Sonar X2 Notation

Over the months I've never seen any of the folks that are consistantly asking for an update to SV ask for anything like Sibelius. They just want a SV that functions better than what we have now.

I think they have a valid point. While I'm not exactly 'conversant' with notation I know enough that it would help me if there was a better SV. As it is I've tried using it a few times and each time I end up scratching my head and revert to PRV.

Regards,
 

synkrotron

John

Why do you say CW will charge extra for something that is already included? 

Hi John,


At the moment we have a staff view that functions at a certain level. It falls short of the kind of detail that you would get out of a package such as Sibelius. Can you really see Cakewalk putting as much development time into their current staff view in order to bring it up to the standards that the Sibelius uses expect. Considering the amount that you have to pay for Sibelius, I really cannot, for the life of me, see Cakewalk taking their current staff view to the level of Sibelius without some kind of additional charge, and they would do that, in my mind, by making it an add-on module that you would have to pay for.

Can you understand what I am saying? Just using Sibelius as an example here, it is so much more expensive... It might even be that Avid have some kind of copyright on the scoring software they have developed. Who knows... there may even be some kind of agreement between Cakewalk/Roland and Avid that Sonar will never compete with Sibelius in terms of staff view functionality.

I'm not deliberately trying to cause more of a rumpus here... I am just trying to reason, in my own head, why things are like they are with our staff view, that's all.

cheers

andy

I do want a high quality Staff View I do not want or need a Sibelius type printing program in Sonar. Sibelius is for producing not just scores but for sending out to score publishers that require a great deal more than what a normal publisher needs. First off the size of a score manuscript is non standard. The contents of the score is not normal print and so on. Its not the same as what you can dash off on your home printer. No one on the forum has asked for or wants as far as I have noticed anything like Sibelius for Sonar. What we want is simple. A great display that translates fully to MIDI as Sonar sees it with easy and simple note entry that can handle
sophisticated scoring. 

You assume things that are not part of the equation. This is not your fault BTW it is often misunderstood and dedicated score editors are used as the gold standard by those that don't fully have an understanding of what can be done with for example Cubase.

This topic is like the never-ending story...  
 
I believe it's fair to say that what the SV folks want is something on par with other major DAWs such as Cubase, Logic or DP.   And something tells me that none of those are on par with standalone Sibelius (probably not Finale either).   But that's not what is being requested.  
 
Disclaimer: I've never used Cubase, Logic or DP.  But I've read these threads often enough to know that *they* are the common benchmark for comparison to SONAR's SV, not dedicated scoring software like Sibelius. 
 
 
 
 
PS: DJ...  no boycotts here either.  In fact, the idea of boycotting a software package just seems really weird to me, not to mention a futile exercise in the overall scheme of things.    Boycott schmoycott. 
 

stevec


This topic is like the never-ending story...  
 
I believe it's fair to say that what the SV folks want is something on par with other major DAWs such as Cubase, Logic or DP.   And something tells me that none of those are on par with standalone Sibelius (probably not Finale either).   But that's not what is being requested.  
 
Disclaimer: I've never used Cubase, Logic or DP.  But I've read these threads often enough to know that *they* are the common benchmark for comparison to SONAR's SV, not dedicated scoring software like Sibelius. 
 
 
 
 
PS: DJ...  no boycotts here either.  In fact, the idea of boycotting a software package just seems really weird to me, not to mention a futile exercise in the overall scheme of things.    Boycott schmoycott. 
 

I could write a long post in response. However its not needed due to the simple fact that Steve has written what I consider a post I can fully agree with in its entirety. 


Well done! 

stevec


This topic is like the never-ending story...  
 
I believe it's fair to say that what the SV folks want is something on par with other major DAWs such as Cubase, Logic or DP.   And something tells me that none of those are on par with standalone Sibelius (probably not Finale either).   But that's not what is being requested.  
 
