jimkleban
Max Output Level: -64 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1319
- Joined: 2008/11/09 09:42:45
- Status: offline
SONAR X series observation
Remember how a lot us old timer users complained about X1 being so different and a huge step backwards in the GUI from the previous interface SONAR 8 and earlier series of releases?
Now, I can't imagine NOT working in the X series... all these fancy new windows are now imbedded into my workflow and I, for one, would not want to go back to the old GUI metaphor.
Funny how these things work.
Jim
The Lamb Laid Down on MIDI www.lldom.com Studio Cat Custom i7 with Thunderbolt (wonderful system built and configured by our own Jim R) Apollo Duo (via TB) UAD Quad UAD Duo WIN 8.1 x64 with 32 GB Ram 4 SSD for programs and sample libraries Splat (latest version)
|
jb101
Max Output Level: -46 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2946
- Joined: 2011/12/04 05:26:10
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 07:41:49
(permalink)
I'm with you.
When I first opened X1 I felt lost, but thanks to Scott G's book, people on here and the Cake videos, I quickly picked it up.
I opened an old version of Sonar recently (Sonar 6, I think) on an old laptop, and was struck by how cluttered it was.
I could not imagine going back to pre X series now.
In fact, I recently opened up X1 & X2 to trouble shoot another forum member's issues, and was struck by how well the X series has evolved. Each version had a better, more streamlined workflow.
|
mmorgan
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
- Total Posts : 676
- Joined: 2013/02/19 23:39:05
- Location: Bellingham, WA
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 07:49:31
(permalink)
I much prefer the X series. Window management pre X series used drive me up the wall.
Regards,
Mike Win8(64), Sonar X3e(64) w/ RME Fireface UFX.
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 08:00:31
(permalink)
X all the way or X marks the spot or X is good for the soul.
I wasn't the only one that got the notion behind X1 when it was released but I do believe I was the most vocal supporter of it. When I read threads of this sort I feel that that support was worth it.
It bothers me that I may have lost some friends because of it. For those that have given it a fair chance, they are the winners.
|
Funkybot
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 796
- Joined: 2003/11/06 16:32:13
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 08:04:34
(permalink)
I like the X series GUI paradigm and the improved window management. It's the size of the GUI elements that bother me. I recently opened Sonar 8.5, and thought, "oh wow, yeah, everything's the right size." Then I opened up X3 and it's like someone changed the zoom settings on my display.
Examples: look at the console strips in 8.5. Pay attention to width and vertical use of space, how many could you fit on your monitor? No look at X3 and do the same. 8.5 wins big time in the "most efficient use of screen real estate" category. On the subject of the Console view, the console strips are so big that you can't use it when it's in the multidock because you're constantly scrolling. This makes the multidock useless for me. Similar complaints with areas of the GUI like the toolbar. 8.5 and prior had a thin customizable toolbar that I could make as thin or narrow as I want. I kept them thin, and had everything I needed in a single toolbar row. This devoted a lot of space to the Track and Console views where I spend most of my time. Now look at the X series toolbar. It's huge. It takes up a ton of space. Same for the track inspector, much smaller in 8.5, but still had everything I need. In X3, it's much wider, really digging into the track view.
These kind of things end up being workflow killers for me, since I'm constantly closing docks to try and increase my screen real estate. Meanwhile, if X3 had a 75% zoom option, I'd probably love it. I really think Cakewalk is on the right track, but they really need to shrink down the GUI elements, at least for the non-touch screen users. Take a look at how a DAW like Studio One makse much better use of screen real estate. Or how Reaper's dynamically resizable console view makes using it while docked an absolute joy.
So...it's a mixed bag for me. Good idea, now shrink everything so I can see more stuff.
Intel i7 4790k, ASUS Z97-A mobo, 16GB Kingston DDR3 RAM, Windows 10 x64, UAD2 Duo, RME Fireface 800, Sonar X1/X2 Producer
|
stevec
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 11546
- Joined: 2003/11/04 15:05:54
- Location: Parkesburg, PA
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 08:11:59
(permalink)
While I have no problem using the C and D shortcts to gain vertical space, as well as F11 to remove the top menu bar, I probably would make use of a 75% (or so) GUI scale in certain situations if it were available. It would be pretty cool if that were something that could be stored in a screen set. 
