Glennbo 
Max Output Level: -57 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1840
- Joined: 2003/11/10 22:38:37
- Location: Planet Earth
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/01/06 22:10:12
(permalink)
Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]
Glennbo
That said, I find it appalling that you are required to use a 1920x1080 monitor just to run Sonar. How do you run it on a friggin laptop? Oh I know, you go buy a brand new laptop that runs 1920x1080, coz Sonar won't scale to fit your screen. I use an un-named DAW soft that can easily scale down to fit even my oldest Eee PC running 1024x600, or scales up to sit nice on my 32" 1920x1080 monitor in the studio. As you size the app down, things like FX bins, and Sends automatically collapse to accommodate the smaller size
First of all you're not "required" to use 1920x1080 and I suspect you know that, but hyperbole is fun! Secondly, you run it on a laptop by having a laptop with high-enough resolution. I've had a laptop that does 1920x1200 for probably 4 years now. Surely you know that many laptops support higher than 720p resolution, and have for quite some time. FWIW: many apps look too small to me at 1920x1080, including the un-named.
Well, I see people being told that their existing 1366 x 768 display is outdated and not good for audio production apps. That sounds to me like you gotta buy a new monitor that is at least equal to HDTV res. I run the un-named app at 1920x1080 on a 32" screen and it is quite comfortable to me, and my eyes are fairly shot. My monitor sits on the monitor bridge of my mixing desk and I sit about 3-4 feet back from it. My brand new (bought less than six months ago) Eee PC 1201N only does 1366 x 768, and my music software fits on that display just fine.
It's safe to assume you haven't actually seen X1 "in the flesh" on your 32" monitor isn't it?
Absolutely! It would cost me two hundred bucks just to try it right now, and I have to get a plumber out tomorrow (for real). I will try it when the demo is out.
|
...wicked
Max Output Level: -1.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7360
- Joined: 2003/12/18 01:00:56
- Location: Seattle
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/01/06 22:19:12
(permalink)
I dunno, I normally find Glenbo's post a little hyperbolicly biased as well, but the ONLY app I run on my DAW that doesn't fit is X1. Either you guys made "the leap" into the future of hi-def, or you missed a great opportunity to scale the UI so it resizes.
As far as laptops, sheesh man mine is only two years old and doesn't run at that rez.
Some of this is probably just needing to "embrace the future" as it were. It's not like I still have SCSI drive after all. But since X1 is the only program on my DAW that really is requiring this kind of graphics upgrade, it makes the $99 cost a little more like $299 (monitor, GPU, and SONAR). And that's only upgrading 1 of my 2 monitors.
=========== The Fog People =========== Intel i7-4790 16GB RAM ASUS Z97 Roland OctaCapture Win10/64 SONAR Platinum 64-bit billions VSTs, some of which work
|
n0rd
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 237
- Joined: 2010/11/02 02:18:00
- Location: Down Under (Australia)
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/01/07 01:11:30
(permalink)
...wicked
or you missed a great opportunity to scale the UI so it resizes.
Agreed... You go buy 30" monitor with a resolution of 2560x1600 only to find that some GUI elements are fixed size - so maximising only gives you a bucket load of wasted "gray area"... (Console view)
|
Tommy01
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 123
- Joined: 2007/10/10 00:53:50
- Location: Federal Way, WA
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/01/07 06:56:57
(permalink)
I agree with you guys! My laptop is only 2 years old if that, and it has the bare recommened resolution - 1280x800 minimum screen resolution and i cant see all of the pro channel or even scroll to see all of it in the track view, only way to see all of it is to turn modules or components off so you can see it all, not very convenient at all, all other Daws ( reaper and Sonar 8.5) are fine. In the console view you can at least scroll to see all of it, this really needs to be fixed IMO. They should offer a few different sizes or let us be able to scale to fit our monitor since i have the: 1280x800 minimum screen resolution Tommy
post edited by Tommy01 - 2011/01/07 06:59:23
|
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3617
- Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/01/07 07:34:01
(permalink)
Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]
1360x768 is, IMHO, very low resolution to run any advanced content creation program, like SONAR.
