I've been constructive too - reporting bugs, putting forward suggestions and trying my best to justify why they make sense, etc. I'd love Sonar 9 to get it together more, but at the moment I have to be sceptical on the likelihood of that happening, given the stringent release cycle.

I think the main problem stems from the fact that this is a difficult and decidedly niche market. Even though Sonar probably has some thousands of users and costs a pretty penny, it doesn't generate enough revenue to fund enough developers working full time on the next release AND the current stable and porting fixes to the last code branch. I don't know how large their installed user base is, but I'm fairly sure it isn't in the millions, so . Add to that the problem that with each structural change required by the evolution of the software( gapless, surround, multicore, etc ), the ability to backport certain features and changes is all but impossible. They cannot fix the external inserts in 7.x, for example, because they had to rewrite large portion of the code to fix it in 8.x, and the codebase is probably substantially different. They could push 9.x out another 6 months, maybe, but if the rate of adoption of new customers isn't large enough, they at least have to release something for which they can charge an upgrade fee just to pay the devel team and testers.
It's perfectly reasonable to expect stability and attention to detail in your software - doubly so when you use it to make a living or produce a product. Consider how many people own Sonar, and then think about how many people own an iphone or windows, or even protools. Cakewalk is being honorable in that if they released every 18 months instead of 12, they'd probably have less staff to develop and test, or they'd generate enough less revenue that they would be in danger of Roland shutting down their division due to lack of profit. Things are always a compromise in business, and this is no different.
There is stiff competition in this market, too. While Cakewalk hold their own, you have many entrants in the market. Some, like Reaper, are developing at a frenzied rate, and while they don't measure up for many users in raw features, they can errode some of Sonar's market share on the more casual end of the user base. New VSTs are springing up, new DAWs, new control surfaces, new VST/DX specifications, new OSs, new hardware with different capabilities year after year. If they wait too long to release, they become yesterday's news, and new customers get entrenched in someone else's software. It's not easy to switch DAWs once you've gotten accustomed to one, so when they lose a prospective customer, that may be a permanent loss or at least a loss through many release cycles. Imagine the pressure that creates to release something viable and competitive and modern - frequently.
There are so many factors driving the development, testing, patching, and release decisions that make each decision a complex balancing act. Sonar serves lots of different audiences because it is so capable. There are electronic musicians, audio professionals, live performers, composers who use the notation, midi, or audio-for-video features. They service a wide range of platforms from the cpu to the OS, the audio interface and driver models, to the control surfaces and midi devices. They are constantly getting feedback and requests for new features and changes in functionality that are often at odds with one another. They all too often try to make the most people happy only to find others very upset with them for whatever decision they made.
While I know everyone has the same basic motivation at heart - they want to see Sonar be the best it can be - I personally believe from my experience in software development that the reality of the 12 month release cycle isn't driven by CW's greed or by some sort of apathy toward their customers' wants and needs. It is driven by the necessity to turn enough profit to survive as a company in a relatively small market with many competitors. Their goal beyond that is to generate enough revenue to actually grow a bit, so they can buy some more testing configs and hire a few more developers and testers and expand with more partnerships that bring to bear more technologies that they can bundle like they've done with content, dithering algorithms, v-vocal, etc.
All of this was somewhat stream-of-consciousness, so I hope it made sense and made a point that CW is, in my humble opinion, trying to make the best product they can within the constraints of their resources. I've never sensed anything less than slavish devotion and good intentions from their staff, judging by years of posts, here.

ORIGINAL: groove

(uber-paragraph)

You raise some very good points. I can see it would be a risk to change their release cycle, I just don't agree it's as cut-and-dry as "yearly release = yearly money, 18-monthly release = 18-monthly money". If Sonar gets better as a result of an 18 month period between major versions, arguably Cakewalk stand to make more money in the long run: happier users, better reputation, more breathing room to address subtler parts of the program. It all adds up.

But I suppose, logically speaking, you could argue that those users you described who are liable to move to a different app in the absence of a major update would have an offsetting effect on the above. Thus any gains brought about by the extended release cycle would be cancelled out.

Obviously it's up to Cakewalk, and I somehow doubt they even have time to consider this, judging by the ageing state of their website, support channel and bug reporting system. When push comes to shove, I can only vote with my feet. It just depends on how other users feel.

I think you're right...
...I also think it should be noticed that, on the other hand, the same quickly moving technology is causing a certain deal of other users to feel pretty tired of always rushing to be after the new stuff... I mean we almost never take full advantage of the "tools" we have invested (a lot of money) in... as we soon have to start "looking forward" again...
...after a few cycles of these... things can get bothering, if not even annoying...

Welcome to the Forum!





I've got a Cake ProAudio7 disc stashed away, somewhere. You will love Sonar 8!

