dubdisciple
I think comparing Cakewalk's model to monthly subscription is off in both ways that favor the consumer and don't. There are people still running 8.5 and happy with it. They will still be eligible for upgrade pricing despite not having paid a cent to cakewalk for years and have full access to software they paid for. While it's true that we don't own the software we theoreticallu have access to access to it perpetually.

Who is talking about a monthly subscription anyhow ? What is wrong with having a annual subscription based system where users that may have stopped at 8.5.3 have a method to get their software "fixed" ? Say a hundred bucks a year ? No biggie.
 
Suppose I don't like the X DAW system (I don't). Suppose I bought it (I did) just to offer support Cakewalk in lieu of a 30 free trial. Well I installed it. I tried it. It does not work for my long established and reflexive workflow. Nor do I have any use for a modeled pro channel. Now suppose I really do like what had been developed up to and including 8.5.3 and I really want debugging to continue. I will without question continue to support Cakewalk that way. But I will not continue to support the X system. I don't like it. Just based on the forum activity over the last year or so alone, I suspect that I am part of a large group.
 
Since cpm software systems, that just how it has worked or works if a person want to continue with further maintenance , and I accept that. It was or is provided strictly for the purpose of maintaining the software - or to illustrate, as users discover bugs. Even the simplistic QuickBooks "PAYROLL" system has gone to the subscription model to just maintain updated tax tables. And that is not inexpensive.
 
The way I see it, the folks that are infatuated with X1 and X2 are doing nothing more that sticking it to the longtime users by demanding that we see it their way or hit the highway. Further Cakewalk has allowed that type of condescending conversation to continue since X1 was introduced.  I don't like it. And I think that if a person reads between the lines, it is obvious  they (Cakewalk)  must (behind the scenes) condone those posts.
 

Danny I'm sorry you see it that way. I have been a very vocal supporter of the X series. It started when X1 was first released. And the reason was what I saw as continued bashing due to unfamiliarity with it. But some was down right hostile that may have turned off possible other customers. 
 
With me I immediately saw X1's potential and climbed on board. I even made a thread that asked  those that are saying things were taken out what were they.  Name them. In the end I mentioned one and some one  found another.
 
To me its a lot like defending Vista. A great OS that was smeared by people that didn't think about it. We seemed to have the same thing happen with X1.
 
For me its a question of truth. You may not like X2 or X1 but not liking it is not the same as it being poor software. Or buggy.
 
There are many reasons why people post about the X series in a negative way. One is they just don't like it and will repeat talk  about bugs that are not real to prove their point. Sometimes I believe they are not seeing those bugs just repeating what some one else has said. 
 
The question must be easy to see in that why do so many bash it and reinforce that while those that like it seem to have no real show stopping problems. Could it be attitude? 
When we were dealing with Sonar 8 it was some what much the same. Now its become a serious problem as to how many feel a need to post negatively about it. 
 
How many times has some used the term fan boy in the past? In every argument there are at least two sides. I feel for those that can't get a stable X2 working. I felt the same way when we were using Sonar 8/ 8.5 too. I just remember that perhaps a little better than some. 
 
Also we have seen direct attacks on CW and its people for all sorts of reasons. Some want a new patch others want more presents of CW on this board. It never stops. No matter how often it is pointed out that this is a peer to peer forum they still demand some one from CW to answer all their questions.
 
Keep all that in mind and then see if what I do and many others do is so wrong? 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   

Well done.

dubdisciple

pianodano


Who is talking about a monthly subscription anyhow ? What is wrong with having a annual subscription based system where users that may have stopped at 8.5.3 have a method to get their software "fixed" ? Say a hundred bucks a year ? No biggie.
 

 
The problem with that model is that 8.5.3 would get phased out the same. and your $100 bucks would go to a forced upgrade to X1 and the X2.  Cakewalk is not going to simultaneously continue developing multiple flagship products.  The reason we mentioned monthly subscription is because the OP referred to the monthly fee model that Adobe uses.  In any case an annual fee similar to Adobe model still removes the option to simply keep using the software you have .

 
Sure, I get that 8.5 is phased out. Never to be re-released. I understand that. But what does that have to do with those users that would gladly pay a annual subscription fee that would be applied  towards continued maintanence of that series ?
 
