Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]

Anderton
 
If they're different performances, what's wrong with having them in different Take Lanes? You can trim individual clips within take lanes if you want. Sounds can overlap all you want if they're in different lanes. They can also play back at the same time.

Exactly, overlaps are permitted as long as they reside in different lanes. So you can certainly continue to work with cases where you want stacking of voices on a single track. The comping workflow favors isolation but you can certainly ctrl-click on a clip to make it sound simultaneously with another lane. 
 
Here is the thing. However users interpreted the old layers approach. it was originally intended for comping but fell short because the design was too simplistic and didn't handle the 90% case it was intended to solve, which is comping a single part out of many takes. Yes you could comp in a loose sense with layers, by using workarounds and by manually toggling the solos and mutes along with using the older isolate tool. I've worked with the old layers approach myself and frankly the experience wasn't good, requiring so many intermediate operations that it destroyed my focus on what I was trying to do.
 
Essentially all the old layers paradigm did internally was assigning an index to the clips withing tracks. Beyond that you were on your own to mute solo or isolate the individual clips after recording multiple passes. It was a cumbersome workflow requiring users to manually toggle the solo states after each record pass to hear it.
On the other hand with the take lanes design, we started with the use cases we wished to be effortless and worked from there on designing tools especially for that purpose. We considered all boundary use cases as well as we could, and alternate workflow decisions were also carefully considered. Take lanes also build upon similar infrastructure as layers (that's why its backwards compatible) but all the magic and logic lives in the new tools and commands. Essentially lanes *are* layers with tools that are optimized for the most requested comping operations.
 
For those asking why we couldn't retain the old layers UI functionality, the reasons are manifold. The tools paradigm there wasn't something that could be extended to do what we wanted. Also it would have been an utter mess to maintain and support two completely different user interfaces especially since the latter was a dead end.
We can pretty much do most of what the manual layers approach did better and faster with the lanes approach. If there are missing workflows we can consider them and expand lanes to accommodate it potentially but your cases need to be clearly articulated and described separately. Putting a million posts into a single thread makes it very difficult for anyone to decipher and ends up clouding the issue further. A good way to describe workflow related problems are by stating use cases or "stories". Make a thread or report explaining exactly what you are trying to do from start to finish and why you cannot achieve it with the given tools. That's by far the best way to communicate an idea to a product manager or someone involved with the feature.

Thanks Noel...

I appreciate the explanations regarding the reasoning and changed solution process very much... With a few changes I could easily work with Lanes instead of Layers, but some of the changed toolset make some work much harder fir me so I get aggravated by every other issue along the way...

I think that my biggest issues wit the X generation have not changed and they all seem to relate to the use of screen space... Fewer visible tools or data sacrificed for other reasons... Zoom.... Ok I won't go there right now...

The new comping tool is awesome in its foresight and I appreciate it a lot more than it seems others understand me to be... What's killing me about it is that it is a default action instead of a choice. As Craig has pointed out to me once again, the work can still be done, but the tools and defaults have changed and been added to...

I hope that over time I can learn to be as comfortable with this arrangement as I once was with the earlier incarnations and I will do my best to remain calm... Not an easy task for an eccentric artist! ;-)

Keni

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Each discrete recording should end up in its own take lane. I normally write down the good take number T3/T4 etc. 
Also you can directly put your notes in the take lane itself. You do know there is a comment field right in the lane itself don't you? :)

Yes I did, and I forgot about it :) Quite right...
 
I guess I was thinking more about my Post #39 more than anything, that was one of the things that really put me off the functionality, what it was doing here didn't make much sense at all to me ......
 
Thanks...
 

I see that Cakewalk's fixed idea about what people are supposed to do with Sonar is the basic stumbling block here.
 
A simple, stupid tool or edit mode which would allow us to just grab clips and move them around without all the fancy bells and whistles may seem to be a mere salve for the weak-minded and inexperienced, but please remember that a lot of the most interesting art comes from exploring the capabilities of a limited tool.  When you assume that the only use for lanes is comping, it's not surprising that the tool becomes less versatile.
 
Besides all of this, from what I have read here, comping multi-track instruments has not been adequately addressed in the new toolset.  I would think that if you're going to focus on one use, you would try to master every case of it.

brian brock
A simple, stupid tool or edit mode which would allow us to just grab clips and move them around...

Stay away from the bottom half and the very ends of the clip, and that's what you've got - the Move tool. Looking at it that way, 50% of the clip is devoted to just moving it around. I don't see how you get that an assumption has been made that "the only use for lanes is comping".
 

