Who said anything about jumping ship? 


I don't think I'd want to be swampthing..judging from the algal blooms around our lakes here...  


Now...about that beer....

I've been on a hunger strike from the beginning of the year, now I've got a cause!

InstrEd


I didn't say I would jump ship. I would just bite the bullet and get Cubase when I can find a deal on it. I also won't upgrade to Sonar X2 until it is on sale. It just is so upsetting to me that Cakewalk hasn't done anything to improve the staff / notation for 10 plus updates at least. I also don't understand the ganging up on us that want it.

What InstrEd said ^^^
 
I bought PT MP9, but haven't opened or installed it yet.   Waiting to see if there is an improved SV in X2.
 
If there is an improved SV in X2, I can always sell the unopened MP9, otherwise it may be time to see what is so wrong with PT or CB.

pbognar

InstrEd


I didn't say I would jump ship. I would just bite the bullet and get Cubase when I can find a deal on it. I also won't upgrade to Sonar X2 until it is on sale. It just is so upsetting to me that Cakewalk hasn't done anything to improve the staff / notation for 10 plus updates at least. I also don't understand the ganging up on us that want it.

What InstrEd said ^^^
 
I bought PT MP9, but haven't opened or installed it yet.   Waiting to see if there is an improved SV in X2.
 
If there is an improved SV in X2, I can always sell the unopened MP9, otherwise it may be time to see what is so wrong with PT or CB.

The problem with PT is that it is still 32bit.  Cubase is 64 bit but I'm interested in seeing the new DP8 for Windows.  It might be cool.

vintagevibe

 The problem with PT is that it is still 32bit.  Cubase is 64 bit but I'm interested in seeing the new DP8 for Windows.  It might be cool. 

Yes, and the PT sound engine is not floating point so you have to be careful of gain staging - it's possible to clip audio. With Sonar and Cubase's floating point sound engine this is practically impossible.

Considering PT is supposedly the industry standard, it's a surprisingly crap piece of software.

Brett

Brett

vintagevibe

The problem with PT is that it is still 32bit.  Cubase is 64 bit but I'm interested in seeing the new DP8 for Windows.  It might be cool. 

Yes, and the PT sound engine is not floating point so you have to be careful of gain staging - it's possible to clip audio. With Sonar and Cubase's floating point sound engine this is practically impossible.

Considering PT is supposedly the industry standard, it's a surprisingly crap piece of software.

Brett

Yea, I don't mean to standup for proTools,  but I think it is fine for mixing...just awful for music creation or composing.
 
It is just not the right tool for me...for sure.   

Jimbo 88

Brett

vintagevibe

The problem with PT is that it is still 32bit.  Cubase is 64 bit but I'm interested in seeing the new DP8 for Windows.  It might be cool. 

Yes, and the PT sound engine is not floating point so you have to be careful of gain staging - it's possible to clip audio. With Sonar and Cubase's floating point sound engine this is practically impossible.

Considering PT is supposedly the industry standard, it's a surprisingly crap piece of software.

Brett

Yea, I don't mean to standup for proTools,  but I think it is fine for mixing...just awful for music creation or composing.
 
It is just not the right tool for me...for sure.   

Kind of ironic.  When I hear the term "composing", I automatically think notation. 

With all this talk of notation, I've gone and dusted off my copies of "The AB guide to Music Theory part I and II"

They are only small publications, around a hundred pages each, but I would recommend them to anyone stepping into the world of music notation for the first time.

Maybe it's just luck of the draw, but i have been asking working composers i encounter and i have not come across any that actually compose within their DAWs.  I'm not implying that no composer does so and i will readily say that my sample is under 20 composers and possibly just a statistical anomaly. It does make me wonder if Cakewalk observed a similar pattern but on a larger scale enough to dissuade them from putting a significant investment.  My guess, and i have no problem admitting this is a guess, is that the typical paying customer is either bedroom musician or studio owner, making the recording and mixing aspects of the program the most commercially viable for them with everything else thrown in to keep up with other DAW's.  IMO, the people who seem most satisfied with Sonar are not those who compose music professionally via their DAW.  I am using compose very loosely to include those who "compose" (for lack of better word) genres that do not depend on notation too.  i bring this up because I'm quite sure the sample based producer trying to be the next Deadmaus is just as likely to find fault with Sonar as the staff view complaint posse. 

I think it would be interesting to conduct a very broad study of the methodology of successful composers across multiple genres use for original creation of their respective forms.  obviously one would have to objectively measure the parameters of things like "successful" and i only use such a term to acknowledge that every guy who took a music theory course online is not necessarily a composer.  I'm sure Cakewalk has some criteria and i would be interested as to what those numbers say.  My guess is those numbers say that there are a lot more wannabe Kanye Wests, Lady Gagas, Justin Biebers, skrillex's , etc than there are wannabe John Williams in the world. That's not a defense of the policy but just a suspicion that their seeming indifference towards staff view is rooted in pragmatism.  I'm sure they would love to be all things to every type of musician, producer, artist or whatever one wants to call him/herself and the bloated pile of legacy plugins shows they would love to do so and in many ways they succeed in being a great all-around program.  The classic jack of all trades and master of none scenario and even that is not quite right since they do succeed very well in many areas or i would not use it.

I'm not saying to stop complaining.  the squeaky wheel gets the oil.  I'm just saying that odds are good that somebody at cakewalk has weighed options.  Too big of a company for them not to consider every demographic and make some hard decisions. If it was me wanting improvement to something so badly, i would approach them with hard data that would make them think making a major investment in improving staff view would accomplish more than pleasing the inevitable group of longtime clients who dislike an aspect of your product.  I believe they need to see something that will significantly increase business and not just slightly reduce churn. 

I'm not certain what kind of demographics you chose to survey, what kind of composers they may be. Although certainly, every person probably has a particular way and workflow to compose, in my experience and knowledge it is very common to find film and game composers compose at the computer, in one way or another. Lots use Cubase, DP, Nuendo, or Logic, amongst others.

I could be part of your surveyed population, as I don't compose on the DAW. Why? Simple- 'cause Sonar SV is totally non-conducive to doing so. I do rely mostly on a Notation program to initiate the process. Sometimes I start at the piano and move on to the electronic staff.

I'm 100% PC, so very rarely check anything Apple-related, but I just had a good laugh at this, please compare the two very similar advertisement strategies, especially the set of icons, and tell me what you think SONAR maybe missing:

http://cakewalk.com/SONAR-X2/

http://www.apple.com/logicpro/top-features/

I actually found it hilarious.  Call me crazy. To me, it is totally obvious. And I do agree with you in that the decision is probably 100% marketing-driven, thus SV will never be up to others. Sadly.
 
 
 
 
edited for: various typos