I guess X1 fans just don't think that Cakewalk has probably lost a group (who really knows how large) of long suffering users that have annually paid for a "upgrade" simply in the hopes of having bugs in their existing version zapped and have a dislike of the X1 methodology.

pianodano, semantics aside, whether we are talking about 8.53, X1 or X2a, under the model that Adobe has introduced updates for previopus versions would cease and  you just get the normal bug fixes, you just get them spread out a little more similar to the weekly adobe flash or acrobat reader never ending updates.  Sounds much better in theory than actual practice.  For those of us that have a stable working version, constant updates can be a pain.  A prime example is those employing the CUDA hack for premiere.  Every time we get one of these minor bug fixes we have to reset things in premiere again.
 
You are also ignoring the fact that under the Adobe model there is no option to simply stop if you are satisfied with what you have. The fee is not to maintain stability of that series.  That's going to happen or not happen anyway and Adobe is going to abandon versions and features just like they always have. Imagine if you hate X3 and find X2 stable enough for your needs but Cakewalk tells you that you must keep paying a monthly fee in order to use X2 despite the fact they are no longer developing it?  That is a real and legitimate concern.  There are people now still using X1 because they don't find X2 stable enough.  They are not getting any new cool things for X1 but they are not be charged to stand pat either.

dubdisciple
pianodano, semantics aside, whether we are talking about 8.53, X1 or X2a, under the model that Adobe has introduced updates for previopus versions would cease and  you just get the normal bug fixes, you just get them spread out a little more similar to the weekly adobe flash or acrobat reader never ending updates.  Sounds much better in theory than actual practice.  For those of us that have a stable working version, constant updates can be a pain.  A prime example is those employing the CUDA hack for premiere.  Every time we get one of these minor bug fixes we have to reset things in premiere again.
 
You are also ignoring the fact that under the Adobe model there is no option to simply stop if you are satisfied with what you have. The fee is not to maintain stability of that series.  That's going to happen or not happen anyway and Adobe is going to abandon versions and features just like they always have. Imagine if you hate X3 and find X2 stable enough for your needs but Cakewalk tells you that you must keep paying a monthly fee in order to use X2 despite the fact they are no longer developing it?  That is a real and legitimate concern.  There are people now still using X1 because they don't find X2 stable enough.  They are not getting any new cool things for X1 but they are not be charged to stand pat either.

 I do not think Cakewalk would stoop as low as you guy say Adobe has. We have all paid for a license to permanently use Sonar - for as long as we can maintain a machine that runs whatever os we have the software for- whichever version you purchased. Cakewalk has always been bleeding edge but I don't think for a minute that they would break their contractual obligations.

i personally wouldn't subscribe if cake switched to that model. most likely i would just stick with the last version that didn't require subscription. i also don't like the idea of "renting" software with the unknowns of what will happen when i "stop paying my bill". i have so many other things pulling at my budget the last thing i need is another additional monthly, quarterly, yearly fee. it's bad enough when i forget each year my website is due then BAM the autopayment hits my account man i hate that. i love cakewalks software and for little as i even use sonar i have still tried to faithfully upgrade to each release. there have been a couple year i didn't even do one project that year but i still did the upgrade when they offered it for $79 or $99. admins/developers, if you read this know that some of us love your product so much we will upgrade if we feel the price point is reasonable enough. i love all the new plugs and features you add. i do wish there were better patch support for known issues, like someone referred to linux that releases patches when & where needed.
 
just my 2 cents, probably only worth one cent

Mystic38
This has nothing to do with "fans of X1", it is simply not economic for a company of CW size to continue to invest in the bug fixes for prior versions. 

 
I'm glad you don't manage the company. :-)
 
I remember the first time I used a desk top computer application. Some guy sold my boss a WANG the size of a refrigerator.
 
The applications barely worked. As the sales guy was leaving he introduced us to the idea of upgrading to a future software version as the solution for all the stuff we were sold that didn't work.
 
I still remember what I thought that day as he left our building:
 
"Theif"
 
In my opinion, software marketers have two choices...  commit to the same rules every other business operates with or continue to be regarded as hacksters, confidence men, and or worse.
 
I'd love to pay for bug fixes to SONAR 8.5 Classic Edition but the guys who made their living preparing that package are exercising their escape clause and have bailed on it so it is no longer an option.
 
The fact that this is a fact doesn't make it right.
 
