how great would it be if....

cakewalk/ roland decided to take a huge step forward and (i guess you could say "re-added") in a fully functional scripting language into sonar in the future?!  they had CAL obviously but basically dropped it--but it wasn't fully functional (by that i mean ANY thing you do in the program should be able to be scripted up).

in real life, i'm a 3d "technical artist" working in film and games--and all major packages have the ability to code your own tools allowing to do the most "painful" of tasks with just a push of a button--and all have adopted the industry standard of python.  

i would just freakin' absolutely LOVE if cakewalk took the first steps and had a fully functional python scripting language to help us all build our own tools and workflows (and actually share them) to help make a lot of our tasks in sonar even easier!  --and in a short while, users would start creating their own tools for the package if the language api was open enough helping make the software even better.

maybe i'm the anomaly here, or maybe just crazy ;p --but when 3d added scripting languages as a standard, it changed everything--i feel that it could be the next great step that the music DAWs take....

please please please roland/ cakewalk....

yeah...i know...definitely lots of people would love/ appreciate it.

i just had this urge to reiterate it/ remind cake (again) this morning...that's all.


;)

John


What you suggest has been asked for many times. I hope CW is listening. 

This is total speculation on my part- but I suspect this is not on their "Must Have" list for the next version (if ever).
 
I'd like it too.   But I don't know, I haven't gotten the sense that CAL updates or scripting is in their immediate plans.
They certainly haven't updated CAL in ages.
 
 

John


It would be a shame if what the suspect is the way it will be. I think you may be very well right Billy. We can still hope.

John - to be honest, I'd like to see some effort in this area by CW, but I don't think I would put it on the top of my list either.
Automation, as one example, is way more important at this point.
Seemless/non-glitching inserting of plugins, loop points, etc -- there are many areas I'd like to see them address for the next version (the Matrix is another key area for me, since it's useless to me as is).
 
So I know resources are probably tight for CW as they are for many companies today -- and, in that regard, I'd rather they put their energies into the utmost priorities most of us would agree need the attention.
 
 

garrigus


The problem is that most musicians are not programmers, so that probably puts this type of feature/update very low on the request list.

Scott

Agreed, Scott.  But there are some 'functions' in CAL scripts that sure would be handy to have as actual utilities in Sonar.   Things like "MIDI Compression" (where you can set a high/low limit and a center value for velocity of a given range of notes); and so on.
 
The Interpolate function in Sonar is super powerful -- but, as you rightly point out, most musicians are not programmers.  Using Interpolate requires a certain programmer mentality, I assert.   I use it quite a bit but at first I had to kind of figure out exactly how, since it is all encompassing and can literally change/modify almost any type of event.   I wonder how many users just on this forum actually use Interpolate?
 
So there is some room for taking some of the best parts of CAL scripts and incorporating them directly, I would think. 

The problem is that most musicians are not programmers, so that probably puts this type of feature/update very low on the request list. Scott

That didn't stop CW from having it in the Pro Audio series. Nor did that notion stop CW from providing Studioware either. Both were left out of Sonar when it first appeard. Neither has been developed or been included as it was in Pro Audio. Sonar still supports them but without any editing ability within Sonar itself. Many DAWs do have a scripting or macro language. Cubase reinstituted mixers panels so there is no good reason for CW not to do the same. 

Agree... but what exactly do I get from supporting this request? It's not clear I get much value from a scripting lang other than the existing CAL. I use several other tools that could benefit from improvements. I'd rather they spend their talented resources on those improvements than delivering a programming language I'll likely never use. [BTW - I used CAL a lot... but I don't seem to need it anymore as the product features grew.]

You may not have any need to write your own CAL routines. But the ones you have used were written by others. We don't know what useful things might come from a strong healthy language that the user base would have at its disposal. There are a few things I do in Sonar now that could be made into a script but because there is no macro recording ability in Sonar I am not likely to create one.

Further so what if you don't immediately benefit from a macro recording ability.  It wont hurt you or anyone else if it does appear. The notion that having this ability will mean something else is not done as feature is pure speculation that gets us nowhere.
So what if the feature is knocked out not because of this but something else. How are we to know what was dropped or not because of a feature being added.

Clearly some want these things added. It wont stop CW from adding other features by adding this one too. Also how long are we to wait for a very long asked for feature? When is the right time to add it? When all other features have been added? Just when will that be? We can't know what is in the plans of CW for features so we can only ask and see what comes of it.

There is no need to protest any one feature request unless it would mean a fundamental reworking of the product we know so well and make it something we can't use. 

 

I find I ask for this whenever I'm trying to solve a problem of a dedicated function not existing already. Clip Gain envelopes, multiple track operations, and certain kinds of processing (esp. MIDI) I need to accomplish.

If SONAR added a few of these my gumption for a scripting language would decrease dramatically.

So, as long as they accomplish one or the other I'm cool.

Don't be foolish.

Foolish? What a nice way to discuss something. I may be  a lot of things but foolish is not one of them. Judging by that answer I don't think you understand what I am talking about.

ba_midi

Agreed, Scott.  But there are some 'functions' in CAL scripts that sure would be handy to have as actual utilities in Sonar.   Things like "MIDI Compression" (where you can set a high/low limit and a center value for velocity of a given range of notes); and so on.

Midi FX -> velocity

much easier, faster and non destructive (as opposed to CAL)

..."technical artist" working in film and games--and all major packages have the ability to code your own tools

You neglected to mention the license costs of these major packages that have an open architecture.
Which packages are you meaning and aren't  they going for 10-20 (or more!) times the cost of Sonar?
 
 

You neglected to mention the license costs of these major packages that have an open architecture. Which packages are you meaning and aren't  they going for 10-20 (or more!) times the cost of Sonar?

Sijel

nah...not anymore...times have changed and prices have dropped dramatically.  ;p  (tho yes, more pricey than sonar--but even individuals buy the packages for home/ hobby usage).  gone are the days of the 20k software.  the main package most major studios use you can get for the list price of 2k...and that's the "recommended" price (i've seen it *super* cheap online--tho it's questionable).  let's just say...sonar may be 1/4 of that price, but if you compare feature "sets" (tho yes *completely* different worlds) sonar is WAY more expensive for what you get. ;p  and there are numerous 3d packages that we use for the same price as sonar (under 500) as well.  

and with the community of people around the world that have added tools/ workflows/ etc to the package and shared them worldwide...the package(s) have grown exponentially faster than any one company could have ever done by itself.   (and no...CAL/ Studioware were NOT that--never would/ or could have been). 

--but i'll still buy the next version of sonar happily whenever they announce it.  just as i have for most of the past upgrades ;)  

(back to 3d: actually there's a number of open source (free) packages out there now a days that are really good. and that have full scripting languages--but then again...python is open source in the first place--so...).  but graphics tend to attract more programmers than audio, i'd imagine.)

---------------

and someone above mentioned that other DAWs have scripting languages?  really?  i didn't actually know that?  which one(s)?  (i was an early adopter of sonar myself so i didn't spend much time using other packages).