vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2446
- Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/04 15:52:40
(permalink)
djwayne
I think it should be optional. I rarely have any use for written music, heck I don't even have a printer connected to my computer. (Any printing I want done, i just e-mail it to myself then go to the library and use the printer there to do my printing jobs. This saves me a fortune on printers and ink !!) But it would be nice to see my music scored out occassionally.
If the need arises, I'll buy a copy of Finale.
As posted elsewhere probably hundreds of times that is not a solution. I have Sibelius and Notion and I still need usable notation inside a DAW. Do a search here on notation.
|
pbognar
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 720
- Joined: 2005/10/03 16:22:03
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/04 16:10:15
(permalink)
djwayne
I think it should be optional. I rarely have any use for written music, heck I don't even have a printer connected to my computer. (Any printing I want done, i just e-mail it to myself then go to the library and use the printer there to do my printing jobs. This saves me a fortune on printers and ink !!) But it would be nice to see my music scored out occassionally.
If the need arises, I'll buy a copy of Finale.
djwayne - see post #26. For Sonar, it is an accepted fact that for printing a score, exporting MIDI to a dedicated notation program is the best alternative. What we are trying to address are deficiencies in the staff view / editor WITHIN Sonar so that the staff view can be better used DURING the creation process, not necessarily at the END of the creation process. <sorry, don't mean to offend anyone with the bold, UPPER CASE and underscored text> When I needed to leave the Logic PC platform, and I was looking for a PC replacement, I would not have considered anything without an active MIDI notation editor. I started with Music Creator 3, then on to Sonar HS6XL, and finally Sonar Producer. The current staff view is inline with what I paid for MC3 and HS6XL, but not Producer. My hope was that the staff view would evolve to what was in Logic PC. I don't want to be a wet blanket. Sonar X1 looks like a big improvement from the UI and workflow front <"stealing with pride" from Logic / Studio One>. Clips were a great concept <"stealing with pride from Acid"> as well as the Matrix view. But, I'm not thrilled about having to potentially upgrade my computer to continue on the Sonar "Love Train", ESPECIALLY if there are no improvements to the staff view. I mean, this is Roland we are talking about now. You would think that they have deep enough pockets to just buy some notation technology and integrate it. The Matrix view was successfully integrated <"stealing with pride" from Ableton, but with a Cakewalk twist>. Why can't there be some "stealing with pride" to compete with Cubase, Pro Tools, and Logic on the notation front? Frankly, and I've said this before, considering the other things Sonar has to offer, I would be satisfied if the handful of limitations in the current staff view were resolved. But it is my understanding that the code behind the staff view can no longer be modified. <sorry it was not my intent to ramble on like that, I was originally going to post what vintagevibe posted above, but it I got carried away>
post edited by pbognar - 2010/11/04 16:16:52
|
Johannes H
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 333
- Joined: 2009/03/11 17:25:51
- Location: Norway
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/04 16:10:46
(permalink)
Sonar X1 looks great, but it`s disappointing that the staff view is much the same as it was. Let`s hope the bakers do something about that in the next version.
Best, JH
|
djwayne
Max Output Level: -55 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2021
- Joined: 2005/08/07 17:27:09
- Location: USA
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/04 16:15:33
(permalink)
Well I hope they do intergrate so existing notation program, that would be nice. But it's not necessary for my needs, and I don't want to be forced into having to pay an extra $200-300 just for notation capabilities.
It's not a deal maker or breaker for me.
|
pbognar
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 720
- Joined: 2005/10/03 16:22:03
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/04 16:19:46
(permalink)
djwayne
Well I hope they do intergrate so existing notation program, that would be nice. But it's not necessary for my needs, and I don't want to be forced into having to pay an extra $200-300 just for notation capabilities.
It's not a deal maker or breaker for me.
I doubt that you'd have to pay an extra $200-300. Just take a look at the score editor in Apple's Garage Band. Most look down on GB, but it's score editor blows away Sonar's.
|
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2446
- Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/04 20:05:24
(permalink)
Just take a look at the score editor in Apple's Garage Band. Most look down on GB, but it's score editor blows away Sonar's.
