Well, I agree with the premises of her posts, just not the way she goes about it.

Hence, I agree with John :-)

thomasabarnes


No need to yell at me.

huh?  Nobody is yelling.  Just talking about Sonar.

dontletmedrown

thomasabarnes


No need to yell at me.

huh?  Nobody is yelling.  Just talking about Sonar.

And Reaper.

Yes, please GUT the current code and start over. The bugs in the envelopes are unacceptable, they do more to taint an otherwise stellar piece of software than just about any other issue I can think of. It's absolutely insane that this is still an issue, this isn't just some people, with some hardware configurations experiencing intermittent issues....This is everyone who ever uses envelopes having problems, every time.

CW engineers: Give Sony's Vegas a spin, the way envelopes and audio clips work are an excellent example, whatever they're doing would be a great model for the next Sonar.

I love your software and appreciate everything that's gone into it, but honestly, I don't need another convolution reverb or a bundled beat machine or whatever. If I want those things I'll get them from someone who specializes like NI... I bought Sonar so I'd have a DAW, that's what I want and need it to be. All the other things are all well and good, but until the app works, please focus on the priorities.

It's beyond myopic to think that slapping on all these bells and whistles is the path forward. You may pad your bottom line today and add some newcomers lured in by the promise of bundled goodies, but over time you'll lose your core users. The power users who produce and own studios, the people whose opinions others trust. If you build a solid foundation and become known for that, everything else will follow. Then you can add all the BS like "X-Ray", "Beat Contortor 4800" and whatever other gimmicks you want that I'll just have to click "don't install" for during installation.

John

Of course nobody wants that. The thing is, if the current clip envelope problems don't bother you, than it shouldn't bother you one bit when they're fixed. I promise it won't be like learning a new DAW.

You see that is not necessarily true. It is for you and me but not for all. See my post of 113. It is in favor of and support for CW's fixing this bug. On the other hand the post I took exception to is one in a long line of posts from the same author that is fairly clear in expressing unhappiness at the very nature of Sonar. Not at a particular feature that may not be there or one that is undeveloped but the entire program and how it works. 

We are not talking about a fix of a bug but a radical remake of a program that has served us well to meet those objections of that author. When a thread of this sort is here its one thing to give support to those wishing for a fix or even a new feature its quite another thing to only find fault on any issue. Another reason to reject Sonar and demand a total redo. I don't believe that that was the intention of the OP or the main idea running through this thread. It is in the agenda of one person that uses these subjects to undermine the confidence and contentment with those many that like Sonar as it is. Have chosen it because it is what it is.

You know I have been vocal on notion and the need for Sonar to get its act together in area. It is not as if I don't see faults in Sonar or that I will not tolerate comparing it to another DAW. I do that all the time. I don't sell the merits  of a competing product in any way. And I always try to balance positive entries about another program with why it is not my main DAW. This can be a vague as I like Sonar better period. The point is not to bash any program but look at things in as positive  away as one can.

Most people that comment on another program do the very same thing as I do. But not the poster in question here. There accordingly nothing good about Sonar and everything great about any other program.

The bottom line is that she seems to want Sonar to be rewritten to fit her as if it were a custom made glove.

Well said, John. I like most of the things about SONAR the way they are. I'm not hoping for a fundamental change in the tool I am familiar with using.

I've read some of the posts from the person I think you're referring to, and I got the impression, she's so unsatisfied with SONAR, I don't think she will ever like it again. I don't want to get into an exchange or debate with a female, so I don't really read her posts. I just skim over them quickly and if I notice negativity against SONAR, I jump to reading the next post in the thread.

Thanks Thomas. I hear you load and clear. Fools rush in where Angels fear to tread.

Alright guys,

Rather than talk about these issues in the forum and do nothing about it, why don't we fill a feature request form right now?  I know you've done this before, but I want for all of us to send a LOUD message to Cakewalk saying we want them to improve automation in Sonar in the near future (hopefully by the next version).

Thing is, if they consider a bug to be of less priority, then that bug will take the back door and be there version after version.  Maybe we haven't asked for it enough.  I know we have in the forum, but not directly to Cakewalk.  I don't know about you, but I'm an action guy; I walk, I don't talk.  So let's tell Cakewalk, directly, that we NEED these improvements now.  Let them know it is a NEED, not a want.  Perhaps then we'll see these automation improvements sooner than we think.

So, anyone with me here?

