bitflipper


So why am I still running 8.5? Because being "as stable as the previous rev" isn't a compelling motivation on its own. The new product is essentially functionally identical to its predecessor.

With sincere respect Bit - I think that's rather debatable and depends highly upon how a user works and what is important to them. ProChannel, drag and drop browser with arguably superior content management, improved tabbed interface (MultiDock), screensets, etc would qualify as functional differences. Whether or not they are valuable to you is completley subjective of course.

jm24


3 main S-X changes that make me crazy:
  Restricted multiple choices everywhere, sorta, requiring more attention from user, more clicks, eyes away from work
  Reduced flexibility:  modification of colors, smart tools,...
  Less visual feedback: more attention from user 
  

Fantastic post.  I do senior level tech support and deal with salespeople, programmers and end users.  I am a UX/GUI fanatic and you have hit it on the head.  4 years into the MS office "Ribbon" paradigm, it is still a dismal failure on this front and I curse it daily.  Most programmers don't use their own products, and end users are generally captive audiences to whatever interface they are given--the fact that they can get up to speed and adapt to the "simpler" design more quickly does not mean they will be more effective in the long haul.  Once the initial learning curve is over, the frustrations and limitations become very apparent.   Yes, you can dumb down an interface to something that is idiot/bulletproof for a mall kiosk touch screen, but that isn't necessarily the style of app that what you want to use for be creating a spreadsheet, multi-media production or flowchart.
 
That is the most distressing part to me, streamlining to make it "easier" for the beginner makes most tasks more of a pain for everyone else.  No, I DON'T want to be constantly using a mouse to get to drop downs, right-click options, having track view sub-sub options move around to different spots on the screen depending on whether my inspector, browser are expanded.  Functions should be in a predictable, stable location and accessible via the same keystroke regardless of context.

jm24


3 main S-X changes that make me crazy:
  Restricted multiple choices everywhere, sorta, requiring more attention from user, more clicks, eyes away from work
  Reduced flexibility:  modification of colors, smart tools,...
  Less visual feedback: more attention from user
 
These are reflective of the thought that "what is good for a new user, is good for all."

It is often, but not always the case.

   
 
The new MS office/Sonar paradigm changes are similar to:
 
Barber: To reduce the amount of clutter on the table, the table top has been reduced in size.
ALL tools are now stored in specific drawers. Some of these drawers have trays that will be moved to be able to access the tools beneath.

I'm not so sure. X1 would be more like a person using a very functional MultiTool that does most things  - with a some specific tools in "drawers" that can be accessed with a single gensture and that magically disappear back into the drawer when no longer needed. 

 
Example: ALL scissors are stored in the 2nd drawer. To select pair of scissors requires opening the drawer. Scissors placed on the table top, in order to select a different pair, will automatically be placed in the drawer and the drawer will be closed, requiring opening to use a different pair.
 
 
The same is default for ALL other tools.

Not sure what this means. 

 
A quick way of changing the configuration of the scissors is to hold the scissors with both hands. This will change the blades to a thinning configuration. Removing the 2nd hand will automatically change the blades to the default straight cut, short blade.
 
 
=====================
 
 
Every hypothesis, art work, business, tool, game, etc., starts with a set of assumptions that determine what follows. These assumptions frame the expectations of what is to happen by the experimenter, the artist, the worker, the player,.... If the initial assumptions are reasonable with respect to the laws of physics and human nature the expectations will be more likely to be realized. And there will be much rejoicing. If not, it is hoped the participants will be flexible enough to learn from the actual results (I. e., discoveries of Teflon, and vulcanization, penicillin,...)
 
 
MS and CW managers appear to have disregarded decades research of how people work, and in specific, graphic user interface design.
 

Let's take these one by one: 

Some of the new assumptions

(It's an assumption in and of itself that these are in fact adhered-to assumptions but...)

   New users, and seldom users, are no different than long term users and power users

Not true. New users vs. seasoned users is a regular and recurring subject of consideration. Because we don't always succeed in the balance doesn't mean that we have made this assumption. And in fact i can say unequivocally that we haven't.

