Destro


People really hate change that's all I can think about when I read post on X1.

Then you really haven't been reading properly IMO. For instance I posted the equivalent of 8 pages of suggestions on things that should really be done better. Like the existence of a Select and Move Tool instead of a single Grab Tool. What were they thinking?

Glitches and bugs, aside X1 really is a better product than v8.5.3 or below.  We can all thing of things that CW can do better or where they missed the boat, but after using X1 for a month now, I don't see why this didn't happen sooner.

Some things are good, some things are bad but overall, there is much less available stuff on the screen in X1 than previous versions of Sonar. (Screen usage being the topic of this thread). This is a step back, not forward.

 Now I'll admit, I really do feel like this version is geared toward the 24" inches + and the dual monitor crowd when dealing with the interface, but if we've been paying attention to the computer tred at all; large screens, dual monitors and more are all the rage, so to speak.  The first thing I thought of when I saw this product being advertise was "I'm gonna need a larger monitor."  I was using a 18" inch monitor before using 8.5.3 and I hated the experience.  I figured dual monitors would have made a much better experience, but I didn't have that luxury.

Sorry to say but this is non-sense. Increasing your screen resolution (monitor size is irrelevant) should give you more screen real-estate. You shouldn't have to buy a new screen because the new GUI in a new version of software is so badly designed. In X1 things are bloated and bulky and use up way too much space. Like I wrote earlier: From Lego to Duplo. This gives me a "My First DAW" impression rather than an advanced professional tool.

Also, as tarsier points out, there are things that just can't be read and don't fit regardless of screen resolution. How can they come up with that kind of design? The very first time someone at Cakewalk inserted an effect into an effect bin in X1 they should have told themselves "Oh wait a minute. This won't do. We need to fix this before we move on" .

And for the record, my studio and the studio I tested X1 in both have dual 1920x1080 24" screens. I have these screens so as to fit as much possible stuff on them. Not to see things bigger! (My eyesight is fine).

Enters X1, right around Xmas time(smart),

It is not smart if it causes this kind of backlash from the customers. Brand reputation is an extremely valuable asset. It is easy to damage a reputation. Very hard to gain one or rebuild one.

Steinberg didn't try to catch the Xmas shopping frenzy and instead released Cubase 6 in January. I wonder how that is working out for them...

Large displays is really where the interface really establishes itself over the previous versions.

Again, no. Previous versions of Sonar make much better use of large screens. More tracks and more info available at all times. X1 is without a possible doubt a step back as far as that is concerned.

Again though, smaller monitors are so........90s

Big Duplo interfaces are so 90's...

At least run dual screens for this product IMO.

I've been running dual screen for years and so does every studio I work in. (Well except one actually which has the largest Apple Cinema display). X1 is a step back because so much screen space is wasted.

anything has to be better than all those damn buttons.

Seriously, if they bothered you, why didn't you remove them?

Yeah, I could hide buttons, but who needs hieroglyphs, when I can just use words with a dropdown.  Again Hieroglyphs so......late b.c. to early AD.  Some buttons are fine, but everything a button!?!? especially when I'm going to learn the shortcut for it anyway, doesn't work for me.

Indeed, you could hide them. A lot of the criticism directed at X1 is about thing that can not be changed by the user and you present counter-arguments of things that could be changed by the users. That makes no sense.

That said, I agree that the buttons needed an overhaul. I quite like the the Control Bar and the way it can easily be hidden but many many things in X1 really need to be scaled down. (Also see here for many more suggestions on enhancing the Control Bar and other things in X1 http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=2193406 ).

While I may feel smaller monitor users are kind of overlooked here, I also feel like smaller monitors are just like the 8.5.3 interface; in need of an upgrade.  Times are changing and we can't all jus expect everything to always stay the way they were.

No but we can expect them to move forward! Wasting space the way X1 does is a step backwards! You whole argument is based on the usage of small screens. I think that argument is entirely flawed. I use big screens and I don't like the bulky GUI.

