BJZ

groverken
.... I'm just looking forward to the next BandLab announcement so that (hopefully) we can finally drop all this "lifetime updates" dialogue!

Hah! I love the naïveté of that statement.
 
No matter what BandLab announces there WILL BE immense, intense and eternal "lifetime update" dialog.
 
Mark my words. 

I think it will be short lived, the licence is with with Cakewalk Inc ... which after having sold everything except it's obligations to it's customers ... will have to change it name to something like Void Inc (If that trademark is available). It may take time for people to realize that the risk with this new online licensing is that there is a major difference when a company goes tits up. Before you were left with abandonware, now you are left with nothing ... but your eyes to cry with. Fortunately it is now clear that this is not what will happen. Let's hope BandLab has a long and successful future ahead of it. I feel confident that this will turn out well. Even optimistic. I think this time next year, Cakewalk will be a turnaround success story you can read about.

abacab

Kamikaze
 
IMO this is what BandLab needs to do...
 
<snip>

Some very good points made here!  The focus on the core skillsets of Sonar is a must. 
 

Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording

 
If it isn't something that Sonar can do as well, or better than the competition, cut it out.  Harsh, but necessary to avoid a jack of all trades mediocrity.  Sonar needs a strong identity to appeal to the future uninitiated DAW users, or else the competition will win.
 
As far as the Matrix is concerned.  Nice idea, but Live can do it better, so just let it go.
 
Same with chord tracks.  It's a nice idea, but Cubase can do it already.  It hasn't happened in Sonar yet, so just let the feature request go in peace.
 
Notation?  Get a dedicated notation program.  Studio One and Live are both successful without a notation view.
 
Trim the weeds, and focus on areas that are the strongest!

Terrible advice, in my opinion.

abacab

Kamikaze
 
IMO this is what BandLab needs to do...
 
<snip>

Some very good points made here!  The focus on the core skillsets of Sonar is a must. 
 

Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording

 
If it isn't something that Sonar can do as well, or better than the competition, cut it out.  Harsh, but necessary to avoid a jack of all trades mediocrity.  Sonar needs a strong identity to appeal to the future uninitiated DAW users, or else the competition will win.
 
As far as the Matrix is concerned.  Nice idea, but Live can do it better, so just let it go.
 
Same with chord tracks.  It's a nice idea, but Cubase can do it already.  It hasn't happened in Sonar yet, so just let the feature request go in peace.
 
Notation?  Get a dedicated notation program.  Studio One and Live are both successful without a notation view.
 
Trim the weeds, and focus on areas that are the strongest!

Making Sonar clearly better than the competition at "Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording" is a very difficult and unlikely task. At best it can only be seen to be 'as good as'. So if it's 'as good as' why choose it. It's as good as Cubase, but cubase has Chord Tracks and hasn't been passed from company to company and was closed down at one point. Chord Tracks will most likely become the norm as ARA2 is adoptied but more DAWs and it's one of it's attributes. So Studio One will probably have one soon as they are a key Melodyne partner. When Extract tempo was created, so many Sonar users were saying 'we want it, Studio One has it'. Melodyne is now part of my tool box, and I'm choosing the DAWs that are capable of utilizing it to the full. 
 
Sonar needs to re-build a reputation and gain new customers, it has to be a clear option compared to the leaders. stripping it back will not do this.
 
Ableton users wanting to progress onto a fully fledged DAW have no reason to choose Sonar over the top 3 DAWs. Things like the 64 pad controllers are becoming more common and many will see that as a way into music. Sonar should be breaking new customer grounds.
 
This is a BandLab Product now, and easy Song Writing is the ethos of BandLap. Chord Tracks and Matrix view are tools for easy song writing. I don't know, but maybe BandLab already do use a chord track. BandLab are also interested in the Educational Market and Notation is valuable to this, and schools are a great way to introduce to a new customer base.
 
With all the sample libraries now, and the interest in gaming music and film scores. Orchestration is bigger than ever and growing. And Notation users wanting to move onto a fully fledge DAW will want this option in the DAW, otherwise 'Why pick Sonar'.
 
Making Sonar great at just Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording, won't win new customers, and stripping it back will lose existing customers. It may suit you needs but I think it's a plan for failure. I can't see it being BandLabs vision.
 
 
 
 

bapu
The (arguably) most groundbreaking band in the world even occasioanlly used loops.
 
Maybe you heard of them?
 
The Beatles.
 

Post of the week. Add The Mamas and the Papas to that.

I believe Hendrix experimented with them as well.

Earwax

ch.huey
Thank you but I'm not a lover of long posts myself, I mostly find them a pain in the rear.

You’re joking, right? You have 4 posts. They’re ALL long!!

 
I can promise you this will be short.

ch.huey
- I DON'T FEEL SCREWED THAT I LIKELY WON'T HAVE LIFETIME UGPRADES/ROLLING UPDATES ANYMORE THAT I PAID $399 FOR. ... Again I blame Gibson for what seems like a crass attempt to milk... I'll stop there but you get my point. Glad Sonar is away from Gibson, even if it won't be the same program as I bought into.

Can we PLEASE, once and for all, dispel the myth that Gibson came up with the “Lifetime Updates” idea? They didn’t. Cakewalk came up with the Lifetime Updates, not Gibson. Don’t believe it? Ask Noel Borthwick or Craig Anderton.

 
Yes, except that I never said Gibson came up with the idea of lifetime updates. I blame Gibson for being such a poorly run company that Cakewalk, a company that has been around for decades and I had faith in to buy lifetime upgrades, shut down due to Gibson being a poorly run company. If you disagree with that, please drink some chamomile tea and have a good cry. Perhaps find a kitten and pet it. Or if whatever severe crisis you seem to be having is more existential in nature, find a priest, and pet him.
 
