I'm with you there, John, 100%.
 
It's not just with automation that we see threads crying "BUG" that turn out to be user errors or a misunderstanding of how features are meant to work.
 
FWIW, I had a singer in this afternoon tracking vocals.  We did many, many takes.
 
Take lanes worked perfectly. I love the way I can make notes after each take in the lane itself - I no longer use take sheets.
 
I've just started comping and love using the isolation tool - it makes comping so easy.
 
Automating the vocal is so much easier for me with the automation lanes, too.
 
Automation and take lanes make the whole process so much easier and quicker.  I did have to study how it all worked - both reading and watching videos, but it was worth it.

It all does take a lot of getting used to. Personally, I've only used X1 and X2. So, coming from an actual hardware desk and other DAW's, it was a very serious adjustment. I went through the manual (and refernce Guide) and have gone through both offerings of Groove3's X2 Explained and SWA from FastBikerBoy. I think Automation rocks in Sonar now, but it's quite clumsy from where I came, unless you have a good controller. There's not much that can be done about that, though (touch features will need a better GUI). It's still better than the rest, which was one of the things that brought me over to try it out. I have found several issues/bugs with Take Lanes, more so than Automation.

Gain Automation, the one I find the most useful precludes the need for Offset, but doesn't get a "Lane". 

Lanes (when expanded) waste a lot of real-estate compared to Layers, and boy do I get LOST in them at times.

Everyone has a valuable opinion, but I do hope opinions still matter. My gripes are mainly with a few cosmetic bugs and how Lanes could have been better. I think Cakewalk had a good start, but I sincerely hope they overhaul Take Lanes in the next version. I nearly blow a gasket every time I have to navigate through them. My opinion is Take Lanes blow for me. Nobody has been able to convince me otherwise yet.

Amen to that!

Kev999


I believe that Offset Mode would be more useful if:

1. Offset Mode could be set per track rather than for the whole project.

2. The Offset Mode flag is something much more prominent than the little "+" sign.

This is something I've been meaning to ask you guys.

I want to know how to make "volume" automation edits like the "trim" automation* in Pro Tools. If I'm reading this correctly this is what the Offset mode does or is there a specific envelope that can be used to achieve this? 

*trim automation in PT supposedly keeps your automation in perfect relation to the fader level. 

brconflict


It all does take a lot of getting used to. Personally, I've only used X1 and X2. So, coming from an actual hardware desk and other DAW's, it was a very serious adjustment. I went through the manual (and refernce Guide) and have gone through both offerings of Groove3's X2 Explained and SWA from FastBikerBoy. I think Automation rocks in Sonar now, but it's quite clumsy from where I came, unless you have a good controller. There's not much that can be done about that, though (touch features will need a better GUI). It's still better than the rest, which was one of the things that brought me over to try it out. I have found several issues/bugs with Take Lanes, more so than Automation.

Gain Automation, the one I find the most useful precludes the need for Offset, but doesn't get a "Lane". 

Lanes (when expanded) waste a lot of real-estate compared to Layers, and boy do I get LOST in them at times.

Everyone has a valuable opinion, but I do hope opinions still matter. My gripes are mainly with a few cosmetic bugs and how Lanes could have been better. I think Cakewalk had a good start, but I sincerely hope they overhaul Take Lanes in the next version. I nearly blow a gasket every time I have to navigate through them. My opinion is Take Lanes blow for me. Nobody has been able to convince me otherwise yet.

In the past gain was called trim and really one should avoid changing it. It should be at unity. The only time adjustment to it should be done is when you have a track that is pushing a plugin too much causing it to clip. Other than that the fader is the normal thing to automate for volume changes. 

Take lanes are not automation and that was what I talked about. I have no opinion on them except that I would rather use them then layers. 

Its funny how some find take lanes troublesome and others love them. Clearly something is amiss here. Not with the lanes but with how they are being used.

Though Sonar is versatile in how one can use it, it does have its own way of doing things just like any other DAW. A lot is talked about work flow which Sonar has and its up to us to use it in a way that doesn't go against that work flow.  The developers have a design goal and philosophy that many of us find to our liking. Its why we use it. The changes that occurred with the release of X1 and now X2 were off-putting to some and embraced by others. Many of us saw where CW was going and were very pleased with the new direction. 

It think it would help this forum and the user base to find reason to applaud the new direction instead of finding fault with every post.

I can see a need to improve things and I am all for that. Often times however its not being expressed well or a feature is not understood well enough yet a fault is found.

I am very competent with Sonar. I have been for many years. None the less I am always learning things or refreshing my memory on things. Its a constant study. When I come here I often know the answer to a question for me but find it difficult to put it into words for the questioner.

Again I believe that we never know it all and that we need to revisit ideas we learned in order to stay current and fresh.

Believe me when I say this I get far more out of this forum than I put in. Its a place for us to learn. I have taken full advantage of that and will never stop doing that.