That makes me want to cry. 
|
daveny5
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 16934
- Joined: 2003/11/06 09:54:36
- Location: North Carolina
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/04 20:54:12
(permalink)
I wouldn't want to get rid of it because its handy for editing since I don't use the Piano Roll View at all. Just stop advertising it as notation. A little truth in advertising would lower expectations to the appropriate level.
Dave Computer: Intel i7, ASROCK H170M, 16GB/5TB+, Windows 10 Pro 64-bit, Sonar Platinum, TASCAM US-16x08, Cakewalk UM-3G MIDI I/F Instruments: SL-880 Keyboard controller, Korg 05R/W, Korg N1R, KORG Wavestation EX Axes: Fender Stratocaster, Line6 Variax 300, Ovation Acoustic, Takamine Nylon Acoustic, Behringer GX212 amp, Shure SM-58 mic, Rode NT1 condenser mic. Outboard: Mackie 1402-VLZ mixer, TC Helicon VoiceLive 2, Digitech Vocalist WS EX, PODXTLive, various stompboxes and stuff. Controllers: Korg nanoKONTROL, Wacom Bamboo Touchpad
|
pbognar
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 720
- Joined: 2005/10/03 16:22:03
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/04 23:05:59
(permalink)
daveny5
I wouldn't want to get rid of it because its handy for editing since I don't use the Piano Roll View at all. Just stop advertising it as notation. A little truth in advertising would lower expectations to the appropriate level.
We in Information Technology call it "Managing Expectations" 
|
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2446
- Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/04 23:28:54
(permalink)
Interesting timing: Protools 9 anounced ADC  96 tracks works on any hardware notation derived from Sibelius iLock 
|
cmusicmaker
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2328
- Joined: 2004/01/18 08:21:47
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 05:45:23
(permalink)
Hmmm the ProTools 9 announcement is interesting. Cakewalk really do not want to lose customers to AVID, at that price (for PT9) X1 is cheaper but...it's close enough to compete. Notation might get a much higher priority now in Sonar...lets see. I think X1 on paper is still better value IMO but no question about it PT9 is a much closer competitor with the necessity for their hardware removed. I think Cakewalk surely will spend more time on notation before the next version of Sonar. The DAW market place is getting increasingly competitive. AVID are probably the most difficult of all the competitors Cakewalk have now. No x64 support in PT9 by the looks of things yet. But that might not be enough of a problem for some as they will expect that to arrive soon enough. Interesting times. Very interesting. Notation in PT9 is not bad by the look of this video. Still X1 is better value though IMO.
post edited by cmusicmaker - 2010/11/05 05:48:50
|
Sepheritoh
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 585
- Joined: 2004/01/08 16:39:53
- Location: Under the big fat tree
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 06:10:32
(permalink)
I am very surprised and disillusioned with the general responses to this issue. It either comes down to "I don't need it therefore nobody should have it" or "If you want it go somewhere else". Cake's total lack of interest and response to this issue must be taken as endorsement of those views. There are view companies who will survive in any competitive environment when they keep telling their customers to use the the competition's products.
post edited by Sepheritoh - 2010/11/05 06:11:56
|
malcolmb
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 713
- Joined: 2008/06/11 14:43:05
- Location: Isle of Wight - England
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 06:43:00
(permalink)
Sepheritoh - I share your view. I write all my music by notation in Staff View. When I first started trying to write music about five years ago, I raised what I thought was a sensible question about Staff View with Cakewalk. The response was terse to the point of rudeness. "Sonar is a sequencer; if you want to write music, go elsewhere." So I bought Sibelius. Yet I still write all my music in Sonar and only use Sibelius when I need to produce a printed score by exporting a midi file to Sibelius. Why? Because Sonar is excellent. It enables an amateur like me to produce music rather than just dots on a page. So I put up with the shortcomings of Staff View. But that does not mean I have to like it! I firmly believe there is a real opportunity for Sonar to totally dominate the World-Wide music market IF they get Staff View sorted out. Everything else in Sonar is World-Class. So why spoil it with a third class Staff View?