Change is hard to deal with, so I understand the frustrations, but I think Sonar has really changed for the better.

Change is not the problem. I love change. The problem is the actual implementation.

This is not just same package with new toys, its a paradigm shift meaning going forward this new design will only get expanded upon.  I've yet to read a review that hates the new interface and everyone that seems to dislike it, never provide a good reason, at least not a reason I can agree with.

A reason you agree with is not the same thing as a good reason... Anyway, read my suggestions' list. Many of those things should have been caught by Cakewalk before shipping. (And I only looked at a small section of the application! http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=2193406 )

So being able to collapse the browser to a sliver when I don't need it and then re-open it with a simple scroll and click of the mouse to use the drag and drop feature is just convenient. 

If only it was a sliver... Anyway, I prefer it would go completely and be accessible with a key hit.

UnderTow

Undertow, although I like the new GUI more than you do, I think you have a whole bunch of really good suggestions that Cakewalk should really consider.

As far as the "slivers" go, when the browser is collapsed, it's taking up barely more than 1/4". Is that really that bothersome?

Even though I like the control bar as it is, I suppose it would be nice to be able to scale it down a bit. I prefer the look of it a little larger, but I think even I would probably size it down to a bit smaller than it is now.

And I have to say that I really appreciate the fact that you have very good reasons for your dislikes in X1. The total negativity of some posters really bugs me. In your case, you have some dislikes and you back them up with well thought-out reasons. I definitely like the new GUI more than you do, but I think your suggestions are good and should be thoughtfully considered by Cakewalk.

neiby


Undertow, although I like the new GUI more than you do, I think you have a whole bunch of really good suggestions that Cakewalk should really consider.

Thanks.

As far as the "slivers" go, when the browser is collapsed, it's taking up barely more than 1/4". Is that really that bothersome?

Well it is cumulative. Nearly everything is a bit too big which together amounts to a  lot of wasted space. In comparison have a look at this image:



That is 65 audio tracks visible in one go. I understand that not everyone would like to work this way but I don't like the idea of being forced to have all those big huge clunky things in X1. That is part if the reason why I quite like the Control Bar. You can hide it completely. Nice and neat.

Even though I like the control bar as it is, I suppose it would be nice to be able to scale it down a bit. I prefer the look of it a little larger, but I think even I would probably size it down to a bit smaller than it is now.

Maybe they should leave it as it is and allow a second compact mode with small icons and small texts etc. That should please most people. Even better would be three modes. Current, Compact and Button Mode. The Button Mode is just one button height high with all the relevant and necessary buttons and maybe the most relevant text like Loop Points (side by side to save height) and of course the usual ability to select which modules are shown. And, as I have already suggested elsewhere, the ability to undock any module.

I really wish Cakewalk would approach feature development this way. Instead of overhauling the whole GUI (or feature set or whatever), tackle one element at a time and really make the best of it. Make it super powerful and flexible and then move on to the next element. Once these "Super Features" are combined, they will form tools that are greater than the sum of the parts. (I can show an example of how I see this working in practise but it is a video about Cubase so I better refrain).

And I have to say that I really appreciate the fact that you have very good reasons for your dislikes in X1. The total negativity of some posters really bugs me. In your case, you have some dislikes and you back them up with well thought-out reasons. I definitely like the new GUI more than you do, but I think your suggestions are good and should be thoughtfully considered by Cakewalk.

Thanks again.

UnderTow

Am I the only one who likes both interfaces?  (X1 and S8.5)  Every time I switch versions I fall in love again.

I think X1 nudges out S8.5 by a nose but some of the tools have definite obstacles placed in my way.  (Envelope EDIT in particular - No way to get into it via the Shift click trick if an envelope doesn't exist.  Open it up via a keybinding and I'm a happy camper.)

