I say: Less focus on content, (much) more on workflow!
 
In other words: I don't need any more plugins (most of us have a big arsenal of third-party plugins anyway), but a mastering suite like in Studio One (or better) would be nice, as would freely moveable bus channels in the console, interrupt-free editing in the tracks view while the song is playing, a greatly improved bounce dialog, track versions like in Cubase (aka playlists in Pro Tools), macros, etc ...

stac
I say: Less focus on content, (much) more on workflow!
 
In other words: I don't need any more plugins (most of us have a big arsenal of third-party plugins anyway), but a mastering suite like in Studio One (or better) would be nice, as would freely moveable bus channels in the console, interrupt-free editing in the tracks view while the song is playing, a greatly improved bounce dialog, track versions like in Cubase (aka playlists in Pro Tools), macros, etc ...

A big +1 to this.  I currently use Wavelab 8, but I really don't care for it and would love to have an integrated/dedicated mastering environment built right into Sonar ala Studio One.  As for content, I think it would need a suite of nice metering tools to really be usable for most people.  Personally, I would stick with my Flux metering system.

stac
I say: Less focus on content, (much) more on workflow!

 
+1
And more on bug fixes, too...

Hi Craig,
 
I like the idea.
 
For Mastering purposes, it would be nice to expand the "per-clip" control/processing options...
Something similar to the Object Editor in Samplitude.  (Object in Samplitude is a Clip in Sonar).
More advanced fade curves would be really nice (ie: Cosine for a smoother fade).
 
You've got all the basic layout fade/cross-fade capabilities.
If we could have an "Auto Index" feature... and burn straight from the Timeline... that would be perfect.

lfm
I'm not sure of the necessity of having all plugins within Sonar realm for mastering.
There are so many 3rd party to select from.
And many export and do mastering part in SoundForge and others.
 
Missing though, I find a project manager to manage multiple projects being an album - to manage that for mastering. More urgent, and have to be within Sonar - if to do mastering within Sonar and encouraging that.
 
Maybe an entire new view Mastering View(MV) that holds a number stereo(or surround) busses with plugin slots. Easy to shift between songs etc.
 
Now you have to emulate this by importing tracks for an album project and solo each track to shift listening between them.
 
Just a priority that I favor...

 
This. +lots.
 
Dean

Thank you, Craig. It really would be nice to have some dedicated mastering tools tossed in. I may be wrong but did my Noise Reduction thread inspire this thread? Either way I would absolutely LOVE to see something like an Izotope Sonar Suite included as an LE promotional type thing with the option for discounted upgrade to their full versions like we have gotten with other great tools.
 
The guys at Izo MUST know that Sonar fans are Izo fans. I think it would be an excellent marriage and from the algos that still exist within the program I can only imagine there is a decent relationship there waiting to be expanded. Considering what the Baker's have done and now the involvement of Gibson it could be very worth everyone's time to get this train rolling in that direction.
 
Again... thank you for pushing this. With everything else that has been going on some serious mastering tools could really seal the deal for Sonar becoming a threat to be reckoned with to the other "industry standards".
 
Let's do this shiz!

MondoArt
I'm actually a big fan of Boost 11.  It's always the last stage of my master bus, I can see how much is getting chopped off, it shows a preview of the final wave, and sounds fairly transparent.  Like most plugins, if you don't abuse it and limit the crap out of your mix, it works great, IMO.

Hi,
 
Thanks for pointing that out. I did try to use Boost 11, some time ago, and couldn't get to grips with it. Perhaps I should have given it more time.
 
I'd still end up using SF, though, for final trimming and MP3 creation, because I have had SF longer than Sonar has given us the possibility to export to MP3. So it's just a habit I have gotten into 

boost 11 is not the greatest limiter around, if you're looking for one try https://vladgsound.wordpress.com/plugins/limiter6/
i also use an external audio editor for mastering, i would rather sonar focused on sequencing

And I think the Baker's time is better spent working an the core program (stability, editing improvements, etc) and seamless integration of useful stuff than trying to reinvent the wheel. Getting third party companies to do what they do well, getting them on board and making sure it works within Sonar seems like a much better plan than trying to do all that stuff themselves.
 
Example... for the staff view people (of which I am a casual supporter of) make it so we have a proper third party solution from the kids that do it well and make sure it integrates properly as opposed to spending an entire cycle trying to write something from scratch. It's my same feeling on mastering stuff. Once we have a thousand programmers at a thousand workstations to code all this crap... fine. I'd rather the Baker's work on Baking the DAW itself.
 
Cheers.

Also... get the Guitar Pro guys in there somewhere. That would be slick.