ubuntu


Roland are the worst, they simply never respond to emails.

There is pay for technical assistance available from Roland. How many have tried that? It's not in my budget but I'm just an artist working with these high end tools of the trade. Cakewalk has been assimilated by Roland, All the familiar support faces and names we knew are not so accessible now. We are all in a holding pattern, waiting to see what will land out of the fog.
 

Crg

ubuntu


Roland are the worst, they simply never respond to emails.

There is pay for technical assistance available from Roland. How many have tried that? It's not in my budget but I'm just an artist working with these high end tools of the trade. Cakewalk has been assimilated by Roland, All the familiar support faces and names we knew are not so accessible now. We are all in a holding pattern, waiting to see what will land out of the fog.
 

Really?  Is Roland going all Avid on us?


Is this pay for support for Sonar, or just Roland products?

Paul P


I can't imagine that it could already be time for X3 anyway. X2 has only been out for a few months.

almost 9 months now.

Yeah, it won't be long before we find out if Cakewalk is back on the their annual release cycle

I'm pretty much giving up on sonar these days.  With all my frustrations with the product I dabbled with Ableton 9 and was simply amazed at it's audio engine and algorithms compared to sonar.  CW talk about improved workflow, thats a bit of a joke in comparison to Ableton 9 which is instant.

As a creation engine it is second to non.  Still use Sonar at the moment for vocal tracking but that is purely because I new to Ableton and haven't yet worked out all the comping features etc but I'm fairly sure as soon as I do it will be bye bye Sonar for good

ubuntu


Roland are the worst, they simply never respond to emails.

Sorry to hear that. Roland's tech support here is top-notch. They're actually the best from my experience. Very responsive, very accurate, and very polite. I sometimes receive their reply on the very day I submitted my inquiry.

brconflict

Paul P


brconflict : "We all keep shopping after we buy"

Not me. I bought X1/X2 Producer figuring it would serve for years as is, like buying Office or similar. If it has bugs, and it does, I expect them to be fixed.
I see no need or reason to buy X3 since X2 already does way more than I need, or will need for the foreseable future.

I can't imagine that it could already be time for X3 anyway. X2 has only been out for a few months.

My point is, that, when you sign up for email updates from Sonar, most people open them and check out new offerings. But unless you're running an old version or are looking for plug-ins, most of their emails aren't very useful. I use Waves as an example here, which was super-successful to get my business. If you bought Sonar the was you can shop for a computer on Dell's website, and check-box the options you want, then you see a price. Obviously, the more you buy, the better your discount in this case, which would equal to what you pay for today for Producer. Then, over time, you can watch for deals on modules and options, like Waves offers plug-ins discounts monthly.

But let's say, for example, you buy Sonar with ProChannel, Console Emulation, and a few plug-ins, but not the EQ, BREVERB, or Compressor (whichever one you don't want). You also decide to hold off on the MIDI options. You can get Sonar for cheaper, say $199. Once you get it under control and you feel you're ready for MIDI, you can not only choose to add the MIDI option later at, say $39, but when you receive a Sonar monthly email, you might see it on sale for $29. Waves does this all the time and gets so many hits from that. In fact, you're more likely to buy it simply because of the sale, and you're more likely to jump on the Sonar bandwagon because the starting price was $199. 

My point is that, if you could buy Sonar for $199, then buy only the options you want, you're more likely to go that route vs. buy DP at full price which contains features you may never ever use. And if you buy the $199 Sonar vs DP 8, you're less likely to jump ship. 

Here's another example of how this could win some hearts: Don't like Take Lanes? Guess what! You can buy either Lanes or Layers at $9 each and you can use either, both, or neither! Many people would buy both at $9. Cakewalk can offer different user-interfaces and sell them each for $5. 

The idea is piecemeal, but it REALLY works in the Smart-phone market, among other industries. It's harder to make a choice when the price for full versions start at $399. I just think rather than sell three different versions, change to a frame-work and allow "us" to decide what features it contains. 

Yes, yes and yes.
Now that would be awesome for us end users and profitable for Rolawalk.
It's a win, win.


Mike 

Now that would be awesome for us end users and profitable for Rolawalk.

 
As a consumer I'm thinking yeah, that might be cool.   As someone who's worked for a fairly large software company for 15+ years, I'm thinking it sounds like a nightmare from a development/QA/support perspective.  Especially for something like the Track Lanes/Layers aspect which (I assume) is two entirely different sets of code.   That kind of thing could result in so many permutations of an already large set of features, which in turn would likely result in less resources to actually develop and test said features.  And I'd imagine Roland/CW has limited resources all around these days...  who doesn't. 
 
Maybe if it was a matter of your license simply enabling or disabling *existing* features, sort of like the Essentials/Studio/Producer concept, it could be feasible (development-wise).  Though it still might be unweildy from a support and customer service angle - "so you have SONAR X4 and you can't see Track Lanes.  Did you purchase that option?  Yes, it's part of the comping module but not the extended viewing options package.  Oh, you're not sure which one you have....? ".     
 

PTheory


I'm pretty much giving up on sonar these days.  With all my frustrations with the product I dabbled with Ableton 9 and was simply amazed at it's audio engine and algorithms compared to sonar.  CW talk about improved workflow, thats a bit of a joke in comparison to Ableton 9 which is instant.

As a creation engine it is second to non.  Still use Sonar at the moment for vocal tracking but that is purely because I new to Ableton and haven't yet worked out all the comping features etc but I'm fairly sure as soon as I do it will be bye bye Sonar for good

ableton doesn't cut it for me.
more of a live application in my eyes anyway,tried it out, lost interest, the engine ? yes pretty smooth but theres a trade off on features im not ready to cahs in for.

stevec

Now that would be awesome for us end users and profitable for Rolawalk.

 
As a consumer I'm thinking yeah, that might be cool.   As someone who's worked for a fairly large software company for 15+ years, I'm thinking it sounds like a nightmare from a development/QA/support perspective.  Especially for something like the Track Lanes/Layers aspect which (I assume) is two entirely different sets of code.   That kind of thing could result in so many permutations of an already large set of features, which in turn would likely result in less resources to actually develop and test said features.  And I'd imagine Roland/CW has limited resources all around these days...  who doesn't. 
 
Maybe if it was a matter of your license simply enabling or disabling *existing* features, sort of like the Essentials/Studio/Producer concept, it could be feasible (development-wise).  Though it still might be unweildy from a support and customer service angle - "so you have SONAR X4 and you can't see Track Lanes.  Did you purchase that option?  Yes, it's part of the comping module but not the extended viewing options package.  Oh, you're not sure which one you have....? ".     
 

Yes it would be a technical nightmare and I think they would lose serious amount of money.  I can't see it ever happening and I wouldn't want such a system.