Unless your video card is pretty old, I'd suspect this limitation you are facing is due to your monitor. What is the native resolution of your display monitor?
1080p monitors are very affordable these days and expand your workspace a great deal. If you have the means, I'd seriously consider an upgrade...and why not use this opportunity to go 24"+ while you're at it. :-) It's pretty amazing what you can get these days when it comes to display technology vs. price.
+1 agree
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
|
Jonbouy
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 22562
- Joined: 2008/04/14 13:47:39
- Location: England's Sunshine South Coast
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/01/07 07:57:52
(permalink)
Secondly, you run it on a laptop by having a laptop with high-enough resolution. I've had a laptop that does 1920x1200 for probably 4 years now. Unbelievable! Sounds a bit like 'let 'em eat cake', no?
"We can't do anything to change the world until capitalism crumbles. In the meantime we should all go shopping to console ourselves" - Banksy
|
himalaya
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 282
- Joined: 2006/10/24 12:30:01
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/01/07 07:58:38
(permalink)
Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]
Secondly, you run it on a laptop by having a laptop with high-enough resolution. I've had a laptop that does 1920x1200 for probably 4 years now.
Brandon, are you being serious? Are you suggesting I stop using my laptop with 1280x800 screen resolution, and buy a new laptop with a higher screen resolution in order to run X1. ??? I've had my laptop for 4 years as well. It runs perfectly ok and I do not see a need to get a new one. And it wouldn't be just the laptop I'd need to upgrade. I'd need to get a new sound card as well, as the one I use currently based on PCMCIA Cardbus is no longer supported bu majority of laptop manufacturers, so there would be an extra expense involved with a new soundcard, all to run X1 comfortably? I can't believe the short sightedness expressed in your post.
|
alexniedt
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 842
- Joined: 2004/03/06 01:33:50
- Location: Kansas City, Missouri
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/14 03:57:30
(permalink)
n0rd
...wicked
or you missed a great opportunity to scale the UI so it resizes.
Agreed... You go buy 30" monitor with a resolution of 2560x1600 only to find that some GUI elements are fixed size - so maximising only gives you a bucket load of wasted "gray area"... (Console view)
Exactly! It'd be one thing if everything scaled accordingly, but if Cakewalk is gonna sit here with these posts about buying new laptops and monitors just to run their new software when I have NO OTHER SOFTWARE that makes this necessary, then at least don't waste a bunch of space if I do make an upgrade. Absolute BS. I'm getting so frustrated lately trying so hard to really like X1, only to repeatedly be given reasons to use something else. DAW 2.0 my ass. DAW-In-Progress at best. Never felt so negatively about the quality of a Cakewalk product, and I've been a customer since Pro Audio 9. X2 should be free to all customers just for putting up with X1. [/rant]
|
DeveryH
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 780
- Joined: 2004/12/01 21:27:43
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/14 09:10:35
(permalink)
Boy you must be irked to necro a thread that died out 4 months ago!
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/14 10:17:22
(permalink)
alexniedt
n0rd
...wicked
or you missed a great opportunity to scale the UI so it resizes.
Agreed... You go buy 30" monitor with a resolution of 2560x1600 only to find that some GUI elements are fixed size - so maximising only gives you a bucket load of wasted "gray area"... (Console view)
Exactly! It'd be one thing if everything scaled accordingly, but if Cakewalk is gonna sit here with these posts about buying new laptops and monitors just to run their new software when I have NO OTHER SOFTWARE that makes this necessary, then at least don't waste a bunch of space if I do make an upgrade. Absolute BS. I'm getting so frustrated lately trying so hard to really like X1, only to repeatedly be given reasons to use something else. DAW 2.0 my ass. DAW-In-Progress at best. Never felt so negatively about the quality of a Cakewalk product, and I've been a customer since Pro Audio 9. X2 should be free to all customers just for putting up with X1. [/rant]
have you read the tos?
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
alexniedt
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 842
- Joined: 2004/03/06 01:33:50
- Location: Kansas City, Missouri
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/14 15:43:00
(permalink)
chuckebaby
have you read the tos?
