artturner

jpetersen
Scook, Beepster - After what Craig and Noel revealed sunk in, I began to understand where the priorities really lie. And must do. I tried replying 3 times and that was all I could say.
 
Puts our diligently assembled lists of bugs and feature requests properly in their place.
 
It's left me shattered.

This. I can't speak for others, but this describes my reaction to the LANDRing.
 
Out of all the bugs and features passionately requested and discussed on the forum, I don't remember any that were looking for an "add track" button or the ability to export to LANDR. We pay for rolling updates and look forward to what will be fixed next, then discover that the bakers have used their time to produce updates that few people seemed to need. They then spend time explaining why this is what we should have wanted all along.
 
Ever since the new rolling update model began, it seems to me that the primary focus is to reduce beginning user support calls first and serve pro users coincidentally.
 
For the record, I won't be leaving Sonar over this. But the "sigh...denied again" feeling is all too familiar.

I'm quite sure that not every feature request can be completed in a month, so there will be months where the deliverables are a little on the light side. I'm sure we'll see some cool stuff soon, it just takes a little longer than we'd like sometimes.
 
Dan
 
 

My first post on this thread as I took the time to give LandR a chance and like those above who have given it a go with equivalent pre-mastered mixes around the -3 to-6db mark I have been pleasantly surprised. I have used the results to compare with my own work, checking out freq analysis, spatial analysis and phase analysis and actually found myself tweaking some of my own masters as LandR has highlighted differences, particularly in the low end which have improved the sound.
Yes I can see the point of those who feel it has been thrust upon them, particularly if the download was done before reading the update information, but I can accommodate another 100Mb of data and the download of updates has never been lightning fast for me in any case. The kettle is always ready to go whilst I wait.
As for use case scenarios, if you are looking to master more than a couple of tracks a month then maybe a price comparison between human and machine is worth doing otherwise it is there to use or not use I guess.
 
p.s. welcome to the sonar forums Ludovic, an opinion from the horses mouth is always appreciated.

When my in-laws come to visit, we never discuss religion, politics, or LANDR. 😄 This is our family rule to keep peace...ha ha.

When LANDR can make me a Bacon Double Cheeseburger with Saute' Mushrooms I'm in!
 
Right now I am taking the time to learn how to do it myself.  It ain't easy!
 
I know this isn't the Coffee House, and all Kidding aside, this thread has been intense. 
 
 I am getting better at my making a Bacon Double Cheeseburger with Saute' Mushrooms and the quest has been excellent. However, last week I was Jonesing for one, didn't have time to make it myself, so I went for the alternative. The Bacon was good, the mushrooms were too processed and the bun was not toasted, but it tasted pretty good, but not like the ones I make.
 
I just learned there is a Kenny Rogers Chicken going up across the street.  I sure hope they don't put up a big Neon Sign! 
 
Have a great Friday
 
Jesse Q. Screed
 
 

artturner

jpetersen
Scook, Beepster - After what Craig and Noel revealed sunk in, I began to understand where the priorities really lie. And must do. I tried replying 3 times and that was all I could say.
 
Puts our diligently assembled lists of bugs and feature requests properly in their place.
 
It's left me shattered.

This. I can't speak for others, but this describes my reaction to the LANDRing.
 
Out of all the bugs and features passionately requested and discussed on the forum, I don't remember any that were looking for an "add track" button or the ability to export to LANDR. We pay for rolling updates and look forward to what will be fixed next, then discover that the bakers have used their time to produce updates that few people seemed to need. They then spend time explaining why this is what we should have wanted all along.
 
Ever since the new rolling update model began, it seems to me that the primary focus is to reduce beginning user support calls first and serve pro users coincidentally.
 
For the record, I won't be leaving Sonar over this. But the "sigh...denied again" feeling is all too familiar.

 
With all due respect...I think there are some extremely short memories around here...
 
The M release had a bunch of optimizations, and responded directly to user feedback about improved solo logic for patch points and aux tracks, as well as the request to include patch points and aux tracks in track templates. Trust me, Patch Points and Aux Tracks were not introduced to "reduce beginning user support calls," and along with synth recording, this kind of functionality was one of THE most-requested features of the past few years.
 
The L release included optimizations that related to projects with large numbers of clips (as required by pro users), loading times, file imports, and more. Fixes related to Staff View, the PRV, clip splitting, the Start Screen, Matrix View, Event List data, drag drop and drag copy, control surface persistence, and others.
 
The K release was also super-heavy on optimizations, with a focus on speed increases and VST3 enhancements. If pros don't want faster and more stable operation, especially with large projects, I would be shocked. There were also 31 bug fixes (and of course, the wonderful Monitorizer FX chain ). And the Start Screen had the list view people had wanted.
 
