Dappa1


Thank you ProjectM it does work now!

Jonbouy



And sorry I don't sympathise with this bit at all.

"You cannot possibly expect Cakewalk to spend resources supporting old software, the job just supporting X1 (4 different versions now) must be massive enough as it is. If you think 8.5 should still be supported just because of your current circumstances (or the fact you were a nice guy in the past) then sorry you are living in cloud cookoo, I have every sympathy but facts are facts."

Cakewalk are a big boy grown up commercial company and they need to realise that they can't expect people long-term to keep forking out for upgrades where existing broken functionality migrates from version to version. 

ProjectM

Dappa1


FBB this is the scientific find of the decade! SO whilst in playback mode you can arm your track?

This has been a around for a while tho. Since v8? I think you have to tick a box in preferences for "alow arming of tracks during playback" or something along those lines. Check the help file if needed - and if it doesn't do it by default.
 
It works tho, I do that all the time. Now if I could disable the Write Automation while playback is running then it would be all swell

dappa1--Thank you ProjectM it does work now!
 

"I shouldn't have to read the manual or help screens to change options to set up the program the way I want to use it!!  CW should already have it standard as the way I (and therefore everyone else  ) wants to work!!  Their program is weak and not as good as everyone else's who includes everything I've ever wanted in a recording software right now without further developing and upgrading! I'm trying to make music here without learning the ins and outs of my software!"

mike_mccue

Like for example; it seems as if someone within Cakewalk could have pointed out that reducing track visibility in Track view was going to be met with derision and ridicule. My guess is that someone at Cakewalk did make that observation and that someone else dismissed the concern.

I keep hoping that the end user reaction to X1 will empower the people who have some common sense at Cakewalk and allow them to exert some influence in the design of SONAR.

What I see in X1 is a stack of non sensical ideas.

I am. personally, hoping for some common sense to pervade the Cakewalk shop to the extent that who ever actually coordinates or "manages" the overview and development of SONAR starts making practical decisions. I'd probably settle for some bread and butter logic. I'll continue to send money in and hope things get better.

FastBikerBoy

The thread I referred to is here.

I don't normally work that way so it was more of an experiment for me but if I did, I'd be jumping up and down about the MIDI weirdness/crosstalk that I witnessed long before any dropout issues or glitching got to me.

It would loop forever, inserting tracks, changing tracks, dropping in & out of recording mode, what it wouldn't do was faithfully play back what I was playing as I was playing it.

It would make Sonar unusable for me if I wanted to work that way but not because of the engine stopping. The MIDI was frankly a mess, and I'm 99.9% certain that it wasn't user error in exactly the same way that the dropouts seen by others aren't user error on their systems either. I just don't experience a lot of dropout issues here. Different users seeing different results, must be a nightmare to know what to start fixing first.

• Edit > Preferences > Project > Record > Recording Mode > Allow Arm Changes During Playback/Record

Dappa1


I am not having a go at him I am responding to what he said about apps being gapless. 

Ableton Live's main concern is gapless audio because it better be if it's going to be a live performance instrument

rtucker55


I just received another Email from Cakewalk;

Last Chance: Save up to 28% on SONAR X1 Expanded Bundles - Free Gift From Groove 3‏

I would love to pull the trigger and do it but Expanded is still broken, just like X1c, and there is no fix in sight to my knowledge. At least no one from Cake has mentioned anything about an ETA for the fixes.

I could not deal with the Aim assist being broken and the workaround sounds like an exercise in frustration. As much as I want to I just can't spend another $79 for even more workarounds...

Come on Cakewalk, for Christ sakes, Give us a Fix ETA or a rain-check on the discounts or both. Continuing to send these sale emails for a product that you have acknowledged has issues but will eventually??? be fixed is just Bad Business.

P.S. The formatting of this message looks nothing like when I typed it. Just another brick in the wall...

Jonbouy

Just as a reality check...no one program will ever have all desirable characteristics of all programs, or there would only be one DAW, it would have 100% market share, and everyone else could go home.

Who's reality check?

I don't think anybody here is complaining about Sonar not being all things to all men, in fact it is probably still the one DAW that gets closest to claiming that role.

Yes I agree you see many issues related to specific setups not working in different scenarios I think most are aware of the likelihood of running into issues in that respect on any product, most of us live with that.  Few that live in the real world will need a reality check here.

It's certainly not what I've been talking about.  I've been talking about realistic ways of achieving better stability at launch and how to add real beer not froth to the feature set.

Take Z3ta 2 for example unlike a DAW it gets used in a specific way yet a 50 pager on KVR on the issues at launch it had characterized it for many as being a 'typical' Cakewalk release, nothing to do with Hardware, complicated scenarios just another Cakewalk standard quality release.

Here's the real reality check.  Cakewalk can certainly do much better than saying sorry it didn't work but we are a commited bunch here's a bugfix that solves some of the issues now go and make music!

Incidentally, there's a thread running on Props User Forum just now as there is some indication of increased CPU usage on Reason 6 over the previous Reason/Record duo,  I can't repliacate it neither it seems can they presently.  But did you know somebody from there has gone through the threads to identify those being affected, created a test project and invited those users to report back with their findings?  Now that to me indicates a company that is serious about the quality of it's product.

They are pro-actively involved in supporting those that are seeing this issue seeking it those affected and supporting them directly, just on the strength of a consensus on the forums.  They are checking to see if there is a fire behind the smoke, and as much as I see praise here (most of which is worthy) for the interaction from the staff the Props are clearly on another level in this regard.

Again I can't see the point of saying it's alright everyone and everything else is as bad I just believe that there are ways of making this favourite DAW of mine stand out by being that bit better than the rest.

ba_midi

 

While much of what we are discussing really does fall to the "who really knows" category, there are some things that are on point and probably bare reiteration.

For example:  Using a system strictly as a DAW, not putting on a bunch of unrelated applications (games, spreadsheets, are some examples) affords some protection against multiple sources of interference.  What I mean by that is ...  every application has its own install issues, update issues, configuration issues and more.  These things add to the "potential" for conflicts, bugs, data loss, and more.   So obviously "lean" is good when it comes to using a DAW.

I also feel that many users of host software (like Sonar) are hobbyists for the most part so they approach their "DAW" (the system itself) differently than someone who makes a living at it.   This generally means that the DAW is not approached as a singular entity as it might be for the professional and ends up being used as a "general" computer (internet, word processing, games, etc).   That certainly exposes a system to way more potential problems than one that is dedicated and maintained accordingly.

But even a dedicated system doesn't guarantee complete success with respect to stability and such.   As we all know - there are literally countless configuration possibilities.

This is where the suggestion made about seeking professional system builders is important.  By reducing the amount of variables and going with configurations that are known to work well or at least have the best chance of working well, a lot of the problems are or can be alleviated from the get go.

Speaking from my own experience, though -- I feel that both arguments, ie., "it's your system" vs "it's the software" are equally possible and equally "easy" to assert.   Much depends on the level of expertise of the person making the assertion.

So in my own case I can feel pretty confident that it was the software that needed fixin', so to speak, for me to have a stable experience with X1.   I can't speak for anyone else.

And, at the same time -- I have often seen resolutions offered on this forum to users where it did, in fact, turn out to be the hardware that needed fixin'.

So I think the quest for absolute nirvana with software and hardware will continue regardless.  It's just something we all have to live with and improve at ;)