reclaiming this post (if I may)...
I don't know about automation lanes. I also don't know (much) about different modes of snap. I could do well to take some time to learn the new stuff, I agree.

what I know is my workflow and clicks to get where I need to be. I also know (remember) how things used to be-- for years mind you, not a single version or minor update--- and changing basic software workflows (which translate to thought processes) are bad for my brain and are extremely frustrating. I wish that software updates and additions and enhancements were out of the way, and things you had to go to in order to use, NOT replacing the existing way of working. that's all. 

example: it used to be (perhaps 7.0?) when I double clicked on an audio track (or clip) it would maximize that lane to the screen. that was brilliant. they changed it to double click it opens loop view.
example: all the way back to the dos days I could copy/paste around 20 midi tracks in about 5 seconds. I don't know how many times ive done this in the last 5 years only to realize later that they were set to 'snap to' and not 'snap by' or some such, and they ended up being off by a few ticks here or there. if I wasn't patient, this would RUIN a track. and clients will not put up with this.
example: this automation issue.

bugs: um, don't get me started. there are bugs, and plenty of them. ('COLORS' FOR EXAMPLE DONT WORK AS WELL AS THEY DID IN 6.0!!!) I have crashes about every 3 hours, but I would call myself a power user. MIDI quantization could use some help. IMHO it doesn't work as well as it did back in the DOS versions.

don't get me wrong; I love enhancements as much as the next guy. but to me,  usability and stability come very first.

I moved to X1 from Sonar 6, and was lost for a while, but as I learnt the new way of doing things I found it a great improvement.  X2 just made it even better.
 
I still mess up, like double clicking on an audio clip and expecting the loop view to open, but this is becoming less frequent.
 
I think the whole snap to/by has improved in X2 with the addition of the little switch in the control bar.
 
As for the crashes, when do they happen?  I found X2 on initial release to crash a lot, but the first quickfix, and then X2a, stopped them.  It now seems very stable here - as stable as X1d, which was solid as a rock for me.
 
I think a  lot of it depends on workflow.  If "X" don't use a particular feature of X2 that is buggy, then it appears stable to "X".  If "Y" uses it all the time, then it appears very buggy.
 
Can you isolate any situations that elicit a crash?
 
As for colours, I wonder if that's going the same way as the Staff View.  Not a "show stopper" for me, but I can see it bugging others.

John

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. 

weather is a bug or whatever lanes locked together is just useless. and the X1 setup was by far the best lanes version to date. now if they put x1 set up with the new features then we can say its fine, but saying its never been better is just not true. but instead of a good debate and a focused aprotch we get fanboyism. thats a way worse thread read. than someone picking out a flaw and starting a debate,its a sonar trend i know, but lets be real here. they need to change the lane set up
be more versital, not more limited in view of screen space.and anyone with 3 monitors would like to see it all undockable. thats the kind of versitality we want, not a step back like lanes are now. sorry but its the point of 20 threads every week followed buy 3 posts saying there crazy for there effort on fixing this cosmetic issues

brconflict


I'd like to see:
What if in Console View, you highlight a Track on the console, and in the remaining Track View, you'd see the Track, Automation Lanes, and as many Take Lanes as can be displayed (over-flow would generate a scroll-bar to the right). In other words, the highlighted track would monopolize the Track View portion of the View, like the Loop-Construction window. Obviously, an option to enable or disable. 

I would love to be able to double-click a track in console-view and, instead of Loop construction, (I still have no clue how I personally would use this feature) you'd see the Track-View view of the highlighted Track in the window and no other tracks would be viewable. 

You can set up a screenset to pretty much achieve this. There's a video on my youtube page (surprise, surprise ) that sets one up for showing a track with time line. It was done in X1 so you'd need to make a few adjustments but auto zoom now helps. Obviously you need to expand lanes/takes as required but the principle of clicking on a track in the CV and showing the track in the TV is the same.
 
I also use a cut down CV a lot in my screensets for quick track control and changing while editing. You'll see that a lot in the SWA video and there's yet another one of my youtube videos that demonstrates setting that up although it has now morphed a bit so I display the MSR buttons at the bottom of the view as well.
 
Finally there's also a similar trick for showing multiple sends per "in focus" track (24 is easy) and yup..... yet another video showing how.

example: it used to be (perhaps 7.0?) when I double clicked on an audio track (or clip) it would maximize that lane to the screen. that was brilliant. they changed it to double click it opens loop view.

 
This still works. I think you are confusing where you click though. IIRC double click a clip has always opened a view such as loop construction or PRV.
 
Double clicking in the track header maximises or restores track vertical height and still does but you do need to make sure that "Autozoom" is off. (Press Shift + Z)
 
HTH

DigitalBoston

John

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. 

weather is a bug or whatever lanes locked together is just useless. and the X1 setup was by far the best lanes version to date. now if they put x1 set up with the new features then we can say its fine, but saying its never been better is just not true. but instead of a good debate and a focused aprotch we get fanboyism. thats a way worse thread read. than someone picking out a flaw and starting a debate,its a sonar trend i know, but lets be real here. they need to change the lane set up
be more versital, not more limited in view of screen space.and anyone with 3 monitors would like to see it all undockable. thats the kind of versitality we want, not a step back like lanes are now. sorry but its the point of 20 threads every week followed buy 3 posts saying there crazy for there effort on fixing this cosmetic issues

I think you missed the point of my post.  Also X1 didn't have lanes. 

Calling people names is in violation of the TOS.