   Restricted Multiple choice everywhere is preferred

Not "everywhere". It is preferred in some cases and not in others. As I've mentioned previously, some functionality had to be removed to get us to square one and to guage the result. In some cases I think you will see enhanced choice in areas of SONAR over time. For instance, I know I have stated that I'm in favor of Smart Tool customization, etc.

   Color provides no value

Again, no. Color provides value, but too much color defeats the entire purpose of color as feedback and makes the application messy and overwhelming. It's one thing to say that we should add more color feedback, but quite another to say that we have made the blanket assumption that "color provides no value".

   Visual feedback (via toggle buttons) does not improve efficiency

SONAR has more visual feedback regarding things like snap settings and tool states than it did previously. And there are other cases where no button exists at all inherently removing that feedback. So again, it's true in some cases and not in others and is in no way a mantra or philosophy.

   Most all users use the select tool

Puzzled by this one. I never use the Select Tool. I would expect most users to use the SmartTool.

   Larger pictures are ???

???

   Reduced user configurability results in
       less complex code
       fewer programming errors
       lower programming costs  
       lower support costs

I think some of these are arguably true, but probbaly don't factor in to decisions as much as you might think. It's mostly about making the user experience straight-forward and consistent. the rest is just icing on the proverbial cake.

  
A result of the assumptions: those wanting to use the draw tool should hold a modifier key, or have less functionality when selected from a multiple choice pop menu.

I think we've been through all this before nd decided that some customization of the Smart Tool would solve a lot of these issues. But is it really that hindering as is? The Smart Tool basically does everything. If you want to use the draw tool you switch to it with a hotkey.

 
 
Imagine ALL traffic signs to be light grey on grey.  No red, yellow, green, blue. All the same. Would that be more efficient?

Of course not, but I think this is a pretty vague analogy to SONAR X1's UI. SONAR X1 has buttons with color.

 
  How about a directional signal without a flashing light, and the click sound?

Again, how does this directly relate to SONAR's UI? 

 
At least MS office provides for a 1-click button bar in an attempt to appease the long term and power users. Yet they did remove many previously available options. i.e., the toggle for the OL reading pane has been replaced with a drop menu with 3 choices. The button provide a way to click once to get to the button instead of 2 clicks to change the ribbon tab.
 
 
That "many" find the new interface, with its default settings, an improvement is OK. This is an obvious result of CW managers identifying what this group of users finds comfortable. What tools they use most often, their level of confusion caused by color and 1-click buttons, their need for mystery and challenge to search for clues as to where to find the control of current interest.
 
 
I am one of the "many" that find the new interface to have been based upon bad assumptions.

Well we appreciate yours, and others, longtime users feedback and it certainly finds serious consideration amongst the design and development teams. Remember too that many of us at Cakewalk have also been using the application for years and years and are not "new users", so we very likely have at least some similar desires, frustrations, etc.

 
 
After 30 plus versions of Sonar development and research and user contribution the existence of S-X is just plain heartbreaking.

That certainly doesn't make any of us happy and just know that we are continually working to improve, based in large part on user feedback, such as your own. 

 
To the "love-it-or-leave-it-get-over-it" crowd I say. You don't get it. And although I wish this type of disappointment upon no one, I know "many" of you will someday have this experience.
To all of you who keep writing, "I think they should fix it before the next release," I say, "Get real! We have been hoping the same thing for more than 9 years.

What have you been hoping for for 9 years?

 
Brandon: You response can be inferred to indicate some fixes are still to come before the next X'd version. And given the astounding break with Sonar Past it is reasonable to think the history of how and when CW products are updated and released may have no relation to what is to come. But even an update in the next month will be essentially no different than the general update cycle of the nearly every previous numbered release of Sonar.
Did I miss any:
Number of numbered Versions, actual versions and year released.
1                                    1     2001
1.02                               2 
1.31                               3 
2                                    4     2002
2.1                                 5 
2.2                                 6 
3                                    7     2003
3.1                                 8 
3.11                               9 
4                                   10    2004
4.01                              11 
4.02                              12 
4.03                              13 
4.04                              14 
5                                   15    2005
5.01                              16 
5.2                                17 
6                                   18    2006
6.0.1                             19 
6.2                                20 
6.2.1                             21 
7                                   22    2007
7.0.1                             23 
7.0.2                             24 
7.0.3                             25 
8                                   26    2008
8.0.1                             27 
8.2.2                             28 
8.3.1                             29 
8.5                                30    2009
8.5.1                             31 
8.5.2                             32 
8.5.3                             33    2010
J

