Softube Console 1 Integration - I might jump ship...

I've been a cakewalk user for nearly 20 years (oh dear god I suddenly feel very, very old) - and I have updated with each new release, haven't missed one in all that time, and I have never felt a need to switch out or even look at another DAW.  But...
 
I have also recently incorporated the excellent Console 1 into me workflow, but I would love to see it work even more seamlessly with Sonar.  This week Softube announced, not just a Neve emulation for the Console 1, but also demonstrated a more integrated union between it and Presonus' Studio One.
 
https://youtu.be/5UKkOPKgkLE
 
I am literally now in the process of shopping around for a good deal on Studio One, and when I find one I will drop my Sonar subscription and that will be it.  I feel a little sad about it actually.
 
What I would like to know is this...do Cakewalk have any plans to work with the Softube guys the way Personus already have?  I'm prepared to stick around if so, but I can't look past what is currently offered by Presonus - this seamless mixing set-up between the hardware and DAW is something I've wanted for a long time.  It's a no-brainer for me.  I really want/need this to happen with Sonar.
 
Is this on the horizon?

Clearly you did not watch the video.

Dreamstation
I've been a cakewalk user for nearly 20 years (oh dear god I suddenly feel very, very old) - and I have updated with each new release, haven't missed one in all that time, and I have never felt a need to switch out or even look at another DAW.  But...
 
 
I am literally now in the process of shopping around for a good deal on Studio One, and when I find one I will drop my Sonar subscription and that will be it.  I feel a little sad about it actually.
 

 
I can sell you my copy of Studio One 2.6.5 Professional for $149 if you want it. Then the upgrade price after that to Studio One 3.2 Professional will cost you another $149.
 
 
Cakewalk needs to update Sonar to included a brand-new rompler with 24bit uncompressed sounds, and replace all their current included softsynths with some decent ones. The Tasman AAS synth is a terrible low-quality softsynth, and the rest of the archaic sounds in Sonar are terrible too.

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
I did watch it. Besides the presenter mentioning tight integration several times it wasn't clear what was meant by that. Solo mute etc do work in SONAR via Console 1. Can you describe what seamless integration means in this context? 
 
Softube makes great stuff. If there is something more to be done to integrate better than we do today we can certainly work with them and improve on the interop. 

Thank you for your response Noel.  I'm a little surprised you can't see what I'm talking about.  Noel, you're the CTO, is that right?  I'd expect you would know Sonar backwards.  Are you saying that you can't recognize some of the differences shown and talked about in the linked video?  Seriously?

Solo, mute, fader changes, panning - when applied from the Console 1 hardware now directly effect those parameters in the actual DAW track, not merely within the plugin instance.  That appears to be the most obvious difference...  and yeah, I'd call that "tight integration" - and that does not currently exist between Sonar and Console 1.
 
Also, it is mentioned that track sends can be applied with the Console 1 hardware.  Also, not something you can do currently with Sonar and Console 1.  So this "tight integration" you're talking about essentially looks like it allows the hardware to directly effect track properties in Studio One.  Now, you do know that this isn't possible at the moment with Console 1 in Sonar, right?  You're the CTO.  Now that I've explained it, can you see it?
 
The fact that Softube themselves thought that this was different enough, compared to the way in which the integration has been implemented with other DAWs, including Sonar, also suggested that it might be new, different and "tighter".  I'm not sure why you'd be so quick to blow it off without first trying to appreciate and understand it... seems a little naive. They made an announcement at Musikmesse.  They have publicly announced and highlighted how this works with Studio One, and not with other DAWs - and you assume it is the same as with Sonar?  Huh?  Did you assume they meant all DAWs when they were talking about Studio One?  Again, Noel, they have gone to the trouble of highlighting a difference, that you have failed to recognize does not apply to Sonar.
 
So you've asked that if there is "something more that can be done to integrate better than we do today we can certainly work with them and improve on the interop".  Well, I guess it would be that then.  So... if you're saying you will now work with Softube to implement this direct track control the way they have with Presonus then PLEASE... bring it on... I'd love for that to happen.
 
