Should I hold-off on the update if I use UAD plugins?

We will be releasing an update that automatically skips load balancing if UAD plugins are detected.
However in our test we didn't see any obvious error message with UAD. Can you repro that in a simple project with just 2 or 3 UAD plugins in a track? Also please indicate the specific error message and which plugins throw the error.

i'll ask again, is there any way us users can know in advance which plugins do, or don't, support the load balancing stuff?

Updated Sonar and followed the suggestions in the problem report. Everything seems to be working fine now. Appreciate the help!

However in our test we didn't see any obvious error message with UAD. Can you repro that in a simple project with just 2 or 3 UAD plugins in a track? Also please indicate the specific error message and which plugins throw the error.

 
in my experience,
UAD errors pop up

when I drag copy plug-in(non-UAD) into another track which is loaded UAD.
when I drag copy UAD plug-in into another track which is loaded non-UAD plug-in.
when do nothing (during mixing, rest few minute. many plug-ins loaded)

Pop up messages which I experienced.
UAD sample rate error
UAD disabled error (communication non response)
I do work one mixing project after install new update.
After I found this issue, I turned off plug-in load balancing.
There is no issue but cpu performance is very unbalanced haha.
I turned Plug-in Balancing function on now for testing, Error message pop up again in few sec.
 
ScreenShot
 
 

Keith Albright [Cakewalk]

Brian Walton
For the full screen mode, I think we need an updated option for win 10 users that run extended desktop mode and place the multi dock on the 2nd monitor. The track view extends to both monitors and the multi dock sits on top of it on the second monitor. This means scrolling of the trackview goes underneath the multi dock. It also means scrolling up and down of the 1st monitor view is handled at the far right of the 2nd monitor.

This is poor design for those that use extended displays and place the multidock on the second monitor. I think a second full screen option is needed to accommodate this very common setup.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding how you are configuring the windows.  Please clarify.
To what display mode are you referring to?  Do you mean this setting or something else?
 

 
For me, I can drag the multidock to the 2nd monitor and click full screen on the main SONAR UI with the result that it fills the 1st monitor but leaves the multidock as is.
 

My monitors aren't the same resolution so that's why the first one looks letterboxed by comparison.
Thanks.

Yes, my settings are exactly the same in the windows configuration (though my monitors are exactly the same resolution - make and model).  
 
On my Win10 64 bit computer the track view and browser extend all the way across both monitors the second I hit Full Screen, even though I have the Track view docked on the first monitor and the Multi-doc on the 2nd monitor.  The Multidock then sits over the Track view in the 2nd monitor.  The horizontal scroll is then hidden on the 2nd monitor (but required to keep scrolling), and it places the vertical scroll to the far right of the 2nd monitor.   
 
It works as yours does on my Win7 computer (that I don't really use).  
 
When I'm back at my Home Studio computer, I could send a screen shoot if that is helpful.  

Keith Albright [Cakewalk]

Brian Walton

Keith Albright [Cakewalk]

Brian Walton
For the full screen mode, I think we need an updated option for win 10 users that run extended desktop mode and place the multi dock on the 2nd monitor. The track view extends to both monitors and the multi dock sits on top of it on the second monitor. This means scrolling of the trackview goes underneath the multi dock. It also means scrolling up and down of the 1st monitor view is handled at the far right of the 2nd monitor.

This is poor design for those that use extended displays and place the multidock on the second monitor. I think a second full screen option is needed to accommodate this very common setup.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding how you are configuring the windows.  Please clarify.
To what display mode are you referring to?  Do you mean this setting or something else?
 

 
For me, I can drag the multidock to the 2nd monitor and click full screen on the main SONAR UI with the result that it fills the 1st monitor but leaves the multidock as is.
 

My monitors aren't the same resolution so that's why the first one looks letterboxed by comparison.
Thanks.

Yes, my settings are exactly the same in the windows configuration (though my monitors are exactly the same resolution - make and model).  
 
On my Win10 64 bit computer the track view and browser extend all the way across both monitors the second I hit Full Screen, even though I have the Track view docked on the first monitor and the Multi-doc on the 2nd monitor.  The Multidock then sits over the Track view in the 2nd monitor.  The horizontal scroll is then hidden on the 2nd monitor (but required to keep scrolling), and it places the vertical scroll to the far right of the 2nd monitor.   
 
It works as yours does on my Win7 computer (that I don't really use).  
 
When I'm back at my Home Studio computer, I could send a screen shoot if that is helpful.  

Ok, thanks for clarifying.  The thing to note is the position of the main app window before you click full screen.
Presently if any pixel extends into the other display, then clicking full screen will fill both displays.  If however, the track view is only contained on one monitor it will fill one monitor. 
 
I set my display resolutions to match and now I can get it to fill one or both depending on whether or not the track view (really the main frame) is extending into the other display before clicking the full screen button.
 
Keith

I just tried it again today and the issue seems to be gone.  
 
Here is a picture of what it WAS doing.  I tried to make sure it was "snapped" to the main screen dozens of times yesterday, perhaps it was just a temporary glitch.  
 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9LFoWIHk0ZZSm1acWxndmhjQlE/view?usp=sharing
 
 

Well at least I wasn't hallucinating about the melodyne announcement: http://www.cakewalk.com/Support/Knowledge-Base/2016000048/SONAR-2016-09-Update-Fixes-and-Enhancements#MelodyneEssential41
 

Keith Albright [Cakewalk]

Brian Walton
For the full screen mode, I think we need an updated option for win 10 users that run extended desktop mode and place the multi dock on the 2nd monitor. The track view extends to both monitors and the multi dock sits on top of it on the second monitor. This means scrolling of the trackview goes underneath the multi dock. It also means scrolling up and down of the 1st monitor view is handled at the far right of the 2nd monitor.