I remember when Cakewalk sold us Pro Audio 8. We all got a letter from Greg where he said he would make it right and when Pro Audio 9 came out it actually worked and all the PA8 customers were given PA9 as a replacement because PA8 was sold before it worked. Thanks Greg, that meant a lot to me back then... it was the right thing to do. I bought 12 subsequent upgrades because I had faith in Cakewalk.
 
Then something bad happened.
 
I have begun to suspect that desktop computing will be a thing of the past before any of this "friction" (that's an economics term) between suppliers and paying customers is accorded the respect it deserves.
 
Here is an example; Cakewalk's no returns and no resale policy is simply illegal in the sovereign State of Florida.
 
Who do these software companies think they are fooling?
 
I suspect the marketers are going to try to stretch the fiasco out until they manage to retire and bail on the entire scenario.
 
 
 
It is a two way street. If I pay you money... I have the right to a pre defined set of expectations, but some how the software companies have learned to presume that they can take money with out any responsibility other than to them selves.
 
 
The few operations in the software industry that defy that norm and operate within the boundaries of standard business practice are stand outs and I appreciate that they are working extra hard to do what they know is right.
 
 
Any of you soft ware guys that are reading this... you have a choice... it's not really a screw them or get screwed world... that's just a bad habit that a lot of your soft ware peers have made seem normal.
 
I'm hoping for a change for the good.
 
I got money.
 
Cakewalk used to represent, to me, a road map to excellence. 
 
I'm thinking about buying SONAR X3 the day it comes out just cause it seems like we have to keep the cash flowing and maybe some day, some one at Cakewalk will have the Chutzpah to shake up the operation and set the sights on simple and good instead of "Content Club", "cheap", and "mediocre". 
 
 
 
all the best,
mike
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
I would be very happy to deal with honesty.
 
If someone wanted to be honest about what they were going to fix and they told me how much it was going to cost I'd feel as if I had met someone that I would want to partner with.
 
Absolutely!
 
 
 
 
That's not my impression of what Adobe is doing... and so my initial answer about the Adobe subscription reflects that impression.
 
 
Thanks for asking.
 
all the best,
mike

They can't run in every direction at once. The demand just isn't there.

I find it interesting how many cake users are computer experts by day.

And I think it is awesome that Mike will buy software to support the team he believes in.

I think that the best work will rise to the top. I'm an impatient optimist.

Vlab..image line's model is the exact opposite of what we are discussing. You buy once and own every update for life with no additional fees. I think it's a great policybut no sure I their purchase model is practical for most software makers.

Anderton, do you use the PC EQs or do you prefer to use the LP 64 EQ? I often use the PC EQs because they are so easy and right there. It's rare I bother with the LP 64 EQ.
 
Also, I believe I remember a great section in your video about how to use the MultiBand Compressor. I'm surprised you now comment on it being unusable.

Hi all and with much respect for Craig, i followed this article with much concern. 

i started out with CWPA a long time back in Win95 or NT4, as fas as i can remember. At that time CWPA was the most advanced MIDI sequencer. i could remember connecting a whole bunch of synths, MIDI stuff through the Layla 24/96. Although then, there was always a slight latency issue however, we always managed to work thru. Fast forward to today its really a totally different ball game...

one of the things i am seriously concerned is that software can only get bigger with installs. Companies will always have something new to add; things like soft synths, sounds, samples, effects...etc. However, i have yet to come across a dedicated DAW; a pure DAW as it is.
 
When CWPA started, it was touted to be an extremely comprehensive MIDI sequencer; MIDI in, MIDI out, mixdown to audio and then export out. Weather we master to 8-track within CWPA, or to ADAT, or with Sonic Foundry's Sound Forge was another matter. Things were simple. That's what music production is.
 
In honesty, i gave up on CWPA when they hit version 7+. I am sorry to say the entire interface was a mess; there were too many windows going on, too many icons which until today i have no memory of what they look like or what they do. The first versions of Sonar weren't any better, in fact things got even more cluttered and yet more icons...
 
Sonar X1 was a breath of fresh air; the interface has been cleared up so much, the work flow is great with the docking and tab system, ProChannel plugins, stability and major integration with both hardware and VSTs. There are issues, but nothing like the days of old... 
 
