Protools 8 notation - when will Cakewalk listen?

ORIGINAL: slartabartfast

Maybe, but it is also possible that they do not have the talent in-house to do the job, or the budget to farm it out. Good notation software is a different sort of animal than good recording software, the programmer/designer skillset/experience is just different in focus. My guess is that the Cakewalk programming crew would find it easier to come up with new audio features than to put together a graphics/printing app.

ORIGINAL: robert.t

NB: i just thought i would point out that pro tools did not buy sibelius. Avid (the company who own digi) bought sibelius. I know its just a technicality, and you probably already knew that (we all type still things accidently!!), but i wouldnt want anyone getting the wrong idea!

ORIGINAL: vintagevibe

I filled out the survey as well. It just seems to me that it would make Sonar more of a serious scoring tool with some attention to notation.

If they could ever do a decent transfer, like music XML and give a little more flexibility to control printing, that would make me pretty happy.

ORIGINAL: gordonrussell76

Sorry if this is alittle bit rambling, but I guess what I am saying is that it really should be questionnair based, ie a statistical analysis of hte Cake user base as to who would really like to see this functionality.

If 70% want to see it, brilliant then do it. If 10% want it i would say no, if say 40% wanted it, then code it, but its available as a paid for upgrade bit like the MP3 option. This would also suit another subset of the userbase who while wanting to use notation software, already own there own preferred notation software, for example Sibelius :) and therefore don't want to pay for something they too won't be using.

Hope that all made sense :)

Hmm

I have no use for notation, now before I get flamed, I totally understand that for many its there bread and butter to be able to notate well. However it all comes down to cost and statistics.

If the upgrade price of Sonar, or the overall cost of first purchase, then someone like myself may bault at it, becuase I would be paying for functionality i would not be using.

I would guess that many users are like me they use Sonar as a demoing/recording studio. To flesh out ideas and/or take them to completion. For most of us that will be within the arena of capturing and editing performance, most often by ear rather than by notation. I cannot even read music, let alone score it. However I can put together a pretty decent string section by ear.

Sorry if this is alittle bit rambling, but I guess what I am saying is that it really should be questionnair based, ie a statistical analysis of hte Cake user base as to who would really like to see this functionality.

If 70% want to see it, brilliant then do it. If 10% want it i would say no, if say 40% wanted it, then code it, but its available as a paid for upgrade bit like the MP3 option. This would also suit another subset of the userbase who while wanting to use notation software, already own there own preferred notation software, for example Sibelius :) and therefore don't want to pay for something they too won't be using.

Hope that all made sense :)

ORIGINAL: agincourtdb

The score editor in Sonar isn't meant for producing notation for print, it's for editing MIDI data in a way more palatable for pen-and-paper musicians. By that standard, it doesn't need updating. If the question is about making it fit for actual for-print notation, there's a *lot* of work to be done, at which point see my post above :-)

The score editor in Sonar isn't meant for producing notation for print, it's for editing MIDI data in a way more palatable for pen-and-paper musicians. By that standard, it doesn't need updating. If the question is about making it fit for actual for-print notation, there's a *lot* of work to be done, at which point see my post above :-)