Disclaimer: I've never used Cubase, Logic or DP.  But I've read these threads often enough to know that *they* are the common benchmark for comparison to SONAR's SV, not dedicated scoring software like Sibelius. 
 
 
 
 
PS: DJ...  no boycotts here either.  In fact, the idea of boycotting a software package just seems really weird to me, not to mention a futile exercise in the overall scheme of things.    Boycott schmoycott. 
 

Yes a never ending story indeed.  The folks thinking that anyone would want a full featured notation app in Sonar just never seem to get it.  And there are millions of them waiting to chime in.  I've given up.  Cakewalk doesn't care about notation.  It will always be inferior in Sonar.   I'm waiting to see what DP for Windows is like.

Well done!

 
Thanks.        I don't chime in that often on this subject, only because I've been around long enough to know how it goes.  But I also understand that we have a few newer users on board who haven't had the pleasure.  Uh, I mean experience. 
 
 
 

I've given up.  Cakewalk doesn't care about notation.  It will always be inferior in Sonar.

 
I've seen that same sentiment quite a few times, but I really don't believe that CW (in general) doesn't "care" about notation, rather that their hands are tied in some fashion.  And based on previous Baker comments (years ago now) I understood it to be a technical hurdle more than anything.  I also recall (I think) seeing references to X1's Skylight as being a potential means of pushing ahead at some point.  But given those first comments, I'd imagine it's still a bigger investment than other areas of the product, even with Skylight.  Well, at least based the current list of X2 changes...  I guess we'll find out more over the next few months!
 

vintagevibe

stevec


This topic is like the never-ending story...  

I believe it's fair to say that what the SV folks want is something on par with other major DAWs such as Cubase, Logic or DP.   And something tells me that none of those are on par with standalone Sibelius (probably not Finale either).   But that's not what is being requested.  

Disclaimer: I've never used Cubase, Logic or DP.  But I've read these threads often enough to know that *they* are the common benchmark for comparison to SONAR's SV, not dedicated scoring software like Sibelius. 




PS: DJ...  no boycotts here either.  In fact, the idea of boycotting a software package just seems really weird to me, not to mention a futile exercise in the overall scheme of things.    Boycott schmoycott. 

Yes a never ending story indeed.  The folks thinking that anyone would want a full featured notation app in Sonar just never seem to get it.  And there are millions of them waiting to chime in.  I've given up.  Cakewalk doesn't care about notation.  It will always be inferior in Sonar.   I'm waiting to see what DP for Windows is like.

+1   I've been to other forums and DP seems to have lots of problems that Sonar does not.  But when the windows 64 bit version is available I will jump in on this.  I'm not saying I'll leave Sonar, but I will take a long hard look at DP 'cause of its notation and film scoring features.  I'm sure the initial release will have it's issues,  and I say this not because of my experience with Cake and Sonar, but of what i've read about MOTU and DP.

Yeah, something tells me the grass really is greener when it comes to notation and scoring to picture.  But whether the grass is a little brown and dried out in other areas of the yard, areas where tend to walk a lot, well...    
 
 

synkrotron
...
Can you understand what I am saying? Just using Sibelius as an example here, it is so much more expensive... It might even be that Avid have some kind of copyright on the scoring software they have developed. Who knows... there may even be some kind of agreement between Cakewalk/Roland and Avid that Sonar will never compete with Sibelius in terms of staff view functionality.

...
andy

 
 

You do know there are other scoring/notation software other there, don't you? Finale, Notion, Encore, MuseScore, Magic Score, etc. Not all are at the same evolution level, but they do exist out there. So it is not only Sibelius.
 

 
synkrotron

At the moment we have a staff view that functions at a certain level. It falls short of the kind of detail that you would get out of a package such as Sibelius. Can you really see Cakewalk putting as much development time into their current staff view in order to bring it up to the standards that the Sibelius uses expect. Considering the amount that you have to pay for Sibelius, I really cannot, for the life of me, see Cakewalk taking their current staff view to the level of Sibelius without some kind of additional charge, and they would do that, in my mind, by making it an add-on module that you would have to pay for.
...
andy

