John


Thanks FBB. I understand that the way X1 does things is very different now and that is what prompted me to post this. Because I believe I have been misled by posters here that don't say that but instead maintain that a function or an ability is no longer in this X1 version. 

Workflow is function. Having to do two steps to achieve what used to take one step is removal of function. It is a dumbing down. Even removal of buttons or tools is a dumbing down. (To be clear, hiding of things should be user configurable. Not everyone needs the same tools/visual feedback. Everyone works differently. Removal of tools/visual feedback is a dumbing down).

I am not talking about work flow changes but that X1 was a dumbed down version lacking many things that Sonar had. This was worrisome to me.

I find your attempt to separate workflow from function peculiar to say the least.

Yet what I am seeing over all in posts is an unfamiliarity being mistaken for no longer able to accomplish goals.

You can record a band with an old 4 track recorder. If you bounce to tracks you effectively have an infinite number of tracks (if one disregards the sound aspect for one minute for argument's sake). Smart use of a razor blade let's you do some nice editing etc... yet no one in their right mind would ever try to pretend a 4 track is the same as a modern DAW if you just record bands and use the DAW as a glorified digital tape deck. Just looking at the goals one wants to accomplish is only a small part of the story and misses the whole point of modern DAWs.

What differentiates DAWs from each other more than anything else is HOW things are achieved.

To me this idea that we would be getting a less capable Sonar then we had before is the single most irresponsible kind of posting I have ever seen. It needs to be called out if it isn't true. I wonder why anyone would want a potential X1 buyer be given this kind of information.

If the workflow has indeed been dumbed down, it is more than legitimate to claim that the DAW is less capable. You can achieve everything in Sonar 6 (for example) that you can achieve in X1. The differences are all about workflow and how things are done. If people feel that they are getting a less capable DAW, it is their every right to communicate that even if they are ultimately wrong. Calling them irresponsible is just silly.

Even if every previous feature and function is available in X1 and even if it has been implemented in a much more efficient way, people still have the right to voice the difficulties they are having using it. If nothing else it will tell potential upgraders that there will be unfamiliarity in using the new version and thus a learning curve that they will have to deal with. The view at the top might be gorgeous but that hill still needs to be climbed.

That said, if X1 was indeed all that, the forum would have long settled down and there would be a mood of exuberance where the users that had had more time with the application, or whom are simply faster learners, would be sharing their new discoveries with the other users. There would be many more posts acclaiming the new way of doing things. I don't see that happening.

It is either a case of sheer ignorance or it is a deliberate tactic to undermine   the confidence with CW and its users base. Either way it needs to stop.

Or they are legitimate concerns. Dismissing legitimate complaints as "a deliberate tactic to undermine   the confidence with CW and its users base" is not only insulting but frankly, utterly bizarre if you ask me. You are demonstrating an acute lack of vision and understanding with this whole thread, John.

I suggest that people here assume that what was done in 8.5.3 is still doable in X1 but that more time is needed by them to find out how it is now done.

It is amazing how much faith you have in Cakewalk. You don't have the application and you are telling others who do to assume everything in X1 is hunky dory? I'm sorry to say but Cakewalk's track record does not in any way warranty that assumption and anyway, X1 owners don't need to assume anything, they have X1!

Here the RTFM mantra is more critical then it has ever been.

This doesn't tend to be a sign of great design...

Anyway, the idea behind this whole thread makes no sense to me. Either one acknowledges that workflow and the way things are implemented are a crucial aspect of a DAW or one dismisses that aspect entirely. If you acknowledge that it is crucial then you have to accept the complaints as legitimate. Changing the way things are done is a big deal. The other option is to dismiss that aspect but then  you might as well argue that X1 is 100% identical to Sonar 8.5.3 and thus is not worth paying for... Of course that makes no sense but it shows how absurd this whole line of thinking is.

UnderTow

Work flow is a matter of contention. For example what is a good work flow for you may not be good for me. I never save I always use save as. There is no difference to me if the save button is removed. However the track inspector for MIDI tracks is going to be a big work flow saver for me.

It was stated  more then once that X1 could not do the things that 8.5 could things had been removed. After reading the manual I could not see what had been removed thus the thread. If people are going to make statements about something and people are using that information to make a decision they ought to be true. As far as I could see it was a blatant lie.

