When was the last time you remember someone saying that Word, for example, wasn't conducive to good writing because it didn't have lots of 3D widgets? But if someone made a word processor with a really funky interface, more people would want to use it?

On a more serious note, you can change the colours of most of the track widgets (volume, trim etc) - my own preference is for a blue/grey look which is pretty monochromatic. And you can lose the "big clunky blue Windows banners" (a very wise move because they waste screen space as much as looking childish, IMHO) by just running in Windows classic mode.

No skins, please! I agree that it can only make the app look like a cheap toy. I've been a Winamp user for a long time and I've tried lots of different skins, but I always go back to the old default one, because everything is laid out so nicely and it's easy to read. I also tried Windowblinds on my (non-audio) PC. It looked real nifty, but I always ended up turning it off when something didn't work right.

I'm another guy hoping hardware emulation in GUIs will die a quick death! Check out iZotope's GUIs. So much easier on the eyes, efficient and easy to use! I like that Cubase has a "controls" mode where you can control your plugins from a standard interface, basically bypassing the plugin's GUI. I'd rather have this than any unnecessary makeover or skin support.

ORIGINAL: kp

When was the last time you remember someone saying that Word, for example, wasn't conducive to good writing because it didn't have lots of 3D widgets? But if someone made a word processor with a really funky interface, more people would want to use it?

On a more serious note, you can change the colours of most of the track widgets (volume, trim etc) - my own preference is for a blue/grey look which is pretty monochromatic. And you can lose the "big clunky blue Windows banners" (a very wise move because they waste screen space as much as looking childish, IMHO) by just running in Windows classic mode.

Look I'll be honest here and shoot from the hip. You just dont get it. And I'll tell you why.

Hopefully everyone else that doesnt understand this issue will read in, including Cakewalk.
Before becoming a player for money I was at art school. OK OK, no real qualification there but I'll let you into a secret about aesthetics. The more you can do with less the better the design. Functionality and visual appeal is key. Look at Apple for instance, sometimes they over step the mark and they have visual appeal but it impairs functionality, like the cubes that split and stripped mouting threads, or that their entire product range cost far far more than it should because they concentrate on aesthetics ALL the time.....Anyway I'll show you something.

Are you using Windows Classic mode? Others have mentioned it, if you arent using it, turn it on for a change. What you may have not noticed is a hell of a lot of the interface is 3D. The buttons all stand out, the scroll bar and even this Reply dialogue I am typing into now is FULL of "3D Widgets". Windows is a 3D widget application !!!...Why use 3D widgets. I'll tell you why, because it makes sense to draw the user to the function availability of the object without having to use another colour and or often even a word. It shows you if its going to repond to a key function if it stands out morem or if its not available just by merely being greyed. Reply to this and look at "Quote Original" for instance.

Now look at the Logic Interface and or Nuendo / Cubase Interfaces. They create focus by using 3D, JUST LIKE WINDOWS, NOT LIKE SONAR....Sonars interface uses too many colours, if you turn down the amount of colours used in the controls alone it just looks murkey, and functions that you want to use dont stand out.

So if you use Windows you are actually using something that is far more like Logic and Nuendo than you are Sonar. You just didnt realise it, you hadnt noticed that your interface isnt just grey, its laden with 3 dimensional detail.

I am not trying to start a battle here with you guys, I think Sonar is the leading application with a company that has the right attitude to take on the big boys and I back them in that quest. But I'll tell you this, and I am NOT lying or overstating the case.
They only people that think Sonar looks good are already Sonar users. Other prefer Logic, Nuendo and or Pro Tools. Personally I think, no I KNOW that Pro Tools looks more Windows orientated than Sonar, because, well frankly I understand how GUI's are designed the process that takes place, whats missing and whats present. BUT...more importantly dont take my word for it, ask around in the outside world.
Sonar needs to improve graphically, its a widely held opinion....check it out if you dont beleive me.

ORIGINAL: Boogie

Have you tried MMD3?

Is that a Winamp skin? I searched Nullsoft's site for it. No luck.

http://www.winamp.com/skins/details.php?id=122902

You just didnt realise it, you hadnt noticed that your interface isnt just grey, its laden with 3 dimensional detail.

