Or perhaps, let the user decide which Take Lane the next recording will be selected for recording.
 
But I can see a problem there - if you've selected say T1 for recording, what happens if you're loop recording and there's material already in T2? Where will Sonar place the 2nd recording in your current recording loop?

So, with all this conjecture from folks who are actively using the feature, it would be greatly helpful to get an official "how the logic of take lanes works" input from the Bakers, rather than us guessing.
 
In a perfect world, you may do a take all the way through and have nice neat lanes for takes, but apparently, we don't all live in that world! :)
 
My personal issue is more related to talent than take lane arrangement.  I stink at playing guitar and keys.  I can get a passible take after enough tries, but I just opt for the ctrl-z, w, r option instead most of the time because I would otherwise end up with 25 take lanes for the verse of a song! ;)
 

The screen shots in the OP's post don't look like X3c Pro to me.

John
The screen shots in the OP's post don't look like X3c Pro to me.

Jlien X
SONAR X3c Base Edition (64-bit),

Never heard of "base edition", is there are link somewhere on exactly what's in it?
What about guitar, keyboard and vocal editions? ;).
Anyway I digress, ignore me.

I can replicate the OP's screenshot perfectly - except for the lighter shade of grey in the Track header and the Take Lanes header

I am one of those throwbacks who still preferred Layers over Lanes even with it's bugs... Lanes are still very buggy, but I haven't managed to come up with good enuf specifics to report them...
 
Many times having two Take Lanes named Take one and if I delete one it also deletes the other??? Lanes getting shuffled out of order for unknown reasons... The list goes on...
 
And lets be a little realistic here... Layers were removed and Lanes were imlemented in their place as a believed improvment... For many of us they are not...
 
Meanwhile as I don't expect Cakewalk to agree with my view, I'm doing my best to live with a very uncomfortable time with my editing... All the new attempts at guessing choices (Smart Grid and Comping Mode come to mind) might be good for some people, but not all and for many of us get in the way... Luckily we can chose to not use them as has usually been the approach of The Bakers, but not so with Lanes...
 
Layers were a brilliant inovation which is sadly in the past...
 
Don't get me wrong... I like many of the new ideas and always look forward to trying new things... I've watched the video on speed comping and see how helpful it can be in some situations... Good... One day I may need that...
 
Right now I need and easy way to turn comping off on the smart tool... the smart tool actually being one of the innovations that's been working for me until now... I understand the premise of the speed comping, but much of it is still very young and in need of more depth development to be  comfortably useful for me...
 
The new color coding is a good step towards retunring and improving some of the usefulness of color controi as we had in 8.5.3.... But for me?
 
I need a way to have Lanes a noticeably different, yet related color to the track as it's still visually confusing as to what is track vs lane as well as the track's display of clips while working in lanes needs to be noticeably different as well as it's very confusing to the eye whther you're looking at a ghost or the real thing and as to how many things are being selected.... Yes, the left side is indented, but that doesn't help when I'm looking at the clips area doing actual work...
 
Not to derail the thread from the OP's matters.... I apologize if I did, but I see all of the matters presented as of the many bugs still apparent in Lanes without nitpicking the details...
 
Oh, did I forget to mention! The huge number of ZOOM issues introduced to accomodate Lanes??? Right now between those decisions and a new bug introduced with C's debugging progress has made editing very frustrating with much time wasted moving the mouse all over the screen to accomplish a zoom and never ge too pleased with the result regardless...
 
Zoom needs some serious re-thinking and Lanes is a big part of the problem... Zoom was much more straight forward in 8.5.3!
 
Keni
 

Blades
So, with all this conjecture from folks who are actively using the feature, it would be greatly helpful to get an official "how the logic of take lanes works" input from the Bakers, rather than us guessing.
 
In a perfect world, you may do a take all the way through and have nice neat lanes for takes, but apparently, we don't all live in that world! :)
 
My personal issue is more related to talent than take lane arrangement.  I stink at playing guitar and keys.  I can get a passible take after enough tries, but I just opt for the ctrl-z, w, r option instead most of the time because I would otherwise end up with 25 take lanes for the verse of a song! ;)
 

I'm with you Blades!
 
The work model I have most often allows me to use Sonar as both idea creation and rehearsal while developing parts, and I most often chose to stop, rewind, re-record as it is much faster than allowing the machine to play through it's entire loop... and many of my clients as well as my own work has much more need of this than recording whole live takes from a multi-piece band/combo...
 
I have some mind you, but I prefer to simply let the tape run so to speak and edit down my selected take afterwards... I have little need of comping takes at that level tho the occasion may arise as it has.... It's just not always the best work model for me.... Far from it!
 
I love the addition of our fast envelope node creation tools... that has been a big help... I still don't use envelope lanes much if at all... and I still preferred 8.5.3's envelope viewing to the X generation's almost invisible approach attempting to force the use of envelope lanes.... And again, I've even found envelope lanes handy.... Once or twice.... I mostly avoid it...
 
I really don't need the program thinking for me, I need it working for me! When it can read my thoughts having so many smart-tools might have a place! ;-)
 
Keni
 

I am similarly flummoxed by the treatment of MIDI in comping mode. For audio recording, I am starting to appreciate it. I do all my own woodwinds live and also use my Rhodes for a lot of tracks with the hardware effects. I can use the 'takes' to try a bunch of variations through, for example, a 16 bar phrase, and then cut them up and mix and match the variations pretty easily. 
 
In MIDI with softsynths, however, it seems to get all mixed up. Stuff gets chopped back and forth and is out of order. I wish that it worked exactly like the Audio version, but I can't seem to get the same fluidity of setting the break points. Seems to have something to do with the 'discreteness' of MIDI events. Too bad, because I would prefer to do the creative front end stuff in MIDI what with the choices of softsynths now available. I still end up committing to a 'hardware' keyboard sound up front and recording it in Audio.
 

Automation Lanes are interesting here, because while they have much of the same unfamiliar newness as Take Lanes do, it's quite easy to adapt to changing the Edit Filter to display automation on the track.  In fact this is generally better than automation ever was in Sonar 8, and I find it almost always to be better than using the Lanes in the X series, except when editing two or more envelopes at once.
 
Take Lanes should have a similar alternate approach using the Edit Filter.  Specifically, it should be possible to choose an edit filter which displays Layers.  This would parallel the automation lanes implementation, and would increase the power available to all users.  The actual implementation of the Layers Edit Filter wouldn't need to be any different than it was in previous versions.