Wow... no customer support from Cakewalk even after sending info twice?

So I have a Sonar X2 issue where I am able to reproduce the problem. I send a tech support email and get no reply. A week later I send another tech support email, mentioning that my first email never received a reply. Now more than a week past the time I've sent the second tech support email... nothing. Am I alone in this? Maybe an anomaly? Or is this more of a widespread, bigger problem? 

Bigger problem; you haven't listed your system specs and you contacted official support before letting the forum get first crack at trying to figure out what your system specs are.
 
The official problem reporter doesn't necessarily excite a response. A request for tech support usually does. 
 
http://www.cakewalk.com/Support/contact/default.aspx
 
 
best regards,
mike
 
 

They do not have many 4 day weekends but this last weekend was one of them.

In general - many issues can be assisted by folks in the forum, though certainly not all.
 
For the forum to be of any assistance, we would collectively need the details of the problem, as well as the specifications of the system having the issues.
 
The reason for needing the specs is that it helps people that are trying to help understand the environment where the issues are occurring, making it much easier to help diagnose issues.
 
For that reason, you will see lots of folks here in the forum add their system specs to the signature area of the forum profile, like you can see mine at the bottom of my posts.
 
So, perhaps we in the forum could assist - I would certainly be willing to try to help, if I can.  That being the case, would you mind giving us a crack at assisting?
 
If you would like attempts at assisting, please do detail the issues and also please list the specs of your system, and we will do our best to help.
 
Bob Bone
 

It may be in your spam folder.

That's weird..  When I looked at Daveny5's post a minute ago, it was blank, but now it says "It may be in your spam folder.", and Jlien X has quoted it..
 
Very odd.

jb101
Ignore mcq.  

 
Sometimes I think about wondering why you don't have the character to walk your talk...
 
 
then I think about other stuff.
 
 
best regards,
mike
 
 
 
 
 

Teksonik

robert_e_bone
The reason for needing the specs is that it helps people that are trying to help understand the environment where the issues are occurring, making it much easier to help diagnose issues.

 
I understand all that but you don't see the same fixation on system specs on the three other DAW forums I frequent and users help each other just fine ( but then the guys who actually write the code participate there as well but that's a whole different subject). 
 
To me it reads like "we need your system specs so we can find something else to blame other than Sonar".
 
Maybe I'm just getting cynical in my old age.........
 

to me it really says, there are certain things that pertain to certain hardware, os , soundcards.
nothing to do with the blame game man  :)
 
ive tried playing that game of guessing but when it comes down to it if I know someones system specs I have a better idea of what im dealing with.
most pro tech's would say the same.
you call and the first thing they ask for is your specs.
a car mechanic just as well looks up your car's make and model.
 
 
its also about wasting time, cant tell you how many times ive gone back and forth with someone trying to problem solve their issues only to find out they're running an non supported os.
if someone feels defensive about giving system specs, I have no problems with that either, I don't take it personal, I just move on to help the next person.
because to me if someone does not want to give they're specs they are being defensive, and we have no time for that, remember we are all just helpers here.

If the folks here on the forum and at tech support hadn't asked for my system specs I would have a $2000 paperweight right now. It is called troubleshooting. Once you eliminate hardware issues as the source of a problem then you can move on to diagnosing configuration issues and THEN the software itself. How many times have we seen threads posted where the user submits a plethora of problems only to find out 30 posts later they don't even have an interface or they are running outdated hardware, OS or drivers? This is standard tech support procedure. Getting insulted when asked for that info is just bizarre. You want to get your DAW working. We want to get your DAW working and Cakewalk DEFINITELY wants to get your DAW working. What's the big deal of providing any potentially helpful info? By refusing to you only hurt yourself.
 
Not trying to be a jerk but it's very insulting to be attacked for trying to offer the best answers possible.

To the original poster:
 
We could have potentially already solved your issues for you, but instead you have chosen to blow off the multiple folks who have kept insisting that our awareness of your specs is of value to those that are FREELY offering to help you.
 
I don't know what the deal with you is where you feel compelled to go round and round on this, and at this point I really do not care.
 
I and others have helped MANY folks here in the forum, saving them from having to deal with tech support and all that entails.
 