What gets me caught and stuck is when there is a gap between clips in different lanes.  Even a miniscule one that I have really zoom to see.  Then when I go to crossfade the clips in the lanes I can't.  I haven't found an efficient way to make sure the clips line up and therefore enable the crossfade tool between lanes.

I always see examples using vocals.  That's fine.  Vox are relatively easy to edit and comp.
 
Please give me a super quick video editing a loose drummer that needs a fill and a random snare hit moved to continue the proper groove.  I have this happen all the time and using lanes is just a nightmare.  I assume it's because my head is where it's been since Sonar 6, but a "editing less-than-stellar drums for dummies" video would sure help me :)

Anderton

elijahlucian
I'm pretty sure roland didn't take all the tech support tickets with them when they left, meaning, these issues should be resolved BEFORE making a new version... that's how it's supposed to be done... at least, when paying customers are in the equation.... 

If those "paying customers in the equation" are using X2 Producer, they're being offered an upgrade price for X3 Producer (which is a better program) for the price of Addictive Drums all by itself. And they get the $99 version of Melodyne, all the Nomad Factory Blue Tubes plug-ins, VST3 support, ARA integration, Skylight improvements, Gobbler integration, Pro Channel EQ improvements, a tape emulation module, speed comping, and bunch of other features. Oh, and four free updates (so far) with additional video capabilities coming next. If they stick with X3 for a year, it costs them $12.50 a month.
 
I think few people would consider that kind of deal as showing anything but gratitude for existing customers.
 
Can you imagine if musicians were subject to this kind of thinking? "I think your first album has a bunch of mistakes in it, especially some of the mixes but also some parts are out of time, so I think you should redo the parts and remix the tracks so the album is up to today's standards before releasing another album. Oh, and you should replace my first copy for free."
 
For better or for worse, that's just not the way the world works. Well, on second thought maybe Trent Reznor would remix stuff and give it away for free...but he's an exception

Oh yeah! that would be an interesting predicament!
 
People are still coming to understand what it means to be a software "developer" and many just don't get it...
 
Keni
 

I think the real stumbling block here is that some people want to use sonar in a way it's not programmed to be used.

It might mean changing your work flow but surely that has to be easier than constantly trying to put square pegs in round holes figuratively speaking.

Noël stated categorically that Layers will not be brought back. So perhaps if enhancements to take lanes are wanted then the proper course would be to put in a feature request. In the meantime learn how to use what can be done

mudgel
In the meantime learn how to use what can be done

I'd love to.  I don't see how it's easily done.  If Cake can make a short video of comping real live drums, not played to a grid, that'd be a huge bunch of awesomeness.
Cause every video shows vocals obviously played to a grid that uses AD or Session Drummer.  If you can't edit perfectly timed takes then you need more than speed-comping to help your workflow.

mudgel
I think the real stumbling block here is that some people want to use sonar in a way it's not programmed to be used.

It might mean changing your work flow but surely that has to be easier than constantly trying to put square pegs in round holes figuratively speaking.

Noël stated categorically that Layers will not be brought back. So perhaps if enhancements to take lanes are wanted then the proper course would be to put in a feature request. In the meantime learn how to use what can be done

Yes... I never actually expected that they would bring back Layers... The statement was really to connect with the needs...

I can easily see Lanes being made to do all the things that Layers did as well as all the new additional cool features that is added. I can easily see where some of these tools will and are already helpful as I learn them... Here's my very short lust of things that would fix that for me...

1) add modifier to alt-click such as ctrl-alt-click to give discrete lane splitting with fast access to this tool
2) change zoom (or add alternate method) so that lanes can be as small or large as a track using the z-click-drag tool
3) enable a view mode that permits the lanes to be displayed within the track area instead of showing the comp
4) add some visual item that differentiates between track and lane while still keeping them relative to parent track Shades?

Note that number 4 should be for both the clips and the control areas...

Then I'd be fine with Lanes...

Keni

fooman

mudgel
In the meantime learn how to use what can be done

I'd love to.  I don't see how it's easily done.  If Cake can make a short video of comping real live drums, not played to a grid, that'd be a huge bunch of awesomeness.
Cause every video shows vocals obviously played to a grid that uses AD or Session Drummer.  If you can't edit perfectly timed takes then you need more than speed-comping to help your workflow.

I'm finding that it is possible to do and only a tad more cumbersome than it was... It took some investigation, complaining, and pointers /ideas from a number of people..

The short of it?

Use the actual split tool and it allows you to split discrete lanes
Use the K key to un mute overlapping clips and edit fades

Then all the other tools become helpful additives as you will find I'm sure...

I found that once I use F8 and cycle it go the split tool, I can simply return to the smart tool and back with a single F5<>F8...

Keni