 
 
And "Anderton" - not sure why you felt the need to chime in.  Obviously you think I'm some regular pest under a different username... well, I'm not.  Just a very rare contributor who wanted a question answered.  I have been using Cakewalk since it's "Pro Audio" days and I used to be a contributor on an old Scott Garrigus forum, back in the day.  These days I don't have many questions to ask, so I keep quiet.
 
If your first reaction, to someone questioning anything, is this personal attack and the jumping to conclusions, calling someone a Troll, then you probably don't belong in this space.  Just not very constructive, big fella.  And to answer your question directly - yes, I suppose I did "describe what seamless integration means in this context" now didn't I?  In very specific terms.
 
edit: I see that "Anderton" is the Forum Host.  Astounding.

JUMP!JUMP!JUMP!JUMP!JUMP!P!JUMP!JUMP!JUMP!JUMP!JUMP!...
(as heard from the street below)

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]

Dreamstation
 
Thank you for your response Noel.  I'm a little surprised you can't see what I'm talking about.  Noel, you're the CTO, is that right?  I'd expect you would know Sonar backwards.  Are you saying that you can't recognize some of the differences shown and talked about in the linked video?  Seriously?

 
Why the aggressive stance and second guessing? I asked some pretty basic questions in response to your request for tighter integration. I don't see why you assumed it to be dismissive. I personally did the softube integration in SONAR directly worked with the developer there, so I know exactly the level of the public integration API that they exposed to us. Perhaps they did some custom stuff with Studio One. If so obviously we wouldn't know about it.
If there is something more that is available we'll have to talk to Softube about it. 

I'll be perfectly honest Noel... your forum admin was way out of line and contributes 100% to my aggressive attitude in this.  There is nothing in my initial post which is aggressive; I honestly just wanted to know if Cakewalk were looking to do something similar, because it was important to me.  I apologize  to you that your admin getting me offside has spilled-over to my reply to you.  My initial inquiry was genuine, and born out of my long-term commitment to Cakewalk and my more recent interest in the Console 1 integration.  The fact remains that something has been implemented with the Presonus guys and I would like to see the same achieved with Sonar.  You have addressed that, and I thank you.  Please do look into it  :-)


"Anderton" obviously thought I was someone else, a regular trouble maker (?), but I think he was too quick to jump to that false assumption, and I think you'll have to agree if you read his dismissive and pointedly rude post that he is himself acting outside this forum's code of conduct which dictates respect for fellow forum members.  I find that astonishing, given that he is the forum host.  Clearly he is jaded, perhaps from some recent bad forum conduct.  I don't visit here often, so I'm not "up" on what is happening in the forums.  Maybe he's just been doing this for too long.
 

So, going back to the OP, it seems there are three new functions here. There might be more, but that's all I can see in the video. And they are: direct control of the DAW pan pot, direct control of the DAW fader, and ability to insert a send.
 
Just my opinion, but that doesn't seem all that decisive to me. You can already control level and pan in Console One on any DAW it works with, albeit in a sort of jury-rigged way. But the practical difference when mixing is minimal-to-none.
 
Ability to insert a send is reasonably nice, I suppose, but I do wonder if it's a significant time-saver.
 
Not knocking it; good work to Softube for continuing to enhance Console One, and good work to Presonus for being quick off the mark supporting such features. But for me personally, I'm not going "holy smokes, it's a whole new era" at this.

Agreed...I wonder how many "my DAW doesn't work with Windows 10" comments in other forums relate to PACE issues and not the DAWs themselves?
 
[Oh, and Dreamstation - I realized that scook deleted the post to which I replied. If you didn't see that post, then I totally understand why you didn't know what I was referring to.]
 
 

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
There is a bug in PACE that causes an instant crash if the plugin is run in a host that reports that it is Windows 10 compatible. For this release we actually had to make a work around to change SONAR's manifest to NOT report Win 10 compat because of this very issue, otherwise all Softube plugins would crash unless run in compatibility mode. I reported this to Softube and they said its a known bug in PACE that they will be resolving soon.
 

Is this fun or what.