still bumping ;)

I guess I see all these requests as a bit of well I'm not sure.

We have an official feature request process but there's no feedback  if a request has any momentum for future inclusion or not.

We're told that Cakewalk don't monitor the forum to offer advice yet many Cakewalk staff offer comments but usually this is only one way and doesn't result in any ongoing dialog. Often they are to diffuse situations or put a subject to rest.

Posts such as this are common nowadays but we have no idea of their impact as we never have a SONAR map so to speak. We don't know what Cakewalk have planned - its their secret.

How much of their plans are actually effected by our posts we don't really know? They say they listen but as many of them are also musucuans you'd have to think there are many parallel trains of thought between them and us yet its clear from the many protestations that we are often worlds apart in what we want and what Cakewalk deliver.

We hypothsise about their marketing and product planning but infact we only get to hear about things after the fact. eg the 8.5.2 update which is soon to be released while we have advance notice it is only just ahead of release. And of course how could it be any different with such a detailed list of updates, patches and fixes.

What we really lack is any idea of SONAR's roadmap for the next 12  to 36 months. Where does Cakewlak envisage being?

By the looks of it, producing a higher quality of processing plugin seems to be on the agenda whereas instruments of the type like Dim pro and Rapture are dead on their feet. No development in ages and probably will go the way of Project 5.

Things like Step Sequencer, Matrix, Session Drummer et al seem to cater to a certain style of music while deep features like V-Vocal and Audio Snap only get cursory updates.

I think the pie's got too big. Maybe there's too many cooks. As a user of SONAR I'd like to see the core of SONAR stabilized and enhanced without so much effort on new frilly plugins. There's a world of folks making some very good plugins but there aren't many good DAW bakers; pardon the pun.

I agree, but I wonder how much of a footprint DimPro and Rapture have outside the SONAR user base.  I do seem to recall seeing vidz of people using them in PT projects, so there's hope I reckon.

I have said this before.... 'Consolidate' and 'Improve' on existing  plugins and features, including overall greater enhancements to workflow with continued focus on stability and efficiency.

Apart from having many discussions on envelopes and FR's already submitted!  I also like to see further improvements on existing features to not only help with workflow but also improve efficiency such as 'File Structure' and one other example; DropZone (remember DropZone? LOL!!) which IMHO would have the potential to become a much more powerful sampler/player.....

1) Drop in a wav or just about any file format and have keyboard and/or midi cc# for velocity > amp, filter and cut-off, additional controls for Mod, LFO and Pulse > being ideal for creating motion, evolving, sweeps, rhythmic, similar to modulation, filter, cut-off. An advance type of pattern generator (auto-sync to host tempo)

2) Auto or manual key mapping to (up to) 16 trigger pads.

3) Apegiator with stereo width controls and mono/stereo delay effect auto-sync to host tempo including the ability to draw in velocity.  

4) 32 part multitimbal allowing you to load up to 32 instruments and assign separate midi chn + outputs.

5) Morphing, ability to assign layers that can seemlessly transition via velocity or cc#.

6) Option to record 'Live' audio directly to DropZone.

7) CPU efficiency! Options, settings for sample rate and polyphony for each part! (tired of your third-party plugin being a total CPU hog? no problem, drop it into DropZone) Options > Examples; if using a simple 808-Hi-Hat sound can be reduced down to 16 or 8.bits with a sample rate of 44.1 and 2 note polyphony, whereas a piano patch can be up to 24.bit/48 with 64 note polyphony. Omnisphere being a CPU hog? no problem, export all those layers and drop it into DropZone :-)

Overall, DropZone being an ideal 'All-in-One' very powerful, very efficient  sampler that allows you to save all your settings along with per-project in a nice integrated browser that displays all files - improved file manager....

.... instead of that old drop-down menu? 'ALL' plugins in SONAR should have an improved file structure for presets... a much better browser fully integrated (expandable but compact by default) located on the left side (panel) of 'ALL' plugins (including effects), much like Native Instruments (including keyword search and catagory options).

So there ya' have it, SONAR with improve file structure for 'all' plugins and also for 'ALL' project tracks that includes auto-naming (on the clip, so when you name it in Trk-View it also names it on the Clip) and elsewhere for example; in windows project file, audio folder, so when I import a file I don't see Trk-63.wav I see RickyBass.wav

But wait!!!! There's more.... also, in Track-View I would like to see slightly better GUI design (but still keeping it ultra compact - option)  that allows a little more space for better description of Track-Titles, and clearer font for example; instead of viewing an abreviation of JRkyBs (load an old project then try to remember what the hell that is?), would be much better it be Jim - Ricky Bass (allowing up to 18 characters 'viewable' in compact view) this is a Feature Request I submitted long ago, a small GUI improvement like that would make the workflow a lot nicer, easier especially when dealing with 60+ tracks.

Along with the Track-Inspector could also be further enhanced (explained in my previous post regarding new features for Envelopes) options for "Lanes' with 'Title-Name' (description for each envelope type), including 'Lock' and 'Show/Hide' toggle icons (with keyboard shortcut options), and more such as user options, settings for inserting/deleting envelopes/nodes using keyboard shortcuts. I think most of these suggestions have discussed and submitted to FR long ago.

I started a thread previous to this one, Feature Request - View List + Submit! Did it get much support? I think so :-), did Cakewalk include some of those suggestions (FR) in SONAR 8.5?, I think so :-).   All too often we see threads like this come and go but it goes to prove that there is support and there's been a lot of discussions on this topic.

