Notecrusher

azslow3
DAW integration is not Cakewalk's task in this case. At least till there is no required specification from NI (and I guess that is not going to happened). NI can do it since the specification from Cakewalk exists.

Are you sure?

Almost.
 
Note that we are speaking about 2 different integrations:
1. Extending VST plug-ins (Rapture Pro) to play nicely under NKS. That is Cakewalk task and

KPerry
From http://createdigitalmusic.com/2015/04/komplete-kontrol-now-plays-nice-plug-ins-hosts-coming/
 
"...so you’ll need to be a plug-in maker with access to NI’s developer tools to exploit those parameter controls"
 
And from Ableton Forum: https://forum.ableton.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=217967
 
"Is on the developers side to adopt or not the NKS standard, not on NI, if developer is interested it gets in contact with NI and gets the SDK."

that is the way to go for them. Note that my personal opinion is that calling proprietary API from one company, which they do not even open to everyone (we are talking about ~100 lines IDL file!) "a standard" is well described in one of KVR threads about that topic...
 
2. Integration of NI Kontrol software with the DAW (Sonar). I do not know either NI SDK includes some information about that part, most probably not (if it is for plug-in developers). But in any case, that is not the task for Cakewalk to support in there DAW whatever devices someone invent. Using the same words:
"Is on the developers side to adopt or not the Cakewalk CS standard, not on Cakewalk, if developer is interested it can get the SDK from GitHub."

azslow3
But in any case, that is not the task for Cakewalk to support in there DAW whatever devices someone invent. 

Disagree. Sonar users deserve the same advanced host integration that is supported in the other leading DAW's -- Live, Cubase/Nuendo, and Logic that enables track navigation, automatic track focus, and automatic record arming w/ NI's keyboards and Maschine. We are not talking about "whatever" devices, nor are we talking about "someone", we are talking about an industry leader, regardless of your personal opinion of Native Instruments.
 
This is not a finger pointing exercise. If it's NI that must enable the integration I will bang on NI. If it's Cakewalk, I'll bang on Cakewalk. I just want it done so Sonar users w/ NI hardware can enjoy the same benefits as users of rival DAW's.

azslow3
 
2. Integration of NI Kontrol software with the DAW (Sonar). I do not know either NI SDK includes some information about that part, most probably not (if it is for plug-in developers). But in any case, that is not the task for Cakewalk to support in there DAW whatever devices someone invent. Using the same words:
"Is on the developers side to adopt or not the Cakewalk CS standard, not on Cakewalk, if developer is interested it can get the SDK from GitHub."

I don't interpret it that way - the developers here are Cakewalk.  I think you'll find that other DAW companies write the control surface integrations, they do not expect the control surface manufacturers do do so.
 
Cakewalk providing an API for this may be nice, but it's not working in terms of getting controller manufacturers on board.

Notecrusher
This is not a finger pointing exercise. If it's NI that must enable the integration I will bang on NI. If it's Cakewalk, I'll bang on Cakewalk. I just want it done so Sonar users w/ NI hardware can enjoy the same benefits as users of rival DAW's.

At least you can ask them what they propose. We know what Cakewalk propose in that respect, but we do not know the NI point of view.
 

KPerry
I don't interpret it that way - the developers here are Cakewalk.  I think you'll find that other DAW companies write the control surface integrations, they do not expect the control surface manufacturers do do so.

I have tried to find that, but I have found nothing. There are several variants:
a) surface producer publish the specification, so a kind of "API" for the device. Examples are Mackie, Akai, (recently) Novation. In that case DAW producers (or users) have the way to integrate such device.
b) device producers are not opening the specification, but supporting some DAW on there own. For example Nektar Impact, Automap.
c) device producer is not publishing the specification and is not providing "deep" support for particular DAW/Device combination. NI Kontrol, Nektar Panorama.
 
So you claim Avid, Steinberg etc. have special team which is waiting which new devices of kind (c) is produced and jump to support it. That looks questionable for me.
 

Notecrusher
We are not talking about "whatever" devices, nor are we talking about "someone", we are talking about an industry leader, regardless of your personal opinion of Native Instruments.

The fact that ALL these devices are almost the same in hardware has nothing to do with my opinion. I agree that they have leading position is some SOFTWARE. And that is the problem. As with long discussed problem with Machine and Sonar, Cakewalk has no chance to modify the CODE from NI.
 
Technically:
* as soon as it is know what some button/encoder/fader/display sends/expect, it is possible to support it in Sonar. Who should do this is another question. Can be Cakewalk, you or me.
* if we do not know HOW to do something we can not do it. For example, I know how to find synth related to particular track in Sonar. I can try to do the reversed operation (which is not going to be 1to1, there can be several MIDI tracks and Audio output track). But I do not know how to convince S-Control switch focused instance. And so I can not do that "integrations".
 
Note that transport controls and some other simple functions are directly mappable (according to NI documentation and BitWig scripts). So we are talking about "advanced" operations only.