Very comprehensive list. All I can say is that SONAR's release cycle will likely continue to break somewhat with tradition and (hopefully) be more responsive in catering to the needs of the SONAR userbase and in providing an increasingly stable product with thoughtfully designed features and enhancements.

The whole thing is a tough call really if we think about it. We obviously have people with real issues that are stopping them from using X1. We have others who are long time users that aren't down with how you have to do things differently. We have other long time users that welcome all the new ways of doing things...no one is really wrong in anything they have posted because it depends how X1 works for you, how you use X1 and how your system takes to it.

I've been fighting with it off and on since it came out. I fight it like Rob above me mentioned with hating the work-flow changes, so I shelve it only to come back because of the things Brandon mentioned. I love the drag and drop, I love the effects chain saves, I love screen sets, the multi-dock has grown on me, and the one thing that totally blows me away is, this is the only version of Sonar that I have ever used that just doesn't crash on me unless I'm messing with Kontakt in certain ways with instrument tracks. I literally ran X1 the other night on a test project for 10 hours without a save just to see how long it would take for some sort of illegal operation or something. To be honest, after the latest updates and new hot fixes, this hasn't crashed once for me.

I really beat up on it too. Loads of audio tracks, loads of plugs, at least 5 VSTi's or more and I bring in this stuff while audio is playing. It will hiccup and pause when I do this, but sure enough, the stuff loads and playback resumes. There's no way I could do this with 8.5. So I started to run the same test project I did in X1 in 8.5 starting it over the next day from scratch. I couldn't make it past 5 hours without a crash. Keep in mind, this was not a straight 10 hour session. I would do some of the project, leave Sonar up and move to another PC to do my actual studio work...which is done in 8.5 because I just move around so much better in it, and then I'd resume during a huge render or something. But, if I don't save a project after every major change in 8.5, it will always get me and crash when I least expect it after a few hours. X1 just laughs at whatever I throw at it.

As much as X1 seems to be solid for me, I still have things with it that just don't allow me to trust in it totally. I still look all over for things that I need because I'm swamped with tabbed menus and options, I absolutely HATE the new preferences menu with a passion, and I wish there was a way to disable making changes to the EQ grid when you click on it. For some projects, I created templates using 8.5 that have the Sonitus EQ embedded. When I click the plot, it just about always adjusts something that I don't want adjusted. It does this with the pro channel eq also. Having a disable for that would be great.

I just think we need more options that WE want instead of options that are just given to us. Though I love that the Bakers went all innovative with this release, they took some things away that I feel we should have had options to change if WE wanted them changed. Additional colors etc...this bothers me that we can't make it look the way we want because someone in the Dev field said "pfff, screw color changes, the object is to make music". I don't like it that we need to conform to special commands...it would be nice to have an options that says "old style Sonar" or something. Some of us are just way stuck in our ways. Options to keep snap to settings to one setting instead of having to change them for each screen set. There should be an option for that if we want it, know what I mean?

Some of us like the Sonitus eq. It was nice to have that embedded on each track. It would be nice to have that choice for a project without bringing it in to the bin or the option to use the Pro channel compressor with an embedded Sonitus EQ. I'm not crazy about the PC eq...I can't hone in on specific frequencies with it and sometimes, we need to be tight. Some of us liked the right click commands that we no longer have. Some of us liked doing things the way we did them in the past without using a smart tool that deletes midi notes when you right click by accident. Some of us like to just drop an envelope without having to adjust a filter menu specifically. Some of us like to have full customization over what tools are in the tool bar and how stretched out of visible we want things to be. There's nothing wrong with being innovative and new, but it would always be a great thing to have additional options. And most of all, the majority of us long time users would really like to see old bugs fixed that still exist today that have been going on for many versions.