(I must add that since my initial contact with Sonar, their technical support staff have been outstanding in handling my queries. Perhaps I just caught them on a bad day!).
Best Regards
Malcolm
|
Elffin
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1196
- Joined: 2007/02/11 16:49:19
- Location: Wales
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 07:23:11
(permalink)
Ignoring notation might be one of the biggest mistakes done..
If its not in the product development cycle - please put it in..
I am a self confessed Sonar fanboy and have been suggesting to other teachers in our county to try and use Sonar and other cakewalk products for years... but the answer is always the same from other staff.... "it doesn't do notation well".... and they are willing to pay the extra for Sibelius.
My thoughts are .... if the kids of today are using sibelius ... then it more than likely they will use pro tools as their main DAW.... People generally don't like to change...
The kids in schools and colleges are your 'new' customers and it doesn't matter how much of a discount you give to these instutions.. they need the software to do notation and audio these days.
By ignoring notation I fear that in the DAW race Sonar may be running with one 'trainer' missing..
Please don't think that this is as a rant ... I just want to see Sonar develop to its full potential and to succeed in becoming a major player in the DAW market
|
Mark Ellis
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3
- Joined: 2009/05/13 02:18:50
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 11:16:50
(permalink)
I've been a cakewalk user since DOS. It's amazing (and depressing) how I've learned to sight-read Sonar's crappy notation.
For those of us who want real notation, the real question should simply be: How do we get it? I have no doubt that pitching in our thoughts here on the forums does get some attention, but is there nothing else that can be done?
Also, is there no way a 3rd party app could be integrated into sonar well enough to not feel like a kludge? I like how PT uses Sibelius. Maybe we need to convince Cakewalk AND Sibelius to get together and make a $200 add on pack fr Sonar...
|
pbognar
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 720
- Joined: 2005/10/03 16:22:03
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 11:27:50
(permalink)
|
sergiobklyn
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 372
- Joined: 2003/11/06 09:43:40
- Location: Brooklyn, NY
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 11:34:47
(permalink)
|
pbognar
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 720
- Joined: 2005/10/03 16:22:03
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 12:41:25
(permalink)
sergiobklyn
vintagevibe
Interesting timing: Protools 9 anounced
ADC
96 tracks
works on any hardware
notation derived from Sibelius
iLock
I got very excited about it working on any audio hardware until I found out these requiremets:
Windows 7 (no XP) and only NVIDIA graphics cards are supported (http://avid.custkb.com/avid/app/selfservice/search.jsp?DocId=380551)
Sergio
I heard about W7, but I didn't know about the NVIDIA requirement. I suppose this has to be taken in context - Sonar X1 has increased the minimum CPU and memory requirements. If one plans to go to X1, and were to have to acquire a new computer to run it decently, one would buy a new computer with W7 on it with a multi-core CPU and additional memory anyway. The only additional step would be to select a computer with an NVIDIA graphics system. Aside from cost, this is similar to buying a newer MAC to run, let's say Logic. It would appear that the days of being able to run PC based DAW software on any variation of Windows, and hardware configuration are certainly drawing to a close. We all knew that having a PC optimized for serious music creation was a necessity anyway.
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 12:53:37
(permalink)
That NVIDIA requirement is simply bizarre.
|
noldar12
Max Output Level: -69 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1075
- Joined: 2006/07/07 20:30:16
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 22:21:55
(permalink)
Since Avid owns both PT and Sibelius, Sonar would likely need to look in the direction of Finale.
|
InstrEd
Max Output Level: -65 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1276
- Joined: 2004/10/13 20:55:03
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 23:26:40
(permalink)
noldar12
Since Avid owns both PT and Sibelius, Sonar would likely need to look in the direction of Finale.