Okay, WAY too much speculation going on here. I'll try to find out who is responsible for implementing the advanced host integration supported in the other leading DAW's, NI or the DAW vendor...

It's a bit like the Control Surface support in Sonar. Cakewalk have made it available as Open Source. Isn't that like throwing up their arms and saying well we don't have any hardware so if you want integration with 3rd party hardware you'll have to do it yourself.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Cakewalk is quickly becoming the only DAW that has no hardware connection and really doesn't support any.

mudgel
It's a bit like the Control Surface support in Sonar. Cakewalk have made it available as Open Source. Isn't that like throwing up their arms and saying well we don't have any hardware so if you want integration with 3rd party hardware you'll have to do it yourself.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

1. Making something Open Source does not mean "throwing up there arms". Note, that they have open Source SDK for much longer time then they do not have hardware. They have moved it to GitHub with more real world examples, but I for example have started using it bofore
2. From some point VST SDK is also possible to download as open source. That does not mean it is dead, that does not mean Steinberg is responsible for providing VST automation support in every DAW. And I see it as a better move then what NI does with NKS.
 

Cakewalk is quickly becoming the only DAW that has no hardware connection and really doesn't support any.

I agree with the first part, but not with the second.
I put a lot of my time into that. And my conclusion is short: most people who claim "Sonar does not support controlley XY" are not ready to spend a single hour nor single cent for that. Those who are interested in getting the result, normally get it (from me, from CakeWalk... who cares?).
 
You can find my Mackie Control post in the near. There was several discussion that since Sonar X, Mackie EQ/Dyn buttons do not produce expected result. Let see how many answers I can get publishing information that is fixed. My guess it will be close (or equal) zero.

azslow3
most people who claim "Sonar does not support controlley XY" are not ready to spend a single hour nor single cent for that. 

Those are two completely different things. The first case is fine -- sure, e.g. Bitwig has a javascript API and many third parties have written controller support and most have offered it free. BUT THAT IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE for the DAW vendor supporting the most important protocols. ONCE AGAIN, in the case of the NI controllers we have all the leading DAW's supporting them except Sonar. I have contacted NI support. If it's NI's omission, okay, I'll pound on NI, but I suspect it's Cakewalk's.
 
As to the second point, customers are spending lots of cents on Sonar and have a right to expect it to be up to snuff w/ its competitors. If it's NI that is stiffing Sonar, I will report it here so there is no misunderstanding, but as I said, I suspect it's Cakewalk's lack of effort. We shall see...

It would be great to get Cakewalk's view on all of this, particularly since they're working on Rapture Session for the next Sonar release and that allows you to "Quickly search and preview different sounds from realistic pianos to soaring synths".  To me, that seems like very similar territory to Komplete Kontrol.
Thanks to all for the great debate on this and particularly to Azslow3 because I didn't know about your AZ Controller.  I do now and I noticed that Jim Roseberry recommended it for Maschine and Komplete Kontrol keyboards.  I shall certainly be checking this out.

Notecrusher

azslow3
most people who claim "Sonar does not support controlley XY" are not ready to spend a single hour nor single cent for that. 

Those are two completely different things. The first case is fine -- sure, e.g. Bitwig has a javascript API and many third parties have written controller support and most have offered it free. BUT THAT IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE for the DAW vendor supporting the most important protocols. ONCE AGAIN, in the case of the NI controllers we have all the leading DAW's supporting them except Sonar. I have contacted NI support. If it's NI's omission, okay, I'll pound on NI, but I suspect it's Cakewalk's.
 
As to the second point, customers are spending lots of cents on Sonar and have a right to expect it to be up to snuff w/ its competitors. If it's NI that is stiffing Sonar, I will report it here so there is no misunderstanding, but as I said, I suspect it's Cakewalk's lack of effort. We shall see...

Since you have mentioned Bitwig... In case support in Bitwig is what you want, I can implement the same for sonar (this JS script is open).
 
As SGodfrey has noticed, I am offering integration with Sonar for any device. Also some other users have contributed interesting solutions. But there are 2 pre-requirements for that: someone has to be ready spend the time at least for testing the result and the protocol should be known. It is already hard to make good preset for a device which I have seen on pictures only, and it is impossible to do that in case I have no info how to communicate.
 
So in case you can get clear answer under which conditions NI is providing required documentation/tools, it can be possible to integrate it. By me, Cakewalk or someone else is a different question.
 
Note about money. Significant part of money you have paid to NI for the controller are for the software. As you can guess, not a single cent went to Cakewalk. It is like you pay for new Auto Radio and complain to particular auto producer you can not integrate it, with arguments "it is good radio from leading company" and "it is possible to install it into many other autos". MIDI Keyboards are build to be used with DAWs, not reversed. And if someone introduce "new protocol", there should be clear way to get it. I repeat, we are talking about one-two pages of text.