Anderton
Of course, we're all human but minimizing uncivil interchanges is a worthy goal...in my opinion 

+1
 
I read every word, Craig, and I'm with you for the most part.
 
For the record, I have not engaged in any name calling or disparaging remarks directed at the bakers AFAIK.
 
Perhaps I'm over-simplifying it, but my takeaway from the OP is: "Sonar could benefit from an integrated sampler." That's it. Simples. You either agree, or don't, and can express your opinion thusly.

So, yeah, Sonar clearly needs a sampler………………
 
 

bladetragic
 
As far as being a "one stop solution".  I'm not sure why people are acting as If I'm saying Cakewalk needs to move the mountains and the heavens to include an up-to-date sampling solution.

Which, of course, is probably why Telecharge posted this ……
 

telecharge
You're likely wasting your time here. I suggest putting in a feature request and moving on.
 

Bladetragic, you made many great points. Given your stated perspective, I actually think you’re quite right. But, ya know……………………………
 
 

Anderton
The difference is that I don't call SONAR's developers "idiots" and "dumb-dumbs," or diss them for a "stupid" interface, or accuse them of making "bad" design decisions when the real problem is the user not reading the documentation. 

 
Now C'mon Craig. William Copper did NOT participate in this discussion...............
 

i don't think that Cakewalk should join samplers race.
however it would be for sure interesting if kind of new
approach is introduced.
 
lets say that you have some track (Track A) with some melody
(no matter - audio or midi/synth).
it would be awesome to have ability to add custom layering
to that track with help of DAW itself.
 
so lets say that workflow is this one:
1. create new audio Track B
2. send copy of Track A to Track B
3. put XXXX plug in FX bin of Track B
4. set the plug up so that each sound that
comes within certain range of amplitude
triggers MIDI message about certain note
with certain velocity being played.
(note is automatically determined of cause)
in theory this plug may allow you to make more than
one such layer. so lets imagine there may be 8 of them
5. for each layer you create instrument track.
make Enable Midi input and assign input as one of layers
outputs tracks.
6. process and mix these layer tracks just as you want
 
i don't know if i described an idea that well but consider this
XXXX plug as a kind of "Drum Replacement idea" being
developed in more extended way.
 
to me this could look like much better alternative to "what
Cakewalk could do" comparing to sampler.
there are lots of samplers out there. but i believe there is
no powerful layering unit there and this is the area where
Cakewalk could benefit. (this could even be ProChannel plug
i guess).
 
so as example:
lets say you recorded some piano track.
then with help of the XXXX layering plug you:
* add slight brass accent sound to most loud notes
* add some pad-like atmospheric sound to notes in C3 octave (but transpose them up by 2 octaves)
* add double bass pizzicato to notes in lowest octave when they are very quiet 
* and so on
 
this is just an example of cause, but imho there could be just endless
possibilities and ways for creativity there.
 
so i will try to summarize a bit my idea:
 
* a plugin that analyses incoming audio stream and outputs midi messages
* various types of analysis base (amplitude ranges, frequency ranges, scales, time ranges etc)
* various types of midi output options (swing, transpose, randomize and so on)
* ability to add as many layers as you want (but i believe 16 would be just enough :))
 
i think this could be a killer unit in terms of arrangement.
(and we can leave playing sounds to samplers/synths).

Anderton
Developing unique features, or a me-too plug-in? I prefer unique features but YMMV.

What if what you refer to as a "me too plugin" is something that really has become a standard that all your competitors offer, and is a pretty essential tool for a particular customer base who make up a large part of the market and you risk turning them off by not including that tool?
 
There's so many reverbs, comps, EQ's, and saturation/tube plugs in Sonar to the point it's almost redundant at times, despite the fact there are even MORE third party options available for those sort of things than even a sampler.  I would argue those are the most "me too plugins" of them all.  If they can take the time to develop and include those, then why not a sampler?
 
 

mdages
Is it somehow important or relevant whether a sampler plugin of Cakewalk itself or 3rd Party is?
Many of the plugins bundled with Sonar are 3rd party and not developed by Cakewalk.
Unlike other manufacturers, Cakewalk seems to be more a DAW developer and not a plugin provider.
 