Looking at the videos I have gotten the impression that the work flow in X1 should be faster for most users. It wont be faster for all but I think it will be for me.

I'm beginning to get a handle on the ideas behind X1's GUI. It does make a lot of sense to me.

I recommend the Brandon video where he introduces X1 in two parts. It sheds a lot of light on Skylight. 

Also judging by what he and other CW people have said X1 will be modified to include things that were removed that did help out work flow. Mistakes will also be corrected. Dark gray on darker gray will be banished for labels for example. Who thought that was a good idea?

.

John


 As far as I could see it was a blatant lie.

Blatant lies, deliberate tactics, sheer ignorance, most irresponsible...   As long as we stay balanced and reasonable in our assessments of other people's comments everything is OK.

UnderTow

Mike that in some cases may have been what was meant but others were clear that functions/features in 8.5 were removed in X1. They made a distinction between functions and interface objects.

 

As far as I could see it was a blatant lie.

Really? Of course, you are always fair and considerate, right John? This thread has become wrong on so many levels. Welcome to another person on my blocked list. I tried to respect you, I really did - but you always have to have the last word and you cannot be wrong.

When I have been wrong I have owned up to it.

As far as you blocking me it really has no impact on me what so ever. Without you telling me you are blocking me I would never know and sure don't care. It wont be the first time I was blocked.

But it really seems rather rude to block someone in their thread.

John



...the track inspector for MIDI tracks is going to be a big work flow saver for me.

It was stated  more then once that X1 could not do the things that 8.5 could things had been removed. After reading the manual I could not see what had been removed thus the thread. If people are going to make statements about something and people are using that information to make a decision they ought to be true. As far as I could see it was a blatant lie.

The Inspector for MIDI tracks has been of great help to me in Sonar 8.5 and Sonar 8 before it. 

Those of us who actually have X1 know that there's an enormous difference between watching videos about the program and actually getting our hands on it. 

The initial shock of how X1 seemed to arrive from another dimension where everything is done differently is only now starting to wear off.  During that period of shock, many people had the impression that a lot of things were missing because they simply couldn't find where the controls were hidden.  If anyone ever deliberately lied about what's in or not in X1, they've been a tiny minority.  Most of the reports about things missing were written by people in the middle of New Program Shock.  They made honest mistakes in their reports.

Meanwhile, I know I'm not alone in saying that as cool as a lot of X1's features are, it's difficult to unravel the workings of the program simply because it's so different from what I'm used to.  Now a few weeks into the release, I can say that work won't be any faster in X1, as far as that goes.  But in its current state, working in the PRV is still clumsy for me, and that's a big reason I need to stick with 8.5 to get work done.

Randy B.

The Inspector for MIDI tracks has been of great help to me in Sonar 8.5 and Sonar 8 before it.

Not for me. I wanted all the controls that were in a track header to be in the track inspector. This would make it possible for me not to have to adjust the track header in order to access some widget. Then also putting the header back to where it was before. They have put everything in the inspector now. This is a big help to me.

I think you are right Randy in most of what you say.  But it really seems that those saying that X1 is a "dumbed down" version or that there were a lot of missing features needed to correct those statements if they were not intended to misinform. Its been awhile since X1 was released I have yet to see anyone retract the hyperbole that some engaged in.

Also I detected a hostility toward X1 that to me seemed irrational. I still see it.

I get the not so subtle dig of me not having X1 yet having the nerve of commenting on it. Actually it bothers me that I am unable to have it in my hands at present but I have not commented in anyway about X1 usage. All the things I discuss are from this forum from the manual and all other sources I can find on X1. The thing one should be asking really is why is it I know that nothing was taken from X1 yet others that say they have it don't? Why I am so far the only one that is asking those that say this to prove it?

Where are the forum members that want CW to succeed here? Do people really think that misinforming and constant finding fault is helpful to our cause? Our cause being a healthy company and one that will listen to us. If all we do is rant at or about CW they will either turn us off or stop listening to us.

This forum is a marketing tool. If it becomes nothing more that a bashing of CW then I don't see much future in it.