WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view?

Page: < 12345 > Showing page 4 of 5
Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6348
  • Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
  • Location: London ON
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/30 07:39:40 (permalink)
John T


I believe I can answer the OP's question. Cakewalk's position on this is motivated by a combination of cynicism, laziness and pure evil, mostly stemming from their background as part of the cabal of lizards in human disguise seeking to bring about the apocalypse.

The tragedy of this, of course, is that despite the fact that their goal is unachievable in the face of the righteous, who will not let a day go by without challenging this appalling abuse of power in the most powerful way possible - whining on the internet - still, they seek to do the maximal harm. Even in defeat, their loathing of their customers will not sway them from their diabolical path.

Literate musicians unite! You have nothing to lose other than your colossal egos.
LMAO!!!! I almost had coffee go out me nose!!! Thanks for the laugh first thing in the morning


The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate.

Bushpianos
#91
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/30 08:54:50 (permalink)
JClosed


I think it is a good idea to make extended notation editing a add-on to Sonar.

I think indeed a price about 200 dollars is about right.

In that case the people not needing the "pro" functions of the staff view (like me) can still buy Sonar fir a reasonable price, while those people that need the extended functions (the so-called "pro" people the OP seem to name them) fork out an additional 200 dollar. A bit like X extended.

If Notion 3 could be developed to be tighter integrated with Sonar it would be a perfect candidate. However - this will costs a lot of development resources, so if the price will be kept below the 200 dollar mark remains to be seen. On top of that I am afraid this will slow down trouble-shooting and development of Sonar as a whole, because those development resources are limited, and using a big chunk of them for developing this staff-integration will drain them from other projects and parts of Sonar.

That said - I think the possible staff view quirks/bugs of the present incarnation of Sonar has to be solved.
Absolutely fabulous response.
 
    This is one of the first responses that included a sensible solution instead of just a lot of whining complaints.  What a breath of fresh air. I truly believe this type of response would give Cakewalk something to truly contemplate. Time out for trying to make "COMPANIES" feel guilty. 
 
Any more solutions?  Solutions that work for everyone (the company and the buyer)?
 
Thanks JClosed
#92
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31918
  • Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/30 09:07:46 (permalink)
Yes, charge more and provide more of the stuff that people will pay more for.



That might be better than spending 2 years on the stuff that people hesitate to buy before every thing is bundled into a special give away sales price package.

I mean, the X1 upgrade was half price for a reason... and the full package suddenly became $100 less valuable than every other version of SONAR Producer for a real good reason too.




The notion that Notion might want to become tightly integrated with Roland seems optimistic. Notion may have other plans.




all the best,
mike






#93
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/30 09:57:43 (permalink)
mike_mccue


Yes, charge more and provide more of the stuff that people will pay more for.



That might be better than spending 2 years on the stuff that people hesitate to buy before every thing is bundled into a special give away sales price package.

I mean, the X1 upgrade was half price for a reason... and the full package suddenly became $100 less valuable than every other version of SONAR Producer for a real good reason too.




The notion that Notion might want to become tightly integrated with Roland seems optimistic. Notion may have other plans.




all the best,
mike

+1
#94
Zonno
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 999
  • Joined: 2007/04/11 16:37:33
  • Location: The Netherlands
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/30 09:59:34 (permalink)
gtgarner

 
Any more solutions?  Solutions that work for everyone (the company and the buyer)? 
  

Yes. Improve Notation in SONAR X2. Upgrade to X2 will be paid.
If you don't want improvements in the Staff View, you skip the X2 upgrade and wait for SONAR X3.
We will pay for upgrading to X2.
You will get an improved staff view for free when you upgrade from X1 to X3.
 
 
 

Cakewalk, Reason 10, KOMPLETE 11, BIAB 2018, Roland OctaCapture, Finale 26, PCR-300, HP ZBook, Guitars 
__________________ 
Any text above is a random collection of characters which bear no meaning whatsoever. The reader will be held liable for any damage due to interpretation of these characters.
#95
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/30 10:03:09 (permalink)
Zonno


gtgarner

 
Any more solutions?  Solutions that work for everyone (the company and the buyer)? 
  

Yes. Improve Notation in SONAR X2. Upgrade to X2 will be paid.
If you don't want improvements in the Staff View, you skip the X2 upgrade and wait for SONAR X3.
We will pay for upgrading to X2.
You will get an improved staff view for free when you upgrade from X1 to X3.
 