But all of the above said, I'm still on the fence with this release. I hate it one day, and find myself missing some of the new things it offers when I use 8.5. I've forced myself to try and like it and use it because I paid for it and feel it deserves a chance. But now that I'm 6 months into it nearly, "being on the fence" isn't where I should be. I'm torn...I truly am. I've still not done a client project using it, but have had good results doing test projects and stuff for myself. I like the stability and some of the features, but some of the work flow enhancements are just not for me. It works, it was well worth what I paid for it, but I feel it was released too soon and quite a few months passed by to where I was turned off from it and this put a bad taste in my mouth. But now I'm so confused, I don't know what I like. One is easier to work in, the other gives me options that the other doesn't have yet hinders my performance a bit. One crashes at times, the other never crashes no matter what I throw at it unless it's Kontakt. I'll just keep on using the 2 and make a decision some day I suppose. And in the mean time, I'll just hope additional options are added so that we that are set in our ways can have the choice on how we use the software without having to revert back to an older version. :)

Seth Perlstein [Cakewalk
]

You're right, having to deal with right-click menus all the time sucks. 

I disagree very very very strongly...Right Click menus, where the context is determined accurately, were the best thing about the old way....and now do not seem to carry as much choice or do not understand the context as accurately as they used to.....(edit0 in fact often you have to tell it the context (via the edit filter) so that it presents the prefered option on the right click menu which is a total PITA

chaunceyc

Seth Perlstein [Cakewalk]


You're right, having to deal with drop down menus and right-click menus all the time sucks. 

That's why in X1 we put the Clip and Track Properties in the Inspector. 
SP

Yes and this is a perfect example of creating more work.  Moving it over there means probably 300-400% MORE mouse scrolling and even MORE  clicks to change things like clip names, colors.  The "Bad" old way of right clicking, properties brought the dialog box right next to the clip in the center of the screen. Now it has to be invoked 10" away from the initial click.  Here is a paste from a previous post I made on this very issue:


Old way:  Single Click on clip, 
hit alt+enter
make edits 
OK. 
Click on next clip, repeat.

New Way: Single Click on Clip. 
Hit "I" to make inspector visible
Pick up mouse. 
Scroll left...scroll left some more...keep going....10"...11"...12" (if mouse runs out of desk pick up mouse and move to the right of mousepad). 
Click on "Clips" 
make edits
Scroll right...scroll right some more...11"...12." 
Click on next clip, 
scroll left scroll left scroll left. 
make edit. 
When you're done, be sure to move mouse back to "Clips" and click to toggle view back to make your inspector visible again. 

Note that the old way had a dialog box that popped up in the MIDDLE of the screen and (handily) completely disappeared from view when you were done.  

So you don't like right-click or drop down menus, and you don't like the Properties in the Inspector. So, what exactly would you like?


Also, I think your list of steps is actually subjective. Personally, I leave my inspector open all the time. And my mouse is on a high enough resolution that I never need to pick it up to get from one side of the screen to the other, and I'm on a 2048 x 1152 screen.

Another benefit of having the Properties in the Inspector is that you can leave it up while working on other things. With the old right-click menu you could only work on the menu and nothing behind it. And if you wanted to change properties of multiple clips or tracks you would have to right-click for each clip or track. Now you open the Clip or Track Inspector once and move from clip to clip or track to track and change whatever you need to change much faster. 

Twigman

Seth Perlstein [Cakewalk
]

You're right, having to deal with right-click menus all the time sucks. 

I disagree very very very strongly...Right Click menus, where the context is determined accurately, were the best thing about the old way....and now do not seem to carry as much choice or do not understand the context as accurately as they used to.....(edit0 in fact often you have to tell it the context (via the edit filter) so that it presents the prefered option on the right click menu which is a total PITA

I think in some instances dealing with right-click menus is great and in others its a pain. When inserting plugins, for example, its a pain. Especially because of all the child menus. Frankly, I think inserting plugins from the Browser is light years better than dealing with the massive right-click menu of versions past.


And there are many things we left in the right-click menu that have their useful place, like Insert Audio Track, etc.


