Leee
I'm curious and a bit concerned about one point that's been raised (several times).
A few people were insisting that LANDR be removed from the latest update, and only be available as an option, separate from the main Newburyport update.
Other than the additional time it takes to download the update, why are people so adamant about not including it with the Newburyport update?

It's my understanding that this is just a plugin/separate program, when you go to export audio from your Sonar project, LANDR is just one of many options to choose when exporting the audio, and that LANDR doesn't even become active unless you choose that option.  Is LANDR running in the background as soon as you open Sonar?   Is it creating an open Internet connection before you even choose to use it?

So, I just don't get why it's so important to some of the commenters that LANDR be not included in the Newburyport update?  If it adds a couple of minutes to the overall download time of the latest update, what's the big deal?
Or am I missing something?
 

Hi Lee,
There are many views going on: LANDR usable / unusable, want LANDR/ don't want LANDR, Should be included/not to be included.... etc etc.  So you are not missing anything:)
 
Important points are:
The user should get the provision to install it or not to install it.
It can be included within SONAR PLAT but as a separate entity, a separate download.
User should be able to uninstall it completely.
The downloading time matters for some users with lower internet bandwidth. It is 18% (someone has calculated) more in the file size.
Cakewalk never mentioned that it will be installed automatically and users will have no control on this not even uninstalling.
Also this has to be noted that since it has been included within the main program - in normal course it will appear all future updates of SPLAT !!
 
Very few opposing LANDR - because many of us don't use everything which provided. Be it Loops, FX Plugins, contents, but they are all provided as separate downloads. LANDR could have been given as a separate downloads like Melodyne Essential is.
 
This is something what I have understood!! May be I am missing something :)
Regards
Snehankur
 

Snehankur
Very few opposing LANDR - because many of us don't use everything which provided. Be it Loops, FX Plugins, contents, but they are all provided as separate downloads. LANDR could have been given as a separate downloads like Melodyne Essential is.
 
This is something what I have understood!! May be I am missing something :)
Regards
Snehankur
 

Thanks Snehankur and Mettelus,
Like you, and I'm sure many others, I don't use everything provided, like the loops and certain plugins, there's a lot of redundancy in what's available, especially if you have 3rd party plugins like Ozone.   I also have Melodyne Studio, so I have no need for the Cakewalk provided "Essential".

Yeah, I was just asking because the way some people were talking, I thought that LANDR might be running in the background as soon as you start Sonar, and I'm always cautious about ANY software that is sending/receiving data over the Internet without my knowledge.

And after reading some of the other posts, I see I wasn't the only one that experienced very slow uploads to the LANDR website.  By the time it took to finish the upload, I could have been half way through mastering the song via Ozone.   But I see there is a new update for LANDR, and I'm willing to give it another try.  My first experience using it was not that great, but I can see there is some potential there, in certain situations.  But it definitely wouldn't be my "go to" mastering tool.

I'm going to offer an edgy and controversial new spin on this: I don't care whether it's bundled or not.
 
It's time us indifferent people spoke out.

Leee
Other than the additional time it takes to download the update, why are people so adamant about not including it with the Newburyport update?

Well I did not insist anything however my preference would be to have it as a separate download. My connection is slow and often disconnects causing problems. Having smaller file sizes help with that situation.
 
It would also make sense for it to be a separate download from the distribution point of view. For instance if Landr is not updated by the time next months release is ready then downloading it again is a waste of bandwidth and server load on Cakes servers.
 
For me the jury is still out on its usefulness but I am willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.

Anderton

 
My guess would be the 10,000,000 GoPro owners who want better audio, the 350,000 churches that record sermons, and every videographer who does weddings. (Never fear, mastering engineers - they weren't going to hire you anyway.)
 
If I can still do math at the end of the workday, if 1.8% of GoPro owners buy the cheapest available subscription, that makes back the seed money instantly, with a little left over for sushi dinners . It's not hard to see how they could make back the investment in 5 years, probably less. It all depends whether they can break into the consumer market, and market their message effectively to it.
 
The next step after DAWs would be things liike TuneCore and CD Baby, then after that, the apps that ship with camcorders and such. Maybe even something like Vegas Movie Studio so video prosumers can beef up their soundtracks. 

Craig, I think you have hit the nail on the head. I have not heard you so passionately defend your position, time and time again before. I applaud your persistence, and once again, you've taught me things, or made me aware of them, just by hearing you speak. Thanks. It's been very clear to me right from the start what you thought the benefits of LANDR are, and I agree with you. It's great for it's intended use, which is NOT Master Engineering.
 
But your post above, I believe, highlights why there is so much debate here. LANDR is NOT for SONAR users. A SONAR user with half a resolve, will mix their own client demos, straight from the DAW. I'm not talking about mastering here, just the demo's to get the clients opinion on where they want the song to go, to create the mix to suit. Then, it's either mastered in house, or given to them to take to their favourite master engineer. Most of us here probably use SONAR for everything. I will use a master engineer for my next album, because I don't know enough about it or have the right tools, and because I simply don't have the time to do everything anymore. I've proved I can do a half reasonable job, but it takes me too long to get it right.
 
