dj squarewave
 My Impression is that Studio One caught fire by appealing to existing small groupings of active musicians who already had familiarity with the brand via the use of small affordable digital mixers.
 
 The early feature set seemed like an ideal choice for ensembles that were already making music and simply wanted to record their efforts and maybe polish it up a bit in post.
 
 If Presonus continues to develop Studio One to appeal to all the people it has not previously appealed to, and does so at the expense of frustrating its existing users, it will follow a well traveled path that has been shown to result in a dissolution of interest that may ultimately equate to infrequent upgrade purchases. Existing users, regardless of why or when they become users, who are taken for granted, while features designed to attract non users are prioritized, will react with a disinterest in paying for upgrades. 
 
 Groups of musicians do not sit around one computer and play music. Even electronic music groups use a collection of instruments and jam together with their own tools so that they make adjustments on the fly without interrupting each other. Groups of musicians rarely treat one central computer as a central brain where a bunch of effects and virtual instruments are imprisoned.
 
 Live, Reason, and FL Studio have not caved and started catering to the multi track needs of a ensemble of players, and those brands seem to be doing well.
 
 Pro Tools has not caved and become a one man universe for the one man band and it seems to be doing well.
 
 The infamous digital audio workstation that has often been celebrated as the most complete universal feature set known to date has *evolved* into a milk toast freebie, and a few wanna be clones of the Swiss army knife feature set ideology seem like the wonder bread of the music business. 
 
 Studio One entered the market with a tool set that made sense to band mates who did not want to be computer geeks or Pro Tools experts. It made pressing record and getting some great sounding multi tracks as easy as getting a good mix on an existing digi mixer in an existing rehearsal space. It leveraged a skill set that existing ensembles, the musicians that are largely ignored by the the "computer music press", were already familiar and comfortable with. The result was a product that was quickly and widely adopted by the many musicians who exist outside the influence of trend and style.
 
 Presonus's success seems to reflect its recognition of the existence of a very large user group that seems invisible to the cognoscenti of the music marketing industry. Presonus has catered to the needs and interests of these existing musicians despite some parties ivory tower speculations that musicians are some sort of endangered species. The genius of Presonus's business is the realization that, all things considered, musical instruments are more affordable than ever, and more people can afford to purchase and learn to play musical instruments than ever before, in the entire history of the planet. It seems natural to realize that these musicians will enjoy recording their music and will prefer to do so with as little distraction as possible. Studio One has been serving that purpose better than any other product.  
 
 If Presonus stumbles into a dichotomy where new growth undermines retention, Studio One may find itself with less dedicated customers than it has earned to date.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Some good insights there and you used "cognoscenti".
Adding features that are more song writing related may be the way to attract new users without alienating the loyal base. Song writing and beat making tools can be used by anyone.

I started with SO at V3 and the new V4 features haven't alienated me in the least.  I'm able to use V4 as a more efficient V3, or use the new features if I see them fit for the moment.
 
Track templates and folders aside (), I'm not missing much that I'm aware of.

After reading some post's, here and on other boards, it strikes me how some people have no problem making snap judgments as too whether this is worthy of an Upgrade or Update and so costly that they predict the the downfall and exodus of Presonus from the DAW market...real "Wizards of smart"...without any research or basic knowledge of the DAW, of its User base or the market in general.

Things are pointed to these nattering naybobs like most of these features in version 4 were voted on and called for since version 1. When a pattern feature was requested(quite frequently and often) the standard reply was "it's a young DAW, let it mature and let Presonus add it when it could be implemented in a better way". Of course the reply to that would be "if they don't do it immediately they will loose the EDM people". That was the discussion over the past 7 odd years in a nut shell. They have it now along with all the other bells and whistles in this Upgrade which WILL be updated for another 3-4 years with more great surprises and fixes free and in response to User votes and bug fixing.

How can a record like that be a failure if you know and use the DAW.

Even if what I wrote is wrong there is no denying the hardware integration would always keep the DAW alive.

CTStump
After reading some post's, here and on other boards, it strikes me how some people have no problem making snap judgments as too whether this is worthy of an Upgrade or Update and so costly that they predict the the downfall and exodus of Presonus from the DAW market...real "Wizards of smart"...without any research or basic knowledge of the DAW, of its User base or the market in general.

Things are pointed to these nattering naybobs like most of these features in version 4 were voted on and called for since version 1. When a pattern feature was requested(quite frequently and often) the standard reply was "it's a young DAW, let it mature and let Presonus add it when it could be implemented in a better way". Of course the reply to that would be "if they don't do it immediately they will loose the EDM people". That was the discussion over the past 7 odd years in a nut shell. They have it now along with all the other bells and whistles in this Upgrade which WILL be updated for another 3-4 years with more great surprises and fixes free and in response to User votes and bug fixing.

How can a record like that be a failure if you know and use the DAW.

Even if what I wrote is wrong there is no denying the hardware integration would always keep the DAW alive.

I understand why this happens here.  This is a Cakewalk/BandLab forum and Studio One is a competitor.
 
Hopefully over time, as users that have recently switched age with their new DAW of choice, discussions about these DAWs will migrate to the DAW vendor forums or others like BMD.  At BMD there is no inherent DAW affiliation.  Discussion about ANY DAW -including CxB- are welcome and civil.  I'm sure there are others, but BMD members are mostly prior/current Cake users, so there is familiar territory common to most.

Brando

TheMaartian
If for no other reason than the improvement in speed (v4 feels FAST compared to v3.5), upgrading was worth it.

I bought the S4 update when it was first available but it's sitting in my Presonus account. That's very encouraging though, but 3.5 is so efficient anyway. Did you have any of the license/activation issues John?