My point was that the person I originally quoted was saying why he dislikes X1 so much and then making arguments for X1 without even realizing it.


SP

Seth Perlstein [Cakewalk
]

Twigman

Seth Perlstein [Cakewalk
]

You're right, having to deal with right-click menus all the time sucks. 

I disagree very very very strongly...Right Click menus, where the context is determined accurately, were the best thing about the old way....and now do not seem to carry as much choice or do not understand the context as accurately as they used to.....(edit0 in fact often you have to tell it the context (via the edit filter) so that it presents the prefered option on the right click menu which is a total PITA

I think in some instances dealing with right-click menus is great and in others its a pain. When inserting plugins, for example, its a pain. Especially because of all the child menus. Frankly, I think inserting plugins from the Browser is light years better than dealing with the massive right-click menu of versions past.


And there are many things we left in the right-click menu that have their useful place, like Insert Audio Track, etc.


My point was that the person I originally quoted was saying why he dislikes X1 so much and then making arguments for X1 without even realizing it.


SP

and there are many USEFUL things that have been removed from Right Click menus too.....but you know what, it's so long since I used a version older than X1 I can't recall one right now - I must have been assimilated.......my frustrations with X1 have moved on from the interface to the appalling stability and the unpredictable nature of X1 (see my other thread regarding Split suddenly not working and Copy/Paste randomly pasting clips to the wrong time on new tracks and my problems with external midi controlled synths changing their timing on record because there happens to be a perfect space on a buss that isn't even in the signal path or 1 in 3 X1 shut downs result in a white screen and a sonardpe.exe crash.....etc etc etc)

Seth Perlstein [Cakewalk]


So you don't like right-click or drop down menus, and you don't like the Properties in the Inspector. So, what exactly would you like?

You misunderstand. I actually LOVE drop-down menus - look carefully--I said "I DON'T want to be constantly using a mouse to get to drop downs..."  Right-click menus are  totally fine too (and unobtrusive, so no one should ever have reason to complain about having them as yet another option--as long as they are not the ONLY way to accomplish something).  For occasional functions they are fine and handy, but shouldn't replace drop-down menu keyboard-able actions.

Case in point on using the mouse to get to drop downs (pasted from an earlier post of mine on this subject)


Sonar 8.5 had 12 main drop-down menus, all accessible mouse-free by The 17 year old Windows Alt + ______ keyboard shortcut standard.  (i.e. Alt + F pulls down the file menu, no matter where you are in the program.) 


X1 took these same commands and scattered them off into 19 menus - only 9 of which can now be accessed without a mouse.  Open up the same project in both versions with just Track view and the inspector open and you'll see what I mean.   MORE drop-down menus?


This is bad enough,  but it also raises one of my all-time User Interface pet peeves -- pulldown submenus that change location.  Those freaking submenus--depending on what you have open, visible, expanded, resized, etc.--they can literally vary in location by 9.5 inches horizontally and 1 inch vertically.  So, X1 has removed keyboard access to them, made them extremely unpredictable as to where they are going to be on your screen. The "track" submenu on my 23" monitor can be almost all the way to the left or 3/4 to the right, depending on whether the inspector or browser is open.   It is hard to imagine a dentist or a surgeon or woodworker anyone who relies on their tools having them move around.  My "go-to" menus now take an extra effort each and every time I use them--are they visible?  Yes.  Let's find it on the screen--well, it is going to be somewhere in a 9.5 sq. inch area somewhere in the upper part of my screen...uh...Good.  Now lets find where the mouse cursor is.  uh.....OK, now move it the 15 inches to the track menu.  Click on it, drop down the menus.  Congratulations!!, it has only taken 4-5 seconds and  you've made the track submenu actions visible! That's only about  800% to 1000% slower than the equivalent action in 8.5, where I could pull down the menu AND fire off the command [ALT + E,K] in about a half second WITHOUT LOOKING up from my work--all without assigning a single keybinding.  