The problem I see with Finale is that it is a public traded company and Roland / Cakewalk seem to of stayed with all private firms as long as I can remember.
|
noldar12
Max Output Level: -69 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1075
- Joined: 2006/07/07 20:30:16
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/05 23:59:15
(permalink)
InstrEd, you are likely correct, I was simply wanting to point out that partnering with Sibelius was not an option.
From your comments, partnering with Finale would not be an option either.
Looks like we will continue to have to wait, and wait, and wait, and wait, and wait...
|
Rbh
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2349
- Joined: 2007/09/05 22:33:44
- Location: Indiana
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/06 00:15:43
(permalink)
I think cake should outsource a whole separate Pro level notation package and price as an add -on. Go Pro partner on it, get your present customers satisfied..make a small profit on a per package basis and expand your customer base. But, make sure it has a solid intuitive smooth interface with X1.
|
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2446
- Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/06 09:19:36
(permalink)
Rbh
I think cake should outsource a whole separate Pro level notation package and price as an add -on. Go Pro partner on it, get your present customers satisfied..make a small profit on a per package basis and expand your customer base. But, make sure it has a solid intuitive smooth interface with X1.
You miss the point. As has been said many many times we need notation INSIDE of Sonar. I and many others already have external notation programs. Why is this so hard to understand?
|
noldar12
Max Output Level: -69 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1075
- Joined: 2006/07/07 20:30:16
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/06 12:16:34
(permalink)
vintagevibe, to take a stab at your question...
It seems that for those who live strictly by improvising (not a bad thing - it is a very valid approach), there is sometimes a bias against those who use and need notation, a sense that anyone who needs notation is somehow inferior. Sort of a "why would anyone need or want that?"
It rears its head in virtually every thread over the years requesting improvements to notation within Sonar. IMO, it is ok for those who never use notation and don't need it to not grasp the reasons some may want it within a DAW. The troublesome issue is "I don't need it, why should anyone else need it?"
Personally, I have no use whatever for loops, but that doesn't mean I think those tools should be excluded for those who do need them.
|
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2446
- Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/06 13:54:44
(permalink)
noldar12
vintagevibe, to take a stab at your question...
It seems that for those who live strictly by improvising (not a bad thing - it is a very valid approach), there is sometimes a bias against those who use and need notation, a sense that anyone who needs notation is somehow inferior. Sort of a "why would anyone need or want that?"
It rears its head in virtually every thread over the years requesting improvements to notation within Sonar. IMO, it is ok for those who never use notation and don't need it to not grasp the reasons some may want it within a DAW. The troublesome issue is "I don't need it, why should anyone else need it?"
Personally, I have no use whatever for loops, but that doesn't mean I think those tools should be excluded for those who do need them
This is very true. I don't use loops but I understand why some do. Notation is probably more difficult for some to understand. I improvise as well. If I'm doing a pop or rock tune I just play but if I'm doing an orchestral work or percussion ensemble or even the string part to a pop song I need notation. I wonder if anyone has ever tried to do voice leading in the piano roll? Yikes! Sometimes even in a rock or pop tune I want to do various harmonic things between the synths and piano is my weakest instrument so I need to write it out.
|
Rbh
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2349
- Joined: 2007/09/05 22:33:44
- Location: Indiana
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/06 16:35:48
(permalink)
vintagevibe
Rbh
I think cake should outsource a whole separate Pro level notation package and price as an add -on. Go Pro partner on it, get your present customers satisfied..make a small profit on a per package basis and expand your customer base. But, make sure it has a solid intuitive smooth interface with X1.
You miss the point. As has been said many many times we need notation INSIDE of Sonar. I and many others already have external notation programs. Why is this so hard to understand?
