Hey Everyone,

So, I know you're all waiting on an official response from us. I want to first say that any lack of a response hasn't been due to lack of care or concern. Our teams have been working extremely hard on several things which extend well beyond the day-to-day conversations we sometimes partake in here on the forums. Sometimes the lack of a forum response is us just trying to collect official details before speaking out of turn. This is how I personally operate at least. If it's not in some way "official", I prefer to not speak up at all. I don't like to make empty promises.

Nevertheless, I'm sorry for lack of direct response lately. I don't personally make it onto the forums very much in my typical daily routine, but obviously have been trying to much more recently with the X2 release. I've spoken with many of you multiple times via emails and phones and know that you folks are very passionate about SONAR, the VS-700 and have made a big investment.

With that being said, there are a few VS-700 & SONAR X2 compatibility issues that are on our radar. 

Display Lag:

We've collected a lot of feedback regarding a delay (or lag) when performing certain actions on the VS-700C. I explained a bit in my post here <http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?high=&m=2667217&mpage=1#2669608> why this has changed from pre-SONAR X1d to now. Please understand this is only an attempt to explain the difference, not a defense for what I think is better or worse.

Ultimately, a lot of it has to do with new implementation in SONAR X1d/X2 and how messages must be sent to and from the console. One alternative to not refreshing the display this this way would be to not display parameters properly on the VS-700C's LCD. This is obviously not a desirable solution. The new implementation was a direct result of us fixing many issues in regards to ProChannel functionality on the VS-700C and Bus Selection on the VS-700C.

With that being said, we're investigating if there are optimizations that can be made. I'm not personally savvy enough on this topic, but I know there is a very specific protocol we must follow when sending data to and from the console as defined by the hardware itself. I can't say for sure if anything is going to change on this front at the moment, all I can say is that it's being investigated.

Selecting ProChannel modules from the surface:

We've received some reports that this can be weird in certain conditions and plan on addressing it. You should be able to cycle through the modules so if you're having difficulties that is obviously not intended.

Snap from the VS-700 getting confused:

We've received reports that this is not toggling correctly in X2 due to the new implementation with Snap and Snap Override. Also obviously not intended behavior.

Other issues & feedback:

I encourage anyone else to continue to fill out the Problem Report Form to report any issues. This is here: http://www.cakewalk.com/s...act/problemreport.aspx

If you don't receive immediate feedback on something it doesn't mean we're not pushing Feature Requests or Problem Reports to the appropriate people internally.

I also encourage everyone to give feedback in this thread. We did something similarly for SONAR X1d and were able to implement some of your great ideas. I can't make any promises, but if there is any way to get our Product Managers' attention it would be in this thread, since I'll be following it.

Thanks everyone,

Ryan Munnis
Product Support Manager
Cakewalk, Inc.

This is great, Thanks Ryan! Everyone please list and use [Problem Report Form] here's the chance to try to get some of these issues looked at and completed if possible. There's nothing worse then having a great DAW system with some significant OS issues still unresolved.

Hi Ryan, thanks for stopping by.

Bugs
1) Instrument tracks can't be unarmed individually, only globally on the console.
2) Offset-Button does not light up
3) Weird channel strip control behavior (EQ/SEND/ACT) in X1 (might be the same for X2) as explained here (see points 2-4): http://forum.cakewalk.com/fb.ashx?m=2621970
4) When you edit a BUS via the Channel Strip Control, and then hit the Track-Button (to view Tracks), the Channel Strip Control still controls that BUS, even though you have a properly selected Track in front of your eyes on the console.
 

Feature Requests
My favourite one would be zooming at the PRV via the console.

One more thing: upon switching tracks, the channel strip control should have focus on the same module (if existant) as on the previous track and not simply revert back to the one on top (which in X1 is always the compressor, even if you're switching through tracks to control the EQ on each track). 

But there's a neat list by this very community here: http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=2676731
I like the idea of 'modes' presented in the link, like e.g. the midi edit mode.
Also the request "Ability to assign modifier buttons" could solve a lot of missing features.



Afaik, almost all of the bugs and feature requests have been sent via the official support route.

It's mostly down to the Channel Strip Control.


Thanks very much for reading.

"I'm here because you broke something" Lol, luv it. I had a feeling it was hardware-software related. It's a shame we just can't just plug  the X2 chip into the Console and reorder the command structure.

Thanks for jumping in Ryan and your content really confirms what I was thinking. I'm generally an optimist however sometimes you have to face the facts.

It's great you guy(s) show support but the reality is that the 700C is (now) an afterthought to the core product which is X2 which does not obviously integrate tightly with the hardware. The inability to reliably operate eq and plugs from the surface confirm this.

Bugs and faults are to be investigated and will be addressed and there are loads of non intended behaviors and we've already skipped past X1 which is when the troubles actually began. X2 already.....

Thanks again Ryan however the writing appears to be clearly on the wall for us investors.

Cheers.

Yes,thanks for stopping by Ryan. One thing in your post sticks out more than anything else. "I can't say for sure if anything is going to change on this front at the moment, all I can say is that it's being investigated." I'm hoping so much that we didn't waste our time and money in this venture which seems to have become an unwanted adventure.

That's only referring to the display lag, in fairness.

Hardware limitations? Let's ugrade some of the componants inside the console then.

Stil cheaper than an SSL... and yeah, make it ready for some expansion fader pack.  The hardware already exist, house it in a similar frame.

I just don't want to put the console STRAIGHT in the garbage... let's recycle what is still usable hardware-wise and upgrade what is lacking for future-proofing.

Work around things lead straight to mess and confusion in the long run and we're almost there, so let's update that poor hardware.

@Dynonight I would love to see a 8 fader expansion module same idea as the MC pro