Native Kontrol Standard

I hope Cakewalk will spend there time for real instrument improvements and not for supporting questionable "standard" coming from the company which almost ignore the existence of Sonar.
 
Cakewalk has published (open) SDK for "Deep integration" with Sonar long time ago and NI have never looked into it. NI is (going to) publish (closed?) SDK for "Deep integration" with there keyboards, why Cakewalk should care?

azslow3
... why Cakewalk should care?

IMO, the DAW marketplace will ultimately decide what Cakewalk should care about.

In all honesty, if I were building a DAW oriented keyboard, I would make sure it works with every DAW before I tried to sell it. It's up to NI to make it work.
 
Now, if 80% of it works but there is some special functionality, I would think it is incumbent on NI to Kontakt Cakewalk and discuss what integration options are available.
 
Regards,
Dan

Maybe it's an opportunity to build bridges with NI - they're pretty heavyweight in the industry at the moment and making some very cool stuff IMHO.

Correct me if I wrong, but proposed by NI interconnection schema inside any DAW is the following:
 
DAW <-> Native Kontrol (wrapping VST, proposing NKS for better integrations) <-> NI Controller
 
In that respect, Native Kontrol is a "DAW inside DAW". And in case of Cakewalk that is going to be:
 
Cakewalk Sonar <-> Native Kontrol <-> Cakewalk VST.
So, OP propose Cakewalk spend time to make Cakewalk VST NKS friendly, while NI has no known plans make NKS Sonar friendly. Nor NI had any plans make there controllers directly Sonar friendly, Cakewalk schema:
 
Cakewalk Sonar <-> VST/DXi
    |-> Hardware controller (open source SDK for deep integration with Sonar is published years ago).
 
In that schema, controller operates Sonar (mixing, transport, menu, etc.) as well as plug-ins (VST, DXi) throw Sonar (moving focus to different plug-ins, changing plug-in preset, changing plug-in automate parameter throw ACT or directly). Sure that schema was not updated long time, so Sonar X+ features are not exposed in API, ACT has many bugs, etc.
 
But why Cakewalk instead of spending time to lift there own (not bad designed!) Controlling Schema in Sonar should invest into supporting third party controlling schema in there VSTs?
 
If NKS API is better than VST automation/presets API (which is not proved by now) AND (!) it is open to be used by DAWs as well (so, Cakewalk can implement "server side" NKS inside Sonar and load NKS enables plug-ins without NI wrapper), it make sense to ask Cakewalk support NKS in Sonar and VSTs. Otherwise, NKS is just a marketing trick using "heavyweight" power to force VST producers help NI to collect more money for there "exclusive" boards (which as a hardware are not so exclusive).
 
I think I have explained my point.

Hey, don't feel bad. I love the NI products that I use, but I just think this expectation is a little unrealistic.
 
Regards,
Dan

What's wrong with implementing a new standard into Cakewalks soft synths?

The keyboard isn’t that expensive. Mind you, the keys is just perfect. The light guide is not just for fun. You can see what is sounds and what is not, sound controllers and so on without having to learn every sound and its placement on the keyboard. The implementation is not a rewriting of anything. Just an add. So that the keyboard reads the knobs and shows their name on the display. And the light guide.

So far, Cakewalk has managed to implement Previous and Next Program CCs in the Rapture Pro as the only keyboard friendly feature... Let see when "the light" come out of it
 

I'm with Sharke on this one.  Hopefully azslow3 can bang out a deal with Noel to get things up to date and supported by Cakewalk

Voted! Would love to see Sonar <-> NI KK integration. It's an incredible system.

Jarsve
Voting?

Yes, that's an important aspect of this forum. In the upper right corner of the OP click a star rating to register your level of approval for the FR. Perhaps Cakewalk cares.

Back in June we opened up our internal file format to the world

I have tried hard... But so far I have failed to find it.
 
Is that just me who think that a "standard" means something established with clear specification and "open" means somehow available for public (may be for some fee) ?

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.
 

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."