Here's the Feature Request form: http://www.cakewalk.com/support/FeatureRequest.aspx

I'll not only fill this form, but I will also call them about it.

Let's stop talking and start walking :-)

John,

I wrote the steps on how to reproduce the clip envelope bug on page 2 (Post #38) of this thread:

http://forum.cakewalk.com/fb.ashx?m=1828178

But we don't need to log more Bug reports on this.  Cakewalk already knows about it.  What I'm asking is for us to fill a Feature Request form asking for workflow improvements of envelopes/automation in general.  If Cakewalk revisits this area of the software, they are bound to fix any bugs within.  If we all do it at once, within a short period of time, that will send a loud message to Cakewalk.  That's at least what I propose instead of just talking about it day in/out.

John

Of course nobody wants that. The thing is, if the current clip envelope problems don't bother you, than it shouldn't bother you one bit when they're fixed. I promise it won't be like learning a new DAW.

You see that is not necessarily true. It is for you and me but not for all. See my post of 113. It is in favor of and support for CW's fixing this bug. On the other hand the post I took exception to is one in a long line of posts from the same author that is fairly clear in expressing unhappiness at the very nature of Sonar. Not at a particular feature that may not be there or one that is undeveloped but the entire program and how it works. 

We are not talking about a fix of a bug but a radical remake of a program that has served us well to meet those objections of that author. When a thread of this sort is here its one thing to give support to those wishing for a fix or even a new feature its quite another thing to only find fault on any issue. Another reason to reject Sonar and demand a total redo. I don't believe that that was the intention of the OP or the main idea running through this thread. It is in the agenda of one person that uses these subjects to undermine the confidence and contentment with those many that like Sonar as it is. Have chosen it because it is what it is.

You know I have been vocal on notion and the need for Sonar to get its act together in area. It is not as if I don't see faults in Sonar or that I will not tolerate comparing it to another DAW. I do that all the time. I don't sell the merits  of a competing product in any way. And I always try to balance positive entries about another program with why it is not my main DAW. This can be a vague as I like Sonar better period. The point is not to bash any program but look at things in as positive  away as one can.

Most people that comment on another program do the very same thing as I do. But not the poster in question here. There accordingly nothing good about Sonar and everything great about any other program.

The bottom line is that she seems to want Sonar to be rewritten to fit her as if it were a custom made glove.

Most of this is just such nonsense, John: "nothing good about Sonar and everything great about any other program: ... "radical remake of a program"... "undermine the confidence and contentment with those many that like Sonar as it is."

<<  Have chosen it because it is what it is. >>

I think it's much more complicated than that. I can say that I chose Sonar for "what it is." But "what it is" changes over time, due to actual changes in the app, and probably even more so, changes in how one works.

Re: the thread's "official" topic: How many Sonar users chose it because of how how its envelopes behave in track layers, and because of how copying bus envelopes work, and because of how clip envelopes can't be keybinded? No one choose Sonar for those things because those things don't become apparent until after you've been using it, possibly not until your needs advance to the point where those things matter, and you realize that it's not user error but app implementation that's at issue. At THAT point, a user may well "choose" to stay with Sonar because of what else it is IN ADDITION to and independent of those other things, and because the thought of having to relearn how to crawl isn't too appealing. I know this because I made that choice several times in upgrading from 2 through 7 (I missed 5, but that was more a timing thing than an active decision.) 

Whenever we get into this John, I'm reminded of the time I asked a question about strange clip envelope behavior. You replied and we went back and forth a bunch of times until you finally revealed that you that don't actually use clip envelopes.

I have a feeling that many potential new users reading this forum would be way more influenced by your replying to posters like me with a message of "please don't change the Sonar I know and love" than they would be by my complaints in the first place. It's easier to dismiss complainers than satisfied users, as complainers make more noise.

Think about it. In order to mischaracterize what I'm saying, you paint it as a call for "radical change" and counter it with what amounts to "if it ain't broke, don't fixt it."

The problem is, what do you do when the brokenness and the implementation become almost inseparable? Is the way that copying bus envelopes works a bug or an implementation issue?

Is the inability to keybind clip envelopes a bug or an implementation issue? My answer: It doesn't matter. It undoubtedly started out as a minor implementation issue, probably the result of a simple oversight when the feature was first implemented, but has now evolved to the point where it amounts to a frequently encountered bug-equivalent that has to be worked around in order to use it as designed. Think about that. Clip envelopes. Buried 3-deep under a right click. In version 8.5.