SteveC https://soundcloud.com/steve-cocchi http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=39163 SONAR Platinum x64, Intel Q9300 (2.5Ghz), Asus P5N-D, Win7 x64 SP1, 8GB RAM, 1TB internal + ESATA + USB Backup HDDs, ATI Radeon HD5450 1GB RAM + dual ViewSonic VA2431wm Monitors; Focusrite 18i6 (ASIO); Komplete 9, Melodyne Studio 4, Ozone 7 Advanced, Rapture Pro, GPO5, Valhalla Plate, MJUC comp, MDynamic EQ, lots of other freebie VST plugins, synths and Kontakt libraries
|
FCCfirstclass
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 969
- Joined: 2003/11/15 15:02:42
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 08:22:23
(permalink)
Win 10 Pro x64, 32Gb DDR3 ram, Sonar Platinum, Cubase 9.5, Mackie MCU Pro, Cakewalk VS 100, Roland Octa-Capture, A 800 Pro, Carver M-1.5t amp & C4000 pre amp, various mics, drums and brass instruments. And away we go!
|
icontakt
Max Output Level: -32.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4266
- Joined: 2012/03/04 08:18:02
- Location: Tokyo
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 08:24:02
(permalink)
While the X-series GUI looks the most beautiful and professional (to me) among all DAWs, narrower strips in the Console View and narrower modules in the Control Bar would be nice.
Tak T. Primary Laptop: Core i7-4710MQ CPU, 16GB RAM, 7200RPM HDD, Windows 7 Home Premium OS (Japanese) x64 SP1Secondary Laptop: Core2 Duo CPU, 8GB RAM, 7200RPM HDD, Windows 7 Professional OS (Japanese) x64 SP1Audio Interface: iD14 (ASIO)Keyboard Controller/MIDI Interface: A-800PRODAW: SONAR Platinum x64 (latest update installed)
|
Zo
Max Output Level: -25 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5036
- Joined: 2008/01/25 20:49:55
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 08:24:03
(permalink)
X pretty all the way here !! and X3 is just exellent feature wise ...
Still i think some has to be done to optimse display of infos (sends and FX for exemple , in the console view) and we loose here and there some usefull workflow habbit ...under than that X series are just exellent and a step up in all areas ;)
For sale (PM me) : transfert ilok includedEventide Ultrachannel make offersSoftube Summit EQIK Neve 1081 , Neve precision Comp/LimEastWest GoshtwriterSoundforge Pro 12
|
robert_e_bone
Moderator
- Total Posts : 8968
- Joined: 2007/12/26 22:09:28
- Location: Palatine, IL
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 08:30:33
(permalink)
8.5.3 was tremendously powerful, IF you learned the key bindings and such. This drove many folks to tearing their hair out when the X series completely rewrote the UI.
The Cakewalk decision to rewrite the UI was, in part, driven to make the UI easier for a larger segment of folks to get things done, and as lots of folks have pointed out, once you get used to the X series UI, there are a lot of nice things there. It is also true that for some tasks, the 8.5.3 UI was more efficient, but again this is for those who mastered the shortcuts.
I believe X3 is a great success thus far partly because of that decision to completely rework the UI when X1 came out - X3 is like the grown-up version of what X1 started.
I am really getting lots of things done these days, and it is thus far being quite the pleasant experience along the way.
Bob Bone
Wisdom is a giant accumulation of "DOH!" Sonar: Platinum (x64), X3 (x64) Audio Interfaces: AudioBox 1818VSL, Steinberg UR-22 Computers: 1) i7-2600 k, 32 GB RAM, Windows 8.1 Pro x64 & 2) AMD A-10 7850 32 GB RAM Windows 10 Pro x64 Soft Synths: NI Komplete 8 Ultimate, Arturia V Collection, many others MIDI Controllers: M-Audio Axiom Pro 61, Keystation 88es Settings: 24-Bit, Sample Rate 48k, ASIO Buffer Size 128, Total Round Trip Latency 9.7 ms
|
lawp
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1154
- Joined: 2012/06/28 13:27:41
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 08:47:10
(permalink)
the new gui is because of touch
|
paulo
Max Output Level: -13 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6218
- Joined: 2007/01/30 05:06:57
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 08:50:45
(permalink)
Funkybot
I like the X series GUI paradigm and the improved window management. It's the size of the GUI elements that bother me. I recently opened Sonar 8.5, and thought, "oh wow, yeah, everything's the right size." Then I opened up X3 and it's like someone changed the zoom settings on my display.