I remember the "cluttered GUI" being hammered on quite a bit by non-SONAR users but these were people who never customized the views to get a less cluttered view.  I wonder if it would have been better to just create a different default track view and console view and advertise that instead. 

Bugs aside, I like the interface although I'm not sure about the gray because a lot of LCD monitors I have seen lean toward a slight greenish tint with grays. Especially using the VGA port.
Not sure why that is and it can probably be corrected with the calibration tools.

That aside, the new UI is light years ahead of 8.x.
However, it takes getting used to and the Groove 3 videos go a long way toward helping with this.
Seeing someone navigate around the interface is a lot better than either hunting and pecking or reading the doc.

@UnderTow, I *really* like the idea of having those three modes for the control bar. That's a great idea.

I don't find X1 cluttered. I can show much the same number of tracks in X1 as I did in Sonar 8.5.3.

Both pictures were snapped on a 22" LCD display running at 1680x1080.



Here is Sonar 8.5.3 with the same project with as many trqcks as in the above or there about.

Mod Bod


  I wonder if it would have been better to just create a different default track view and console view and advertise that instead. 

Something I've mentioned here already. I really think that Cakewlak had put a lot of potential customers off with that default UI.

Talking about how the UI can be customised, has anyone seen/worked with Samplitude? It allows to jump from different work screen set ups at a press of a button (not to be confused with X1's screen sets).  I can have a lean and mean UI that doesn#t have too many buttons one minute or one with all editing options showing the next, or choose one optimised for mastering (which will included CD bruning option buttons). It really is well concieved. Sonar's (up to X1)  customisation was extremely clunky and user unfriendly by comparison.

John


I can show much the same number of tracks in X1 as I did in Sonar 8.5.3.

Both pictures were snapped on a 22" LCD display running at 1680x1080.

< Silly pictures deleted to keep the thread clean>

Oh come on John that is silly.  How can you compare these two pictures? In the 8.5 picture you have every toolbar and it's grandma open while in X1 you have everything closed. At least open the Control Bar for a fair comparison. If that wasn't enough, you don't even fully minimise the tracks in the 8.5 view! (And you have the Track Inspector open to make things look even more cluttered).

Here are some real hard facts: Sonar 8.5 can show 42 tracks on 1080 vertical resolution. That is 6 more than X1 or a 14.3% screen real estate loss when upgrading to X1 and that is with the Control Bar closed! With CB open you get a 21.4% loss of screen real estate. More than a fifth.

X1 wastes space needlessly. Fact, not opinion.

Still, Cubase clearly wins with the ability to show 65 tracks on the same screen.

UnderTow

UnderTow

John


I can show much the same number of tracks in X1 as I did in Sonar 8.5.3.

Both pictures were snapped on a 22" LCD display running at 1680x1080.

< Silly pictures deleted to keep the thread clean>

Oh come on John that is silly.  How can you compare these two pictures? In the 8.5 picture you have every toolbar and it's grandma open while in X1 you have everything closed. At least open the Control Bar for a fair comparison. If that wasn't enough, you don't even fully minimise the tracks in the 8.5 view! (And you have the Track Inspector open to make things look even more cluttered).

Here are some real hard facts: Sonar 8.5 can show 42 tracks on 1080 vertical resolution. That is 6 more than X1 or a 14.3% screen real estate loss when upgrading to X1 and that is with the Control Bar closed! With CB open you get a 21.4% loss of screen real estate. More than a fifth.

X1 wastes space needlessly. Fact, not opinion.

Still, Cubase clearly wins with the ability to show 65 tracks on the same screen.

UnderTow

Look I'll be the first to admit that I think the CB is a bit too big (that's only my personal opinion). The good part of this is that it can be instantly hidden most of the time and easily shown when needed. Either way this is something that will no doubt have work done on it as time goes by.

But let's not make a direct connection between number of tracks visible at one time as an indicator of how good or bad a UI is. There's a lot more to the equation and for some, these factors are going to far outweigh being able to see less tracks by some percentage.