Again not sure why such fixation about Sibelius and Avid. You keep insinuating that somebody is asking for Sibelius-like functionality built into SONAR. Just to clarify - nobody is asking for that. It's been said countless times. Since I mentioned it on the very first page of this tread, I thought it could be instructive for some to refer to these videos to try to get a flavor for what (at least) I would like to see CW implement:
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqDK2Rhpb3g
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFi9rsyh8eY
 
 
You know what part of the problem is, that this has been for so long neglected, that the cost to develop and build something like this into SONAR is most likely high enough for Cakewalk to be quite reluctant to entertain the idea at this point. Quite a shame.
 
Mr. Noel Borthwick has been active on the other X2 tread, maybe he would swing by and provide some kind feedback on this. Some of us would greatly appreciate it.
 
 
 

Don't let this thread change your opinion of the forum, synkro. There are the occasional flare ups but generally it's a pretty chilled place I find. Besides, I'd miss our chats if you left. We need good folks like you here. Cheers.

Cake just need to buy these guys scorecleaner.com Sound on Sound's review, while mentioning some stability issues to be fair, just blew me away. As far as I could see from the review, this product transcribes MIDI in a truly musical way without in any way claiming to be as complete as Sibelius. I'm just downloading the trial version now to check it out. Apparently it 'understands' swing and triplets etc. in a completely natural way. This is surely what Sonar needs......

Andy,

Your post at the top of this page does display a fairly negative flavor seemingly criticising the notion addressed by this tread, in a way not necessarily substantiated by reasonably sound arguments, but very loose expeculations. I truly meant no disrespect with my previous comment or this. And I do value having an open conversation within netiquette terms, and think this tread has basically stayed as such.

I've been using Cakewalk since v4, probably also going back to early the 90's or thereabouts, and extensively used v6 for some years, back then. So been on the CW boat for a good while, hence the bit of emotional load about where SONAR is headed. Reason why I do feel it would only be fair to seek some formal and serious advice from CW directly at this point.

I'm really surprised at what an awful place this forum has turned out to be... I am truly disappointed.

 
Like Beepster said, IMO this thread/topic is certainly not a good gauge of these forums.  It's just something that's been brought up many, many times, and it always end up with two separate "camps" that don't seem to understand each other very well.   More than any other feature set than I can think of, for whatever reason.    Stange how that works.
 
As for my comment, it wasn't intended for any one specific person.   Just look at the number of views this thread has had vs. the number of replies - it's a pretty big difference.   I just figured that a good number of people reading this thread may have never seen the classic notation threads of yore...  
 
 

synkrotron


I'm really surprised at what an awful place this forum has turned out to be... I am truly disappointed.

Andy this place is really mild and completely inoffensive compared to some sites that I could mention but I won't names names.


We always get a few heated discussions when a new version or upgrade is announced, so don't get put off. Hang on in there brother.

synkrotron


To be honest guys, I've been one of the least vocal about this kind of stuff on this Sonar/Cakewalk forum, and I have spent most of my time trying to help others with their MIDI problems. I mentioned very early in this very topic what my position was regarding staff view, and the fact that I hadn't used it since early Cakewalk days, before it even had audio capabilities, simply because it was never as versatile as the piano role.

So, as I'm reading through the rest of the posts here, I felt that the guys wanting to see improvements in staff view had a point and I was changing my opinion. I then had a bit of a ramble, sort of talking to myself really, trying to figure, in my own mind, why Cakewalk is ignoring peoples requests to improve staff view.

I seriously wish that I had not bothered ever coming here now. And this is always the danger, isn't it? When you put something into writing here, on the WWW, it is always open to misinterpretation and be taken out of context.