Examples: look at the console strips in 8.5. Pay attention to width and vertical use of space, how many could you fit on your monitor? No look at X3 and do the same. 8.5 wins big time in the "most efficient use of screen real estate" category. On the subject of the Console view, the console strips are so big that you can't use it when it's in the multidock because you're constantly scrolling. This makes the multidock useless for me. Similar complaints with areas of the GUI like the toolbar. 8.5 and prior had a thin customizable toolbar that I could make as thin or narrow as I want. I kept them thin, and had everything I needed in a single toolbar row. This devoted a lot of space to the Track and Console views where I spend most of my time. Now look at the X series toolbar. It's huge. It takes up a ton of space. Same for the track inspector, much smaller in 8.5, but still had everything I need. In X3, it's much wider, really digging into the track view.
These kind of things end up being workflow killers for me, since I'm constantly closing docks to try and increase my screen real estate. Meanwhile, if X3 had a 75% zoom option, I'd probably love it. I really think Cakewalk is on the right track, but they really need to shrink down the GUI elements, at least for the non-touch screen users. Take a look at how a DAW like Studio One makse much better use of screen real estate. Or how Reaper's dynamically resizable console view makes using it while docked an absolute joy.
So...it's a mixed bag for me. Good idea, now shrink everything so I can see more stuff.
All of this. I don't mind the track view so much, I like the browser and such, don't care at all for the multidock, but that's ok because I don't have to use it. Now that colours are back to some extent X3 console view isn't as painful to look at, but still needs work. I guess everything being bigger than necessary is to do with the move towards touchscreen capabilities, but for me it seems that the whole thing has just been screwed up for the sake of accomodating the latest gimmick. For those who don't want to buy new screens and be forever cleaning fingermarks off them, not to mention the arm ache (ie most people) it would be nice to have it re-sizeable so that it is possible to actually read the names in narrow strip mode. Please, please CW sort this out, its the biggest single fault with X series and I can't believe that any single user prefers to not be able to read the track names /fx bin. I find it hard to believe that even the people who designed it really think it is better.
|
Dave Modisette
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 11050
- Joined: 2003/11/13 22:12:55
- Location: Brandon, Florida
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 09:16:46
(permalink)
I still prefer the Screen Layout paradigm (pre X series) over the Skylight Screenset. I like having my GUI layouts set up globally so that if I get a bundle from a client, my layouts are the same as my normal workflow. I already know the work around but I simply prefer the old way of doing things.
Having to scroll sends to see them in in the console is another disappointment that I have mentioned over and over again and one that I will likely keep grousing about ad infinitum.
|
Grem
Max Output Level: -19.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5562
- Joined: 2005/06/28 09:26:32
- Location: Baton Rouge Area
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 09:20:22
(permalink)
When X1 came out, I made a a decision to abandon all my old work flow and start over.
At first I found myself resizing everything all the time. But once I got use to the key binding's for the Inspector, Browser, Control Bar, Multidock, my need for a second monitor became less and less. I now have X1 stretched across both screens (which is real nice) and just use the hot keys to navigate around.
Once I became familiar with the above, that's when I really started to make use of the smart tool.
And then it all made sense to me. And I am glad I decided, in the very beginning, to give this new UI an honest try.
Grem
Michael Music PC i7 2600K; 64gb Ram; 3 256gb SSD, System, Samples, Audio; 1TB & 2TB Project Storage; 2TB system BkUp; RME FireFace 400; Win 10 Pro 64; CWbBL 64, Home PCAMD FX 6300; 8gb Ram; 256 SSD sys; 2TB audio/samples; Realtek WASAPI; Win 10 Home 64; CWbBL 64 Surface Pro 3Win 10 i7 8gb RAM; CWbBL 64
|
Paul P
Max Output Level: -48.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2685
- Joined: 2012/12/08 17:15:47
- Location: Montreal
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 09:20:49
(permalink)
Sonar really wants a large screen. On my laptop everything is too crowded and needs much scrolling. On the 30" monitor of my desktop everything is just right (and I think it looks fantastic).