I tend to buy major updates directly from the vendor. Cost me an extra 20 bucks or so, but I had no trouble...unless you consider the v3.5 license disappearing trouble. v4 used my v3 license code. A new license for v3.5 was placed in my account, but it will sit there unused, just like the Notion 5 and SO2 licenses. 

Genghis

dubdisciple
For nektar users, they sent an update email the day s1v4 was released

Oh cool.  I must not get their emails, but if they have an update for the keyboard I'll check it out when I get moved into the bigger place.

No update for Panorama users. My next keyboard/controller will DEFINITELY NOT be a Nektar. I'm hoping v2 of NI's S88 is released by the time I've got a spare $1K.

I find the point dj squarewave brought up very interesting about can a group musicians communicate with a DAW at once and it would have to be something with a computer involved. I had not thought about it.
 
As someone who has come from the total hardware era of synthesis and also having jammed with others in a Tangerine Dream situation I can say that was how we did it then.  We had three of four sets of hardware synths. Clock signals were distributed around though in case anyone wanted to lock to them for example.  I am keen to start a live electronic music ensemble.  I have been wondering if the three separate gear setups would be best this idea of making everyone talking to one larger setup might be cool.
 
I think a powerful computer running a DAW would work.  Each player would have separate controllers. (possibly all the same) The DAW would have to accept incoming midi data from multiple sources at once.  Its easy to merge midi data or use an interface with 8 separate midi input ports. 
 
Multiple virtual synths could be setup on tracks and each player maybe have access to 3 or 4 or any number. Hardware synths could also be connected and certain tracks could be routed to them. Each player would need a remote control setup (iPad) and the Studio One remote app (which has just been updated now includes V4 compatibility, new features and bugs fixed) is ideal.  Although a deeper version of it might be useful.
 
It would be interesting to know how Kraftwerk run their setup live now. They all have laptops in front of them.. But what is each one doing. Maybe they are all just setup for virtual instruments. 

It is easy to speculate about Presonus but what actually goes on is very different.  Studio One rarely looses someone who has either shifted to it or started fresh with it.  EDM users are not lost either.  EDM users may delay getting into it more likely.  As new features are added they start to attract a different range of users. The chord track being a good example.  It can be used by seasoned players with strong music harmony knowledge already but also people who know nothing about music and chords.  And everyone in between.  It's gapless performance too will attract a different range of players and needs. 
 
The whole idea also of Presonus hardware and their software being so integrated is also unique to them.  No one else is really doing it.  They have an amazing roadmap planned for all that area of development.  The way the Series III Studio Live mixer and Faderport interact with Studio One is a fine example.  How Capture and Universal Control and all their interfaces having nice DSP built in and being controlled by it all.  You don't have to use their eco system.  But if and when you decide to, then it is all there to be had and used. 
 
The way the music industry operates now is completely different.  And also what is different are the groups of people who are getting involved in it.  These are two very important points.  Presonus actually know this and working with it.  If you don't you will fail.  If you are onto this, then success is there to be had.  There are some drawbacks too in how things are sold these days.  On line.  People now don't know how to use the stuff they have just bought and opened.  There is a whole market in education and training booming now.  It is becoming super important. 
 
Older musicians and people who started in the industry around late 70's 80's etc can make the mistake of not even seeing this and thinking the only way is how things worked back then.  You can move forward with it or stay with how you did things and the type of music being made back then and that is all good too.  DAW's need to not service just one group of people.  They need to be smart and cater for a wider range of people.  Existing users need to embrace the changes within their DAW of choice.  DAW's are getting more complex all the time, and the concept of not reading the manual and fiddling around is gone!  This is the age of the manual. 
 
Cakewalk in an interesting position now it seems.  What Bandlab should do now is inject some new code and ideas into an already existing product.  Keep what's there but add some new, fresh and exciting aspects to the program. Remember you don't have to use it! Tap into new and fresh markets.  They also need to maintain and improve existing features at the same time though to keep the loyal original fan base happy.  The potential to attract new users and thrive is also a possibility for them too.  I am sure there are some clever people involved there too.
 
There is not a finite number of users.  They are limitless and growing!  The universe is very large and provides. 

Anyone who can't make the music they want to make with any DAW that's on the market needs to stop blaming the DAW and realize the problem is with them. Sure, one DAW might make their particular workflow a little faster. Whoop de do. People made music with Notator and Master Tracks Pro...because they were musicians. Their world was about making music, not whining about perceived deal-breaking features or the lack thereof.
 
In the process of adding tools to appeal to more users, DAWs don't eliminate existing tools. When Sonar added a Matrix view, they didn't take anything away. People could ignore the Matrix View if they wanted to. Or they could use it whatever way they liked. Or in my case, they didn't have to hassle with rewiring Live into Sonar every time they wanted an efficient loop triggering environment. 
 
To me, partitioning off a program into "this part is for rock people" and "this part is for EDM people" and "this part is for songwriters" is absurd. You can use step sequencers to create excellent hand percussion and tambourine parts to accompany rock drum tracks. You can write songs with Matrix View.
 
Creative people will welcome new tools, find creative uses for them, and won't care what labels others put on those tools.

I still have too admit, I work alot faster in Studio One version 2.6. After dabbling with Cakewalk by Bandlab for a month now it really is a great DAW but for a couple of blue screen crashs which may be due to video card conflicts caused by possible skylight conflicts or my OS not up to snuff. I have to remember to save as autosave is turned off as is my preference. Now that I know that I try to remember. With Studio One as old as it is still works almost flawless thus I finish more work in it these days.

I may Upgrade myself at version SO 4.1 during a sale but maybe after I update my nvidia drivers, upgrade the OS, upgrade my system and or Cakewalk stops crashing(enough to not break workflow), I may not at all. I really want too like CbB, it has all I need and it is far easier on my old eyeballs.