The J release brought Patch Points and Aux Tracks but also lots of optimizations regarding load times, virtual instrument streaming, VST scanning, and CPU power savings...more pro-oriented features...and again, 31 bug fixes including the end of the long-standing denormalization problem that produced pops with some plug-ins. There was also upsample on playback...an extension to upsampling, another pro-oriented feature because it makes SONAR sound better. To me, sound quality is sorta important.
 
All the people who don't think this was all that big deal of a release should have a discussion with all the people who've said they don't care if Cakewalk misses a monthly release if it's too difficult to come up with big features and improvements every month (like the ones listed above). 
 
And think logically for a second. What's more important, general optimizations of the core program, or attending to subsets of the core program which might be made obsolete by core optimizations?
 
Some of the bug fixes people want are issues with awkward functionality, not stability. But I think those who realize you can't have everything fixed all at once would place a higher priority on stability. Sure, it's not as glamorous to fix things that people forget were fixed because they're not causing problems any more. But they're important fixes. Plenty of people posted threads about "Hey, my ProChannel effects make loud pops at unpredictable times, when are you going to fix this?" No one ever posts a thread that says ""Hey, I just noticed none of the ProChannel effects pop any more at unpredictable times." They'll move on to the next thing they want fixed, and forget about what was fixed.
 
Fortunately, some people look over the continuum of the past year and realize that taken as a whole, Cakewalk's priority has been on providing a balance of features, enhancements, fixes, and optimizations for all types of users, from first-timers to veterans. The result has been increased stability, speed, and functionality. 
 
I'm surprised more people don't take a longer view. IMHO that's the best argument for having yearly updates - people won't have to remember all the cool stuff that happened just a few weeks or months ago, everything will hit at the same time, so they can't avoid seeing the balance.
 
 

I don't want to degrade the signal to noise ratio furhter, but since it's me quoted up there, perhaps I can clarify:
 
My reaction was in response to the revelation that Artist is by far the better seller - and I acknowledge that, based on this fact, that market segment must take priority. As you (or was it Noel?) pointed out, Platinum users are riding on the coat tails of Artist. This was a big surprise, a reality check, I am still astonished, but I get it.
 
The bugs/feature requests I refer to go back to Sonar 4 (My First Sonar(R)). And other bugs/feature requests that came with Sonar 7. Not just mine, others too. There were members of this parish that maintained lists, but I think they made themselves unpopular by rolling them out after every release.
 
...same happens on the forums of other DAWs, I notice with some bemusement...

...anyway, that's it from me on this subject. I've taken a deep breath, pulled myself together and I'm not going to stoke the fires any further.
 

Never get involved in a LANDR war in Asia the Cake forums.

jpetersen
I don't want to disrupt the signal to noise ratio, but since it was my quote that triggered this, perhaps I can clarify:
 
My reaction was triggered by the revelation that Artist is by far the better seller - and I acknowledge that, based on this, that market segment must take priority. As you (or was it Noel?) pointed out, Platinum users are riding on the coat tails of this. This was a big surprise, a reality check, I am still astonished, but I get it.

Well, then let me clarify something else...that which sells the most copies doesn't necessarily yield the greatest return. Noel can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Cakewalk could survive if it sold only Artist or only Platinum. It needs a family of products that appeals to users at all levels. 
 
If you look at the features I mentioned in my previous post, I think it's clear that features for pro users have had just as much of a priority as features for those who are starting out. Maybe more, because both benefit. Although the optimizations for projects with large track counts and users of large numbers of VSTs are going to affect pro users the most, those benefits make using SONAR a better experience for those with Artist.
 
And while some people may think of LANDR as something solely for "the Artist crowd," so what? They're people too. and they're entitled to features that may be useful to them. However, I've already explained in a quite a bit of detail why I find its inclusion useful to me, even if it's not for mastering per se. Granted, based on the opinions I've seen in these threads this place isn't exactly teeming with pro mastering engineers, so maybe LANDR's inclusion in Platinum is of little use to the vast majority of Platinum users. But why deny it to those who can use it, especially considering that it didn't take Cakewalk dev time?

Lets just say that the majority of users for whom Landr would be really useful don't necessarily frequent this forum.
Also forums are frequented mainly by certain persona's of users (power users, more technically inclined, computer savvy or heavily engaged users, myself included). There are many people I know who are top notch musicians but rarely frequent a user forum let alone post. These aren't daw or mastering geeks but they use SONAR as a music production tool. I think this is the audience that will get the most benefit from something like this. Thinking of the "artist" crowd as less pro somehow is pretty narrow minded. 
 
edit: further clarified to avoid misunderstanding.