Sorry...I didn't make my point clear.... outsource the development...but make it fully resident and fully parametric within Sonar. My point is that it should act only as if it's a solid smooth part of Sonar's workflow....of course there choices outside Sonar...but conversion via midi doesn't allow it to be parametric to Sonar's workflow. Which makes it pretty useless. I'm saying that marketing and selling it outside of the base DAW purchase gives users choices, and gives Cakewalk a whole new professional area to market too.
|
Audiounity
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 40
- Joined: 2010/07/13 11:56:00
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/06 17:32:32
(permalink)
noldar12
vintagevibe, to take a stab at your question...
It seems that for those who live strictly by improvising (not a bad thing - it is a very valid approach), there is sometimes a bias against those who use and need notation, a sense that anyone who needs notation is somehow inferior. Sort of a "why would anyone need or want that?"
It rears its head in virtually every thread over the years requesting improvements to notation within Sonar. IMO, it is ok for those who never use notation and don't need it to not grasp the reasons some may want it within a DAW. The troublesome issue is "I don't need it, why should anyone else need it?"
Personally, I have no use whatever for loops, but that doesn't mean I think those tools should be excluded for those who do need them.
I feel that this is a bit of a misnomer. I love improvisation and have studied jazz for more than 10 years. I've played in many bands from funk, soul, rock, techno, jazz.. whatever... And the more complex improvisation has become, the more complex of a backing track I want to make... Think Zappa.. I don't want to noodle on a minor scale while having 4 power chords in the background ala Malmsteen.. I can play alot of guitar, but if I want a sax break that is playing Coltrane licks that I might not even be able to play on guitar (well for one it's not saxophone..) I want to compose it and have midi play it. Notation is great for this.. Improvisation is just sped up Composition.... The more proficient that I've become in letting it rip, the more demanding I'v e become of what I want backing me, and without live players in the studio with me, well I can write a piano or violin solo like how I play guitar, but I need to write it if an instrument like piano or any other than guitar will do it. This too is a misnomer, because a piano solo will have a different natural line than that of guitar. Notation lets us tap into our inner Chick Corea.
|
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2446
- Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/06 18:58:19
(permalink)
Sorry...I didn't make my point clear.... outsource the development...but make it fully resident and fully parametric within Sonar. My point is that it should act only as if it's a solid smooth part of Sonar's workflow....of course there choices outside Sonar...but conversion via midi doesn't allow it to be parametric to Sonar's workflow. Which makes it pretty useless. I'm saying that marketing and selling it outside of the base DAW purchase gives users choices, and gives Cakewalk a whole new professional area to market too.
OK I see. That's a really good idea. I wonder if Cakewalk ever thought of it or how hard it would be.
|
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2446
- Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/06 19:00:10
(permalink)
I feel that this is a bit of a misnomer. I love improvisation and have studied jazz for more than 10 years. I've played in many bands from funk, soul, rock, techno, jazz.. whatever... And the more complex improvisation has become, the more complex of a backing track I want to make... Think Zappa.. I don't want to noodle on a minor scale while having 4 power chords in the background ala Malmsteen.. I can play alot of guitar, but if I want a sax break that is playing Coltrane licks that I might not even be able to play on guitar (well for one it's not saxophone..) I want to compose it and have midi play it. Notation is great for this.. Improvisation is just sped up Composition.... The more proficient that I've become in letting it rip, the more demanding I'v e become of what I want backing me, and without live players in the studio with me, well I can write a piano or violin solo like how I play guitar, but I need to write it if an instrument like piano or any other than guitar will do it. This too is a misnomer, because a piano solo will have a different natural line than that of guitar. Notation lets us tap into our inner Chick Corea.
Excellent point. This illustrates how we all tend to see our software through the prism of our own needs. Come to think of it life is a lot like that.
|
noldar12
Max Output Level: -69 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1075
- Joined: 2006/07/07 20:30:16
- Status: offline
Re:Sonar X1 Notation
2010/11/08 02:05:06
(permalink)
Audiounity, your points are well taken. Many do use multiple approaches and value the strengths that each approach has. My reaction was in regards to the knee-jerk responses against notation that seem to crop up so often in these threads.
|