I hope that we all view this place as a place to learn and exchange ideas. But not so much a place for finding fault. When a bug is identified its a valuable service that I fully support. When user error is the cause of the problem let us not also submit our own pet peeve to add nothing but confusion and misinformation.   

We all can be better in the quality of our posts. It is the only thing we really have control over. 

That is all I have to say. I hope its viewed in the spirit it was written. 

jb101


Or when you tell people to press the PDC button when they're using a latency inducing plug-in, or tell them that they're posting in the wrong forum when they're replying to a sticky in that forum. :)
 
How embarrassing..

jb101


I'm with you there, John, 100%.
 
 
Im sorry JB can you please remind me once again why you wrote this first statement ?
was it because you were sticking up for the OP ?

John,
   I agree with most of what you said, but have a few things to part with:

1) If there are no gripes, the company doesn't know where they can work to improve. Bad feedback is actually good feedback for a company that really wants to strive hard and satisfy. In this case, there are many people who have gripes, especially regarding Take Lanes. I gripe about them, but wouldn't so much if Layers were still an option. Giveth and Taketh. Cakewalk wouldn't know that people wanted to keep Layers, or would prefer more input to make Take Lanes better. I think we've done that. Lack of participation from the forum owners in the forum other than occasionally Noel leads me to believe I wasted my breath anyway. Sure, praise them for what's right. I do that sometimes, but it doesn't always provide the most valuable feedback Cakewalk needs.

2) Nobody should doubt another's experience with the DAW. Everybody learns, absolutely. I do, too. But the mere assumption that someone's gripe is largely based on ill-use of the software isn't a warm welcome mat. I do mis-use some features, such as Gain. The reason is, I want to adjust the source signal vs. the treated signal. I don't compress on the way in. 

I think Sonar X1/X2 are the best ones yet. Certainly better than Sonar 8 or older. However, my patience is tested nearly every session. And I'm naturally a calm and calculated guy. You have to be to be a Linux/Cisco Network Engineer during the day. I think many of you still have more patience with the DAW than I.

Please don't take my response as a rebuttal, but rather, at least you can know that I understand and agree with much of what you said. The reality is, Sonar still makes me curse, and I'm still searching for hope. 

John : "Though Sonar is versatile in how one can use it, it does have its own way of doing things just like any other DAW. A lot is talked about work flow which Sonar has and its up to us to use it in a way that doesn't go against that work flow. The developers have a design goal and philosophy that many of us find to our liking."

This makes perfect sense. Is there a document somewhere that explains this workflow, in overview form ?

Paul P


John : "Though Sonar is versatile in how one can use it, it does have its own way of doing things just like any other DAW. A lot is talked about work flow which Sonar has and its up to us to use it in a way that doesn't go against that work flow. The developers have a design goal and philosophy that many of us find to our liking."

This makes perfect sense. Is there a document somewhere that explains this workflow, in overview form ?

Not in so many words. I don't think any software as such spells out its work flow. I think its something that comes to one over time and comfort level. Thats why in my opinion it can be harder for some to pick up a different DAW then it may be to one just starting out. I think motivation plays an important role here too.

The closest one would have to a "work flow" explained text are the tutorials that come with every version of Sonar.



 

brconflict


John,
 I agree with most of what you said, but have a few things to part with:

1) If there are no gripes, the company doesn't know where they can work to improve. Bad feedback is actually good feedback for a company that really wants to strive hard and satisfy. In this case, there are many people who have gripes, especially regarding Take Lanes. I gripe about them, but wouldn't so much if Layers were still an option. Giveth and Taketh. Cakewalk wouldn't know that people wanted to keep Layers, or would prefer more input to make Take Lanes better. I think we've done that. Lack of participation from the forum owners in the forum other than occasionally Noel leads me to believe I wasted my breath anyway. Sure, praise them for what's right. I do that sometimes, but it doesn't always provide the most valuable feedback Cakewalk needs.

2) Nobody should doubt another's experience with the DAW. Everybody learns, absolutely. I do, too. But the mere assumption that someone's gripe is largely based on ill-use of the software isn't a warm welcome mat. I do mis-use some features, such as Gain. The reason is, I want to adjust the source signal vs. the treated signal. I don't compress on the way in. 

I think Sonar X1/X2 are the best ones yet. Certainly better than Sonar 8 or older. However, my patience is tested nearly every session. And I'm naturally a calm and calculated guy. You have to be to be a Linux/Cisco Network Engineer during the day. I think many of you still have more patience with the DAW than I.

Please don't take my response as a rebuttal, but rather, at least you can know that I understand and agree with much of what you said. The reality is, Sonar still makes me curse, and I'm still searching for hope. 

Not at all. I think we are not really in opposition. I think we just come to it from a little different viewpoint. And hope is what keeps me thinking the Staff View will become useful too, one of these days. LOL