Gusfmm, I am not the only one that has mentioned Sibelius in the topic, and I only mentioned it because someone had mentioned it before me, and so I picked up on that. And Cakewalk recommend this software on their site too. I was only using that one as an example, out of many, and yes, I am already aware of them, but what was the point of mentioning every single notation package available?

But I also understand that we have a few newer users on board who haven't had the pleasure.  Uh, I mean experience.

I'm not sure who that refers to... it certainly can't be me. I've been a member here since 2006, and I've been using Cakewalk since 1993.




I'm really surprised at what an awful place this forum has turned out to be... I am truly disappointed.

I didn't think you were opposed to SV improvements. Nor did I think you were being like another poster that I wont name.


I thought you had a reasonable approach but had some misunderstandings. I don't think you deserve a harsh post in response.


To me often when a poster makes an argument that is well thought out and is well within the TOS it offers one an opportunity to set the record straight. To make a counter argument. This is a valuable aspect to this forum. 


I think Synkrotron you are a fine member of this forum and I look forward to reading more of your posts. 


I also think that we are a little jaded by having to dredge this up from time to time. 


BTW I was not going to get involved because I have been on just about all of these threads. But the nameless poster started picking on posters here. That requires other members to "get involved".


The only reason I am posting this is I value your contributions. 

If synkrotron leaves I'm boycotting pants... and that ain't good for nobody.

If synkrotron leaves I'm boycotting pants... and that ain't good for nobody.

 
Dude, please... for all that's good in this world, don't do it.    
 

Me dummy has been cleaned off, and teddy is back in me pram.

 
Umm...    was that English?       Ha!  Just kidding.  I know it was actually British.   English is what we use on this side of the pond.   Now *there's* a discussion that can get heated!   
 
 
Good to see you're back in the water for another swim.  Don't let the other fish bother you too much, it's a public pool.
 

Oh good. The pants will stay on then. ;-p

Sibelius 7 First would be a great program to integrate into Sonar 2. Why? Because i have it.

Exactly. Everyone get back to your DAWs and put this energy into some kick *** tunes. I myself am in the process of wrapping my head around BFD before I drag my butt to the hospital tomorrow.

well thanks for mentioning this scorecleaner.com I will check that out I just downloaded tux guitar a tablature program that opens guitar pro and power tab files so now I can open the songs written in the latest version of guitar pro that I couldn't open without buying the latest version. By the way its a free program.

synkrotron

John

Why do you say CW will charge extra for something that is already included? 

Hi John,


At the moment we have a staff view that functions at a certain level. It falls short of the kind of detail that you would get out of a package such as Sibelius. Can you really see Cakewalk putting as much development time into their current staff view in order to bring it up to the standards that the Sibelius uses expect. Considering the amount that you have to pay for Sibelius, I really cannot, for the life of me, see Cakewalk taking their current staff view to the level of Sibelius without some kind of additional charge, and they would do that, in my mind, by making it an add-on module that you would have to pay for.

Can you understand what I am saying? Just using Sibelius as an example here, it is so much more expensive... It might even be that Avid have some kind of copyright on the scoring software they have developed. Who knows... there may even be some kind of agreement between Cakewalk/Roland and Avid that Sonar will never compete with Sibelius in terms of staff view functionality.

I'm not deliberately trying to cause more of a rumpus here... I am just trying to reason, in my own head, why things are like they are with our staff view, that's all.