Indeed, I have. And nowhere do they say it's unacceptable to post an honest opinion, and my language was "on-TV language". Thank you so much for your input. It totally helps with the less-than-stellar design issue at hand. Spanky, if threads weren't meant to be referred back to and further commented on by forum members, they would be deleted or locked.
|
sdpate67
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 344
- Joined: 2008/03/09 09:59:21
- Location: Charlottetown, PEI
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/14 18:12:52
(permalink)
You can't put new wine in old bottles.
The intense graphic experience of X1 or Cubase 6 is going to be wasted on old equipment. A 27" or 29" monitor is under $400.
Asus i7-760 Win 8.1/ Sonar Platinum / Lynx Aurora 16 AES16 / Mackie MCU Pro XT C4 / Millennia Media STT1 x 2 TD-1/ UAD-2 Quad x 2 / Neumann O-300 O-810 U87 KM184 x 2 / Shure 57/58 Reverbnation NJN Network
|
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2446
- Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/14 19:26:14
(permalink)
Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]
First of all you're not "required" to use 1920x1080 and I suspect you know that, but hyperbole is fun! Secondly, you run it on a laptop by having a laptop with high-enough resolution. I've had a laptop that does 1920x1200 for probably 4 years now. Surely you know that many laptops support higher than 720p resolution, and have for quite some time. FWIW: many apps look too small to me at 1920x1080, including the un-named.
It is, however, not uncommon for current laptops to have 1366x769 resolution. I'm typing on a Dell Inspiron with that resolution right now. It's a year old. It does seem a bit limiting to require higher resolution to see the channel strip.
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/14 19:30:30
(permalink)
alexniedt
chuckebaby
have you read the tos?
Indeed, I have. And nowhere do they say it's unacceptable to post an honest opinion, and my language was "on-TV language". Thank you so much for your input. It totally helps with the less-than-stellar design issue at hand.
Spanky, if threads weren't meant to be referred back to and further commented on by forum members, they would be deleted or locked.
im not having a problem with it..i think its awsome..i love the view of the prochannel.but if you have a small monitor than your not going to see the whole prochannel..sounds more like your just digging up old posts so you can complain..i read your other post this morning thatwas another thread from a while back..no one asked you to buy x1 man.theres other daws out there. sorry your unhappy,but im estatic..i love it..i think the new gui is very proffessional looking.and the prochannel is something you dont see built in to every daw out there..this version x1..it rocks..ive made some awsome recordings.. i dont hear that word on t.v much.but we'll see what the mods think i guess.
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
alexniedt
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 842
- Joined: 2004/03/06 01:33:50
- Location: Kansas City, Missouri
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/14 22:02:41
(permalink)
^Oh, that's right! Anytime you buy something, you can't have a complaint because no one ASKED you to buy it. Everyone should just sit back and shut up and just have Cakewalk do their thing with no customer feedback whatsoever because public user forums are just for talking about how much you love everything, because every user's experience is the same as yours. Awesome. No more finding threads with issues some people dislike or feature requests for which to voice support. At least you contributed your opinion to the thread in your last post instead of just playing forum language police, which is so incredibly helpful. Thanks!
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/14 22:35:44
(permalink)
freeze...forum police..im taking you in...on what count?...opinions... lol.. alex..are you that upset about just the prochannel or is it a bunch of things and now the prochannel was the straw that broke the camels back?you just sound angry man..you got a great video there i will say that..the song..well..ill keep my opinion to myself(see sometimes its good to keep an opinion to yourself). i probably shouldnt have mentioned the tos..guess i was being a little lame.i didnt like your post so it was the best i could come up with..which was not good at all. it is a decent daw when it comes down to it.ill try and respect your opinion,have at it. hope all works out.
post edited by chuckebaby - 2011/05/14 22:44:04
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2446
- Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 02:07:12
(permalink)
sdpate
You can't put new wine in old bottles.
The intense graphic experience of X1 or Cubase 6 is going to be wasted on old equipment. A 27" or 29" monitor is under $400.