Everyone,

I'm in the middle of a production using Sonar 8.3 and I'm quite troubled : the "Move To" problem that is described on the support/download page is bigger than they think - whenever I move a clip (copy, move, clone track) it is mistakenly repositioned with a margin of more than "a few clicks" - especially in high tempo project (above 160/170 BPM Drum'n Bass or Punk for instance) it's a damn nightmare !!!!
Please fix this ASAP and not "in the near future"...

Much appreciated,

Michael.

I'm so glad I switched from Logic way back when...Thanks.

I really loved reading this thread ... and I really love working with Sonar 8.3 PE -- incredible things are happening in my life since I upgraded!

Hi-

I'm not Noel, but do you have "Allow Only One Open Project at a Time" checked by any chance (Options > Global > General)?

Just a thought...

-Susan

This is a great update. I think the PDC overide is a Godsend when using soft synths . I also disable my network card (by shortcut) after using DPC latency check software(3rd party). It would be good if Cakewalk could do a computer analysis scan(future update maybe) to find problems such as found by the dpc tool to find any audio problems.

Thanks for good update.

To the Fantastic Space Cowboys and Cowgirls at Cakewalk Development,

When you treat us to techspertise and don't talk down to us, it sure does feel good!
I have to admit the improvements that were advertised in the <then> upcoming 8.3 "patch" sounded pretty much like a major release to me.

And you didn't disappoint....

These are all usable components that will do nothing but improve what any of us are doing with SONAR.

Kudos, ladies and gentlemen....

See you in October.....

I always have sonar set to allow multiple projects open but the funny thing with 8.3.1 is that if I shift click select multiple projects (in Windows Explorer) Sonar opens with only one of the selected projects loaded. (the last one on the list). If I leave SONAR open and just close that project nothing happens but if I close SONAR down, it immediately opens with the next project in the selected list, and so on until all the selected files have been opened one at a time.

Now I can have a multitude of projects open at one time as long as I select them individually. Either through SONAR's Open File Dialog or Windows Explorer doesn't make a difference.

which is why I think some developers have gone to public beta's as they get close to release

"public beta" seems rather to be code for "if we'd released this, you users would legitimately expect the software to be fit for purpose: so we'll never release it, then you won't be able to complain if it doesn't perform". At least Cakewalk is more honest than that.

Hello,

I'm Albert Syeles. I started using Sonar in 1972 in the US Navy. True, but a different Sonar.

But seriously, I've been a Cakewalk user since Music Creator 1.0, Sonar since 2.0 and Sonar PE since 3.0. I just upgraded to PE 8 and I'm very happy that it has many of the feature improvements I've been wishing for for many years, particularly MIDI workflow in Piano Roll View. I use Sonar of course for terrific audio sequencing and production, but especially for MIDI recording, composing, arranging, etc.

However, Sonar still underwhelms in one critical area: notation. Not much change, if any, since Music Creator 1. Yes I know, it's not intended to be Finale or Sibelius. Fine. But they could spend just a little effort to refine what Sonar does in Staff View. For instance note resolution is still restricted to 32d for printing. How hard is it to increase it to 64th or finer? Grace notes, arpeggios, etc, just don't print out at all the way it works now. And how about providing a tool for expression markers and more flexible placement for expression text. Not asking much I think. I'm not even asking for hairpins and the like that actually work on a MIDI level. Just printing enhancements.

Just those few changes would save me the expense and MAJOR hassle to port my MIDI to Finale just to print a presentable score. And also end my constant thoughts of just switching to Finale as it keeps getting better at audio production.

Albert

I spent too many months trying to make S8 run without crashing and Unable to open audio playback device error messages. Im back to Sonar 703. This is the best thing I have done since the release of S8. BitBridge is not exactly stable but its fine. Today is the first day since I upgraded to S8 that it was possible to work 14 hours without crashes with S7. So I flushed my S8 DVD's in the toilet. Sorry, for me it wasnt worth the money. I've lost a fortune trying to make Sonar work instead of making music and Tech. Sup. hasnt got the slightest idea what is wrong. Actually I dont think they believe me. Now I will try to come back in business... I have been using Cakewalk since Cakewalk 1.0 for DOS from the eighties. They all had their issues. And Im not going for Sonar9.

ORIGINAL: RigPa

...So I flushed my S8 DVD's in the toilet. Sorry, for me it wasnt worth the money...

Ok, we know You don't really mean it... it must be just a way of saying you won't use it any longer...

anyway, given the money invested, plus the fact that you MUST have heared and read (QUITE A LOT...) around that SONAR 8 is simply the best SONAR ever, and, possibly, according to QUITE A LOT of people involved in the industry, the BEST DAW at the moment...
...I think you had better keep your purchased software, instead, as you might take a chance to use it on a different (better working...) system...

regards