cheers

andy

Andy,
 
I don't know how many people misunderstand this, but apparently a lot of people.  You're comparing a notation program with a DAW, you're comparing the notation funtion of a DAW, which is for MIDI input and editing, with a notation program, which exists to create published-quality scores and song sheets.  Sonar's staff view leaves a lot to be desired, so much in fact that I am using Sonar 7.0.2 because it lacks the new bugs that the staff view in X1 has.  But the complaint that a notation editor in a DAW should do what Sibelius or Finale does is really a useless complaint.  Even Cubase, which has superior notation functions to Sonar, isn't capable of doing what Sibelius does, it too is not designed for that.  I wish the people who gripe about the staff view would first understand what it's about.  Besides this, if X2 doesn't resolves many of the very-long-standing issues with Sonar's staff view, my view is that Sonar will never fix it, my view is that they simply don't understand the importance of notation to the creation of detailed, complex music composition and orchestration and never will.   Cakewalk has been unwilling to repair the bugs in the staff view for at least 5 versions or so, inaction speaks louder than words--they're essentially telling the end-user is to forget about it.  By the way, Sonar 7 works well as a 64-bit program in a 64-bit OS environment so there is really no need to upgrade unless you just enjoy spending money or have a fetish for the newest version, even though it's common knowledge that in software the newest version is not always the best version.
 
Jerry Gerber
www.jerrygerber.com
 
 

People:  Why all the anger?  We haven't even seen the 2nd trailer.  And on the X2 page
 
http://www.cakewalk.com/SONAR-X2/
 
Under the "Deliver icon (with the headphones)", they actual list "Print Notation" as a feature.
 
If they have the ballz to list that as a feature, I can only assume that there will be some improvement

He wasn't complaining. Synkrotron was NOT complaining. Neither was I. It was (mostly) a friendly and intelligent discussion on a relevant issue in regards to Sonar. Nothing more... nothing less. These discussions help the Cakesters know what the people want. It seems many of the functions and doodads within the current versions are based on requests that have been made on this forum. The more we keep the conversations going (and civil) the better the product will become. At least that is the impression I get from Cakewalk as a company. They do care and they do want to make things better for us wherever they can. That's part of the reason I am happy and proud to own their software. I know I'm a n00b but when people talk AND (this is the most important part, folks) LISTEN the human beast can accomplish great things. Heck, we just landed a freaking truck on Mars last night. That took a whole heck of a lot of cooperation and communication. Maybe we can call the next major Cakewalk version Cakewalk Curiosity. ;-)

Sibelius 7 First was cheap - $89 for Sibelius 6 First and $49 for the upgrade to Sibelius 7 First. The "First" series is a paired down version of the Full featured Sibelius software that has more features than I would ever need. And it does work with Sonar (rewire) already. http://www.sweetwater.com...etail/Sibelius6Firste/

@relpomiraculous... Now THAT is awesome and attainable. Thank you, kind sir. It has been bookmarked for later purchase.

stevec


This topic is like the never-ending story...  
 
   

Does that mean that the staff view is eventually going to eat up the world unless we all start reading childrens books?

Can I be the boulder eating monster?

Well, some might compare the SV to the Nothing. 
 
Perhaps what we need is a new name for it...
 

Giant Amorphous Protoplasm?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbgMbVWAB7w

the Blob

Maybe the reason why Sonar's user base includes so few staff users is because music readers see no reason to buy it, precisely because it doesn't have decent notation functionality. 

I for one, think it's a shame. The trouble with PRV's is that it's like the keyboard version of guitar tabulature. It's basically there for people who cannot read music, or people who can play by ear. I played guitar by ear and from tab for years. When I finally knuckled down and learned to sight read, it was a revelation. Now as a classical guitar player I cannot even imagine learning (or composing) an intricate piece with guitar tab. It doesn't offer a good enough visual representation of the music. 

My main problem with PRV's is that I'm not a keyboard player. I can write music that's in my head, but the PRV is just nowhere near as good as traditional notation for setting down music swiftly and accurately, and keeping it organized in your head. If you have keyboard skills, then I imagine the brunt of your arranging is going to involve playing the parts on the keyboard and then touching them up in the PRV later. Without keyboard skills, you're reduced to inserting the notes on the PRV from scratch. It's just so much easier to do that on a proper stave. 

I think that by offering a good quality notation view, or by offering a plugin for a price, Cakewalk would be greatly increasing the potential user base of Sonar. 

