My issues aren't so much what's inside the DAW.  I need help with mic placement, equalization ideas, the best ways to use reverb.  I need a "Stop sign" when I have too much going on in effects.  And any intelligence in mastering is always welcome.
 
I know many people will say "Yeah, it is called 'learning the craft'."  That's true, but even if I understand these things, it is still helpful if the technology can guide me in the right direction.  I believe these "externals" will become increasingly important in the DAW world, simply because there just isn't that much more to do on the DAW internals.

Perhaps a link that will appear at startup to take the user to a file (local or internet site) that will show them how to use certain aspects of the software, and make it to where this link can be recalled at anytime in case the user gets stuck trying to do a particular task. I know this would take some effort on the company's behalf but I'm sure a manufacturer could draw a lot more customers if there users, current and potential, could go somewhere and quickly watch a "how to" video. Perhaps they can partner with some one like Groove3 to make these "how to videos" or do it in house. (Just a thought)

Larry Jones
Presets. The QuadCurve EQ presets are a good start, as are the project templates and lenses, but more of them, tailored to more genres and types of projects (2-hour narrations, 3-minute guitar pop songs, orchestral pieces, recording, sweetening, mixing, etc). Once the project is open, a whole bunch of track templates for various instruments and vocals would be handy. Basically, any pre-built setups that take advantage of industry standards and best practices, to get the ball rolling. Obviously users would adjust templates and presets to their own taste, and nobody would have to use any of the pre-built stuff, but I think it would make DAWs easier to use if they contained a lot of quick-start stuff. 
 
PS: I know you can make your own templates, but the question is "what would make DAWs easier to use?" Creating a template from scratch is just as hard as working without templates, and almost impossible if you're new at the game.

Presets for sure.
 
Before synths had on-board preset memory, a person would have to know the details of how the synth worked in order to twist the right knobs and flip the right switches (or plug cables from here <--> there). Nowadays, a synth can have an ultra-sophisticated sound generator, but anyone can plug it in, find the power switch, and play many different sounds from presets. When someone later wants to find out how something is done in the synth, they can crack open the manual and examine, then twiddle the settings. If too many twiddles messes up the sound, just hit a preset to get back on track.
 
Computer-based DAWs have an inherent startup complexity involving coordinating various hardware hookups and software installations. There are so many choices for the components of a DAW, it seems hopeless to be able to simplify things in a central way. But maybe the portion of getting the DAW software started and configured could be encapsulated in presets. Sonar has templates for starters, so maybe promote the idea of templates to an easier level, like presets. Presets may not address the overall OP question, just beginner steps. Also, presets shouldn't take over the GUI for everybody.
 
Another potentially helpful paradigm in a DAW GUI would be something like "make this be like that". It's a generalization of "clone" and "copy", but applies to elements or sub elements in configuration. So when you have a project that has a track or bus or sound-chain that works in some desirable way, click on that and apply it somewhere in your current project. Again, similar to the idea of a template, but instead of creating, naming, and saving a template, then loading it in order to use it, just point and select an element, then apply it in a new place, or overlay an existing element. Determining what constitutes such elements is a high-level design effort, and would have to be built in to the foundations of the DAW software.
 
Ultimately, there would be the "me2fx®" region effect: say your words, hum your melody, then click on some existing song you like. Then all the elements of vocal quality, harmony, rhythm, instrumentation, sound stage, and even today's most modern and creative effects would be pasted from that song into your project, overlaid by your words and melody. ( I apologize)

That's easy! A neural synaptic interface. You imagine the song in your head and SPlat scores in with 4 part harmonies, full orchestral arrangement and perfectly mixed.
 
But seriously, I have no clue. If you strip down the interface it just makes some options or functions more hidden, harder to remember and to access. Tutorials or trainers eventually just serve to irritate me. They also don't really 'make it easier' they just help to learn complex functions.

...wicked
DAWs still generally try and hold onto hardware paradigms where possible. While this is great for us folk who learned on tape machines and old desks it can be a little confusing for new users.
 
So, I would say an interface that can focus on signal flow and "sense-making" of the audio. Something that keeps the basics up front and easy and only exposes the deeper elements as you need them. I'm always surprised at how many folk don't understand how aux sends work, for example. Coming from the hardware world it makes total sense because you literally have to patch it in. But in software, if we could just do a pinch/expand motion with our fingers to designate a split in the signal, which you drag over to an FX square that you then setup to be your Verb return or whatever.... You can trace the signal with your finger and it will probably make more sense to a younger person.
 

I like the thinking used here.  I'm not sure how CW could implement this but perhaps an old idea I had as a feature request many years ago could use this idea. A graphic diagram of the routing with editable points to reroute or add tracks, buses, Pro Channel effects, sends, aux tracks and so on. All touchable and pen ready. This could be in a separate window not unlike any other Sonar window. It could also be tied into the drum map. It could be the way MIDI can send to more than one out. I think this could be the heart of the Sonar system, saved and reused for other projects. Now I'm not sure how easy this would be for new users but I think it could solve a great many problem.
 
 

Tabs..... 

