OK...I guess we are back to the infamous...in the war between the 'fanboi' vs the 'basher' can there be a little bit of space for those of us who like what we have but can see a need for some improvement? 


@Bub....if 8.5 works for you then use it...I guess....

Thanks, John, for your service in the military...

CakeAlexS


Yup I love my Saffire Pro 40. Stability wise. Run windows update. Update your PC chip set drivers. Update your sound, graphics drivers, music controllers, network card, every driver you can. Update your firmware everywhere and PC BIOS. Update and review your plugins. Run scan disk then defrag. If that doesn't work you need to do some tweaking. Leaving at that for now....

I've never had a problem with mine:

"A year or so ago, he spent a while insisting I must be on Cakewalk's payroll. He's a lunatic." what ever they are paying you, ill give you double ;)

bapu

It just seems to me that you are the one that reiterated that on re-mixes you experienced "good results".

Yes, that's 100% right. It was working really good. I've said so several times ... not trying to hide anything ... it's all there in black and white. But ... when I started tracking, and dealing with all the Take Lane, Envelopes bugs, and more ... it introduced a whole new slew of bugs.

I don't want anything from you Bub. I was just trying to clarify which was giving you the most or more problems.

And I don't want anything from you either. Thanks for trying to clarify.

I will continue to use the product (X2) that I paid for off and on and check for updates and participate in this forum.

If you or anyone else does not like what I say ... block me ... or ignore me ... or report me.

trimph1


Thanks, John, for your service in the military...

Thank you Trimph. That post was actually for Stratman. I think you can understand why. 

One thing I think I should say is when Ba MIDI passed away this forum proved what I already knew that it is made up of some of the very finest people around most of which are not vets. I hope you and all others know that I hold you all in very high esteem. It is only a tiny few that on occasion push over the line and cause me to have to respond in a way I wish I didn't have to.

For me you don't have to post great things about Sonar to get me thinking good things about you. You don't have to have a trouble free system to get my respect. You don't have to have been here from the forum's beginning to have me read your posts with wonderment or appreciation. All you need to do is be nice to the other members or at least not be unkind to them. 

This forum proves everyday that good people do inhabit it and that their only reason for being here is to be of help. 

What more can anyone ask of another?

Can you guys help me understand something here.

I've read through this thread (and many other similar ones) and a lot of you are making a big thing of how long SONAR runs for you without a crash, or more accurately, before a crash. This, I'm guessing, is a way of illustarting how stable SONAR is running for you?
 
Which leads me to a couple of thoughts...
 
Firstly, wouldn't a more accurate portrayal of reliability be garnered if, instead of stating simply how long SONAR has been running, you were to state what you were actually doing with SONAR during that time, and how often you were doing it. I mean for example, if you were tracking audio or writing some MIDI in the PRV for 2 or 3 hours, I wouldn't be surprised if SONAR was going for long periods without a crash. But if you'd been inserting VSTs on the fly and adjusting loop points repeatedly (by way of example) with no problems, that would mean a lot more to me.
 
Secondly, is it fair or reasonable to estimate SONAR's stability with some sort of "crashes per hour" formula? Aside from taking into account my previous point, this also raises the question of 'why' a crash happens. Surely, if a certain (unknown) procedure is always crashing SONAR, it's completely irrelevant to how long SONAR remains stable whether you perform this procedure 5 minutes into a session or 5 hours into a session.
 
Obviously I say 'unknown' procedure, as once you've identified it, you can address the problem to prevent further crashes. I would imagine the biggest pain is when a certain technique or procedure only occasionally causes a problem - especially if it's in the same project.
 

 

http://www.dawbench.com


[white space]












[/white space]

I happen to be a keyboard player that also sings and plays a bit of guitar.

Most of the time, I am tracking MIDI, either recording live or using Step Sequencer, depending on whether it's drum or keyboard parts.

I often add vocal tracks and guitar tracks after most of the keys are done - bass is usually also midi.

I have used the above approach since forever ago, through multiple releases of Sonar, and generally do not run into trouble.  I use X2a now, and I have not had any crashes whatsoever with it so far.  Again, I only really do things as I explained above.

As I get into more advanced mixing and mastering, I will likely venture into areas where I may trip on some of the things people are experiencing, but in the meantime, on my system, with my approach to recording, Sonar X2a seems quite stable.

Bob Bone

It's sad that marketing strategies don't follow code versions in hardware code development.

For example, Cisco Systems, the largest manufacturer of Network Infrastructure equipment, which I've got a lot of experience with creates what they call Early Deployment (ED) code, meaning this code has been tested for release as the latest "tested" version of code for the network device. 

After the version has been out on the market, and bugs are reported and fixed the code eventually becomes General Deployment (GD), meaning that since the code has been known to be bug-free and stable for x-number years, it can be downloaded with near absolute reliance.

Where I'm going with this, is, it would be no surprise that after the latest version (X2) was released, the company no longer focuses on fixing reported bugs/issues of X1. 

On the top of my wishlist is that I can work on a version of Sonar that is absolutely stable. Neither X1 or X2 are fully stable with my system, although they're not bad. I would like to see an X2b, but I'd also like to see an X1e with nothing but bug fixes and corrections of any idiosyncrasies people gripe about. We won't see that, because I'm pretty certain Cakewalk's staff is running lean compared to the likes of Cisco Systems, but this is reality.