If you have keyboard skills, then I imagine the brunt of your arranging is going to involve playing the parts on the keyboard and then touching them up in the PRV later. Without keyboard skills, you're reduced to inserting the notes on the PRV from scratch.

 
Good point...   I do play keys, so have never realy thought about it much.   I may sometimes manually write parts into the PRV, but I usually do play them in and edit afterwards as needed. 
 
My hope for the SV is simple: Make it as simple to enter and modify notes as the PRV when it comes to snap and duration. 
 

Shall we keep this visible? Back up.

Hi,
 
I have often posted and answered Cakewalk surveys just to express my frustration on Cakewalk/Sonar notation before.
 
On the Sonar forum, Gusfmm has published the BEST post (below) on notation I have ever read!
 
Why... of course because his clarity but mostly because of the YT links. Watching those two videos are HUGELY PAINFUL as a Sonar user!!!
 
As I said before, I (and lots of Sonar users) use the written language of music which is of course Notation and would love to do so in Sonar. At this point, this is barely possible.
 
How can Cakewalk pretend they offer professional level software without adequate notation (as in the Cubase videos below) is beyond me!!
 
And, unfortunately, I have stopped hoping for Sonar to join the other DAWs in decent Notation capabilities... and also buying upgrades Sonar upgrades (until that is, Notation is re-imagined).
 
So Bakers: any chance, this might change??
Jon
  
____________________________________________________________________________________
 
 
You do know there are other scoring/notation software other there, don't you? Finale, Notion, Encore, MuseScore, Magic Score, etc. Not all are at the same evolution level, but they do exist out there. So it is not only Sibelius.

synkrotron

At the moment we have a staff view that functions at a certain level. It falls short of the kind of detail that you would get out of a package such as Sibelius. Can you really see Cakewalk putting as much development time into their current staff view in order to bring it up to the standards that the Sibelius uses expect. Considering the amount that you have to pay for Sibelius, I really cannot, for the life of me, see Cakewalk taking their current staff view to the level of Sibelius without some kind of additional charge, and they would do that, in my mind, by making it an add-on module that you would have to pay for.
...
andy

Again not sure why such fixation about Sibelius and Avid. You keep insinuating that somebody is asking for Sibelius-like functionality built into SONAR. Just to clarify - nobody is asking for that. It's been said countless times. Since I mentioned it on the very first page of this tread, I thought it could be instructive for some to refer to these videos to try to get a flavor for what (at least) I would like to see CW implement:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqDK2Rhpb3g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFi9rsyh8eY


You know what part of the problem is, that this has been for so long neglected, that the cost to develop and build something like this into SONAR is most likely high enough for Cakewalk to be quite reluctant to entertain the idea at this point. Quite a shame.

Mr. Noel Borthwick has been active on the other X2 tread, maybe he would swing by and provide some kind feedback on this. Some of us would greatly appreciate it.
 

Shinyhead


 
How can Cakewalk pretend they offer professional level software without adequate notation (as in the Cubase videos below) is beyond me!!
 

Watch out.  Whenever I make this point the flames start flying.  It could get ugly.

Shinyhead

Again not sure why such fixation about Sibelius and Avid. You keep insinuating that somebody is asking for Sibelius-like functionality built into SONAR. Just to clarify - nobody is asking for that. It's been said countless times. Since I mentioned it on the very first page of this tread, I thought it could be instructive for some to refer to these videos to try to get a flavor for what (at least) I would like to see CW implement:

This is an endless loop of ignorance.   I even emailed one of the moderators about notation and the reply was that you might see incremental improvements but Sonar will never be like Sibelius.  Just shoot me!  If even they don't get this there is no hope.  Don't expect them to chime in.  They avoid this subject like the plague because they nothing is going to happen.

I believe if they had the open source code they would address the remaining issues. My guess is they do not and this is a result of the split/spin off company so long ago. 

rabeach


I believe if they had the open source code they would address the remaining issues. My guess is they do not and this is a result of the split/spin off company so long ago. 
 
