AT

bladetragic

AT
Blade,
 
one of the good things about Cake is they try to be all things to all musicians.  Some of the bad things are also because of this - some times they come up with a feature or tool that kinda works but not fully (see the lists of problem children above).
 
They do try to expand their base, see P5, Matrix, Beatscape, cyclone etc.  But they can't afford to ignore their base, as with most DAWs, of guitarists/rockers/folkers who record and mix acoustic instruments at home.  As Anderton shows above, this is not a plurality, but a super majority of users and potential users.  Which is one reason they don't fool around with the crapshoot of programming effective software for those apps that make acoustic recording available at home where users don't have a drum room or isolated guitar booths.  See Guitar Rig, the various drum synths, etc.  They buy/lease working versions of those programs while synths and "beat" functions get done in-house.  If Matrix needs work, they can do that tomorrow and they aren't going to piss off a lot of users and lose them like they would if an Amp sim makes your guitar sound like flatulence so that Cake has to pay the programmers overtime to fix what they should have writ right the first time.  The Matrix, no, we'll put Joe on it next cycle.  If they lose a few customers, they are still a head. 70% or more don't care.  You screw up the drums, every one cares.
 
As far as other programs - SONAR splits the market with several of the other "big" DAWs.  Of the beat DAWs, Live! garners the serious crowd but FL Studio is the best ... you can't say seller since they have so many pirated copies... but at one point was the most used DAW of all.  If SONAR were free it would probably have more users, too.  If I was Cake I'd rather have 1/5 of 70% of the market plus 10% of the other 30% rather than the other way around.  And Cake is probably the best known of the PC DAWs since it remains a PC-only DAW. 
 
Cakewalk is a business and makes decisions based upon their own sustainability.  Keep the base happy and build on that.

A quick Google search will show you that pretty much all the major DAWs are pirated (including Sonar) so that's null and void.  FL Studio is PC only as well, so you kind of contradicted your own point (I'm assuming maybe you didn't know it was PC only).  And if you say FL "was the most used DAW of all", what does that tell you? Especially when you consider it's audio recording capabilities were relatively non-existent until fairly recently.
 
As far as ignoring their base, how much more can they really develop for guitarists and people who record acoustic instruments?  Those people are essentially using Sonar as a tape recorder and mixer.  That's about as basic as a DAW can get.  There is a ton of compressors, eqs, reverbs, melodyne, audiosnap, TH3, Guitar Rig 4 (from older versions, if you have them), AD2, etc.  I would say that group is covered extremely well at this point.

FL was PC only?  I was sure I used it on the Mac I never had.  And of course everything is pirated, including SONAR.  If you want to nitpick what I said, that ain't my problem. 
 
But it was only a few years back when FL was the most used DAW and most, if not many of those copies were pirated.  Cakewalk never had to put out an update so that pirated versions couldn't load any user songs, but FL did.  That was some fun on the FL Forums with all the newbies asking why they couldn't play their beats.  What that tells me is a bunch of kids with PCs stole FL Studio because it seemed so easy and available and made some beats before they went back to gaming and porno.  Can you tell me what is your point is?  That Fl Studio was the leading DAW because it did beats and if Cake just followed their lead they, too, could be the most stolen DAW in the world?  
 
I am actually on your side of wanting more electronic tools and improvements in the ones we have, and you are slagging me for pointing out reasons Cakewalk maybe isn't replacing SONAR with a new Fruity Loops DAW that you and I (and others) would love but lose most users. 
 
@

I'm not slagging you.  Maybe it seems that way, but I'm really not.  You said Cake is the best known of the PC Daws, but if FL is (or was recently) the most used (your words) and is PC only then that's simply not true.  That's not really to "nitpick" your words, but more so to show more evidence that the "beat making"/electronic crowd seems to be the market driving the DAW world for whatever reason. 
 
As for the piracy part, I just simply don't agree with your perspective there.  You're basically alluding to the point that FL is only popular b/c of piracy.  Even with piracy, there is still a choice.  Actually even more so, because price is no longer a factor.  It's just a matter of which one you like most.  Not which one is more cost effective.  If all DAWs are pirated equally (which they are) why are more people reaching for FL and not Sonar?  Imo, that says something if a DAW that is focused on beat making, electronic music production, and didn't even properly record audio until recently is the most (or one of the most) used DAWs. Whether the copies are stolen or not, the fact is more people are using it even though they could be using Sonar.  I just don't think you can so easily dismiss that. I personally know people who have made millions b/c of the music they created in FL.  They definitely were not porn watching kids playing video games.  They were young producers who didn't have a lot of money , but were serious about their craft and they had to start somewhere. And it seems they were not alone, b/c the list of hit records made with FL is VERY long.
 