 
 
lol. Interesting. 
 
IMHO - I don't think the "WE" can afford to supplement Cakewalk with the cost of Cakewalks R&D to establish the (as Cakewalk talked about it in another thread) the total revamp/coding of a new Staff view.  Cakewalk has indicated that it would require a TOTAL re-write of that portion of code.  However - I wouldn't mind it at all. I would actually like it because it would eliminate the my unused Staff view from all possibilities of crashing my non-staffed DAW.
 
 
If this suggestion is accepted by Cakewalk I would rather it be named X1s instead of X2 for various reasons, but thats splitting hairs.  I only think the version of the DAW should change when the Core Daw itself changes - not when add-ons come along.
  
  
 
post edited by gtgarner - 2011/12/30 10:18:19
#96
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2446
  • Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
  • Location: Atlanta, Ga
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/30 12:30:06 (permalink)
Zonno


gtgarner

 
Any more solutions?  Solutions that work for everyone (the company and the buyer)? 
  

Yes. Improve Notation in SONAR X2. Upgrade to X2 will be paid.
If you don't want improvements in the Staff View, you skip the X2 upgrade and wait for SONAR X3.
We will pay for upgrading to X2.
You will get an improved staff view for free when you upgrade from X1 to X3.
 
  
 

You really have to wonder about the psychology of people who are vehemently against what other's need simply because there is nothing in it for them.  I think the notation users should lobby to remove all looping tools from Sonar.
 
#97
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2446
  • Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
  • Location: Atlanta, Ga
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/30 21:07:00 (permalink)
keith


Speaking of MIDI... why would a "true DAW" need MIDI anyway? Can't we just buy a standalone MIDI sequencer and synch over rewire or the old fashioned way?


Exactly.  If Digital Audio Workstation is taken literally all MIDI should be removed.  No patch changes, no C.C., no MIDI to drive virtual synths.  Of course that is rediculous.  Cakwalk for Windows 3.0 (the first WYSIWYG version) had notation but no audio.  Audio came years later.  Anyone stating that it doesn't belong in a DAW doesnt' understand the tools he is using.
#98
Kev999
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3922
  • Joined: 2007/05/01 14:22:54
  • Location: Victoria, Australia
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/30 21:45:41 (permalink)
I used to ignore Staff View, but after trying it I now find it very useful.  PRV is normally better for fine editing, but SV can be better in some situations.  For example, when viewing several midi tracks together where there are a lot of unison notes or overlapping phrases, PRV can look cluttered and confusing, whereas SV displays the different instruments on separate staves.

The two views each provide a different perspective.  You don't have to stick to using one or the other; you can use both.  You can even use both views together if you have two screens.  I urge all PRV users to check out SV.  It's a useful tool, despite not having being upgraded in recent times.

SonarPlatinum∞(22.11.0.111)|Mixbus32C(4.3.19)|DigitalPerformer(9.5.1)|Reaper(5.77)
FractalDesign:DefineR5|i7-6850k@4.1GHz|16GB@2666MHz-DDR4|MSI:GamingProCarbonX99a|Matrox:M9148(x2)|UAD2solo(6.5.2)|W7Ult-x64-SP1
Audient:iD22+ASP800|KRK:VXT6|+various-outboard-gear|+guitars&basses, etc.
Having fun at work lately
#99
kitekrazy
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 174
  • Joined: 2003/11/07 14:36:29
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 14:28:45 (permalink)
gtgarner


trimph1


gtgarner


Here are 5 More pages for those who are bored:

http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=1743654

5 more
[link=http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=1705850</a></font>]http://forum.cakewalk.com...lt;/a></font>

A total of 13 pages including this thread.



Lastly, Look at independant forums that compare DAWs such as the one I'm including below.  To answer the OP's original question, who talks about choosing a DAW based on the staff view? I purchased the best DAW in SONAR. I purchased the best editor in Sebilius. I purchased the best piano vst in Ivory. I purchased the best Drum vst in BFD. I purchaed the best Orchestration vst in VSL. 

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/348572-pro-tools-vs-logic-vs-sonar-vs-abbleton-vs-cube-base.html

But then, why does it have to be either/or? Why NOT have staff view?
Let me try it another way.
 