So while I believe you are right about it's potential, I believe we are the wrong market. DAWS should not be first on list for integration, camcorder and hand held recorders etc, should be. Big market there as you say. And it should have been an addition by choice. The whole CCC concept and installation paths etc, in my book, still falls a long way short of a pro approach, and this is yet another example. The talk from the people here who know much more than me about the residuals left in my system after deletion, and the potential for activations by unknown software, is a concern. I would not knowingly have accepted this additional software onto my DAW had I been given the option.
 
I believe you when you say LANDR has potential benefits for some, but I don't believe those benefits are for most DAW users. As you say, you don't sit with clients and track or mix. So your benefit with LANDR is sending them off with their files to LANDR, have a listen, and report the results, so you can get on with mastering their dreams. That's a great use for sure. But it does not involve SONAR. Why would I output a file for upload, when I could use 3 FX chains on the master to basically do exactly the same thing. Better still, sit with the client while I do it and I can tweak the FX chains, get a result, and move on.
 
I respect your position on this and your arguments, but I think the target audience is wrongly placed.
 
Regards. Dave. 

John T
I'm going to offer an edgy and controversial new spin on this: I don't care whether it's bundled or not.
 
It's time us indifferent people spoke out.

what do we want? we don't know! when do we want it? meh

pwalpwal

John T
I'm going to offer an edgy and controversial new spin on this: I don't care whether it's bundled or not.
 
It's time us indifferent people spoke out.

what do we want? we don't know! when do we want it? meh

You made me laugh, pwalpwal - thanks!

I'm still interested in whether anyone here knows how Waves (fairly new) MixCentric by Greg Wells would compare to Landr. I ask because I've been considering splurging on the Greg Wells signature bundle (MixCentric, VoiceCentric and PianoCentric), but if Landr is essentially the same as MixCentric, I'd change my mind.

Thanks for any info and thanks for the laugh!

P.S. I already know that MixCentric doesn't include a limiter.

Leee
Other than the additional time it takes to download the update, why are people so adamant about not including it with the Newburyport update?

 
1) Because it requires a (good) internet connection. The installer just has a checkbox marked "LANDR". Not a word of explanation.
2) Because if you want it, it's free at the LandR site anyway.

Leee
Is LANDR running in the background as soon as you open Sonar?   Is it creating an open Internet connection before you even choose to use it?

 
It phones home to look for updates, so, yes.

Hi folks,
 
Thank you for all your comments. I just wanted to set some facts straight about the Landr installer and why we include it. 
 
Our primary goal with SONAR is to give customers a seamless experience using the software irrespective of their experience. We have been working towards this goal for many years now. SONAR has a wide user base composed of musicians, producers, sound engineers many of whom are NOT expert users who can easily tweak their systems. Our support records attest to the fact that many users just install the program and don't realize that they can go back to command center and install optional components. Its not necessarily intuitive to many people who don't have a technical background.  
 
In light of the above our goal is to make features easily accessible in the user interface and having a new feature that requires a secondary install creates a bad user experience. For example many of our support calls relate to melodyne not being available in the region fx menu due to this.
This is always a trade off between installer size and convenience. In the case of Melodyne we didn't include the installer because of size restrictions (it is a 146MB installer and takes time to run).
For Landr their installer is just 50MB so we chose to include it especially since the choice for it is in the export menu. This is no different from the approach we took with Soundcloud which requires you to log in to their service. By any definition it would be a poor user experience if you had to install soundcloud as an optional install before you could use it.
 
Regarding the Landr app itself, their client app is exactly like the soundcloud app in that it does nothing until you choose to export. There is no impact on system performance since it doesnt run in the background. It has its own uninstaller that you can access from Windows add | remove programs should you choose to remove it. As many have pointed out there is also the possibility to avoid installing it if you use the command center custom options.
 
While you do have to pay to use the Landr service regularly, previews are free even if you don't pay for a subscription so its still useful to audition mixes. As has been explained in many threads, for many musicians who don't use mastering services frequently or lack the skills to do this themselves (I think its fair to say that most musicians don't know how to master) Landr is very likely to be all they will need for mastering. We will however continue to improve on our mastering tools and plugins that cater to the pro production audience and even have some goodies in development for subsequent updates.
 
Finally, the entire industry is moving to a service oriented model. SONAR is not just a closed DAW for power users but is an open platform for music production. That means integrating popular tools and standards such as ARA, VST3 and even services like SoundCloud and Landr which are integrated as export options.
If anything it was our foresight to provide for external encoders (that has existed for close to 10 years), that allowed us to integrate Landr so easily. It was done with minimal changes to SONAR and was essentially just an installer drop in for us.
 
My request is to be tolerant and open minded to the needs of other users. Just because a feature is of no use to one doesn't imply that its not useful to another set of users. There are already several who have said this will greatly help improve their mixes and save time.
 

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
In light of the above our goal is to make features easily accessible in the user interface and having a new feature that requires a secondary install creates a bad user experience. For example many of our support calls relate to melodyne not being available in the region fx menu due to this.

 
Thanks Noel for the clear overview of things from the Cakewalk perspective.  I would have preferred receiving this statement before the update was released.  I think the discussions would then have been mainly positive in nature.  I can't help but think that to not state beforehand that LANDR was in fact optional was a way of pushing it onto people's systems.