Not to mention, the DAW that seems like it may have surpassed FL in popularity at this point (Ableton) is also very producer/electronic music focused.  This was all in response to the notion that the user base is guitar players and acoustic musicians, that this is the largest base of users out there, and that Cake adding a sampler may detract from targeting this "core" user base.  So, if two of the most popular, if not THE two most popular DAWs (neither of which has been around as long as Cake) are focused on a totally different user base yet have managed to pass Sonar in popularity, then common sense would say that perhaps they (Cake) may want to take a hard look at finding a way to tap into that user base.  My original suggestion of adding a sampler is just one way I think they could begin to do that.  Because honestly, whatever their target audience is currently doesn't really seem to be gaining them any huge strides in the race.

telecharge
But would you advocate for an update to an existing Cakewalk sampler to be included with Sonar?

I certainly wouldn't object to it Telecharge, but given the option and a dash of self interest I would trade it for an upgrade of Matrix View and the Playlist, both core functions where you can't really substitute a third party option.

A good overhaul of Matrix View would make a nice composition tool.

tenfoot

telecharge
But would you advocate for an update to an existing Cakewalk sampler to be included with Sonar?

I certainly wouldn't object to it Telecharge, but given the option and a dash of self interest I would trade it for an upgrade of Matrix View and the Playlist, both core functions where you can't really substitute a third party option.

mettelus
A good overhaul of Matrix View would make a nice composition tool.

I would very much like all of the above, and I say that with more than a dash of self interest.
 
The Matrix View has been in Sonar since 2009, and I still see posts to this day from customers who didn't even know it existed or how to use it.

tenfoot

bladetragic
You TOTALLY missed (or misinterpreted) my point. 

 

tenfoot
No, I TOTALLY got your point. I just didn't agree with it. Luckily though this forum is not a zero sum game and is chock full of differing opinions at no others expense:) 

 
I honestly don't think you did, but okay. 
 

tenfoot

bladetragic
Actually, you're supporting my point.  Recording acoustic instruments and vocals is basically using a DAW as a tape recorder and mixer, and that IS about as basic as a DAW/recording can get.  The last sentence you chose to leave out is describing and showing that there is an ample amount of tools and functionality already available that goes above and beyond for the guitarists, acoustic musicians, "traditional DAW users", etc.  Which goes back to my first sentenfunctmuch more can they really develop for guitarists and people who record acoustic instruments?"  This is more of a rhetorical question.  Obviously they can keep coming up with stuff 'til the cows come home.  The point is there is a LOT there already that far exceeds what one would need to do traditional acoustic, guitar, vocal recording on a computer.

Dont get me wrong - I hope Sonar continues to develop features for all musical persuasions, but to say that the current tools are more than anyone needs to record acoustic instruments seems to me a pretty short sighted view of audio production in this 21st century. Creative producers use all kinds of tools, regardless of genre or instrumentation. I hold core Sonar users in much higher regard than your characterisation of guitarists who can do little more than push record and stop! That's clearly Pro Tools users:)

Please show me where I said anything of the sort?  This is why I don't think you got my point, because I never said this.
 
I'm having trouble following what you're trying to get at.  My point, as you seem to have again misinterpreted, is that there is LOTS there for guitarists/traditional musicians to do far more than "push record and stop" and get quite creative.  I've had a good amount of success as a producer "in this 21st century", some of which includes doing quite a bit of work WITH live guitarists, so I'm quite familiar with recording and producing with live/acoustic instruments in Sonar.  Trust me, my view is far from "short sighted".

