gtgarner


All-IN-ONE in my estimation leads to Mediocre-IN-Everything.   

I agree with you about these particular two features. I don't want Sonar to be a 'Jack of all trades, master of none'.

benstat

gtgarner


All-IN-ONE in my estimation leads to Mediocre-IN-Everything.   

I agree with you about these particular two features. I don't want Sonar to be a 'Jack of all trades, master of none'.

I agree to some extent, but I think there's room for improvement of video and notation support without SONAR becoming a full-fledged notation or post-production package.  A few key improvements in each area would be welcome.

That is where the DAW industry is headed.  From everything I have read, all of the top DAWs have decent scoring to video features AND they all record your audio and midi fine, as professional people use each one.  (DP, PT, Cubase,Logic). 

What would be the point in Cakewalk falling behind all of the top DAW in features?  (I'll point out these are features that already exist, just need some improvements)  From a business point of view it would make no sense to further restrict your customer base by taking out these features when they are standard with all of the other DAWs.

This would be like Ford saying, "yes I know all of the other car manufacturers are putting stereos in their cars, but dangit, we want to make great cars we dont care about stereos!"  It's one of those things that people have come to expect and desire in their professional DAW software....erm, video and staff view features, not stereos, just to be clear.

Lastly, I  don't want the ADD-ON (video and staff) features to Cost me ANY extra in money or processing power.  
I currently write code at my job for something else and I know that there is no process that is void of processing power.  I would TOTALLY give up on Sonar if my Audio Pluggins (DAW stuff) choke or belch on Sonar trying to keep up with a staff or video code running in the background.  
 
Now if Sonar decides to go with a Super Sonar version that "requires" dedicated hardware to run features (like ICON - which is in my studio) then fine....I'll splurge the 5K-150K for it.

Scoring and video are not where most DAWs are headed. Most DAWs are headed to being all-in-one compositional and recording solutions for the home musician.

I'm guessing Cakewalk want to increase sales as much as possible. Right now, they are underrepresented in electronic music production. To tap into that I think they'll develop Beatscape/Matrix (Beatrix?) before scoring and video facilities.

I'm sure they will improve scoring and video at some point, but I don't think they're priorities for most bedroom producers, the growth market IMHO.

gtgarner


Lastly, I  don't want the ADD-ON (video and staff) features to Cost me ANY extra in money or processing power.  
I currently write code at my job for something else and I know that there is no process that is void of processing power.  I would TOTALLY give up on Sonar if my Audio Pluggins (DAW stuff) choke or belch on Sonar trying to keep up with a staff or video code running in the background.  
 
Now if Sonar decides to go with a Super Sonar version that "requires" dedicated hardware to run features (like ICON - which is in my studio) then fine....I'll splurge the 5K-150K for it.

Asking for new features in an unreleased application is one thing, but please don't request the removal of an existing feature which others actually use.

• If Sonar's staff view (even in its current state) were to be removed, I would switch to a different DAW app

• Sonar's staff view is not using any processing power if you don't open it (the improved UI and and use of ProChannel on the other hand...)

• There is a lot of electronic music being produced in Europe using the Apple DAW (which happens to have a great staff functionality)

• DAW applications which already have adequate staff based editing will most likely not bloat themselves by implementing full fledged scoring capabilities - that is best left to scoring apps

• Apps like Live, Acid, and Fruity Loops will probably never add staff editing, because they are targeted for a specific user base (the exception being Acoustica's MixCraft which added a staff editor in version 5)

I want them to go full in the idea i dropped years ago about a channel strip :

THE abilty to choose the default channel strip plugin linked (by choosing the dll: Waves SSl , Duende SSl,Uad .....or the X1 one !!!

That would be awesome !!

There is indeed a lot of electronic music being produced in Europe using Logic, but it has little to do with Logic's staff functionality. Most producers have no need for it. But I agree that removing existing staff features is not the way to go.

Prunesquallor


There is indeed a lot of electronic music being produced in Europe using Logic, but it has little to do with Logic's staff functionality. Most producers have no need for it. But I agree that removing existing staff features is not the way to go.

Sorry if I wasn't clear...  I was just making the point that the presence of a staff editor does not preclude the creation of electronic music.  I never meant to imply that those creating electronic music were actually using a staff editor. 

Prunesquallor


Scoring and video are not where most DAWs are headed. Most DAWs are headed to being all-in-one compositional and recording solutions for the home musician.

I'm guessing Cakewalk want to increase sales as much as possible. Right now, they are underrepresented in electronic music production. To tap into that I think they'll develop Beatscape/Matrix (Beatrix?) before scoring and video facilities.

I'm sure they will improve scoring and video at some point, but I don't think they're priorities for most bedroom producers, the growth market IMHO.

Well, pretty much every other DAW supports video to some extent - as does SONAR, of course.  So it would be bizarre to say the least if that support were withdrawn.  Those of us who do work with video just need a few basic enhancements really, to keep it in line with the other DAWs.  As a number of us have repeatedly said, we're not arguing for a full post-production powerhouse to take on Protools, just the basics done right.