Perhaps the model i sincerely hope Cakewalk would consider is to develop a powerful yet stable DAW without all the bells and whistles of forced built in synths, sounds, samples, effects... etc. Just develop a tool dedicated to the music production process and continue to improve on its strengths. Perhaps retail this DAW at a reasonable price. If there is perhaps a new feature in the MIDI PRV like the colouring of corresponding keys, perhaps, long time and dedicated users will be willing to pay a very small fee for the update. Saying this is fair towards Cake and users alike because this is a new feature and programming codes will have to be rewritten and integrated for this.
 
My long time yearn is for a feature, similar to Cubase, MIDI Chord harmonies... unfortunately, over the years, Cake's PRV has never changed until X2.... yet this feature is still not avail.... (sad)
 
ON A SIDE NOTE: Sony has just released Sound Forge Pro 11. it comes with an integrated iZotope Mastering Suite... why would i wanna pay for a forced upgrade when i have Sound Forge Pro 10 and iZotope Ozone & Advanced Mastering Suite...???? Doesnt make sense..... 

as far was additional synths, sounds, effects, etc... perhaps Cakewalk could sell them separately as plugins. For those who would like them, they are able to make the payment to Cake for the development. i am saying this because, i have no use for most of the other features and i am quite sure, there are many on this forum who would agree too. Personally, i do not use the Matrix view, however, for those who have the need for this workflow, they have a choice to make that purchase. Also, for ProChannel, no matter how good the reviews are, personally again i do not use them. The choices for sounds is even a greater subject for discussion... it all depends on the genre of music we produce hence the choice of synths... thus all of these should be available as plugins; after all plug ins are what they really are...
 
i believe that the main DAW should be the main focus and not developing additional incentives to justify a bulk purchase of stuff we dont need. what producers and musicians want is a stable workbench to showcase their works... the audience is not gonna to know the difference which EQ was used to cut the mid's or add hi's... or which compressor was used to side chain the drums.... etc. The line between analouge synths are even worse... to the audience they all sound the same, so frankly and IMHO, it really doesnt matter. But what does matter, is which DAW platform the performance was made on.
 
When you go from studio to studio there is no way to demand that we want ProChannel or iZotope or Waves to be on the final mix... we have to work with whats available there. its back to the basics... a powerful yet stable DAW is essentially back to the basics and thats the support users need to count on Cakewalk for. Whats the point of having a car with all the interior luxury money can buy, but square shaped wheels...????

As Craig mentioned Adobe's model, though i have never used their CC collection, i am still on CS6. i can honestly tell you, with Photoshop, Fireworks, Premiere and After Effects there is nothing CS6 can do which CS3, CS4, CS5 and CS5.5 cant. Unfortunately the same cant be said about Flash and Dreamweaver... the web is now being developed by clowns who just put in codes and stuff which nobody can agree on.....  
 
It all boils down to the matter of workflow and competency. Sure there are improvements in both CUDA and OpenGL, honestly it doesn't matter, hitting the "ENTER" key will still give you the result in almost similar times. Quite frankly, editing a video in native AVCHD (Sony) its is even faster in Premiere CS4 when compared to CS6.... As for Photoshop, how much different can can changing a dull red to a bright red be...??? its all just a tool... the workflow and the steps remain the same. Are we paying for new, prettier icons, layout differently while the back-end engine remains the same... 
 
its times like these when we would ask ourselves, was the cash spent worth while...??? i dont wish to go on about the latest hardware and all, that is another totally different topic altogether....
 
written with much respect to Craig Anderton and all....
 
many thanks for reading... 

I hate the idea also. Ampfixer and Make Shift explained my feelings for the most part. I like Scott G's comment too....if the subscription I paid for never dies (like Cake) once I stop paying for that version, that's fair. However...
 
There are lots of things within the software industry that I think need to be revisited badly before we ever make the subscription thing more common in my opinion. Like we can sit here and fire off quite a few legit things that are wrong with our criminal justice system in the USA, software is to me, in the same boat. It's one of the only business models that basically says "up yours" if it doesn't work for a particular person. You open it/download it, 9 times out of 10, it's your loss if it doesn't work and it's rare you get your money back.
 
Dongles, iLok's, whatever other piracy tools they use (thank you Cake for NOT doing things like this. Please don't ever change.) often times hinder those of us who are paying customers. I'll never forget the problems I had with iLok or the dongles of old where I paid top dollar for something while my bud across town used an ASSIGN crack that had none of these things hindering his performance. We that pay, shouldn't have to "pay" for thieves.
 