Who wants to go to Cakewalk and program/work for free?  Then everyone else can have Staff View for free. 
 
Does everyone think that Cakewalk is just sitting there wanting to disappoint/punish their users by just holding back a new staff view?  NO IT COSTS MONEY.
 
I truly believe that if Cakewalk had the "extra" staff (no pun intended) and resources to put forward to the development of the staff view then they would. I am so happy that they put forth the effort of developing a new work environment in their main view than focusing on the staff view.
 


   I don't understand this. Sonar is one of the more expensive DAWs. If they ditch the notation thing then it shouldn't be $500. There are other DAWs for half that amount.  (some very good ones too)  I've heard that PG Music's PowerTracks Pro has a better staff environment than Sonar.
 
   
#100
kitekrazy
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 174
  • Joined: 2003/11/07 14:36:29
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 14:41:32 (permalink)
lowdown



The staff view is not only for printing notation.
It is used, like the PRV and the Step Sequencer, to input and edit notes.
Why have a good PRV and a bad Staff View?
Why disappoint people that rather use the Staff View than the PRV?



This really......
When writing large Orchestral or Big Band section passages,
Half a dozen or so Staves is a lot easier on the eyes, than the PRV.
And some of us like to use a combination of PRV and Staff.
[For those that are ok with the dots that is]

Although i use Sibelius for printing out parts,
I don't like arseing around between Sonar & Sibelius for editing and putting tracks together.
Staff view in Sonar is just about workable, but miles behind the likes of Cubase/Logic/DP and others
when it comes to editing in the staff view.

Just my very selfish POV of course.


Garry


     They have lost users because of this. One company that has a very under rated DAW is looking at open source possibilities to integrating notation into their DAW.
     Thank goodness Sonar has one of the best PRVs out there. Having no staff and a lousy editing window would be similar to working in software like another app I have.
#101
kitekrazy
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 174
  • Joined: 2003/11/07 14:36:29
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 15:07:45 (permalink)
JClosed


I think it is a good idea to make extended notation editing a add-on to Sonar.

I think indeed a price about 200 dollars is about right.

In that case the people not needing the "pro" functions of the staff view (like me) can still buy Sonar fir a reasonable price, while those people that need the extended functions (the so-called "pro" people the OP seem to name them) fork out an additional 200 dollar. A bit like X extended.

If Notion 3 could be developed to be tighter integrated with Sonar it would be a perfect candidate. However - this will costs a lot of development resources, so if the price will be kept below the 200 dollar mark remains to be seen. On top of that I am afraid this will slow down trouble-shooting and development of Sonar as a whole, because those development resources are limited, and using a big chunk of them for developing this staff-integration will drain them from other projects and parts of Sonar.

That said - I think the possible staff view quirks/bugs of the present incarnation of Sonar has to be solved.


  $200 more? So that puts it around $700.  I thought over pricing belonged only to Ableton.  I think people pay the current price because it offers notation.  Sonar isn't that special that people would consider lower price apps like Studio One or the increasingly popular and affordable Reaper.  It's very evident in this forum people show a dislike for getting milked some money every year from Cakewalk.     
#102
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 15:19:18 (permalink)
kitekrazy


lowdown



The staff view is not only for printing notation.
It is used, like the PRV and the Step Sequencer, to input and edit notes.
Why have a good PRV and a bad Staff View?
Why disappoint people that rather use the Staff View than the PRV?



This really......
When writing large Orchestral or Big Band section passages,
Half a dozen or so Staves is a lot easier on the eyes, than the PRV.
And some of us like to use a combination of PRV and Staff.
[For those that are ok with the dots that is]

Although i use Sibelius for printing out parts,
I don't like arseing around between Sonar & Sibelius for editing and putting tracks together.
Staff view in Sonar is just about workable, but miles behind the likes of Cubase/Logic/DP and others
when it comes to editing in the staff view.

Just my very selfish POV of course.


Garry


    They have lost users because of this. One company that has a very under rated DAW is looking at open source possibilities to integrating notation into their DAW.
    Thank goodness Sonar has one of the best PRVs out there. Having no staff and a lousy editing window would be similar to working in software like another app I have.
Who left Sonar because of the staff view?  Really?   Thats pure speculation. Who?
#103
trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6348
  • Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
  • Location: London ON
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 15:53:12 (permalink)
You know, this whole thing started about someone wanting something fixed that was in an older version of Sonar.

