streckfus

Anderton
 
Again, the bottom line is this. Fixing bugs and making current users generally happy is doable. To devote resources to create something that goes way beyond that would prevent dedicating those resources to something like VocalSync or Mix Recall, which is useful to a wide variety of the user base. Also remember that notation has no relevance to people who do primarily audio recording, which is how many people use DAWs.

What a thread!  Add one more unique user to the list of folks who'd like to see some refinements in the staff view.  Craig - I agree with about 99% of what you've written on this topic, and no, notation has no relevance to people who do primary audio recording.  In this respect, Cakewalk has in a way shot itself in the foot by including SO many features in their DAW.  If Sonar's primary intention was for audio recording and mixing, then one would expect advanced editing tools, signal processing capability, and so on.  But by including so many virtual instruments and MIDI tools, Cakewalk has made it clear that their intent for Sonar is to create a (mostly) one-stop-shop for music creation from start to finish.  But because they are a front-runner from a MIDI/VSTi standpoint, a deficient staff view is all the more glaring. 
 
Sonar is SO flexible in so many ways.  This flexibility allows users to define their own workflows.  Don't like the Inspector pane?  Hide it and never see it again.  Prefer the ProChannel than the FX bin?  Have at it.  Want some interesting ways to create and manipulate MIDI?  Check out the step sequencer, matrix view or piano roll.  Stay away from the staff view though, because that's not as intuitive as the rest of our stuff. :)
 
Just saying that for the sake of consistency, staff view should be just as functional as the rest of Sonar's features, especially since Cakewalk places such a strong emphasis on music creation by bundling tons of virtual instruments.
 
I do, however, feel encouraged that because of the recent changes at Cakewalk and the way they've been implementing fixes/features with the new membership model, Cakewalk will address the staff view issues.

You're quoting a post from Craig that goes back to January. Just FYI for everyone else, in case this initiates a bit of a pile on, and I understand that that may be what some users are wanting. However, I just want to remind people, that there HAVE been threads ( I believe the biggest was from Kamikaze) started in the Feature Request forum concerning staff view improvements - If you haven't already contributed your voice to those threads, please do so or add your own improvement ideas there. I believe that whether or not we think it's the way to proceed - Cake is clearly using the Feature Request Forum (and Problem Reports forum) as the basis for determining what users want in the way of fixes, and features.
 

jsg
For the first ten years or so, the Sonar owner's manual introduction (hard copy in those days) always touted Sonar as a tool for composers, arrangers, musicians etc.  Sonar began as a MIDI sequencer, audio was added later.  My point is that the term "composers" was listed first, or near the beginning, so it gave me confidence that Cakewalk understood that composers would be using their software.   No other DAW publisher (DAWs that have a staff view that is) have dropped the ball as CW has in terms of bug fixes for a part of the programs that is essential for musicians.   Look at this thread!!!  Look how many Sonar users do care about the staff view and notation!

Well put.  I do think Cakewalk has wandered off the path, and is under far too much influence from a relatively small segment of the CAW community (those that just want to work with WAV tracks and never anything else.)  But I don't think they are so far off the path that they cannot come back to the mainstream where the product needs to be. 
 
This should not be a contest between those who only do WAV tracking, those who do a lot of MIDI work, and those compose in notation.  There is no reason why the product cannot support all three adequately.  It is just a question of getting some balance in the voices that are pushing the product direction.
 
A somewhat related item is what I consider a giant step sideways (if not backward) with regard to MIDI editing.  That came as they implemented the new UI for piano roll when selecting multiple MIDI tracks.  For those who do very much of this, especially using several controllers per track, this is entirely unusable.  And with a few seemingly simple improvements could be a very nice solution for everybody.  That is discussed here:
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/In-PRV-controller-lanes-are-practically-unusable-please-fix-this-m3166007.aspx
 
So my point is that Cakewalk does not hate notation view.  The problem is insufficient appreciation of just how important MIDI editing and notation editing are in the DAW world.  These things are becoming MORE important, not less important, as the technologies converge.
 
So let's hope that some of that very impressive energy that has produced several very good monthly updates can be channeled into the more neglected areas of the product in the months ahead.
 
(P.S.  It seems that many of the scroll view complaints involve triplets, particularly those that include rests.  My guess that this is a non-trivial problem because there is no MIDI equivalent of a rest.  A rest has to be inferred as the absence of a note.  Not an insurmountable problem, but it may be a bit more involved than it seems at first.  Proper notation programs all include objects for notes and rests alike.)
 

williamcopper
"triplets must occur in full sets of three"
"all three steps in a triplet must be notes (no rests) of the same duration".
 
I believe Vivaldi, Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven might have decided to use another DAW for their notation.  Brahms would be here in the forum complaining.

What about all those blues players ?  Oh, wait.. they don't use notation.
 

I believe this thread is about to become self aware...

Doktor Avalanche
I believe this thread is about to become self aware...

That would be interesting. Perhaps when it does, it will write a new program and solve this mess once and for all.

Maybe we should take it as a sign of good things to come that at 0:37 or so, an actual score appears in the new Rapture Pro promo video! Or not...
 
-Susan

Hi,
I am from Germany and I will aslo vote for staff view / notation improvements.
 
I wrote also some posts in the past about notation with the hope something will happen. Because notation is the music language and as others wrote, we cannot give prints of the prv to other musicians. That's only possible with printed sheets.

And just because many musicians cannot read sheets today, we should not forget it as an important basic of music. Maybe that's why other daw's still have a focus on notation. And I think it is only a chance for cakewalk to get more users back. I think we don't need more and more 3rd Party vst's (it is nice to have), sonar has enough, we need the basics!

I want to make clear, that we don't want Sonar to be a professional notation-software (there are others for this purpose). We want basic Features. For example I want to make a print of only selected midi-parts, or to have a preview of the prints. For me it would be enough to have features like in Samplitude. I wouldn't need as much as it is possible in cubase.

Kind regards,
Timo
 

It's also useful for collaborations where MIDI data is exchanged and you want to get an instant impression of the musical key, time and signature and multiple clefs would be very useful if you are documenting for various type of instruments not just standard types.
 

williamcopper
I believe Vivaldi, Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven might have decided to use another DAW for their notation.  Brahms would be here in the forum complaining.

lol...nice one especially the Brahms

 

williamcopper
I believe Vivaldi, Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven might have decided to use another DAW for their notation.  Brahms would be here in the forum complaining

When he wasn't spending time with his "lady friends..."