And so is Sonar's console view. As I pointed out above, the 3D approach doesn't make much sense in track view (although there ARE some subtle 3D elements here also) because the operational elements are real close to each other. On top of this they move around when you're re-scaling the header width or/and flip tabs. So the distinct colours really help to keep track (no pun intended) which element is where. A static layout OTOH would be less flexible.

BTW: As an architect I know very well about the connection between funcionality and aesthetics. EDIT: or better form and function.

werner

ORIGINAL: mark4man

Just out of interest: Can you give some examples exactly where there's too much colour in your opinion?

Uh...like, everywhere?

Yeah, right!

I'm open to any suggestions on how workflow could be improved by changes to the UI, but I haven't heard any that I'm in favor of yet.

The only GUI change that I can imagine would smooth out the workflow a little in sonar is to have
a) The tool buttons above the track list on a seperate toolbar, so that mute tool, snap to grid, auto X-fade, etc etc etc don't get hidden when I want to see more of the clips pane.

b) modify the way the cursor position readout on the bottom of the track view shows the time. as in, make it ALWAYS show SMPTE AND Beats/bars, and also SHOW SELECTION LENGTH.

It's totally insane that there's no selection length readout!

oh, I'm still using sonar4PE, so if these have been fixed in sonar 5, I apologize!

dreamkeeper...

You're an architect...& yet you believe this interface is not obtrusive to the eye?

Now I've heard everything.

This GUI is particularly grating on one's vision (less so than 4, but still pretty bad.) And where is the damn delineation (lateral separation between tracks in the Tracks pane)? If it weren't for the horizontal meters, I wouldn't know where I was.

[&...what's up w/ a Record button that's not red ?*?*?...I don't get it.]

SONAR 2, like Pro Tools, has wonderful contrast & detail...all the different components are easily distinguishable...the entire graphic environment is light & airy (& not harsh...e.g., v3 & beyond.)

Sorry, I think it's a damn poor graphics effort on the part of Cake...JMO.

mark4man

Voting NO here....

In addition to all of the above, adding 3-D buttons and other fancy schmuff will probably make the UI even harder to view on a high resolution monitor. Changing the look and feel would not really gain us anything. I find the Sonar GUI very intuitive, and the main reason I adopted it over the free version of Logic that came with my Delta 66.

You're an architect...& yet you believe this interface is not obtrusive to the eye?

Actually this exact interface was one of the things that attracted me most to Sonar (version 4). It's not shiny, fancy or hyped. It's VERY easy on the eyes, has just enough contrast to let me find all I need in a heartbeat and is showing me all relevant info. It's functional and makes Sonar very intuitive to work with. And I'm talking about the default colour scheme. The small changes in S5 make it even better (although I'm not too mad about the new meters).

Sure it can be improved in some details, but this can't be achieved with some 3D niceness. And as others have said, there are other things that should be prioritized in development.

werner

In SONAR 5 you can reorder those buttons (See the readme file). They also have a better default order in SONAR 5.

ORIGINAL: ooblecaboodle

a) The tool buttons above the track list on a seperate toolbar, so that mute tool, snap to grid, auto X-fade, etc etc etc don't get hidden when I want to see more of the clips pane.

oh, I'm still using sonar4PE, so if these have been fixed in sonar 5, I apologize!

I vote no face lift, no skins. It's perfect as is.

My vote: It looks fine. Particularly I am happy with the choice of different color schemes.

Invest development in making Sonar run vst natively, not through troublemaking converters.

ORIGINAL: kstevege
For example, most of us do not like how Sonar 5 uses the "Microsoft Windows" look. A lot of us look forward to a softer insterface with more 3D-type buttons and dials.

The "Microsoft Windows"-look has traditionally been what I really like about Cakewalk's products. Try any emagic application in Windows and you'll see what I mean...

That said, from the screenshots I've seen, Cubase does look rather classy these days. So, maybe a cooler interface but adhering to the Windows standard as much as possible?

ORIGINAL: Blades



If you really wnat to look at somthing that is more artful or whatever, get yourself a copy of Stardock Software's stuff, like Window Blinds and Object Desktop - while it won't change some elements inside a program,in some cases, it lends itself to allowing for 3d buttons/scrollbars, etc.

www.stardock.com

Will this make some elements of Cakewalk look more 3D like buttons and frames?