One more year with X1

I think the idea behind X1 has been right. I just think that some more work could be done with it for the next 6 months to a year.
 
We could look at working on some of the Sonar Functions or even sell some more goodies such as plug ins maybe a dedicated Keys and drums similar to Studio Instruments but at a higher quality level. I would pay for some cakewalk instruments. They have a good rep across the board when it comes to instruments.
 
This would allow for them to get X2 or whatever right from the get go. if they get it good from the get - go then they can work on other peripherals.
 
anyone else in agreement, are we willing to wait while we use X1?

I really think they would gain from that standpoint. especially as cake are none for 9monthly releases. it would indicate that they are finally serious about the product called Sonar.

There's some good things in X1, but the one thing I hate is that the windows or panes cannot be sized. The fixed pictures and fonts waste too much space. I think that was a big mistake. 

(imo) they should freeze developing "goodies" and put all dev/qa/test resources on stability/bugfixing the current feature set, funded by bank of roland

Dappa1


I think the idea behind X1 has been right. I just think that some more work could be done with it for the next 6 months to a year.
 
We could look at working on some of the Sonar Functions or even sell some more goodies such as plug ins maybe a dedicated Keys and drums similar to Studio Instruments but at a higher quality level. I would pay for some cakewalk instruments. They have a good rep across the board when it comes to instruments.
 
This would allow for them to get X2 or whatever right from the get go. if they get it good from the get - go then they can work on other peripherals.
 
anyone else in agreement, are we willing to wait while we use X1?

The part I bolded is the part I disagree with.  Of all the things I'd like to see work on, new general use instruments are probably at the bottom of my list.  I'm very much a right tool for the right job and I think we have companies that do tremendous jobs with high quality instrument libraries.  While this may seem counter to my love of ProChannel, the reason I see them as separate things is that ProChannel modules have become a key feature with their tight integration to the whole X1 Producer environment - the just there capability of a channel strip model on every track and bus is the feature, not the actual effects, makes them different than additional VSTs or instruments - and they are completely optional content. 

I think Cakewalk already has a great general purpose workstation synth in Dimension Pro, another great more what I would call a creative synthesis synth in Rapture, and a decent included drum instrument with Session Drummer 3 (I think they could offer more expansion packs, but overall it's a pretty good general use drum instrument), but truth be told, for drums I'd rather use existing third party options and I tend to already think that market is saturated so why would Cakewalk even go that route.  As for the other things found in a Studio Instruments type library, once again, Kontakt libraries or dedicated orchestral libraries pretty much already cover this ground more likely better than what Cakewalk could do with a dedicated product - why reinvent the wheel, focus on what they do best - the core DAW and some useful add on libraries (which as I've noted I already think they have covered).  

I'd probably rather have development cycles spent on the core features already in existence and improving or replacing those that have seen better days.  I'd rather see time spent of a replacement/rework of V Vocal for example, the customizations others talk about, bug fixes of course, and ProChannel modules that fit into the channel strip usefulness type of unit. 

As always, individual mileage may vary and these are only my personal thoughts on the matter.

But merely from an exploitation point of view it would make sense for them not only to stabilize which from what I have read it is an entirely different team to the ones that actually programmes for instruments.

 
That is true....   Though it seems to me that the Pro Channel modules have kicked into high gear, and faster, than any CW instruments ever have.   And that's coming from someone who likes and uses CW synths on just about every project.   IOW, if I had to pick one CW "star" that's sold independently of SONAR, right now that'd be the PC modules.   And it sure seems that each one is better (and more popular?) than the last...
 

I like th additional goodies offered while steady updates and improvements are done to the core program.

I'll buy the audio goodies and pass on the softsynths.  To me, it's a totally fair way to do it.

Goodies are always nice, but stability and functionality are way more important, especially since we have soooo many goodies already!

The only thing that has messed with my workflow at all is functionality.

I haven't had a moment in years where I was like, ooh I need this plugin or that synth in the middle of a production in order to kick some butt.

Things like melodyne effects not sticking when bouncing to clip is a big workflow killer. Fix what is there and/or improve upon it before even considering "goodies". That is my angle.

Lance

strikinglyhandsome1


The bakers do what they want. The last time they looked at what people wanted we ended up with a 'pause' button. Mine still has the plastic cover on it.

Don't blame me, I did not ask for it.




Disclaimer: I have used it sporadically.

We did a survey not so long ago, I see no need for X2 yet unless we get a VARISPEED button.
 
As far as instruments, I'd like a better version of SD3, one that allows us to change microphones, maybe rooms stuff like that.
 
I'd prefer them to continue with the Pro Channel modules though.
 
Happy X1 camper here, apart from X1d and today may be the day I try and fix this as I have finished this business plan.
 
This is Neb