>>
<<

Hi, I've just received a marching order from Justin Fraenkel. I am a bit behind with the regular spamming attack and don't siphon enough Sonar users. He sais if I don't report back (pronto) with at least three of you in my bag he's going to put a bad spell on me. I've known many a Reaper user that failed and wasn't ever seen again since, so i am really frightened now...I only need three of you (this time).

I'll do my very best:
spamspamspam-siphonsiphonsiphon-spamspamspam

You coming with me?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seriously,

how far-out can one be?
I still frequent this forum, mostly only lurking, because I still care about the forthcoming and evolution of Sonar and because there's good solid info to read also for non DAW specific topics.
And not least because one gets lots of funny entertainment for free as well :).

But I have yet to encounter either "little Reaperoids" (btw, I find that term quite demeaning) spamming this forum or Cockos encouraging their users to do so. This is rather heavy an accusation and Richard Fey backing it up by "do a search" is a wee weak, no?

Sorry for the OT, but I feel I have to react somehow to this campaign.
Thanks for reading.

It is not this thread alone that you have come in and suggested that Sonar needs a fundamental and I think radical rewrite. Your post history is full of it. That is a fact. And I don't tell people Sonar is perfect never have never will. You know that as well as anyone.

I really don't see what the issue is here with Marah's comments (looks like she is being singled out for the most part) or anyone else who thinks some aspects of Sonar need a rethink. Even if the thread has gone beyond the original topic so what?

I cannot believe anyone from Cakewalk is reading this thread and thinking "how crazy a notion it is that someone or more than one person could post on their forum and mention another product and say they think it is better in one area or more than one area". I am not sure what on earth is so bad about that.

Surely if someone at the very least (in Marah's case for instance) bought Sonar legitimately, then that same person has a right to go the forum that represents comments about the product (good or bad) and express opinions about it. Even if that includes opinions on the products development.

I mean its the real world so we will not all agree so why then is it so hard to just agree to disagree with comments about Reaper or any other similar product and leave it at that?

Its almost like because similar comments about Sonar are not posted on the Reaper forum then that must mean the comments by existing customers (even if they use another product or Sonar and another product) not happy with certain aspects of Sonar are trolling or looking for customers for another product.

Some of the early posts from Reaper users was definitely not helpful but that was a very long time ago (many moons ago). I personally think comments asking for change in certain areas are very constructive and think they have just as much a right to post their comments as anyone without being made to feel they are looking for customers which is absurd frankly IMO.

A feature that I would like to see with the envelopes, and it's possible that someone has mentioned this before, is where you can draw your own and save them to a preset. A bit like how sonar lets you draw and save your own fade ins, fade outs and crossfades.

Then have these presets added automatically to the menu when you want to select a curve.

Rod

Guys you are on a peer to peer forum, expecting responses form Cakewalk is setting yourself up for disappointment. Thinking that if you get the page count up higher then you will force a response/action on the issue is another wrong way to go about it.

Just because we have not posted does not mean your issue has not been reported. Definitely report problems using the lines of communication we created for you to do so. There is something in SONAR called the Problem reporter, refusing to use it and posting here instead is essentially you going out of your way not to have your problem addressed.

If you want to discuss a problem here, no problem. If you want to use it as an official line of reporting an issue I am afraid you should reread the TOS and understand what this forum is all about. I strongly encourage you to use the tools (like the Problem Reporter) we provide to report problems in the official capacity, that is the fastest way to get issues into the system. Then come here and start a thread if you need/want too.

Robin

Some of the early posts from Reaper users was definitely not helpful but that was a very long time ago (many moons ago). I personally think comments asking for change in certain areas are very constructive and think they have just as much a right to post their comments as anyone without being made to feel they are looking for customers which is absurd frankly IMO.

 
Reaper users may not like the baggage that comes with their software, but, alas, history shows they reap what they have sown. A cursory search reveals for you 'deniers' lol a couple of threads from the early days shamelessly trying to bait the forum. Other DAW forums feature similar nonsense. And the KVR forums were totally abused by reaper zealots.
 
That, reaper users, is your history.
 
If you'll notice, I haven't expressely stated that anyone here is involved in that campaign, but it has not been forgotten by those who didn't drink the kool-aid.
 
Finally, I do appear to be drifting the thread off topic, so bye-bye.