Stable location + stable keystroke combinations regardless of context... these are always going to be more efficient than hunting and clicking with the mouse to run a command or pull up a dialog box.   Can we please have those back as Menu items instead of submenus?  If they are always going to be onscreen, why can't they stay at the very top as before? 

mike_mccue

Seth Perlstein [Cakewalk
]

mike_mccue


Right click menus is why I use Windows instead of my other choices.

Is that the only reason or could it also have to do with the competition's over-priced hardware, smug advertising, and cult-like culture?  


SP

When I consider how much easier it would be for me, business wise and such, to just take some cash and join the cult I'm sorta left with the realization that yes, I simply prefer Windows... or at least the classic Windows paradigm... the one that is the result of millions of dollars of focus groups and GUI design studies.

From my perspective, a realization that I enjoy well thought out contextual right click menus seems a lot easier to consider than your suggestion that we have mistakenly been using bad ideas for the past 20 years.


all the best,
mike

When did I ever say we've been mistakenly been using bad ideas for the past 20 years? You're putting words in my mouth here. Frankly, I don't care which platform you choose. That's your choice. I prefer Windows as well. But I also prefer X1. Go figure.

SP

mike_mccue


I stand corrected and apologize for not quoting you specifically. Here is what I was referring too:

"You're right, having to deal with drop down menus and right-click menus all the time sucks."



all the best,
mike

I stand behind what I said. Having to dive into multi-layered right-click menus to insert a plugin does suck, especially when compared to drag and drop form the Browser. There are many things that work well from the right-click menu, as I said before. And others which do not. 

chaunceyc

Seth Perlstein [Cakewalk]

Also, I think your list of steps is actually subjective. Personally, I leave my inspector open all the time. And my mouse is on a high enough resolution that I never need to pick it up to get from one side of the screen to the other, and I'm on a 2048 x 1152 screen.

Another benefit of having the Properties in the Inspector is that you can leave it up while working on other things. With the old right-click menu you could only work on the menu and nothing behind it. And if you wanted to change properties of multiple clips or tracks you would have to right-click for each clip or track. Now you open the Clip or Track Inspector once and move from clip to clip or track to track and change whatever you need to change much faster. 

To be fair, I have a trackball and set to high speed, so there was a bit of hyperbole in my example, but the distance traveled is accurate.  The right-click option for clip name, properties has disappeared in X1, which forces you to invoke the clip properties tab, (and open the inspector if it isn't already up). For constant one-off and renaming and re-coloring tasks, I maintain that the new way is demonstrably slower and inefficient--I may rename a clip every 5-10 minutes or so.  I generally like to keep my inspector set to only show the channel, not the bus. Clicking on inspector sub-tab to access clip properties undoes this and resets the inspector to the mondo view, all while covering up 45% of the 21 square inches of the newly-enlarged inspector (making the pro-channel and sends are no longer visible).  Undocking inspector to put it nearer to my clips for these constant one-offs is, again impractical. 


Keeping the 

Have you tried using ScreenSets? You can have a ScreenSet for each size/ state of the Inspector. Have one with it closed. Have one with it open. Have one with the Clip Properties open. Have another with the Clip Properties floating over the TV. Then you can access all this with one key stroke.

SP

VariousArtist


Not sure if Cakewalk does this, but a lot of mutual education on these issues would go a long way if a variety of users were carefully observed over extending sessions using Sonar.  Cakewalk could see how users are impacted by changes in the software, both negatively and positively.  

On the negative side they would determine that the software is falling short and address it accordingly, or that the user is not realizing some of the benefits in which case Cakewalk could publish "recommended approaches" to getting the best out of Sonar.

For the positive side, these would simply become the main part of their marketing.

VA,


I can assure you that we've been looking at all of the feedback for X1, both good and bad, and have been fixing bugs and tweaking features based on it. And we'll continue to do so in the future.


SP

I can assure you that we've been looking at all of the feedback for X1, both good and bad, and have been fixing bugs and tweaking features based on it. And we'll continue to do so in the future.

Thats always good to hear :)  ..  Hope there working on the groove clipping issues..

Chauncey,

What you can do is make a template with the ScreenSets the way you want them. Then when opening an older project, open the template at the same time. Then you can import the ScreenSets form the template into the new project via the ScreenSet module in the Control Bar.

SP