Sonar Platinum [2017.10], Win7U x64 sp1, Xeon E5-1620 3.6 GHz, Asus P9X79WS, 16 GB ECC, 128gb SSD, HD7950, Mackie Blackjack
|
icontakt
Max Output Level: -32.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4266
- Joined: 2012/03/04 08:18:02
- Location: Tokyo
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 09:21:16
(permalink)
lawp
the new gui is because of touch
People should lose weight and have slim fingers. 
Tak T. Primary Laptop: Core i7-4710MQ CPU, 16GB RAM, 7200RPM HDD, Windows 7 Home Premium OS (Japanese) x64 SP1Secondary Laptop: Core2 Duo CPU, 8GB RAM, 7200RPM HDD, Windows 7 Professional OS (Japanese) x64 SP1Audio Interface: iD14 (ASIO)Keyboard Controller/MIDI Interface: A-800PRODAW: SONAR Platinum x64 (latest update installed)
|
Grem
Max Output Level: -19.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5562
- Joined: 2005/06/28 09:26:32
- Location: Baton Rouge Area
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 09:31:16
(permalink)
At first I would have bet that the new GUI was for touch.
After learning the new UI, I'm not sure about that anymore.
Grem
Michael Music PC i7 2600K; 64gb Ram; 3 256gb SSD, System, Samples, Audio; 1TB & 2TB Project Storage; 2TB system BkUp; RME FireFace 400; Win 10 Pro 64; CWbBL 64, Home PCAMD FX 6300; 8gb Ram; 256 SSD sys; 2TB audio/samples; Realtek WASAPI; Win 10 Home 64; CWbBL 64 Surface Pro 3Win 10 i7 8gb RAM; CWbBL 64
|
lawp
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1154
- Joined: 2012/06/28 13:27:41
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 09:37:00
(permalink)
Jlien X
lawp
the new gui is because of touch
People should lose weight and have slim fingers.
I have a team of children
|
icontakt
Max Output Level: -32.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4266
- Joined: 2012/03/04 08:18:02
- Location: Tokyo
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 09:41:47
(permalink)
lawp
Jlien X
lawp
the new gui is because of touch
People should lose weight and have slim fingers.
I have a team of children
I hope they aren't obese like those in some developed countries... 
Tak T. Primary Laptop: Core i7-4710MQ CPU, 16GB RAM, 7200RPM HDD, Windows 7 Home Premium OS (Japanese) x64 SP1Secondary Laptop: Core2 Duo CPU, 8GB RAM, 7200RPM HDD, Windows 7 Professional OS (Japanese) x64 SP1Audio Interface: iD14 (ASIO)Keyboard Controller/MIDI Interface: A-800PRODAW: SONAR Platinum x64 (latest update installed)
|
stevec
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 11546
- Joined: 2003/11/04 15:05:54
- Location: Parkesburg, PA
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 13:36:56
(permalink)
Grem
At first I would have bet that the new GUI was for touch.
After learning the new UI, I'm not sure about that anymore.
+1 I really don't think everything about the Skylight interface is all about touch. For me, it's just a logical layout without ever having used a touch screen. In fact, it's been mentioned a few times that certain aspects of the UI could actually benefit from being bigger to better accommodate a touch screen. I hope to find out whether that's true some day, when I have a nice 27" (or larger) touch screen positioned at a 30 degree angle right in front of me. 
SteveC https://soundcloud.com/steve-cocchi http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=39163 SONAR Platinum x64, Intel Q9300 (2.5Ghz), Asus P5N-D, Win7 x64 SP1, 8GB RAM, 1TB internal + ESATA + USB Backup HDDs, ATI Radeon HD5450 1GB RAM + dual ViewSonic VA2431wm Monitors; Focusrite 18i6 (ASIO); Komplete 9, Melodyne Studio 4, Ozone 7 Advanced, Rapture Pro, GPO5, Valhalla Plate, MJUC comp, MDynamic EQ, lots of other freebie VST plugins, synths and Kontakt libraries
|
Grem
Max Output Level: -19.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5562
- Joined: 2005/06/28 09:26:32
- Location: Baton Rouge Area
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 13:41:56
(permalink)
I was thinking of a bigger screen for sure. But not touch. Not yet anyway:)
Grem
Michael Music PC i7 2600K; 64gb Ram; 3 256gb SSD, System, Samples, Audio; 1TB & 2TB Project Storage; 2TB system BkUp; RME FireFace 400; Win 10 Pro 64; CWbBL 64, Home PCAMD FX 6300; 8gb Ram; 256 SSD sys; 2TB audio/samples; Realtek WASAPI; Win 10 Home 64; CWbBL 64 Surface Pro 3Win 10 i7 8gb RAM; CWbBL 64
|
stevec
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 11546
- Joined: 2003/11/04 15:05:54
- Location: Parkesburg, PA
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 13:44:45
(permalink)
I'm currently running dual 24" and that's worked out well. But I could imagine something like dual 40" monitors with a third 40" touch screen. All I'd need is a slightly bigger space and a few $$. 