 
Rabeach,
 
Let's say you are right about the missing code...
 
I would say it's a non-issue as the best thing CW could do is ditch everything related to Notation in Sonar and replace with brand new Notation.
 
And yes, looking over Cubase would be a great place to start...

On the off-chance that someone from Cakewalk looks at this ... I'm a no-keyboard-skill vocalist who will enter a complex vocal piece so that I can hear/learn my part at different speeds, either alone or against the other parts. I take and scan old baroque/classical chamber music scores, remove the bassoon line and then put the resulting audio file on a CD so that a bassoon-playing sibling will have something interesting to practice to. I sometimes MIDI/karaoke-ize a chorus number in a show so that kids who don't play (or have parents who play) keyboard can learn their music using any old home computer. I used Sonar 1 through 7 before my frustration with the staff and lyric views (is it yet possible, for example, to enter a capital "C" in the lyric view without using the shift-lock key?) drove me to look for--and to pay for and to use--some other tool. When Cakewalk sends me an email announcing a new version, I wait a few days and then pop in here to gauge the community reaction to staff/lyric view changes ... and then disappear for another year. It's not a "boycott", as some people have suggested. I've just found other tools that are better than Sonar for what I want to do with computers and music. Based on what I'm reading, I guess I'll see you all again next year.

Shinyhead

rabeach


I believe if they had the open source code they would address the remaining issues. My guess is they do not and this is a result of the split/spin off company so long ago. 
 
 
Rabeach,
 
Let's say you are right about the missing code...
 
I would say it's a non-issue as the best thing CW could do is ditch everything related to Notation in Sonar and replace with brand new Notation.
 
And yes, looking over Cubase would be a great place to start...

I have been asking for Notation additions for 12 years.

I don't want to get my hopes high, but under the Deliver element in this page http://www.cakewalk.com/SONAR-X2/ there's "Print Notation".  It leads me to believe that there are some notation improvements if they are listing this as a feature in X2.
Finger crossed,
Sergio

synkrotron

vintagevibe

Shinyhead

Again not sure why such fixation about Sibelius and Avid. You keep insinuating that somebody is asking for Sibelius-like functionality built into SONAR. Just to clarify - nobody is asking for that. It's been said countless times. Since I mentioned it on the very first page of this tread, I thought it could be instructive for some to refer to these videos to try to get a flavor for what (at least) I would like to see CW implement:

This is an endless loop of ignorance.   I even emailed one of the moderators about notation and the reply was that you might see incremental improvements but Sonar will never be like Sibelius.  Just shoot me!  If even they don't get this there is no hope.  Don't expect them to chime in.  They avoid this subject like the plague because they nothing is going to happen.

I don't know why I even bother looking in here any more, not since the last load of trouble I got into, but the above post by vintagevibe is a total misquote. Is that even allowed in here?


I am particularly perturbed that parts of my posts are being re-quoted, even after I have tried to explain where I was coming from in those posts. But, yeah, that's the internet for you, and I should know better. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that, in future, I shall be keeping my opinions to myself, asked or not.


I will continue to try an offer help to others, where I am able, but that is all.


regards


andy

I agreed with you.  What is the problem?

sergiobklyn


I don't want to get my hopes high, but under the Deliver element in this page http://www.cakewalk.com/SONAR-X2/ there's "Print Notation".  It leads me to believe that there are some notation improvements if they are listing this as a feature in X2.
Finger crossed,
Sergio

I thought the same thing.  Check post 149.
 
And yet, for me, it isn't so much about printing notation as it is about inputting and editing.

pbognar

sergiobklyn


I don't want to get my hopes high, but under the Deliver element in this page http://www.cakewalk.com/SONAR-X2/ there's "Print Notation".  It leads me to believe that there are some notation improvements if they are listing this as a feature in X2.
Finger crossed,
Sergio

I thought the same thing.  Check post 149.
 
And yet, for me, it isn't so much about printing notation as it is about inputting and editing.