John
A graphic diagram of the routing with editable points to reroute or add tracks, buses, Pro Channel effects, sends, aux tracks and so on. All touchable and pen ready.

Yes, absolutely.  Bidule does something like this that would be a good point of reference.  I like your idea of adding representation of the USAGE ELEMENTS, not just the routing.  It would be nice to represent the actual amplitudes flowing through each path to make it obvious where clipping may be an issue.  Any way to visualize "audio clutter", redundant paths, spectrum collisions and so on would be extremely powerful.  I can easily imagine clicking on any point in the graph to instantly solo the signal passing through that point.  This would not be trivial by a long shot, but it could be transformational.
 
Here is an example of Bidule:
http://i.imgur.com/FTp5vl6.png

cparmerlee

John
A graphic diagram of the routing with editable points to reroute or add tracks, buses, Pro Channel effects, sends, aux tracks and so on. All touchable and pen ready.

Yes, absolutely.  Bidule does something like this that would be a good point of reference.  I like your idea of adding representation of the USAGE ELEMENTS, not just the routing.  It would be nice to represent the actual amplitudes flowing through each path to make it obvious where clipping may be an issue.  Any way to visualize "audio clutter", redundant paths, spectrum collisions and so on would be extremely powerful.  I can easily imagine clicking on any point in the graph to instantly solo the signal passing through that point.  This would not be trivial by a long shot, but it could be transformational.
 
Here is an example of Bidule:
http://i.imgur.com/FTp5vl6.png

I wish I could claim this as an original idea but I'm stealing it from Logic Platinum 5 for PC. Emagic called it the environment. Without it you couldn't do anything. Once set up you had total control. I don't want that. It would be a horror for new users to deal with. I would want it to be created automatically as you add tracks and buses inserts and so on. It would keep track of all routing and FX but it would be completely editable and printable. I really like your idea of showing the amplitude. That could be a real help. There are other things it could do but for now I would be very happy with what is presented so far. I do know it would be a chore to code but Sonar is already an object oriented program thus it could be built on that concept. Think how CW included insert points for aux tracks. Being able to do that in a graphical "environment" would give a lot of power to the user.
 
   

Sanderxpander
1. A less cluttered interface

Permit me to take the opposite view here.
The only way to unclutter the interface is to hide stuff away.
I prefer having as much visible as possible.

interpolated
Sonar keyboard would be cool. You know prepared with all the default shortcuts and take the thinking out of the process. Like the pro tools one you can buy.

I actually had one for SONAR some years ago but it's since become outdated. Some of the shortcuts has changed.

- Lots of educative materials available, notably videos, most of them free or not too expensive
- An official list of projects, perhaps 10-20, with all the tracks, busses, fx and so  to play with, downloadable from Cakewalk's site / Cakewalk command center: to reference for questions, discussions, technical problems, tips and tricks, techniques (sidechaining) with other people from the community.
- Well, though out keyboard shortcut collections. The possibility to switch from Protools-like shortcuts to Cubase-like shortcuts and so forth
- Live Q&A, masterclass or guest on YouTube or Twitch, where Cakewalk people or guest can answer questions by showing on the daw. Perhaps monthly. I like the Westlake Pro Audio channel on YouTube for example, but of course, everything is almost 100% Protools related.
 
DAWs are complex products and must be used regularly to be easy to use. It's just like Photoshop or After Effects.
For these, there are tons of great video learning tools, including projects.
I cannot insist enough, it is paramount for people to have access to project files, especially, but far from exclusively, the newbies.
 
This is a reproach I would do to the Eli Kranzberg Sonar video series, where courses are too basic and too much divided by technicalities, such as the tracks views or the metronome settings. This is only a basis.
People will learn the keyboard shortcuts/mouse handling/menus  much more easily if they are used and told and shown again and again and again on projects, because people will remember the project and the technique learned. 
 
This is something that was done supremely well by Total Training for Adobe Products.
When you use the cloning tools on the skin of a model, following what the instructor does on video. You'll remember the model and the cloning tool.
When you use the perspective tool on a house, following what the instructor does on video. You'll remember the house and the perspective tool.
 
We need the same, but for Sonar and music/audio.
 

to me i stoped my choice on sonar 5std because the easy to use of it...
 
ps.sorry for my english..

Most specifically, the acknowledgement that a DAW is not its own world.. Ease of use comes from improved integration with the user and other hardware, be it interfaces, control surfaces or synths and other rack gear
 
1. More user objective oriented documentation, blogs, and particularly videos
 
2. Better control surface integration. The competition is far, far ahead of Sonar.
 
3. Better hardware integration for synths. For example, not only does CW not, and it absolutely SHOULD, have a repository for instrument definitions for synths, absolutely any discussion of said topic gets tossed into the purgatory called the hardware forum, where views are 1% of the main forum..yet the topic is clearly SONAR. Understand that the current message from CW for a new user with (say) a MicroKorg, is that not only do we not support your integration efforts, but that we don't really even care about the question....
 
4. Better hardware integration for interfaces. Other posts covered some aspects, but my 2c... Just exactly how hard is it for "move checked devices to top" to apply to audio as well as midi?..