I have been a loyal Sonar user for over 10 years but I am starting to see how Sonar is falling behind when it comes to "intelligence".   This post is not a "troll" post and is not intended to just stir the pot.  I am posting this as a serious user of the prouduct who feels things need to change.
 
I feel when doing a lot of what should be "simple tasks", the application just isnt smart enough to keep up with you.
 
For instance...  we still don't have a great way to move blocks of a song around.  Ive read a bunch of hokey tricks, but no i don't want to add another track and have to add false clips.   
 
Ever try and use the "Slide" feature in order to push a chorus another 4 bars out?   It works IF you don't have tempo and meter changes programmed into your track!   If you do, you have to go into the meter key and delete the ones you have setup and then make new meter changes (doesn't even let you change the measure to start the new meter in - but it should do it automatically anyway).  Same thing for the tempo map.
 
Anderton made a post regarding this (which I inspired):

http://forum.cakewalk.com/Id-Like-to-Recommend-a-SONAR-Mindset-m3477970.aspx

and while I do appreciate the post, I feel the statment:   "Often, there's an alternate, less obvious way to do what he wants" really rings true and is a hindrance to the product.   Why should their be alternate ways?  


 
As i work with Sonar, I feel frustrated quite often and feel this shouldn't be.   Music making should be enjoyable and intuitive. I just feel there is a lot of holes left in the product.  Feels like it is not thought out well at times.
 
I mean how many posts do we see here titled something like "MIDI Frustrations".
 
I feel like MIDI has really taken a back seat for the Sonar bakers... so many bugs and things that could just be improved.
 
Again, not here to start flame wars, but hopefully it will make it to the bakers as a point of improvement.
 
Thank You,
Adam 
 
 

Hi. It seems like this is in the oven already http://www.cakewalk.com/Products/SONAR/Rolling-Updates#start
Ripple Editing would do exactly this.
All the best.

"Why should their be alternate ways"
 
Well, not everybody works the same way. I think it's great we have a variety of ways to accomplish the same task, some of these are keyboard based, some are mouse based and others are geared up for touch.
 
I have absolutely no doubt that if SONAR were to be changed so that there was only one way to perform a certain task, this would seriously piss off the people who had been doing it the other way for a decade or more.

The implication of your post ("this needs to change") suggests that all users feel exactly the same way you do and work the same way/face the same limitations etc. While I welcome things like the upcoming ripple editing and have my own wish list I am happy there are many ways to do things in Sonar. When the disparity between what you have and what you need is too great you have to start to wonder if something else might fit better. Fwiw I looked at other options that I thought would suit my needs better and realized the features I thought i needed couldn't offset major deficiencies in those other daws where sonar's workflow was just so superior to everything else. Grass is always greener, etc.

SilverBlueMedallion
Ever try and use the "Slide" feature in order to push a chorus another 4 bars out?   It works IF you don't have tempo and meter changes programmed into your track!   If you do, you have to go into the meter key and delete the ones you have setup and then make new meter changes (doesn't even let you change the measure to start the new meter in - but it should do it automatically anyway).  Same thing for the tempo map.

 
I haven't used Slide to do that because it's the wrong tool for what you want to do. Slide is a Process command, and as the Help says, it's for moving events in tracks. Tempo and meter changes are not events in tracks, they are Project-related. Therefore you need to use Project commands. If you want to slide a chorus another 4 bars out, you'd use Project > Insert Time/Measures, which will push project-related parameters (including tempo and meter changes) out along with the track data.
 
You could say that "Well, slide should do that," but I'm not sure it makes sense for Cakewalk to spend time adding functionality that relates to the project level on a function that's oriented toward the track level, especially when a tool already exists for doing this on the project level (where IMO the function belongs).
 
As to moving blocks of songs around, as Zargg71 points out ripple editing is in progress, so saying that Cakewalk needs to do something about it is moot given that Cakewalk is doing something about it. Meanwhile, I move blocks of audio frequently, and insert and delete measures - I have to, given that I do a lot of audio for video and remix work. Could it be more convenient? Of course, but with drag in the timeline / split at selection / group clips, I don't find it all that problematic, especially given that moving sections of songs around isn't something I do multiple times during the course of working on a project (and I make sure there aren't MIDI notes that overlap split points).
 
None of this is to imply that I won't welcome ripple editing improvements when they appear. I just don't find the current way of doing things gets in my way all that much. If I had to choose, I'd rather Cakewalk continue to focus on adding functions that don't exist - like upsampling, which can make a profound difference in a mix's sound quality - than tweaking functions that do exist, but aren't as convenient as they could be...especially because Cakewalk seems to be doing both, in parallel development tracks. The recent improvements to comping (bear in mind, they're only the Phase 1 changes, there's more to come) are evidence of that.

Hi Craig,
 
I have to disagree on the project vs. track level thing when it comes to meter, tempo, and key changes.  Those are a function of the song.  Any time you add to or subtract from a track it can have an effect on the song.  Since meter, tempo, and key changes are a part of the song, these functions should change as well.  The tracks make up the song. The project is just a container for the song.  It should contain general information about the song, but the song itself should determine what happens with meter, tempo, key, etc.
 
I can't think of a single time I've ever extended a part of a song that comes before a tempo change where I didn't want the tempo change to move as well.  I could care less about the project itself when it comes to the functions of the song.

To me, this is a holdover from the early days when it was difficult to conceive of a digital project with multiple tempos and key changes and meter changes.  It made sense in the twelvetone days that when you sat down to write a song using MIDI equipment you would set the key, tempo, meter, etc.  That's not true these days, and it may mean that Cakewalk needs to look closely at how people use this tool for songwriting and do some ground-up reconstruction of the process instead of patching in old methodologies and workflows.
 
Of course, this assumes that we're all using Sonar to write songs.  For me, Sonar remains the more intuitive choice, but that's because I've been using their products for 25 years.

I'd add "in some areas" to the thread title.

vanblah
Hi Craig,
 
I have to disagree on the project vs. track level thing when it comes to meter, tempo, and key changes.  Those are a function of the song.  Any time you add to or subtract from a track it can have an effect on the song.  Since meter, tempo, and key changes are a part of the song, these functions should change as well.  The tracks make up the song. The project is just a container for the song.  It should contain general information about the song, but the song itself should determine what happens with meter, tempo, key, etc.

 
I don't understand where you're disagreeing, unless what you're saying is that you want tempo, meter, and key changes that are independent for each track (which may be exactly what you want, but it would probably make my head explode ). At least for me, if there's a tempo change at measure 17 and and I insert 4 measures starting at measure 9, I want that tempo change to move from measure 17 to measure 21. That's what happens with SONAR when you insert measures. Where's the problem?
 
 

SilverBlueMedallion
I am posting this as a serious user of the prouduct who feels things need to change.

Here's the fundamental problem with this premise: SONAR is changing, literally every month. If you look back to what's happened since January 2015, there have been a huge number of improvements, feature additions, and bug fixes.
 
However, in general these have been prioritized in favor of a) benefiting the greatest number of users, b) making SONAR more accessible to new users, and c) offering features that provide a competitive advantage.  a) is particularly important in the context of your post. For example, you may find it much more convenient if Slide was modified to perform functions it wasn't intended to do so it can duplicate a function that already exists, but I think it's safe to assume there's a greater number of users who use plug-ins, comping, and arranging. So Cakewalk prioritizes improvements in those areas. 

If Sonar isn't working for you, use another program. I'm sure there's one that will fit your needs.