karma has a way of finding its own way home.
Primary, i7 8700K 16Gigs Ram, 3x500gb SSD's 2TB Backup HHD Saffire Pro 40. Win 10 64Bit Secondary i7 4790K, 32GB Ram, 500Gb SSD OS/Prog's, 1TB Audio, 1TB Samples HHD AudioBox USB, Win 10 64Bit CbB, Adam's A7x's - Event 20/20's, Arturia V6, Korg Digital Legacy, Softube Modular, Arturia Keylab-88, USB-MidiSport 8x8
|
ch.huey
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 33
- Joined: 2016/01/23 09:57:09
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 19:36:06
(permalink)
Earwax
ch.huey
You have not drawn ire..
No? Then why this…
(snipped)
ch.huey
…and I doubt Bandlab does either.
Given that I’ve heretofore posted significantly less verbiage in this admittedly silly back and forth, I suggest you reassess your contribution to others time wasted.
ch.huey
I asked if he ever sat down with an instrument, wrote music and lyrics, figured out an arrangement, then used his software as a tool to record his composition, revise it and then improve it. He hadn't. I guess it hadn't occured to him that he could do that, or that anyone ever did that at any point.
The reason I asked if you got that impression of his musical awareness directly from him, or from a discussion with his mom, is that I just can’t imagine sitting and chatting with a kid about music, only to have him tell me he’s not aware of the songwriting process you described. He may not like that process, or know how it works, or even know how to approach it, but to be totally unaware of it? Sounds like a great teaching moment to me.
Earwax, I have a very detailed response that answers your question that you put in bold and underline since it seems so important to you to find the answer to for some reason, as well as your other comments, that I tried to send you via PM. I'm not posting it here for the reasons stated before. PM me so I can respond with it, or open your PMs so I can send it to you, but I won't go into it in public as it doesn't contribute to the thread.
|
Paul P
Max Output Level: -48.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2685
- Joined: 2012/12/08 17:15:47
- Location: Montreal
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/16 20:41:14
(permalink)
groverken
If you have a registered copy of Sonar Platinum it is already set for 'lifetime use' just like Office 2010. I'm just looking forward to the next BandLab announcement so that (hopefully) we can finally drop all this "lifetime updates" dialogue!
Not if the authentication server is taken offline.
Sonar Platinum [2017.10], Win7U x64 sp1, Xeon E5-1620 3.6 GHz, Asus P9X79WS, 16 GB ECC, 128gb SSD, HD7950, Mackie Blackjack
|
mumpcake
Max Output Level: -59 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1609
- Joined: 2004/06/16 16:27:42
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/17 03:05:58
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby bodhi65 2018/03/17 15:29:20
|
Kamikaze
Max Output Level: -45 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3013
- Joined: 2015/01/15 21:38:59
- Location: Da Nang, Vietnam
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/17 04:34:55
(permalink)
oops, wrng thread
post edited by Kamikaze - 2018/03/17 07:26:00
|
Gmichaelhall
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 25
- Joined: 2018/01/10 05:40:10
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/17 07:06:08
(permalink)
Congratulations, welcome and thank you for taking the time to stop by the forum and provide such optimism for the future of Sonar-Lab. The Bakers really did have the DAW on a path of reliable stability and efficiency in work flow and I can only imagine any growing pangs from this promising merger will be welcomed by all loyal users. Though I have to be able to float between various DAW systems, for producing and arranging, Sonar has been my go to for years. Knowing I will be able to continue to work in its environment really means alot to me. So much so, soon as there is a path to reaffirm my lifetime update plan, you can count on patronage. Best wishes for the now impending release date and if there is an email list to address the FAQS and rolling facts please tell me where to sign up. Kind regards, Michael ✌️
|
mudgel
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12010
- Joined: 2004/08/13 00:56:05
- Location: Linton Victoria (Near Ballarat)
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/17 07:44:06
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Zargg 2018/03/17 09:47:30
Gmichaelhall
..................... So much so, soon as there is a path to reaffirm my lifetime update plan, you can count on patronage. ..........Kind regards, Michael ✌️
There is no Lifetime update Plan nor will it be reaffirmed. It was offered by Cakewalk, a company that no longer exists. BandLab bought the Assets and Intellectual Property. What has been planned is that a Flagship product (yet to be named) is in the process of being prepared for release in the next few weeks to month, that will be available as a free crossgrade to all Sonar owners. For confirmation please see the first post in this thread from the new owner, Meng.
Mike V. (MUDGEL) STUDIO: Win 10 Pro x64, SPlat & CbB x64, PC: ASUS Z370-A, INTEL i7 8700k, 32GIG DDR4 2400, OC 4.7Ghz. Storage: 7 TB SATA III, 750GiG SSD & Samsung 500 Gig 960 EVO NVMe M.2. Monitors: Adam A7X, JBL 10” Sub. Audio I/O & DSP Server: DIGIGRID IOS & IOX. Screen: Raven MTi + 43" HD 4K TV Monitor. Keyboard Controller: Native Instruments Komplete Kontrol S88.
|
poetnprophet
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 128
- Joined: 2016/07/23 12:56:57
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab
2018/03/17 14:03:34
(permalink)
Hello and thank you for the news and updates. I've read most of this thread and share much of the same sentiment and anticipation that fellow users have here. While I would be content with just keeping Sonar as-is indefinitely, I do hope that the product lives on in some form. I have also been on the hunt for an alternative DAW, yet I am still using Sonar as of now, so that means something, right?
However, I would like to make a HUGE request.
VS700 SUPPORT!
I know that this product is 1) not very popular and 2) no longer supported by anyone, but I've had this unit since launch and I need it in my life. In my hunt for another DAW, there are NONE that have the integrated functionality this has with Sonar. I can't even come close no matter what I try. Sure I can get another controller and interface, but a complete motorized console integration with a DAW, clean quality preamps, AD conversion, plenty of I/O options, headphone outs...you just can't get an all in one system like that right now unless you go SSL. And, to be honest, having the Cakewalk badge on the equipment really means something to me as a 20+ year user of CW/Sonar. And to be even more honest....I would probably jump to another DAW if there is no more support for VS700, because let's face it, the DAW, the interface, the controls - they all need to work together well.
Please please please consider this!
Cheers,
Dave
|
ben1973
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 28
- Joined: 2015/08/11 17:50:48
- Location: Nashville, TN
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab [Updated 3/3/2018]
2018/03/17 14:42:21
(permalink)
In the meantime while wondering if anyone was going to pick Sonar back up, I made the switch to the full version of Studio One. The only way I would come back to Sonar (which I did love) is if they completely honored the lifetime warranty I bought. I love Sonar, but I have been forced to move on, and I'm a little apprehensive about coming back.
Ben
|
InstrEd
Max Output Level: -65 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1276
- Joined: 2004/10/13 20:55:03
- Status: offline
Re: Hello from BandLab [Updated 3/3/2018]
2018/03/17 15:11:09
(permalink)
ben1973
In the meantime while wondering if anyone was going to pick Sonar back up, I made the switch to the full version of Studio One. The only way I would come back to Sonar (which I did love) is if they completely honored the lifetime warranty I bought. I love Sonar, but I have been forced to move on, and I'm a little apprehensive about coming back.
Ben
I do see your point, but the lifetime warranty is gone. Not to hard to understand. Look to see what the new rebranded DAW offers and go from there. I brought Samplitude, Waveform and Studio One 3.5 and I'm glad I did. They all bring something new/different to the table.
|