Geo524
Pro Channel is the best thing that ever happened to Sonar. Skylight is 2nd. If these 2 items go away so will I. Lol.
I'd gladly pay to see an overhaul of Dimension Pro.

I never got the hate for ProChannel, it's not compulsory, you don't have to open it. For laptps it great, for mixing several tracks together, like say Kick Snare and hats it great t have the FX and console al in view, and nt have to open, cse and pin VSTs all the time. 
 
I think Rapture Pro is the overhaul of Dimension Pro, Consolidating the two units in one. Being able to drp and map samples into this wud be the next overhaul I'd like

mumpcake

burkek
Mac version. Since Cakewalk's demise I've switched to a Macbook Pro 2017 and will not look back. Currently learning Cubase but may switch to Logic. If Sonar comes back in a Mac version, well, I'd try a demo and decide from there.

That's one of the things that killed Cakewalk the first time.

With mac users using BandLab I can see a Mac version in the plan. They'd have learnt lessons from this the first time too. I'm Hping they are looking into re-working the old code and have thught this even mre imprtant when setting up a Mac version. s a Mac development could PC users some favours.
 

I would gladly pay BandLab $2500.00 to build me a custom version of Guitar Tracks Pro version 3
 
I'm not Joking one bit.

What I would like to see is:
1) Session Drummer 3 overhaul. Features like send (bleed) to a dedicated bus, in the app kit pieces swap, routing presets.
2) Further development of Rapture Pro. Ability to make it multi-timbral, with easy multichannel routing.
3) Last but not least - audio following tempo track in Sonar. This feature is brilliant in Samplitude and Reaper. It's long overdue to see this implemented in Sonar.

Despite the fact that I bought a fully-paid-up-front version of Platinum (with Lifetime Updates, no less!), I'd be inclined to pay a reasonable subscription fee towards ongoing development/support.
 
The thing is: I really like Sonar. When the Big News dropped and everyone started jumping ship, I held off switching to something different and (hopefully) have been vindicated in my decission. Truth be told, I ended up throwing quite a bit of money in Cakewalk/Gibson's direction for ProChannel modules and the like. No reason I won't be doing the same in BandLab's case (you can never have too many tools). I want to keep using Sonar as my go-to production solution and am willing to pay for the possibility.
 
(We can't really ignore the elephant in the room that is Windows 10. Without continued support, a Win update is bound to break your software sooner or later.)
 
On a different, but somewhat related, note: I'd love to see the product ecosystem expand to cater to a diverse userbase. Ideally, the future would see a cross-platform (which, these days, is pretty much a must), multi-tier toolset that would allow a kid in his bedroom to start with something simple and affordable and then have the opportunity to gradually upgrade right up to a fully professional, studio-grade solution and see their skills - and tools in hand - transfer every step of the way. I was under the impression that this was the general idea under Gibson, before everything went pear-shaped.
 
My thoughts on the matter are somewhat informed by how Microsoft has recently been handling Visual Studio development. For all the complaints one may have with MS (got a couple, myself), they really do make my developer day-job so much easier and they've done a lot of very sensible things with both .NET and the VS ecosystem.

MENG ALERT
 
Here is hoping Meng reads this:
I would Pay $100 if the existing confirmed known bugs were fixed in the re-branded iteration.
AND if Bandlab outsourced add-on features. This so they can make a percentage on the licensing and focus their coders on the main application - ths is win, win.

I think it could be a great idea for the BandLab to start accepting donations.

- Recycle the old SpectraFX plugin, which was discontinued after SONAR 8.5 for unknown reasons, and it was a GREAT effect.
- Also include a pre-timeline clip trimmer.

Nothing.......... yet.
 
I hope it will become great and have the opportunity to blow everyone's socks off with just how good it is. By this I mean people who don't think it's all that right now, not those who are head over heels in love with it already. Shiny new customers and lots of 'em. I hope after what I'm guessing will initially be a touched up version with a new sticker on it that in the future there will be this fantastic shiny upgrade that trounces not only Platinum but the entire DAW universe as we know it and that buying it will be a total no-brainer.
 
Paying just to fix things that were already broken? No. Been there, done that.

Cactus Music
What I would pay for is a DAW that was optimized for live performance. 

That's an interesting comment.
 
I believe we are very near the point where the "basic DAW functions" are more or less universal. I believe the opportunities now mainly lie in better ways to visualize things.  It makes perfect sense to me that there could be new interface layers that are more purpose-oriented.  Live performance would be one such example.
 
Another example is mastering, such as one finds in StudioOne.  Under the covers, there is nothing revolutionary there.  But it really is handy to have that mastering view as one is assembling an album.
 
I also think a graphical view of the DAW routing could be revolutionary.  This would be something like what Bidule does with the added elements of sound energy being depicted in real time throughout the routing network.  That wouldn't necessarily require any new DAW functionality, but would provide a more intuitive path into the DAW functions.  Clicking on any elements in the graphical map would bring up the parts of the traditional DAW GUI that applied to that part of the routing. 
 
I realize this is rather vague sounding, but this is the sort of R&D that successful DAW makers should be doing.  And it has the added advantage of allowing the supplier to offer the additional visualization layers are separately priced modules.  Personally I have no need for the live performance, but I would pay a big price for a more graphical, wizardy view of the DAW.  And others would be just the opposite.