This is poor design for those that use extended displays and place the multidock on the second monitor. I think a second full screen option is needed to accommodate this very common setup.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding how you are configuring the windows.  Please clarify.
To what display mode are you referring to?  Do you mean this setting or something else?
 

 
For me, I can drag the multidock to the 2nd monitor and click full screen on the main SONAR UI with the result that it fills the 1st monitor but leaves the multidock as is.
 

My monitors aren't the same resolution so that's why the first one looks letterboxed by comparison.
Thanks.

 
Is there anyway to have two control bars (one for each display?)

pekbro

Anderton

pekbro
Thanks for limiting the cpu load balancing (and ultimately cpu efficiency)
to the platinum version. This update completely eliminates any reason
to use a lesser version.
 
I've been looking for a reason to cancel my subscription
and now I have it. 

 
Load balancing was a complex, innovative, and difficult procedure to implement and is available in no other DAW. Your logic strikes me as similar to "A Lexus costs more, and has more features, than a Toyota. Therefore I'm not going to buy a Toyota, because I'm entitled to a Lexus for the same price as a Toyota."
 
Seriously, the world of Digital Audio Workstations has somehow managed to survive for over a quarter-century without load balancing. I suspect those hardy souls who use non-Cakewalk software, or lesser versions than Platinum, will somehow still be able to make music.

You're right, I wouldn't have a problem with it, if performance had stayed the same for the lesser versions
and you just added it for the premium. Unfortunately this is hardly the case. Building it in, then disabling
it cannot be the best solution available to you.
 
btw: the platinum version simply offers no value for me as I own full versions of
pretty much everything you have in there (3rd party wise) also arguably better and more
costly products. Sorry, the cool fly-out analyzer and theme authoring just doesn't cut it for me.
 
*edited for rudeness, I am not here to fight. Just express my displeasure
  with the decision of a company that I've done business with for years.
  For someone like me, the upgrade is just asking too much. Make a true
  professional version with no 3rd party content and equal proprietary
  technology, even bump up the price appropriately and I will buy it without
  hesitation. As it stands, this decision is simply a very poor and insulting one IMO.
  What makes you think professionals don't need cpu performance? I find it laughable...
  Additionally, let me tell you, the number of professionals who need you to decide what virtual
  instruments or effects they should be paying for is precisely 0...
 
 
 
 
 
-Cheers

You, my friend, are a rarity. Lifetime updates to Platinum is what a true "professional" should be using.
 
Regards,
Dan

pekbro
Sorry, the cool fly-out analyzer and theme authoring just doesn't cut it for me.
What makes you think professionals don't need cpu performance? I find it laughable...

Perspective is a funny thing. From my point of vIew, in mentioning the ProChannel flyout and cpu load balancing you have pointed out two very good reasons that as a professional absolutely the right choice is to buy into Platinum, irrespective of whether you use additional third party content or not. Add drum replacer, vocalsync, the extra prochannel modules and lifetime updates the mix and I can't see how you could not perceive it as value for money.  
 
To each their own I guess. Best of luck in your search.

So anyone that buys Platinum today automatically gets lifetime updates? That would be a game changer.

...which probably accounts for so many new users.

Craig and Noel,
 
Thank you, I appreciate your responses and your situation.
I'd like to say that as a company, cakewalk has exhibited a great
amount of forward thinking of late, that has breathed much needed
life into the Sonar franchise.
 
I hope this trend continues and allows you to see clear to the fact
that not everyone is going to be using Sonar in the same way and
that there are no universal requirements you're going to be able to meet
with an all encompassing package.
 
I personally never use Sonar from the standpoint of a musician. For me,
its a stalwart workhorse that is powerful and flexible enough to get
whatever job that I throw at it done with minimal fuss. At the same time,
its not the best solution for everything I do. Most of the benefits you've mentioned 
within the platinum version fall into that category for me as well. You might think
it odd, but even the life time free upgrades are not something I'm particularly
interested in. To me its only natural to maintain a yearly maintenance contract
or at a minimum paid upgrades.
 
This is something that I see as healthier for the vendor (and myself) in the long run.
To me its nothing more than a necessary business expense that I will write off
in the end.
 
I think the Ala'carte idea is a good and fair solution for everyone, and I truly
hope it comes to pass. Like it or not, there will always be those who are interested
solely in Sonar itself and the technology that you've developed for it. Personally,
I am happy to pay to support you for the privilege. Honestly, IMO you charge far
to little for the professional version. The surround feature itself is worth nearly
the full price of the top tier version. I would think that a version as I described
in my previous post should easily cost 3 - $400. Many of the tools I use, cost
far in excess of that, specifically due to this feature. The new load balancing
feature is equally valuable.
 
I will stay tuned, and perhaps I will be able to renew my subscription in 
the near future.
 
-All the best...
 
-Eric
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Anderton
Actually in some ways it seems that you're anticipating the future, what with the upcoming workspaces feature, and the lifetime updates model that will likely be more of an a la carte purchasing model if it follows the same path as Apple and Microsoft.

Ok thanks, that is encouraging... 
 
-Cheers