So, good luck - you are being ridiculously stubborn and difficult to deal with, so I am QUITE done wasting my time with you.
 
While you are sitting there looking at your non-functioning software, perhaps you will eventually come to realize that your obstinate attitude has alienated someone who was quite willing to donate time and effort to assist you.
 
Too bad - it's too late.  I have moved on and will focus on helping folks that are less difficult to deal with.  I don't get this torqued very often, but there it is.  Enjoy your paper weight.
 
Bob Bone

Hi Bob,
 You may notice, if you actually take the time to read the thread, that you have chastised the OP for actions they have not taken.
 
 You have responded to other people's comments while demonstrating how short sighted this communities responses can seem.
 
 That is why I don't see any reason to respond to knee jerk requests for system specs... most of the guys that are the most aggressive about insisting they can be helpful can't even comprehend the meaning of a simple paragraph. 
 
 Good luck.
 
 :-)
 
 all the best,
mike

But you do respond to them... even when the request hasn't even been made yet like you did here.
 
:-)
 
All the best.
Beeps.

LOL! Not listing system specs and asking for help is like walking into an auto repair shop and telling them something is wrong with my car and it needs to be fixed but I didn't bring it and I don't know what kind it is!

mike_mccue
Hi Bob,
 You may notice, if you actually take the time to read the thread, that you have chastised the OP for actions they have not taken.
 
 You have responded to other people's comments while demonstrating how short sighted this communities responses can seem.
 
 That is why I don't see any reason to respond to knee jerk requests for system specs... most of the guys that are the most aggressive about insisting they can be helpful can't even comprehend the meaning of a simple paragraph. 
 
 Good luck.
 
 :-)
 
 all the best,
mike

Mike - the specs are only a portion of the issue that I posted on.  The two things that have thus far been stubbornly missing from the original poster are:
 
1.  ANY details on the issues he is complaining about
 
2.  The system specs - and if you will notice, if YOU take the time to thoroughly read my post, I asked politely for a combination of the details of the issues at hand, and the system specs to go along with that, which in my experience has made it quite a bit easier to address issues for someone.
 
My simply asking for system specs with no idea of what the issues are would be quite silly, and I did not do that.  
 
There have been a BUNCH of back and forth threads where folks have indicated a willingness to donate time and effort to helping the original poster, but he seems stuck on the whole idea of providing enough information for anybody to be able to help him.
 
He is certainly free to go through life as he pleases, and I made/make no judgment of that.  I simply have decided that my continued presence in a thread where the poster does not seem willing to provide any meaningful information (thus far), is a waste of my time, because I cannot provide any assistance without some knowledge of the issues, and of the system the issues are occurring on.
 
In one of the original poster's replies, it seemed like he was planning to detail the issues in another thread, and I will CERTAINLY look for such a thread, so that I CAN try to assist.
 
What I do NOT need is for you to decide for me what I have or have not read, when you yourself have not completely read MY posts.  I am not trying to be argumentative with anyone - I am simply stating that without enough information to go on, there is nothing I can do to try to assist, and if my requests for that information do not result in a subsequent posting of what I feel I need to be able to help, then quite simply I am going to move on.
 
I think I have had a pretty good track record of helping folks to the best of my ability, sometimes when others have given up on the thread originator, and as I indicated earlier and again here, should the information I requested get posted, I would STILL do my best to provide assistance to whatever these issues are.
 
If that is not good enough for you, Mike, then I suppose there's not much I can do for you, and I'm sorry someone seems to have peed in your cornflakes.
 
In the meantime, I will keep an eye out for the new thread the original poster here indicated he may put out there, with the detail on the issues, and if so, I will in fact try to help.
 
Bob Bone
 

????????
Sorry but I don't understand. I don't see any stubbornness in the OP's posts (there are only two, aren't they?)
I think the reason why he chose to start a new thread is because the title of this thread is about CW's response to support tickets, so if he continues using this thread to ask for help on the issue he's having, users who have a solution may not read the thread because of the title. Of course, the OP could change the title, but then those who notice the thread and kindly try to help him will have to spend their precious time reading many posts on how important it is to list specs in the signature block.