~ 4500 views are a strong indicator, that the customers are interested in this topic, even if there are great 3rd party options. And the discussion shows, that there are great (not hidden, but camouflaged) features, that should have a little polish after all that years. The next move is by the CW requirements Team ;)

Anderton
I think Cake is correct to be concentrating on tightening down the loose ends and improving the core program before addressing other market segments (and it's not just EDM; audio for video could use a little love, too). More importantly, anyone who wants to make beats in SONAR already has plenty of tools: The step sequencer, Matrix view, the ability to create and edit loops, drum replacer, synchronizable effects, and virtual instruments with plenty of EDM-friendly sounds. (And, you'll see news shortly about a new EDM expansion pack for Z3TA+ 2 by Nico Herz that I've had the pleasure to evaluate. It's really good.)
 

 
Craig, I just want to point out (respectfully) that THIS is where it seems you are a bit ambivalent about supporting better beat-making tools.  Previously, you've not expressed a reservation and that you would like to see better tools, but the statement above seems like you'd rather see them concentrate on overall core program over providing better tools.  Well, I want them to concentrate on the overall program too, it's just that if they can provide Vocal Sync and more EQ updates (which I don't think were necessarily asked for) they should, EVERY NOW AND THEN, be able to do a few things that help keep SONAR competitive basic feature to feature with other DAW's. The beat-making tools in Sonar are outdated and/or incomplete, especially compared to other DAWs, and I and others (and even yourself) have stated it's high time to address that.
 

Anderton
Just because SONAR doesn't have a particular type of sampler doesn't mean you can't do EDM. Ilan Bluestone and scores of others (check out the Cakewalk blog) are proof of that. As this thread has shown, if all you need is a sampler to complete the picture, there are plenty of options.

 
This is true.  But, let me give you an analogy.  Let's say I'm standing in Cakewalk's building on the 1st floor, and I need to get to the 10th floor.  I'm at the elevator, and I've hit the button to take the elevator up to the 10th floor.  However, it appears the elevator is not working.  However, you (and others) walk by, and say, "well, why do you want to take the elevator?  There's a set of perfectly good stairs, and you look healthy enough, you should just take the stairs.  Have you considered taking the stairs?  It's really good for you, and you could really use the exercise."  Well, heck I know that, but I'd really would like to use the elevator, you know? You get the general feeling from this forum that this is the attitude to us here that want better/improved beat making tools -- just take the stairs.
 
I'm a big fan of Ilan.  So, I was happy to hear that he uses SONAR.  However, he did an interview where he talks about this, and he said that he watches some of his other producer friends work at their non-SONAR DAWs, and he's always impressed and how fast they can get certain operations done, things that take him MUCH more time to do in SONAR.  And I think that's a fair criticism by him.
 

Anderton
If Cakewalk stopped work on doing the basic, essential enhancements they're doing now and brought out a simple sampler instead, imagine the hue and cry of "WTF do I want a sampler for when there are already plenty of options available, but ripple editing doesn't work?!??!" AFAIC concerned ripple editing is a far more important feature when creating EDM (or any type of music) than having a sampler that duplicates what's already available elsewhere. I just don't buy the concept of "you can't do EDM in SONAR." If that's true, don't tell the people who do...

 
*Sigh*.  No one's asking to stop work on basic/essential enhancements.  And I did say "WTF do I need VocalSync for when there are already plenty of options available, but there's no decent, basic Sampler?"  But, I was cool with it, because others found it useful.  And just like VocalSync, you could get a third-party option, but the fact it's integrated into Sonar makes it useful, which is the same reason why we would like a non-third party Sampler.  I would like ripple editing, probably over getting a sampler, but to be honest, ripple editing as well as a Sampler should have been in the Sonar feature set some time ago.  Finally, I don't think anybody stated you can't make EDM in Sonar, I know that's not true, because I do it, I would just prefer to take the elevator than the stairs.
 
 

Anderton
I really can't think of any DAW that's more versatile than SONAR, but because it doesn't push the creative process in a particular direction, that means the results are more dependent on the user's flexibility and command of the program's toolset...consider how many of the "Friday's Tip of the Week" came out of my working with EDM and particularly remixing, which required developing techniques in SONAR that relate specifically to that kind of work.
 

 
Versatility is clearly in the eye of the beholder.  And, I very much appreciate your "Friday Tips", I've learned quite a bit from them, but if you did create many of them because of your EDM/remixing work, I think it's a worthwhile exercise to consider whether basic tools such as those found in other DAWs would have either eased or outright eliminated the need for those 'tips' in the first place.  
 

telecharge

LOL

@forkol
 
Well stated.  The stair/elevator analogy was spot on.