This is starting to look more like a Deadmau5 thread on KvR.... 

The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate.

Bushpianos
#104
konradh
Max Output Level: -42 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3325
  • Joined: 2006/01/16 16:07:06
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 16:47:24 (permalink)
To each his own, but I am amazed at the number of people who are opposed to or think it is unnecessary to have a means for entering and viewing music in a system designed for creating music. A staff is to music as writing is to language. If you don't use it, that's your business, but being against it is strange, to say the least. I would like the bugs fixed in the existing staff view. A paid add-on for full notation capabilities would be a good compromise for those who want more function. And although I support each person's ability to choose what works best for him or her, I cannot understand why anyone would rather take the punched roll out of a player piano and try to analyze it than to look at the sheet music.
#105
ChrisBG
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 43
  • Joined: 2004/07/08 03:07:46
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 16:56:26 (permalink)

Who left Sonar because of the staff view? Really? Thats pure speculation. Who?
Film composers and producers who use notation. If there isn't at least a working notation, it's pretty difficult to get the job done. You can't expect to write 2+ minutes of orchestrated music per day if you have to switch to Finale to input notes. Cubase for example at least has a halfway decent notation that is usabale. I think people are over exaggerating how much work it would take to fix the staff view. I don't really think it needs much work.

I just think Cake have decided it doesn't need fixing or doesn't need work because most of their users don't care much for it. And that's obviously true, my guess is most people who need notation have moved on to Cubase, or many of the other DAW's on a mac including logic, digital performer, and so on.

I'm not sure why some people have this 'Oh well, I don't need it, why should you?' attitude here. It's ridiculous. Now, Cakewalk can do whatever they want to do, it's their product afterall. We are not entitled to a good staff view, but let's face it, many of us have been using Cake for years and would expect a feature in the program to continue and at least be updated once every 10 years, that's all.
post edited by ChrisBG - 2011/12/31 17:05:08
#106
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 17:10:39 (permalink)
Well,

I'm amazed at how many people think that Cakewalk can just devote tons of R&D into something for free.

Well maybe I'm not amazed. People these days seem to only be worried about what they want - no matter what it costs someone else.
#107
trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6348
  • Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
  • Location: London ON
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 17:20:26 (permalink)
Oh come on now...again.

I am not expecting them to do this for free...we went through this merry go round before...

 

The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate.

Bushpianos
#108
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 17:32:49 (permalink)
trimph1


Oh come on now...again.

I am not expecting them to do this for free...we went through this merry go round before...

 


If you don't think they should do it for free....then thats great - my response wasn't for you.
#109
ChrisBG
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 43
  • Joined: 2004/07/08 03:07:46
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 17:35:27 (permalink)

Well maybe I'm not amazed. People these days seem to only be worried about what they want - no matter what it costs someone else.
You have seriously got to be joking. Nobody is expecting free handouts here. There is a vast difference between wanting everything for free and just having handouts, and buying a software program and hoping the developers continue to develop it and support it just like every other program out there.

Notation took an actual step backwards in X1. We would obviously be willing to pay more for a working notation. But let's be honest with ourselves. It is not a BIG problem to fix. It would not cost them that much to do it, unless they were to completely revamp it, maybe. We're just asking for basic notation abilities and fixes here. Notation is a feature already advertised in their product. There isn't tons of R&D needed. Sonar just needs a few basic things fixed that customers have been talking and talking about for years. It would cost, but not the way you're making it sound. This is just ridiculous. The logic here, I can't even begin....Wow.

I don't think people feel entitled to the staff view basic fixes, they are just dissapointed after using a program for so long. Like it or not, part of the reason people use Sonar is the staff view. It is a part of the program.

It is probably too late anyway. Most people who require notation and have to use it for their day to day job would have moved away from Sonar maybe before even X1. So then Cake have to say, okay, well, if we introduce staff features, will it be enough to bring people from other DAW's? Will it be worth it? Will we make more money? Probably not.
post edited by ChrisBG - 2011/12/31 17:54:15
#110
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 17:59:37 (permalink)
ChrisBG



Well maybe I'm not amazed. People these days seem to only be worried about what they want - no matter what it costs someone else.
You have seriously got to be joking. Nobody is expecting free handouts here. There is a vast difference between wanting everything for free and just having handouts, and buying a software program and hoping the developers continue to develop it and support it just like every other program out there.

