I was just looking at this Nektar Panorama P1 control surface in a store demo and was quite impressed. It was simply amazing to watch it being used with Logic Pro. But really, its so disappointing that Sonar doesn't feature in its default compatible DAW lists. I mean, I just love Sonar as an amazing DAW that fits my needs so well and Nektar Panorama P1 is not like the greatest control surface or anything. But I just can't digest why Sonar just doesn't appear in most of these lists of compatible DAWs with very well known and feature-rich hardware controllers. DAWs like Cubase, Logic Pro, Bitwig, Nuendo, Reaper, Reason, Studio One, Protools, etc., just seem to be listed all over the place. The dealer doing the demo had no idea whether Nektar Panorama P1 would work with that high level of integration for Sonar and refrained from giving me any assurance of that.
 
WHY NOT SONAR ?! When its such an old DAW used by so many ? Is it something to do with Cakewalk not being cooperative enough to get the hardware tested on Sonar and integrated control templates made OR is it that these device manufacturers just simply choose to ignore Sonar ?
Either way, its not a pleasant feeling for a Sonar user like me. A good explanation would be helpful as a start.
 

Hi. I do not know why SONAR is not included. But you could try Aslow3's plugin. It should help you along.
Hope it helps.
All the best.

The short answer: SONAR is not cross-platform. Companies prioritize supporting products that operate on both Mac and Windows as this increases the potential revenue. You don't see Mixcraft or Samplitude (both Windows-only) supported either. 
 
What's most interesting to me is that they support Logic on the Mac but not Pro Tools. Now, there's a sign of the times...

Anderton
The short answer: SONAR is not cross-platform. Companies prioritize supporting products that operate on both Mac and Windows as this increases the potential revenue. You don't see Mixcraft or Samplitude (both Windows-only) supported either. 
 
What's most interesting to me is that they support Logic on the Mac but not Pro Tools. Now, there's a sign of the times...

There is something I did not think of 
Most likely the best explanation

I think the fact that Panorama series controllers (P1, P4, P6) on Windows need to load a protocol Launcher at startup has something to do with it. I sort of recall a conversation with Nektar back when I bought my P6 and then switched from S1 to SONAR that they had some issues with ACT. Why they have better luck with deeper SONAR support on the LX and new LXi controllers is beyond me.
 
Regarding their DAW-specific packages (like for Reaper and Bitwig)...
 
If you use more than one DAW/app with a Panorama, I'd avoid the custom packages. They look good, but I had real trouble after I installed the Bitwig support. It messed up everything else. I had to factory-reset my P6 and get rid of the custom loads.

The situation is the following:
 
Nektar is the only company which has recently decided to provide deep integration with there Keyboards, they have done that with LX seria. I do not know who has written the plug-in, was it sponsored by Nektar, CW or both (may be Craig knows...), but that is clear indication that Naktar is well aware that CW and Sonar exist.
 
But in there P (more "professional"?) version, they decide not support Sonar. Was that insufficient sales of LX (for Sonar users), too expensive integration development or something else we can only speculate.
 
Unfortunately, Naktar (as many other concurrents, but not all...) has made the decision to declare communication protocol as a proprietary, so no third party tools can "deep integrate" it. Was that decision guided by an attempt to control which DAWs are supported (may be asking some fee for such support) or simply by the fact the hardware is so rubbish that without "proprietary" processing it is useless (I will not call any names, but such devices exists...), again we can only speculate. But I do not thing there is something "innovative" in that communication.
 
There are many devices which are not supported on Linux. And Linux users ignore them. And there are devices not supporting Sonar. I propose Sonar users simply ignore them

 
Thanks for all your replies.
 
I honestly don't think platform could be the issue though. If thats the case Logic Pro is Mac-only, how come thats got such tight integration all around and happens to be the favoured one with most manufacturers and dealers ?
 
No problem ignoring something, one can always do that. But is that the point ? The question is why does Sonar not feature in the top list of DAWs considered for user-friendly integration ?
Well if that's not the case, can I know which could be the best MIDI controller or Control Surface with a high level of direct integration with Sonar ? Apart from possibly the VS-700 of course because thats not even close to portable and currently even shows as "discontinued". Also, apart from the Roland A-Pro series.
 
Also, what happens if I connect this Nektar Panorama P1 to Sonar ? Will it not work at all ?

ramscapri
The question is why does Sonar not feature in the top list of DAWs considered for user-friendly integration ?

Only Naktar knows.
 

Well if that's not the case, can I know which could be the best MIDI controller or Control Surface with a high level of direct integration with Sonar ? Apart from possibly the VS-700 of course because thats not even close to portable and currently even shows as "discontinued". Also, apart from the Roland A-Pro series.

At the moment, the best integration (on the level of VS) you can get only using DIY method.
Still actual everything speaking MackieControl protocol. Except ACT Dynamic Mapping (VSTi control), it allows almost everything.
 
"Good" surface with great potential of integration (any DAW) should have reasonable hardware controls:
* endless encoders, better with ring indicator, even better touch sensitive (but only know device with such knobs is discontinued Alphatrack).
* motorized touch sensitive faders, which can inform DAW when touched (there are Digitar Mixers which have touch sensitive faders, but they do not inform DAWS)
* momentary buttons (send On and Off), with LEDs controlled from DAW (only... gymnastic is required to keep MPK mini pads from flickering)
* display to show controlled parameter names and values
 
Mackie has recognized such simple useful rules long time ago and still produce such devices. Other (f.e. Behringer X-Touch, VS-700, etc.) just use(d) the same or close to the same method.
 
Nektar has created "lightweight" variant. These days one display is cheaper then rings and display near controls, motorized faders ar still heavy, expensive and require extra power. So they have made something in-between, without motor faders and with one display. But they decide to introduce "own" protocol. Mackie protocol is definitively not perfect, it is "2 lines alphabetic" oriented only. Clear, when you have graphical display, there are more possibilities. But as NI, they decide to make it "proprietary". And that cut the possibility someone will use it for DAWs they are not supporting. Without protocol - no feedback, means the display (and so one of the big advantages over display-less cheaper controllers) is effectively useless.
 
ALL controllers, except may be EUCON, do not try to be "smart". Control touched - signal, control released - signal, control moved - signal; signal - turn on/off LED, signal - display included text. And so the whole "deep integration" is done completely in software.
 

Also, what happens if I connect this Nektar Panorama P1 to Sonar ? Will it not work at all ?

It will work, at the level of Korg nano. Significant differences are: korg has more strip buttons (mute/solo is faster to achieve). P1 has more general buttons (more functions), endless encoders (huge advantage) and longer faders (simpler to use). In "not integrated" mode, the display is more or less useless. It can not show the position in case you use endless encoders as such (and you "revert" the functionality to korg knobs if you use normal mode) nor parameters you control.