No music app requires a 27" monitor. To suggest that Cakewalk is somehow ahead of the technology curve because X1 won't fit easily on a huge number of laptop screens is ridiculous. Many people, such as myself, need to work on laptops and desktops. There is no technology advantage to Pro Channel not fitting on the same screen that 8.5 could fit on. It's just bad design.
|
A1MixMan
Max Output Level: -58 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1706
- Joined: 2003/11/19 16:15:11
- Location: SunriseStudios
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 03:15:32
(permalink)
dlesaux
I bought a new monitor after the upgrade (1920 x 1080) and this has greatly improved the X1 experience! The whole X1 design now makes sense.
Yep, I was forced (glad I was!  ) to buy a new 23" monitor (actually two) and it's so nice! I love using X1 with my two new monitors. I run them at 1920 x 1080 and it looks fantastic. Highly recommended.
post edited by A1MixMan - 2011/05/15 04:14:41
|
alexniedt
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 842
- Joined: 2004/03/06 01:33:50
- Location: Kansas City, Missouri
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 03:28:11
(permalink)
chuckebaby
the song..well..ill keep my opinion to myself(see sometimes its good to keep an opinion to yourself)
Hopefully you just think you're being clever, and you're smart enough to realize if you were keeping your opinion to yourself, you wouldn't have posted that.
|
alexniedt
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 842
- Joined: 2004/03/06 01:33:50
- Location: Kansas City, Missouri
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 03:31:57
(permalink)
vintagevibe
No music app requires a 27" monitor. To suggest that Cakewalk is somehow ahead of the technology curve because X1 won't fit easily on a huge number of laptop screens is ridiculous. Many people, such as myself, need to work on laptops and desktops. There is no technology advantage to Pro Channel not fitting on the same screen that 8.5 could fit on. It's just bad design.
Exactly. And for Cakewalk to just suggest their customers buy new laptops and monitors rather than work harder on their design is frustrating and unfortunate, to say the least.
|
brew58ski
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 21
- Joined: 2010/12/11 01:20:20
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 04:34:08
(permalink)
I am also using a laptop that doesn't have a high enough resolution. It's all I've got and I'm not going to get another one so I need Sonar to make the Inspector scrollable. Is it really that hard? I am working around it but it would sure make my life easier.
|
Somerset
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 634
- Joined: 2004/10/20 06:07:27
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 04:51:55
(permalink)
Does anyone know what screen resolution they used for the Groove 3 X1 videos? I know it was quite a lot less than maximum and they made a point about it in the videos. I think it was mentioned that it was done on a laptop at low res, and it looked quite clear. (My video's expired, as I chose the single month licence. Now I wish I got the download).
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 08:07:04
(permalink)
The last 2 laptops I bought didn't have a 1920x1080 screen. The best I can afford to buy for myself is a 18.5" screen with 1680x945 pixels. I bought my wife a new lappy a few months ago... it's 17" with 1600x900 pixels. Neither were budget laptops... neither were top of the line either. I know I can easily spend 2 to 3 times as much and get that 1920x1080 laptop... but I don't have a corporate laptop allowance... and I will not spend that much on a category of disposable throw away hardware. I'd rather send money to my software vendors so they can maintain the software. "There is no technology advantage to Pro Channel not fitting on the same screen that 8.5 could fit on. It's just bad design." I think this statement sums the way I feel about this subject perfectly. I'd also like to point out that the only way to properly discuss this subject is by using pixels as the descriptive unit. The use of inches... eg 27" or 29"... only provides a loosely relative association to pixel size. For example; If you desire the full 8.5 experience in X1 you will not be satisfied with a $400 29" 1920x1200 monitor... you are going to have to shell out $1500 for a 2500x1600 display... regardless of inch measurement. Futhermore, if you wish to restore your ability to see as many tracks in X1 as you could enjoy in 8.5 you will have to add a new graphics card that can output 2500x1600. So, add $200-300 (or more) for a graphics card to the $1500 just so you can see what was taken off the screen when X1s display was turned into bloat design. While you are shopping for your 2500x1600 graphics card make sure you get a simple one with solid drivers... or it will be your systems fault when you have troubles with X1 crashing. My current DAW uses the simplest graphics card we could source when it was built... that's why I never complain about system stability or performance. :-) An ideal DAW graphics card has the exact opposite feature set of what you are going to find on a high tech 2500x1600 display adapter. So if I want to enjoy everything I enjoy in 8.5 in X1 on my dedicated desktop DAW I have to make a $1800 purchase and endure potential headaches. That is an extraordinary expense just to maintain parity between v8.5 and X1 with regards to what is available for simultaneous view in the gui. Bummer. all the best, mike edit spellng
post edited by mike_mccue - 2011/05/15 08:40:34
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 08:17:04
(permalink)
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
DeveryH
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 780
- Joined: 2004/12/01 21:27:43
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 08:36:01
(permalink)
Having a decent monitor and excellent resolution on my studio computer, I didn't know what all the fuss was about. So I went to my laptop to see (1600 X 900), and now I see what everyone is complaining about. Cakewalk really needs to find a way to remedy this and I'm sure they will.