Notation took an actual step backwards in X1. We would obviously be willing to pay more for a working notation. But let's be honest with ourselves. It is not a BIG problem to fix. It would not cost them that much to do it, unless they were to completely revamp it, maybe. We're just asking for basic notation abilities and fixes here. Notation is a feature already advertised in their product. There isn't tons of R&D needed. Sonar just needs a few basic things fixed that customers have been talking and talking about for years. It would cost, but not the way you're making it sound. This is just ridiculous. The logic here, I can't even begin....Wow.

I don't think people feel entitled to the staff view basic fixes, they are just dissapointed after using a program for so long. Like it or not, part of the reason people use Sonar is the staff view. It is a part of the program.

It is probably too late anyway. Most people who require notation and have to use it for their day to day job would have moved away from Sonar maybe before even X1. So then Cake have to say, okay, well, if we introduce staff features, will it be enough to bring people from other DAW's? Will it be worth it? Will we make more money? Probably not.
 
Cakewalk has already responded in the past 10 threads about this - that it would take a total re-vamp and lots and lots of R&D.  Cakewalk said it - not me.
 
Again, Its pure speculation that folks have left unless you know of someone that has left.  I could say that tons of people left Sonar because you can't change the colors in X1, but I don't know of anyone who has.....it would be total speculation on my part.
I will tell you this - it's not speculation at all that folks have turned to Sonar because of the X1 - THE DAW.
#111
trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6348
  • Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
  • Location: London ON
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 18:01:14 (permalink)
Since it supposedly has this HUUUUGGEE R&D issue involved then why on earth did they leave this in then???

The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate.

Bushpianos
#112
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 18:04:37 (permalink)
trimph1


Since it supposedly has this HUUUUGGEE R&D issue involved then why on earth did they leave this in then???

One of the reasons (in the words of Cakewalk) from the other thread is that - The function of saving as XML to export to other notation programs is in the staff view. I suppose they didn't want to move that to the DAW portion of Sonar. There are a few more functions that the staff view was providing to the DAW that Cakewalk referred to, but I can't remember what they were.
 
Its totally understandable to me if someone wants an All-or-Nothing as it pertains to the staff view.
#113
ChrisBG
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 43
  • Joined: 2004/07/08 03:07:46
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 18:08:28 (permalink)

Again, Its pure speculation that folks have left unless you know of someone that has left. I could say that tons of people left Sonar because you can't change the colors in X1, but I don't know of anyone who has.....it would be total speculation on my part.
What an odd comparison...Lol. Thanks though. I do actually know people who have switched off Sonar because of the lack of staff tool development. It would be the same with any other feature, but since notation is apparently only important to a minority, it's cool to just forget about it and tell people who use it they have a problem and that they should pay to get it developed.

I don't understand how it would take a total revamp and time and money in R&D to fix a triplet tool and let it display on the staff view. Or look at the other features, the staff view initially in X1 had no easily accessable note icons. A third party developer managed to write a hack with his own toolbar and put it back. Didn't take him years of R&D.

Again, I don't feel a sense of entitlement. I respect companies want to make as much money as possible, and that's cool - I'm all for that. I love that. I'm just a little dissapointed that I won't be continuing on with Sonar. The staff view is my #1 tool of use. It is important to me. Maybe you don't understand that because as you said, you'd be happy to have the staff view gone, so why you would be so vocal about it I have no idea. But anyway. That's all it is.
#114
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 18:17:48 (permalink)
ChrisBG



Again, Its pure speculation that folks have left unless you know of someone that has left. I could say that tons of people left Sonar because you can't change the colors in X1, but I don't know of anyone who has.....it would be total speculation on my part.
What an odd comparison...Lol. Thanks though. I do actually know people who have switched off Sonar because of the lack of staff tool development. It would be the same with any other feature, but since notation is apparently only important to a minority, it's cool to just forget about it and tell people who use it they have a problem and that they should pay to get it developed.

I don't understand how it would take a total revamp and time and money in R&D to fix a triplet tool and let it display on the staff view. Or look at the other features, the staff view initially in X1 had no easily accessable note icons. A third party developer managed to write a hack with his own toolbar and put it back. Didn't take him years of R&D.