So, what's the problem to use a free sampler vst plugin, like "Grace" for example.
http://www.onesmallclue.com/plugin/grace/
Because it's not bundled with the Sonar package?
-Markus

In a way, yes.  The market pretty much dictates it at this point.  When all you competitors offer one then you may just need to get on board. 
 
I don't see why anyone would think an acceptable answer to a potential customer who is trying to decide on purchasing your product would be: "Sure all our competitors have that feature/tool, but we don't.  But hey there's this random company that we have no affiliation with whatsoever that makes a pretty cool plugin.  Maybe you'll like that."  I really think that is a terrible outlook/approach if you're trying to continue to expand your customer base.

Earwax
So, yeah, Sonar clearly needs a sampler………………
 
 

bladetragic
 
As far as being a "one stop solution".  I'm not sure why people are acting as If I'm saying Cakewalk needs to move the mountains and the heavens to include an up-to-date sampling solution.

Which, of course, is probably why Telecharge posted this ……
 

telecharge
You're likely wasting your time here. I suggest putting in a feature request and moving on.
 

Bladetragic, you made many great points. Given your stated perspective, I actually think you’re quite right. But, ya know……………………………
 

I think a lot of people are missing that this isn't really all about me.  It's about growth.

telecharge

abacab
 
 
By the way, there is another forum for product features and ideas. 

Yes, and you will see I directed the OP there fairly early in this thread. However, with over 2100 views, there's obviously some interest in this thread.

Yep, you did.  That's why I made the post in that section as well.  I honestly didn't think this thread would get as much traction as it has.  Very interesting.

bladetragic

telecharge

abacab
By the way, there is another forum for product features and ideas.

Yes, and you will see I directed the OP there fairly early in this thread. However, with over 2100 views, there's obviously some interest in this thread.

Yep, you did.  That's why I made the post in that section as well.  I honestly didn't think this thread would get as much traction as it has.  Very interesting.

The number of views always correlate with provoking title and the fact some users keep it "on top". Either that number correlates with the number of potentially interested users is an open question.
 
Apart from one interesting link, the moto of this thread:
a) "other DAWs" have it... my drumset does not need 88 keys because my piano has them. Also adding them so "a keyboard player choose to buy these drums" sound like a strange advice for me. Making Sonar DJ/Beat oriented means much more then adding one sampler plug-in, and just adding that one sampler plug-in will not improve Sonar as a DAW. If we speak about Sonar as a package, CW has declared that only new "core" plug-ins will be included, the rest are payed "add-ons".
b) "third party plug-ins are not the same as CW plug-ins"... If you check precisely, most bundled plug-ins (including "build-in" ) are not developed by CW (or not by people which are currently working there). That is not a secret, check file names and "about"s. So the difference is only in "label".
c) "that will attract more users"... till deep marketing research is done, also using resources/man power/foreseen development costs into account (and that part is unknown for anyone outside CW), such statements have no meaning.
 
 

As an aside, kinda, and IMO, the reason why most film scores and jingles sound so lifeless these days is EXACTLY because of Kontakt. No one makes their own unique samples anymore - I can spot all the libraries time and again whilst trying to watch even some pretty high-end films and TV programs. It's the same reason Hip Hop and Rap artists should steer clear of Fruity Loops etc. You borrow from the collective pool, you're going to sound generic...

Then there's this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vfqkvwW2fs
 
 

LJB
As an aide, kinda, and IMO, the reason why most film scores and jingles sound so lifeless these days is EXACTLY because of Kontakt. No one makes their own unique samples anymore - I can spot all the libraries time and again whilst trying to watch even some pretty high-end films and TV programs. It's the same reason Hip Hop and Rap artists should steer clear of Fruity Loops etc. You borrow from the collective pool, you're going to sound generic...

Then there's this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vfqkvwW2fs
 
 

This is a great post.
Originality, variation and differences. This is what makes good scores and good music. It stands out from the others.
If you look at history and see the people who have really made their mark, they have often broke the boundaries.
Made their own rules. That's not to say a sampler wont let you break new ground, I just find samples to be so easily recognized now a day.
 
It something I am constantly working on. how to find something new. something no one has heard before.
Something that's human with all the flaws humans make while recording.