John T
I'm pretty sure that there are no licensing costs in supporting ARA; it's just a protocol that developers can suppport if they want to. The only licensing issue would be around bundling Melodyne itself.

Thanks John.  I hope the new owner will continue to support ARA!  I think I saw where there are updates to it coming from Celemony.
 
Paul

dappa1
Skyline have you read Meng's update?

Absolutely. That's what prompted my ponderings.

Brian Walton

dappa1

Brian Walton

dappa1
It would be really sad if they are basing their new Flagship DAW based on the bugs that are still in the old DAW. I would expect some change to the code in its new form. I would not expect it to look similar but have similar features that we all know and love. But I do expect it to be a NEW DAW. There would be no incentive for new customers if it is solely based on what we have already.

dappa1
Yes I have SPLAT I also paid for lifetime updates. I will be happy with the crossgrade. I also have Studio One 3 
So I guess I'm winning all the way around.
 
BTW. Brian Walton i am sharing ideas no need to be so touchy. However, in the future I would like to see a radical change in the way Sonar acts and performs. Don't you?
 

Many of your posts suggest an overhaul.  You say things like "new DAW"  most people would argue that Sonar 2017.05 and 2017.07 did not constitute a new DAW, but an update.  
 
That is what most of us expect this new product to be generally speaking.  Not a GUI overhaul, not a bunch of major new workflows, or major changes to the code.  These are all assets to what Sonar was, it would be foolish to change them.  Not to mention impossible in a short amount of time.  It is safe to say you don't work as a Programmer.  
 
As for the question would you like to see a radical change in the way sonar acts and performs....tweaks for it to run more efficiently (such as the load balancing idea they came up with), of course, but I don't experience a bunch of bugs or inefficiencies in my workflow using the product, so why would I want a major change?   
 
I certainly don't want to learn a brand new system, otherwise I would have jumped ship with the cross grade offers that were being thrown around.  
 
I expect future development, not a complete overhaul that throws away the last 7 years of progress with the Skylight interface, which is class leading, IMO.  

Brian, Brian, Brian...have you read Meng's update. This is what I am referring to when I put up this post. Rebranding to some is classified as new with a new signature doesnt mean the content will change but they will be some variation. In the future they will be changes. Obviously if Meng is saying they maybe a cross grade withing four weeks then it goes with out saying that it is not an overhaul. Hence I asked the question in the FIRST PLACE will it include new VST's and Plugins. They may be additional but I do expect a new DAW to not be as buggy as the old one. 

Of course I read his post, and I believe I read it more carefully than you did given your posts about the change in code that pretty clearly overlooked what he was talking about.  
 
I think very few people would call a rebranding "new."  Even your edited OP, suggests you want truly new things...and bright shinny things.  
 
Again, I get a strong feeling you don't understand coding.  The vast majority of "bugs" are still going to be in the new platform as that is part of the code.  Each of the previous monthly updates worked to try to address and eliminate a few of them.  It is completely unreasonable to think that is going to magically disappear when they re-name the product and change just a few bits of code.  (I'll say it again, I don't find Sonar to be buggy).  I also don't expect an overhaul or many new plugins, only perhaps something Sonar previously had in the works but didn't put out there yet.  In time, they will likely develop some, but this "new DAW" you speak of isn't going to have a bunch of new stuff along those lines out of the gate.  They didn't hire on the entire previous Cakewalk team.  
 
I'm actually expecting a less complete package with less 3rd party things in the box.  That stuff drives the cost of the product up.  But the core will likely be basically the same thing to a very large extent, and that is a great thing.

You are thinking with the mindset of upgrade rather than cross grade

John T
I'm pretty sure that there are no licensing costs in supporting ARA; it's just a protocol that developers can support if they want to. The only licensing issue would be around bundling Melodyne itself.

Now this is helpful the voice of reason John T

Will Project 5 come out of retirement under Bandlab? Will love to see more 'Performance' features included as we go forward... Along with a Project 5 iOs version.... And Ableton Link on Sonar (Or whatever the new name for it is).

Paul G
I hope the new owner will continue to support ARA!  I think I saw where there are updates to it coming from Celemony.

I am sure they will.  It is a big differentiator versus Cubase.
 

For me, ideally, the new DAW - whatever it turns out to be - would have all the basic SONAR functionality (shouldn't be a problem, given it's what BandLab paid for), possibly including some changes to facilitate whatever direction BandLab wants to take it in the future.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if there are some outstanding code changes by the last team that didn't ship before Gibson pulled the plug, so we may get a couple fixes or whatever. I'm not expecting too much to change, given the timeline.
 
In terms of plugins and whatnot, I'm hoping all the old Cakewalk stuff (especially ProChannel modules) continues to work. Luckily, I ended up upgrading most of the stuff I really cared about (TH3, Melodyne, Rematrix, BReverb) to full versions, so it's just the Cakewalk stuff that's up in the air.
 
Blue Tubes? Can't say I've ever really found much use for those plugins. I'm fine if they stay, won't cry if they don't (besides, I'm not sure if they're in that much danger of going away, if you already have them).
 

35mm
It's also tricky to work out what they could do about making it cross-platform which would ultimately be an advantage to the company - Bandlab. It would take a lot of investment, but maybe now would be the time to make that investment and perhaps release a multi-platform version next year. That could then change Sonar completely as to maintain a cross-platform product would require some changes to the code base. Although, that wouldn't be noticeable to us.

The good news on that front is that - while not a completely solved problem - there's been a lot of work done in the area of cross-platform code over the past several years. Without a detailed knowledge of the codebase, I really couldn't say how much work it would take to make a post-SONAR DAW cross-platform, but I'm guessing it's pretty doable if there's a will to do it. Also a good reason to refactor the code to allow maximum sharing between versions, which would doubtless be of great benefit.

dappa1
Are you not able to comprehend,

yeaaaaa. Okay.
 
 
 
 

chuckebaby

dappa1
Are you not able to comprehend,

yeaaaaa. Okay.
 
 
 
 

Have you got any songs 
 
PS credible material. I would like to hear some lol

Why the hell start a thread and then attack anyone who tries to respond to it? Rather than constructive replies, you just repeat yourself incessantly, saying people haven't read the update or can't comprehend you. I sure as hell can't comprehend you. You talk a load of bollocks!