SteveC https://soundcloud.com/steve-cocchi http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=39163 SONAR Platinum x64, Intel Q9300 (2.5Ghz), Asus P5N-D, Win7 x64 SP1, 8GB RAM, 1TB internal + ESATA + USB Backup HDDs, ATI Radeon HD5450 1GB RAM + dual ViewSonic VA2431wm Monitors; Focusrite 18i6 (ASIO); Komplete 9, Melodyne Studio 4, Ozone 7 Advanced, Rapture Pro, GPO5, Valhalla Plate, MJUC comp, MDynamic EQ, lots of other freebie VST plugins, synths and Kontakt libraries
|
jimkleban
Max Output Level: -64 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1319
- Joined: 2008/11/09 09:42:45
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 19:01:48
(permalink)
The Lamb Laid Down on MIDI www.lldom.com Studio Cat Custom i7 with Thunderbolt (wonderful system built and configured by our own Jim R) Apollo Duo (via TB) UAD Quad UAD Duo WIN 8.1 x64 with 32 GB Ram 4 SSD for programs and sample libraries Splat (latest version)
|
Funkybot
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 796
- Joined: 2003/11/06 16:32:13
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 19:17:49
(permalink)
My gut reaction to some of the replies in this thread are are:
1. The X series GUI predates touch (if I'm not mistaken), but I too suspect they were thinking about making things bigger and wider for touch screens. I'm sure that factored into making things large, but I don't think this was balanced properly against the need of desktop and laptop users (of which there are much more).
2. If you're going to make a GUI for touch, you better make an option that works just as well for non-touch screens (see complaints over Windows 8).
3. If my DAW wants me to buy a 30+" monitor to work well with it: my DAW has a problem, not me.
4. The big concern for me is that wide console strips, long console strips, non-resizable console strips for the multi-dock, only a few effects visible at a time, hard to read effect names (at least we can setup friendly names), only having 1 visible send at a time are all of HUGE importance to me. It can take several hours to polish off a mix, where I'm in the console view the whole time, and I don't want to be scrolling and clicking to see what's important to me and get my mix done. My projects can have a lot of tracks (horizontal width), I might want to have my console docked in the Track view while mixing (vertical height) in case I need to do some light editing, I generally use a lot of effects (larger effects bin), and having 2 or more sends on a track (which should all be visible) isn't at all uncommon. IMO, redesigning the console view to address these points is the single biggest "bang for your buck" new feature Cakewalk could add to Sonar. If they're in there anyway, give me separate pans for stereo tracks while you're at it! I use Channel Tools when I want to narrow or invert a stereo track, but really, the channel strip's pan knobs should do this (see Pro Tools, Cubase, etc.).
Intel i7 4790k, ASUS Z97-A mobo, 16GB Kingston DDR3 RAM, Windows 10 x64, UAD2 Duo, RME Fireface 800, Sonar X1/X2 Producer
|
mettelus
Max Output Level: -22 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5321
- Joined: 2005/08/05 03:19:25
- Location: Maryland, USA
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/05 21:20:56
(permalink)
Ack, touch screening is MS trying to get one OS to drive everything. Applying this to a desktop goes against ergonomics (e.g., making someone hold their arms horizontal for long periods was used as effective torture in the past) and the precision of touch in significantly less. My monitors are not even within reach!
But back on topic... I agree that the X series has done a lot for the GUI, but it definitely more conducive to having multiple monitors. Even then, the X-ray feature was definitely a nice addition to have.
ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), i7-8700k, 16GB RAM, GTX-1070Ti, Win 10 Pro, Saffire PRO 24 DSP, A-300 PRO, plus numerous gadgets and gizmos that make or manipulate sound in some way.
|
blacksheep
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 28
- Joined: 2012/09/25 07:59:46
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/06 05:08:28
(permalink)
Funkybot
I like the X series GUI paradigm and the improved window management. It's the size of the GUI elements that bother me. I recently opened Sonar 8.5, and thought, "oh wow, yeah, everything's the right size." Then I opened up X3 and it's like someone changed the zoom settings on my display.
