Is it time to put Sonar to bed?
I have been using Sonar since Sonar 8.5 and am now using sonar Platinum. I am now thinking of trying a different , more commonly used DAW. This is because in more and more cases, the recording hardware now available , such as keyboards, controller surfaces etc are not compatible with the Sonar software because they fail to update it. I purchased recently a behringer 61 motor keyboard which had it worked with Sonar would have been ideal but of course it didn't. Now I know there are ways round this which involves changing ddl files or the like but this solution is not good because everytime you update Sonar these changes have to be redone. 
When i look at the hardware out there that I may be interested in, nothing seems to be entirely compatible with Sonar.
I look at it this way, If I buy a new car say and there is a fault , then i take it back and get it fixed. With software there seems to be an acceptance that any conflict can be sorted out by the user using tweaks on youtube or the like. Why should this be?
Anyway I think that if Sonar is not interested in being compatible with the majority of recording hardware on the market then maybe they have little future.
Every month there seems to be updates from sonar of things we don't really need, but sorting out this lack of compatibility would I think be much more what customers are wanting.
Seems a shame, but i might be forced to look at something different.
terry

terryj
I am now thinking of trying a different , more commonly used DAW.

Do this! It is really nothing wrong with using several DAWs. As you can easily find, many Sonar users have several of them. And not just for "a DAW collection".
 

This is because in more and more cases, the recording hardware now available , such as keyboards,

Since "recording hardware" includes audio interfaces and keyboards, can you mention at least one hardware in that categories which is incompatible?
 

controller surfaces etc are not compatible with the Sonar software because they fail to update it.

Incompatible surfaces (better say surfaces without special Sonar integrations) is not something to be changed by Sonar. Producers have made the decision to not support Sonar. Using your analogy, if most CD/radios are in a form which does not fit into your car, do use think the car producer should "update" something?
 

I purchased recently a behringer 61 motor keyboard which had it worked with Sonar would have been ideal but of course it didn't. Now I know there are ways round this which involves changing ddl files or the like but this solution is not good because everytime you update Sonar these changes have to be redone. 

Motör should emulate Mackie. And it FAILS to do this. They simply forgot handshake. You could return it with statement "it does not do what you claim it should" (that is true and they know that) or you can use A WORKAROUND and use this "half-functioning" device with Sonar. But as every workaround, that has consequences (copy one file once per month, if you update Sonar, which you do not really need as you write later).
 
And finally, not so many Sonar users (really) use/need this kind of hardware. Someone who does choose it based on quality and compatibility or use 3d party custom solutions.
 
Claiming a company has no future if they do not support "whatever crap I have decided to buy" is pointless.

Well AZslow, i take your point about using other Daws but I have enough trouble remembering how to use one efficiently. Anyway glad to see my questions  are generating comments, either in agreement or not.
the info available for the Motor 61 suggests it is compatible "with all your favourite DAWS". Well it ain't.
Why is it better to say "surfaces without special Sonar integrations" that sound like business jargon to me. Better to say "incompatible" I suggest , because that is what it is.
but thanks for your comments

terryj
the info available for the Motor 61 suggests it is compatible "with all your favourite DAWS". Well it ain't.

The info and the device comes from Behringer. It is not "compatible" with Sonar because they have not implemented Mackie handshake correctly, unlike let say in X-Touch. They have decided not to invest a single cent for the compatibility "with any DAW", they just imitate Mackie Control Unit. Most DAWs "tolerate" incomplete emulation, Sonar does not. So, Behringer has produced and sold you the device. With bug. Without checking it really works with "all DAWs". So send your complains to Behringer, the company which has got your money.
 

Why is it better to say "surfaces without special Sonar integrations" that sound like business jargon to me. Better to say "incompatible" I suggest , because that is what it is.

"Incompatible" means "can not work with". Any existing surface, Motör inclusive, can work with Sonar. For Motör, you can easily assign transport control using Cakewalk Generic surface.
 
What you are asking for is the integration and simplicity of such integration. So you ask for "special Sonar integration" (which sometimes does not exist or broken, as with Motör). My claim is EVERYTHING can be integrated with Sonar, thanks to Cakewalk Open Source Control Surface API.
 
Your claim is that Cakewalk should spend time and money to integrate every crap on the market, without any financial benefits, with very small audience (thanks to Sonar Analytic, they know exactly how many users have each surface). Cakewalk has decided to concentrate on particular solutions, with companies ready to cooperate. F.e. Console 1.
 
I am helping everyone to integrate whatever they wont, for free. For explained reason, commercial interest for such integration is zero. From the money you pay for the device, at least third (sometimes much more) is for software. The company does not send that money to Cakewalk or me. How you think Cakewalk or I should proceed?
 
PS. I forgot to mention, some controller producers explicitly forbid (!) integration. They want control themselves which DAW is integrated and which is not.

I don't plan on moving to a different recording program, although I have some others that I got free with hardware purchases.  I have the entry level Studio One 3 and it automatically detected and setup my Behringer X-Touch.  I also have Ableton Live Lite and it too automatically set up the X-Touch.  In Sonar (Platinum) I still had to select it in MIDI Control Surfaces.  Sonar should detect and set it up like, for example, Studio One 3 or Ableton.  Thus I agree, to a limited extent with terryj.   
 
 

fireberd
I don't plan on moving to a different recording program, although I have some others that I got free with hardware purchases.  I have the entry level Studio One 3 and it automatically detected and setup my Behringer X-Touch.  I also have Ableton Live Lite and it too automatically set up the X-Touch.  In Sonar (Platinum) I still had to select it in MIDI Control Surfaces.  Sonar should detect and set it up like, for example, Studio One 3 or Ableton.  Thus I agree, to a limited extent with terryj.

The difference between X-Touch and Motör is complete/incomplete Mackie emulation. That is why Sonar refuse to work with Motör. And in official Behringer video, they setup it MANUALLY in Ableton: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krqx1xRGZyQ
 

Hey Terry, think I understand what you feel but changing to a different DAW would not get you using your gear without problems imo.
Would advise to try get it to work in Sonar, I know it's a pain sometimes but changing DAWS is not the solution imo..
Good luck/hang in there.
 

These days almost every DAW is unique and has its own issues to iron out initially (which can circumnavigate by buying the entire package fully set up by a pro) and then to maintain ... which can be a major hassle when you change main components like OS upgrade, audio interface or DAW software... so while there are certainly DAW apps out which have advantages for certain applications, changing will restart the entire learning process... and you might just end up way more frustrated than when fixing what you know already

I have read a few reviews regarding the Nektar Impact series that seem to indicate it works OK with Sonar, although it does ship with Bitwig 8-Track.
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/ImpactLX61P
 
It seems that many other keyboards seem to be integrated with Ableton Live or other DAWs out of the box, for example the Novation Launchkey series, or M-Audio Code series.
https://www.sweetwater.co.store/detail/LaunchK2-61
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Code61BK

Cakewalk was not the one that said your Motor would work. Since Behringer said it would work with any DAW and it doesn't then that is their problem and you should take it back for a refund.
 
I have ran across similar situations but it is really nothing new. Some apple hardware wont work with windows and vice-versa. Windows apps won't natively work in Linux. I too don't like the "lock-in" type shenanigans but they all do it in some form or another. I'm not sure but I don't think the Cakewalk ProTools stuff will work automatically in other DAWS. Or, do they?
 
As to changing, that is up to you but you may find the grass across the street is only greener because it has been painted.