Again, I don't feel a sense of entitlement. I respect companies want to make as much money as possible, and that's cool - I'm all for that. I love that. I'm just a little dissapointed that I won't be continuing on with Sonar. The staff view is my #1 tool of use. It is important to me. Maybe you don't understand that because as you said, you'd be happy to have the staff view gone, so why you would be so vocal about it I have no idea. But anyway. That's all it is.
Sorry to see ya go.  I'm not sure why Cakewalk said it would take a total re-vamp, but they did.
 
2 reasons I am vocal about it and I've listed them many times before:
 
    1. I don't want to pay for a feature in a DAW that I don't use.
    2. I don't want a feature that I use to possibly damage the DAW that I use.
 
Both of which has happened in other DAWs. I own 3 Digidesign $50K+ ICONS (ProTools) and they PT10 has added some piddly sideline features that shut down over $200K of equipment in my studio. These features had nothing at all to do with the ICONS "AT ALL".  This has happend 3 times since PT10 came out. I didn't even have the oppportunity to "NOT INSTALL" these options. They made them part of the DAW.  Avid even acknowledged on their forum that it was a bone-head move on their part.
 
All I can say is that I better not have an issue with this Pro-Channel (that I don't use) that Sonar forced into their code. If so I'll be like you - I'm outta here. 
All I want is a DAW that works. Thats it.  If I want something else, then I'm more than willing to shell out the bucks for it.
#115
trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6348
  • Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
  • Location: London ON
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 18:39:19 (permalink)
That is why I think full customization would come in handy.

Disable the parts YOU do not want..have the rest.

And, if others want that then should be the ones paying for it...simples.

Then we would not be seeing these angst ridden threads all the time.

The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate.

Bushpianos
#116
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 18:40:26 (permalink)
trimph1


That is why I think full customization would come in handy.

Disable the parts YOU do not want..have the rest.

And, if others want that then should be the ones paying for it...simples.

Then we would not be seeing these angst ridden threads all the time.

+1 
 
I agree 100%
#117
konradh
Max Output Level: -42 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3325
  • Joined: 2006/01/16 16:07:06
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 18:51:44 (permalink)
I don't know why I am throwing myself in the middle of this, but this argument is really getting ridiculous. Staff/note entry and viewing is a requirement for a music program that includes sequencing and Cakewalk should fix the major bugs with this. A full notation program is a completely different thing that is beyond the scope of a DAW and making it a paid add-on makes sense since many users will not care about it. Cakewalk already has three version with different prices.
#118
gtgarner
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 895
  • Joined: 2005/07/21 14:36:13
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 18:53:11 (permalink)
Someone forgot to tell REASON that staff/notation is a requirement.   They don't have anything.

This is very interesting:

Check out the PDF that the REAPER website put out concerning a REAPER to SONAR cheetsheet.

http://www.reaper.fm/userguide/SONARtoREAPER.pdf

Scroll down the list and Notice how simple the Sonar DAW is compared to Reaper.  Reaper posted this on THEIR website. Sonars DAW requires at least a 40% reduction in keystrokes.  The workflow of SONAR X1 is fabulous - Even stated from other DAW makers.
 
In Sonar you do this:  Simple              In Reaper you do this:   Multipile clicks and keystrokes - or NOT SUPPORTED

I would guarantee that the folks who say they are leaving Cakewalk due to staf fview issues aren't going to REASON.  They don't have anything relating to staff view as THEY state on their website.

I just find it interesting - Maybe you will as well.
post edited by gtgarner - 2011/12/31 18:59:32
#119
ChrisBG
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 43
  • Joined: 2004/07/08 03:07:46
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY doesn't Cakewalk care about the staff view? 2011/12/31 19:22:26 (permalink)
gtgarner, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make there...Reaper is much cheaper than Sonar and isn't designed to do all the things Sonar does. It's a smaller scale DAW and it works very well for a lot of people. ?

I read on their forum that they do plan on adding a notation feature that is 'somewhere inbetween simple and complex' Now that would be extremely interesting. Combine that with some video features and that would make Reaper an extremely powerful, affordable tool.
#120
Page: < 12345 > Showing page 4 of 5
Jump to:
© 2025 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1