Examples: look at the console strips in 8.5. Pay attention to width and vertical use of space, how many could you fit on your monitor? No look at X3 and do the same. 8.5 wins big time in the "most efficient use of screen real estate" category. On the subject of the Console view, the console strips are so big that you can't use it when it's in the multidock because you're constantly scrolling. This makes the multidock useless for me. Similar complaints with areas of the GUI like the toolbar. 8.5 and prior had a thin customizable toolbar that I could make as thin or narrow as I want. I kept them thin, and had everything I needed in a single toolbar row. This devoted a lot of space to the Track and Console views where I spend most of my time. Now look at the X series toolbar. It's huge. It takes up a ton of space. Same for the track inspector, much smaller in 8.5, but still had everything I need. In X3, it's much wider, really digging into the track view.
These kind of things end up being workflow killers for me, since I'm constantly closing docks to try and increase my screen real estate. Meanwhile, if X3 had a 75% zoom option, I'd probably love it. I really think Cakewalk is on the right track, but they really need to shrink down the GUI elements, at least for the non-touch screen users. Take a look at how a DAW like Studio One makse much better use of screen real estate. Or how Reaper's dynamically resizable console view makes using it while docked an absolute joy.
So...it's a mixed bag for me. Good idea, now shrink everything so I can see more stuff.
I have 3 monitors and the QU makes it nice. I work in the middle and just move things aside when im done, and ya know I still run out of room and could never see using 1 monitor again.i would love the zoom idea since im sitting 2 in from the screen anyway picking apart trans and at some point want to see the intire project,but its not a big deal since 90% of my sonar brothers use 1 monitor fine and wouldn't know what to do with all the space of 3 24 in monitors. is a lot or open space,but like a hard drive you never have to much space. +1 on zoom idea for the intire x3
sabertooth 990fx 16 gigs of ram win 7 64 delta 1010
|
icontakt
Max Output Level: -32.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4266
- Joined: 2012/03/04 08:18:02
- Location: Tokyo
- Status: offline
Re: SONAR X series observation
2013/11/06 07:17:02
(permalink)
Funkybot
My gut reaction to some of the replies in this thread are are:
1. The X series GUI predates touch (if I'm not mistaken), but I too suspect they were thinking about making things bigger and wider for touch screens. I'm sure that factored into making things large, but I don't think this was balanced properly against the need of desktop and laptop users (of which there are much more).
2. If you're going to make a GUI for touch, you better make an option that works just as well for non-touch screens (see complaints over Windows 8).
3. If my DAW wants me to buy a 30+" monitor to work well with it: my DAW has a problem, not me.
4. The big concern for me is that wide console strips, long console strips, non-resizable console strips for the multi-dock, only a few effects visible at a time, hard to read effect names (at least we can setup friendly names), only having 1 visible send at a time are all of HUGE importance to me. It can take several hours to polish off a mix, where I'm in the console view the whole time, and I don't want to be scrolling and clicking to see what's important to me and get my mix done. My projects can have a lot of tracks (horizontal width), I might want to have my console docked in the Track view while mixing (vertical height) in case I need to do some light editing, I generally use a lot of effects (larger effects bin), and having 2 or more sends on a track (which should all be visible) isn't at all uncommon. IMO, redesigning the console view to address these points is the single biggest "bang for your buck" new feature Cakewalk could add to Sonar. If they're in there anyway, give me separate pans for stereo tracks while you're at it! I use Channel Tools when I want to narrow or invert a stereo track, but really, the channel strip's pan knobs should do this (see Pro Tools, Cubase, etc.).
Strongly agree. Especially #3.
Tak T. Primary Laptop: Core i7-4710MQ CPU, 16GB RAM, 7200RPM HDD, Windows 7 Home Premium OS (Japanese) x64 SP1Secondary Laptop: Core2 Duo CPU, 8GB RAM, 7200RPM HDD, Windows 7 Professional OS (Japanese) x64 SP1Audio Interface: iD14 (ASIO)Keyboard Controller/MIDI Interface: A-800PRODAW: SONAR Platinum x64 (latest update installed)
|