But anyway, (I just wanted to give you an idea as to why I said things should be revisited beforehand) though software is the future and has more pro's than cons, with innovation comes hardship which gets passed on to us more times than not in MY experience.it makes you feel like it's all about money in a lot of situations. With the economy the way it is, I see things as getting worse for consumers. I know a great deal of time, research and man/woman-power goes into everything software, but there are quite a few companies that really have me scratching my head to where I wonder how they remain in business. I also know that software can be more problematic than building a car engine I'm sure. BUT, that doesn't give it the right to be higher and mightier than any other thing we pay for in life. In a sense, software to me seems to do whatever it wants to do while having us by the stones.
 
I also agree with Mike Mccue about how some software has way more than we need and we sort of have to get it anyway. To me, Adobe Audition 3 is insanely good and nothing Adobe has out today touches it in certain areas. We don't need any more bells and whistles. That program did what it did better than many others costing 2 times what it cost. Innovation, though great (I'm one of the guys that is a bit upset that I'll not be alive to see what the world is about in 4013 if it's still around) can be the death of us as well. Too many cool things can sometimes overwhelm you right out of using this stuff. Add a subscription fee to that to where things stop working and well, I personally feel we're better off using older operating systems on older computers using software that worked for us without all the bloatware we seem to be seeing these days. I'll pass on subscriptions and will try my best to keep using what works for me.
 
I have machines here with old operating systems that run certain programs. I'm totally happy with them to be honest. They work. They aren't loaded with things that I will never use and once I pay for them, I can use them until I pass on or the machine with that OS dies. I respect software and of course those who create it...but it wouldn't take too much for me to stop keeping up with technology while sticking with several programs of "basic stuff" that work instead of all in ones that annoy me. The more in depth these things seem to get, the more problems we all have. This in turn forces you to be good with computers and that gets old too and I've had enough of that in this lifetime. Add subscriptions and other piracy gizmo's to further frustrate me and I search for other means or heck, I'll change my career. No sense doing something you hate due to how the software companies have sort of forced you to accommodate them for things you may not enjoy anymore, ya know?
 
The perfect subscription to me is the one that doesn't exist that also doesn't punish me with piracy crap for purchasing it.
 
-Danny

keyzs
Hi all and with much respect for Craig, i followed this article with much concern. 

i started out with CWPA a long time back in Win95 or NT4, as fas as i can remember. At that time CWPA was the most advanced MIDI sequencer. i could remember connecting a whole bunch of synths, MIDI stuff through the Layla 24/96. Although then, there was always a slight latency issue however, we always managed to work thru. Fast forward to today its really a totally different ball game...

one of the things i am seriously concerned is that software can only get bigger with installs. Companies will always have something new to add; things like soft synths, sounds, samples, effects...etc. However, i have yet to come across a dedicated DAW; a pure DAW as it is.

I certainly didn't sense any lack of respect or confrontation, just worthwhile opinions presented in a rational way, so no problems there. You can find stripped down programs like EnergyXT, which has something like a 2MB footprint. It's a clever program that can even do a few things the "big boys" don't do, but of course, the editing options are very limited.
 
A lot of what you see in terms of "sprawl" s that the features people want from a DAW vary. For example, someone's definition of a basic DAW might not include virtual instruments. Another might find staff and notation essential, while another might need a Matrix view for more groove-oriented work. And while it's true there are plenty of choices for plug-ins and you can use those instead of what's included with Sonar, there aren't any compatibility issues with Sonar and Cakewalk's plug-ins; and when collaborating with other Sonar users, there are no issues about who owns which plug-ins.
 
One of the (very few) things I do miss about 8.5 was the extent of the possible customization One friend found Sonar too complicated so I made a custom layout which was basically an ADAT with faders - 8 tracks, transport, record, solo, mute and that was pretty much it.
 
What you're describing in terms of a DAW sounds similar to what was actually a commercial goal at one point - Yamaha's OPT standard. Sony and Cakewalk were the only two companies I know of other than Yamaha who actually put this into their program builds (IIRC, Acid 4 and Sonar 2). The idea was that you could have a modular DAW. If you wanted a MIDI Editor, you'd use a MIDI Editor plug-in. If you wanted notation, you put in a Notation plug-in. And so on. It seems this would suit your needs exactly - a basic core that you could "accessorize" as desired, and differently people could accessorize differently. But, for whatever reason, OPT never caught on and has become the proverbial footnote in history.