Often Cakewalk will suggest filing a Feature Request form Click Here to submit your ideas.  May the force be with you... young SonarWalker's LOL!! :-)

hugojacquet
Ah, yes, and group them together and make them collapsable.....Well thats ehhhhhhh, just like in cubase. Which I don't use any more but it's nice and I do agree it should be in Sonar too.

AND make a keyboard shortcut for collapsing a track! Also, implement rubber-band sizing on the tracks, so they only expand to their widget contents as an optional default. As it is SONAR has a terrible memory when it comes to Track Heights. Srsly, it is inconsistent between last used, default set, and upon putting tracks in folders. 

John

Ah, yes, and group them together and make them collapsable.....Well thats ehhhhhhh, just like in cubase. Which I don't use any more but it's nice and I do agree it should be in Sonar too.

I'm not sure I would  want or need them to be collapsible. I think there is plenty of room for them. But I would agree that we should be able to customize how they are displayed.

It depends. There was a thread not so long ago that touched on improving the track inspector. If it was enhanced and more things were included in there, having the items collapsible could make sense.

For instance the track inspector could have two modes. One minimal which resembles the current and one more expanded mode.

One thing that could go in there is an envelope tab that lists all the envelopes used in a track with show/hide and read/write/touch/latch options for each envelope. In that case making the tabs collapsible would make a lot of sense.

UnderTow

  John:
  I think with you all giving good ideas about all this we are getting somewhere with it. This whole thread is a really a great one.

I agree :-)

It's great to have a more in depth discussion on the finer details whilst getting broader ideas from a wider user base, exploring ways to improve workflow.

SONAR is one of the finest host's out there! She's more than capable as long as the driver has good knowledge and skills covering all aspect of the DAW.

I'm very passionate about the DAW because it's like the main studio foundation, if that foundation isn't solid, user-friendly and efficient, and has limitations?  it be like trying to drive an old rusty gas guzzler fully loaded, noisy backseat drivers, limited visibility and interior space, bald tires, hurling down a long, narrow, sharp winding, icey dirt road.  Whoo Hoo!!! (Sorry, I drank too much caffine today)

Myconsumerclub I am not seeing any advantage in what you purpose. You still would do this with a mouse something you can do already. Plus in the example you use we already have a simulated fader both on the track and in the console view. I am not sure what added functionality this idea would bring to Sonar. 

I have a Mackie Control and I can't see how what you want to do is at all possible in any program. You are saying you wish to control Sonar on the fly while playing a musical instrument and further while controlling Sonar as if you were the audio engineer i.e. controlling faders and pan pots and whatever. This is equivalent to a one man band and audio recordists in one place. Its too much stuff to do at one time. I can't see how you could automate it either. I am not discounting your dream but I don't know of anyway to do what you want to do at present. Maybe with voice activation or some other control but not with a virtual mixer simulation.  I don't know of a hardware control surface that could do what you want to do. Even programmable digital mixers would fall far short for this.    

And, not to loop this conversation back around to it's own arse, but couldn't you just arm and group the faders and record your fader moves, then do your take? (and yeah, that's automation).

Are you suggesting automation on empty tracks?  How would you know where the automation is to go?

So you are going to automate it before its even recorded. I am not all that sure one can "work it out" either. What the heck are you automating anyway and what the heck for? Sorry but this seems ridiculous.  But you guys can do it any way you want. I sure am not stopping you.

John,

It doesn't make sense to me either, but that doesn't mean it is not possible.

But, like you said, to each its own.

myconsumerclub


Let me give you a scenario and I know you can get it. The guitar player is using amp sims and needs to switch between several tones using them and do so in real time like he would if he was stomping on a pedal for a multi fx unit except these are all tones from diferent amp sims so it isn't possible unless the guitar player is playing on all amp sims simultaneously and then the mixer is controlled in such a way that the amp sim he wishes to play through at anyone time is mixed high while the sims that he wants to not play through are silenced or mixed lower in the mix. This way he can use a foot controller to activate a snapshot to effect the changes in volume while recording and use automation to snap a scene into place so that the end result is as if he had stomped on an fx units footswitch to switch tones. This is a better solution because there is a track for each tone so he can come back later and still retain these tones as a template for recording other tracks or additions to the song. Now ther trails as he switches the mix are still able to fall away naturally in the reverb and delay busses that the now silent track feeds. Much more customization can be done using this approach and a more polished sound is possible in the studio and then we can take the same patches and effects and use it live. Keyboardists already have this power as they just hook up multiple keyboards to feed many diferent modules or plug ins. The bass player would likewise want to utilize this approach as well. Drummers use patches inside BFD and other program but I am not privy to these programs idiosynchacies to know if such measures would be necessary to perform rapid scene changes for them to experience total kit change.

I know what you are trying to do I remember your other posts. You will also recall I said this is best done with real hardware. Sonar is not and never has been meant to do this sort of thing.

Really if you had the hardware all you need do is record it as you play. You could get a Pod 6 or something that would do it directly.  Or you could use a Digitech unit to get the amp sounds you want. There are ways to do this in real time as you play but asking Sonar to do it is going to be difficult.

I know what you are trying to do I remember your other posts. You will also recall I said this is best done with real hardware. Sonar is not and never has been meant to do this sort of thing.

+1 on this. Sure you can use a brick as a hammer but then someone wants that claw protrusion which never quite works on the brick. Sonar is a DAW not a stompbox.

Well, you just need a MIDI controller in foot stompin' form. I think even the Digitech units can send MIDI CC's out.  Then you just map 'em to the mutes on tracks.  I guess that means two stomps for every tone switch tho... altho you might be able to creatively map around that too.

Whether or not SONAR can do it, you'll still need some tactile control.  In which case aren't you better off going with one of the guitar rig/Line 6 dealies into SONAR anyway?