If I remember correctly and I may not the print notation was broken in X1d. So my hopes are not up.

vintagevibe
 
This is an endless loop of ignorance.   I even emailed one of the moderators about notation and the reply was that you might see incremental improvements but Sonar will never be like Sibelius.  Just shoot me!  If even they don't get this there is no hope.  Don't expect them to chime in.  They avoid this subject like the plague because they nothing is going to happen.  
  
  
    To quote part of my previous post (#116)

"I went to one of those "meet a rep" events and spoke with a Cake employee. I pointed out to him, "if Cake improved their notation, they could market Sonar to the ever increasing, "composer" crowd. Currently, it would seem Logic and Cubase has much of that "crowd"." The Cake rep explained that was "not their target audience."
 
I took that as "end of story" on the subject. I don't think Cake employees are going to "chime in" because they already made a business decision on the subject, and are sticking with it. There is nothing new to say that hasn't been said, in several past notation threads. They sure would like it to be better, but they are not going to allocate resources towards it at this time......


 

I have read music since I was about 7 and have no need for it within Sonar. My 2 cents.

I'm using X1 and Garritan Jazz Band for wind instruments arrangement. I use midi tracks for recording, editing them on PRV as required.

While I don't use SV for any note entry, I will check on SV very often as the arrangement develops. At the end of the process, I like the simplicity of printing score directly from X1 and hand over to my band for rehearsal.

So for me, SV is very important and I like to see SV updates in future releases. There are well known limits, and I do my best to submit feature request, more than once, as I may have forgotten what I've submitted - until it's updated, hopefully.

rabeach

pbognar

sergiobklyn


I don't want to get my hopes high, but under the Deliver element in this page http://www.cakewalk.com/SONAR-X2/ there's "Print Notation".  It leads me to believe that there are some notation improvements if they are listing this as a feature in X2.
Finger crossed,
Sergio

I thought the same thing.  Check post 149.

And yet, for me, it isn't so much about printing notation as it is about inputting and editing.

If I remember correctly and I may not the print notation was broken in X1d. So my hopes are not up.

My DAW is not connected to a printer, so I have it print to PDF, and it works. Never tried to print directly.

LpMike75

vintagevibe
 
This is an endless loop of ignorance.   I even emailed one of the moderators about notation and the reply was that you might see incremental improvements but Sonar will never be like Sibelius.  Just shoot me!  If even they don't get this there is no hope.  Don't expect them to chime in.  They avoid this subject like the plague because they nothing is going to happen.  
  
  
    To quote part of my previous post (#116)

"I went to one of those "meet a rep" events and spoke with a Cake employee. I pointed out to him, "if Cake improved their notation, they could market Sonar to the ever increasing, "composer" crowd. Currently, it would seem Logic and Cubase has much of that "crowd"." The Cake rep explained that was "not their target audience."
 
I took that as "end of story" on the subject. I don't think Cake employees are going to "chime in" because they already made a business decision on the subject, and are sticking with it. There is nothing new to say that hasn't been said, in several past notation threads. They sure would like it to be better, but they are not going to allocate resources towards it at this time......


 

Mike,
 
I had read your post previously, absolutely great feedback, thanks much for sharing.
 
My interpretation is that if your perception of the issue were to be right on, which I get the unfortunate feeling there is a very good likelyhood it will be, this would be a sign CW will have absolutely no intention or interest in developing SV beyond it being an atrophic uncompetitive tool part of SONAR. This would also be the end of an era for me. And I'm concious I made a decision to roll the dice with 8, then 8.5 and X1, in hope to see some progression. But there is no point in continuing investing in the wrong place. I'm also well aware I may be part of a very small minority.
 
I remain watchful and even hopeful, for the next 20 more days.

The ONLY thing I use Staff View for is for scanning to see if there are any doubled Midi notes as they are plainly visible (being either side of the stalk) and easily delete-able from within the same view.