Band lab will have the do something with Sonar that no one’s been able to do for many a year.

Make a profit. That will mean significant changes. In what way, I have no clue, but clearly changes will be made.

mudgel
Band lab will have the do something with Sonar that no one’s been able to do for many a year.

Make a profit. That will mean significant changes. In what way, I have no clue, but clearly changes will be made.

I think that this will indeed be the key to winning back those who have already moved and retaining those that have stayed so far waiting to see what will happen.

I'm looking forward to seeing what emerges in the next 3 months.

I think Bandlab only make some minor changes... not some major overhaul.
Look at the main Bandlab thread views and comments 10,000 views in the past 24 hours.
 
Cakewalk has a fairly dedicated following of users. They are the last generation of the analog/digital engineers.
Bandlab can put 2 - 4 guys on this project and still make money, where as Gibson was in dire straits and needed to show major turn around profits quickly.
 
Its all about where you stand:
Gibson is losing money + Bandlab is making money= Sonar being developed in a better environment = reaches more customers = sells more software.
 
In the words of Charles E. Baby
"Why change the formula? Doesn't anyone remember when Coke tried that"
 

mumpcake
I never liked the way they implemented FX Chains.  I never really wanted a container.   Maybe they could implement chains so that dragging them onto the FX bin gives you the container, Shift-Dragging just drops the effects.

 
ahem it it already does this :) Shift dragging an fx chain unpacks the individual effects. Most people prefer keeping them intact as a single object however since its much easier to manage and move the chain as a single entity in the fx rack. Unpacking them prevents you from doing this or using the global controls for a chain.
 
 
>>I also really like how Studio One and Bitwig have Instrument presets which allow you to drag an instrument and effect chain onto a track to replace what is already there. 
Again this is already available. We have had replace instrument available for years.
Its not done via drag and drop in this case. Just right click a synth track and choose replace synth or access it from the dropdown in the synth rack. If you have a default preset set up it will choose that.
 
>>So if I had one preset of a Dimension Bass into Guitar Rig on a track, I could easily replace that with a preset of a Kontakt bass going into Amplitube, or similar.
 
Yes it would be nice to have a separate preset browser that allowed drag and drop as well. We had that in the backlog at some point.
 
 

I read the drag and synth and FX as meaning one unit. so if you have a synth and a set ff FX set up with that synth, they act as one unit. I believe you mean replace just the synth. I can only think this can be done by track template, then moving the midi and assignments.
 
You can do replace instrument
You can't do replace FX
You can't do replace instrument and FX combined
You can combine instrument and FX in a track template.
 
Do I have that right?

Never left, Just bought an alternative should the worst happen, so I'll use the one I fancy on the day. But so pleased Sonar didnt die.
Roy
 

can someone please restore my post
 

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
 
>>I also really like how Studio One and Bitwig have Instrument presets which allow you to drag an instrument and effect chain onto a track to replace what is already there. 
Again this is already available. We have had replace instrument available for years.

 
What about replace track ?
 
As in Right click on a track and choose: Replace with Track template.
Instead we have to insert the track template then drag the data over from the old track to the newly created track template.
 
99% of us don't use the same monitoring levels and settings when we record as when we do when we mix.
It would be nice to find a way to save that and apply an already established template to a working project.
 
Its ironic because we can do the same thing with views correct ? We can have a view for recording, a view for mixing, a view for mastering.
But we can have settings applied to an already established track or project.
The only work around I have found is Pro channel template settings. These have been a life saver in time saving ability's.
A Pro channel template setting CAN be applied to an already established track.

never mind, I guess placing the words "can someone please restore my post"
before my actual comment tricked the spam filter into believing im not a spammer.
go figure.

Myself I think this endless pursuit  of feature requests was why Sonar became so unstable for many. 
There is a huge difference in stability between using Home Studio and Splat for me,, on the same 2 computers and set up parameters. Sonar ( SPLAT) randomly has crashed for me. Mostly during midi editing and sometimes after saving and export. 
 
So I started working in Home Studio as it has all the same features I need for midi and after more than a year HS has never once crashed. So you can go ahead a dream of adding even more junk and making it more un stable, but my wish for what ever these people produce is the same stability Home Studio ( yes and Cubase)  has. I often wondered if Artist was also more stable? 
 
And last night a midi track for no reason decided to add a overlapping few measures of wonderfully out of tune piano chords at the end of the song.. It also extended the drum track by 10 measures???? These weird bugs are what we get used to, but they don't ever happen in HS,, why? Because it is simplified and what it does have, works solid. From there you can start adding code and the more code you add, the more stuff is going to go weird. 

What! Cakewalk hardly implemented any feature requests.
 
Name five?
 
All the added feature were pretty much their own ideas