You are aware I am indeed a man, but not made of straw, yes? So you can go find an immobile human shaped form to argue with that has the holes exactly where you want to poke it with your pitchfork elsewhere, as I have no desire to be prodded by you.
 

ch.huey

I talked to a friend a while back, and she told me ... (blah blah removed, sigh)

I find this incredibly hard to believe. How did he think the loops he was using were made?? Is he blessed with magical thinking? Did you actually have a conversation with him about his thoughts on musical creation, or with his mom? What program could he possibly have used that would magically close his mind to the reality of, oh I don’t know…, who made the loops he was using, and how they were made? He’s never heard of a recording studio?
 
 
I’m not picking on you. I just found your posts……………interesting
 
I find the future possibilities of the flagship BLDAW to be utterly fascinating. I can’t wait to see what the BandLab team cooks up.

I certainly don't find you as interesting as you seem to find yourself.
 
Thank you for your suggestions, though, to Bandlab on what they can do to make your experience of the program better, instead of nitpicking on minutiae that no one cares about from a post several pages ago.
 
Since that was my bigger point about why arguing over loops doesn't matter and it's far more important to suggest positive improvements instead of being someone who sits there nit picking pointless issues like an armchair philosopher. Also why I'm not going to argue about loops with you.
 
That short enough for you? I apologize if it is too brief, as I'm enjoying all the other people who are actually posting constructive comments about what they would like Bandlab to know to devote more time to this response. My sincerest apologies.

 

RTA
 
The dictionary definition of music is 'Rhythmic Noise', so however you get to the end result is valid.
Whatever works for you. The rest is subjective.

 
That is not the definition, and I groan over what dictionary you chose to nab that falsity from.  It's apparent that even dictionary companies are being politicized.

The true definition is: Music - Melody or harmony; any succession of sounds so modulated as to please the ear, or any combination of simultaneous sounds in accordance of harmony. An aesthetic art form of sound produced in a continuum of time consisting of 1) Beat, 2) Rhythm, 3) Melody, and 4) Harmony.
 
Such a shame that people now think noise is music!  It's not.
 
You might say, in a figure of speech, that some type of news is music to your ears, but that is just a figure of speech.  Unfortunately, unschooled people actually believe the brainwashing they have received, and are not able to call things as they are.  

I wasn't disparaging loops. I just thought it was a rather humorous statement that they represented a higher level of abstraction. 
 
Of course, it makes a difference if the loops are your own creation, or you just downloaded them from some repository.

Toddskins

RTA
 
The dictionary definition of music is 'Rhythmic Noise', so however you get to the end result is valid.
Whatever works for you. The rest is subjective.

 
That is not the definition, and I groan over what dictionary you chose to nab that falsity from.  It's apparent that even dictionary companies are being politicized.

The true definition is: Music - Melody or harmony; any succession of sounds so modulated as to please the ear, or any combination of simultaneous sounds in accordance of harmony. An aesthetic art form of sound produced in a continuum of time consisting of 1) Beat, 2) Rhythm, 3) Melody, and 4) Harmony.
 
Such a shame that people now think noise is music!  It's not.
 
You might say, in a figure of speech, that some type of news is music to your ears, but that is just a figure of speech.  Unfortunately, unschooled people actually believe the brainwashing they have received, and are not able to call things as they are.  

Noise is 'unwanted sound', music isn't unwanted

michael diemer

abacab

Kamikaze
 
IMO this is what BandLab needs to do...
 
<snip>

Some very good points made here!  The focus on the core skillsets of Sonar is a must. 
 

Mixing, Arranging, Sequencing and recording

 
If it isn't something that Sonar can do as well, or better than the competition, cut it out.  Harsh, but necessary to avoid a jack of all trades mediocrity.  Sonar needs a strong identity to appeal to the future uninitiated DAW users, or else the competition will win.
 
As far as the Matrix is concerned.  Nice idea, but Live can do it better, so just let it go.
 
Same with chord tracks.  It's a nice idea, but Cubase can do it already.  It hasn't happened in Sonar yet, so just let the feature request go in peace.
 
Notation?  Get a dedicated notation program.  Studio One and Live are both successful without a notation view.
 
Trim the weeds, and focus on areas that are the strongest!

Terrible advice, in my opinion.

I could not agree more.
 
Notation is incredibly important as it is one way of viewing what you actually have in the MIDI domain. Sonar is at best passable, but when you go in between programs, it NEVER translates properly. Staff view is just a way of viewing the same MIDI data that matrix, or event list, or piano roll is. They are all useful in their own ways, and I often have audio, piano and staff view open at the same time so I can see them line up and make modifications.
 
Try recognizing a second inversion dominant 7th piano chord based on piano roll, vs staff view and tell me if it is unimportant. Again, I would highly suggest that Bandlab make notation a priority, in at least one of the editions, if not a version of the newnotSonar that can seamlessly translate between the two. I could deal with the pretty presentation being a different program, as I believe Presonus has done (?), but just neatening up what is already there by a bit and including TUPLETS past 3 would be a huge help.
 
Otherwise, you're exporting MIDI from Sonar into Sibelius or Musescore, and it is an ugly mess that you spend unnecessary time cleaning up so it's readable. To those who can read music, it is important, and a few minor improvements could really help when you've spent a lot of time working on a piece and the lack of ability to have consistent enharmonic spellings when using a keyboard to enter notes is why you can't hand it to a musician without first going and slaving over it in a 3rd party program for an unnecessary amount of time. What I need to see while making the final music is not the same as what I present to a musician, and as of now, it's lacking for both those purposes in ways.