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 09:20:30
(permalink)
i dont think cake really had in mind everyone running x1 on laptops..maybe they did,i dont know,i see what your talking about and yes it stinks to have to scroll to see the prochannel.but hope fully they fix this in the future.its just not ruining my life yet..i use external monitor
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
JamminFool
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 386
- Joined: 2004/01/07 20:19:41
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 10:00:41
(permalink)
brandon,
i have a basically brand-new HP Envy 14 laptop.
the max resolution is 1366x768.
to have built software that does not scale or allow scrolling for information that does not fit is UNACCEPTABLE.
you guys made a very bad decision IMHO.
i suggest you go get a laptop with the above resolution and have a go with a workflow test...good software needs to be tested to run a cross-section of the latest laptops being sold. your design purposely excludes a subset of these laptops.
if you do not want to support musicians who rely on portability, you will find that those potential customers will choose vendors who care about them. many of your competitors provide that support and will be happy to welcome your previous customers.
so since i have the (relatively) latest technology, but you claim i am outdated, it appears cakewalk did not do it's homework on this one.
please reconsider the design. workflow improvements are judged by whether they actually improve workflow.
the answers i have seen from cakewalk so far are rather arrogant and sound a little defensive. your customers are giving you valuable feedback. you should listen, instead of telling them to spend money for hardware for a problem created by the "latest" software.
it does not really matter to me if you change this, since i was already on the fence about contining with sonar. but i thought that maybe X1 really represented a break with the past and workflow would be addressed properly. clearly not the case here, since it appears that translates to "our way or the highway".
fundamental stuff. very disappointing.
|
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2446
- Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 11:09:14
(permalink)
JamminFool
the answers i have seen from cakewalk so far are rather arrogant and sound a little defensive. your customers are giving you valuable feedback. you should listen, instead of telling them to spend money for hardware for a problem created by the "latest" software.
In their defense I've never known Cakewalk to be arrogant. They may be a bit defensive since they've been beaten up a lot with this release. I wouldn't fault them for that. Historically they have, on most issues, listened very carefully to their customers.
|
KeithS
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 182
- Joined: 2005/02/19 22:55:11
- Location: Mobile, Alabama
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 12:02:40
(permalink)
Keith SONAR X1d Producer Expanded (64 bit), Waves Platinum
Home built PC Intel i7 2600K, ASUS P8P67 MoBo
16 Gb RAM, Windows 7 Ultimate (64 bit)
TASCAM FW-1884
EEE-1394 Legacy driver
PNY GeForce GTX 560Ti graphics card
2 ASUS V249H LED Monitors.
|
JamminFool
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 386
- Joined: 2004/01/07 20:19:41
- Status: offline
Re:Pro Channel Height - Is It Just A Few Of Us, Or?.. (A Question Mostly For Cakewalk)
2011/05/15 12:06:37
(permalink)
vintagevibe
In their defense I've never known Cakewalk to be arrogant. They may be a bit defensive since they've been beaten up a lot with this release. I wouldn't fault them for that. Historically they have, on most issues, listened very carefully to their customers.
how about dismissive then?
|