Actually, it is this method of thinking that gives us full-featured products from a variety of companies with great products that match their niche.  It gives rise to folks like NI and others that don't build DAWs.  They build tools to expand the capabilities of software built by others.  Tons of examples out there.  Pick what you do and do it well.  Don't try to be everything to everybody.
 

Mystic38
If anyone paid attention to this method of thinking, then neither CW nor any other company would bother to develop anything at all.. yet they do :)
 

BobF
I have a prediction.  If Cake released a basic sampler (S5) as a core component of SONAR with feature set X:
 
Someone would immediately request a sub forum dedicated to Feature Requests for S5
 
Group A would be happy
 
Group B would feel that another 7 features would be necessary to make it as usable as the sampler in DAW Whatever
 
Group C would think that Cake completely missed the mark altogether
 
Group D would agree with B, except their list is 4 features completely different from the 7 identified by Group B
 
Continue for groups E thru Z, plus Group A which has now decided that the workflow for S5 is all wrong
 
The only way ALL groups would be happy with the features is if S5 included every feature found in every other sampler on the market.

I predict this thread going till about mid November, until samplers go on sale for black Friday
 

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Geist yet. For me, Geist - at least the first one because I don't like Geist 2 so much - has always been the benchmark in the kind of beat/sequence creation tool that Sonar is sadly lacking. Of course there is nothing in Geist that you can't ultimately do in Sonar using different methods, but it's the workflow that set Geist apart. Over the years I've heard older users dismiss the complaints of younger electronic oriented musicians by saying "but you can do that in Sonar, you simply have to....." and then go on to describe some long-winded method or workaround. What this misses is that convoluted workflows and workarounds interfere with the kind of spur of the moment creativity that requires a fast moving workflow which translates ideas into music quickly. If you're the kind of person who composes and arranges music on paper beforehand, or has it all mapped out in some way before even turning on the DAW, then these long-winded ways of working aren't such a problem. But that's not how the kids are making music. Hell I'm no spring chicken at 43 and that's not how I make music either. 
 
Modern electronic music is a very much hands-on, real time process of experimentation, jamming and of happy accidents. I come up with most of my musical ideas, both melodic and rhythmic, by doing crazy things with electronic tools. You have to feel like your tools are an extension of your brain, and when it comes to sample based and sequenced music, Geist has really managed to achieve that for me. I'm sure others have found similar states of Zen with things like Maschine. 
 
So yeah you could use Beatscape and Sonar's step sequencer I suppose, but they are sorely lacking when compared to 3rd party tools like Geist (and what other DAW's have available as standard). 
 
I'm not sure I like the idea that Sonar is just filling a different niche. I hear older users say that all the time, and that they don't care for any of the EDM style tools because they're happy using Sonar as a fancy multitrack recorder to record their "real" instruments. Well, yes this is true to some extent, and there are also many younger people who still make music with traditional instruments. But the thing about that is, the lines are becoming blurred. Many "traditional" format bands are incorporating electronic elements in their music, whether it be the acoustic singer songwriter who mashes up sampler beats to sing along to, or the swirly guitar based band which throws in the odd synth bass part and EDM plucks here and there. You simply cannot get around the fact that the technical side of music has evolved, that younger people are far more electronically minded regardless of the genre of music they play, and that any DAW which ignores this will not survive. Honestly, if I were a Sonar user in my 60's and hated all electronic music, I would still support any effort by Cakewalk to compete with Ableton and FL simply on the basis that it would be protecting the future of my favorite DAW. 

sharke
.
.
.
I'm not sure I like the idea that Sonar is just filling a different niche. I hear older users say that all the time, ...

Who you calling 'old', whipper-snapper? 
 
I've got nothing against EDM.  I've even been thinking about picking up some EDM-oriented tools.  If the tools aren't SONAR built-ins when I'm ready for them, I'll go get some to use along with SONAR.
 
 

Great post James.
 
You are describing a workflow that I don't think Sonar can handle yet. The only time I can cause Sonar to glitch is when I try and be creative on the fly. Not to say it's bad. Sonar is more stable now than painful X1 days. I can drop VST effects onto tracks without problems now. But I do think that it's just too bulky and layered to use as a performance tool. Every time I've seen a small band and a DAW on stage together it ended badly. 
The guys using NI gear seem to fare the best. It's tactile and responsive.
I've never done EDM or anything related so I don't know why a sampler is so important. I hope everyone gets what they want but we all need  to get that ripple editing and all the underpinnings first. This should really go to the features and ideas area if we want to discuss it for months.

sharke
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Geist yet. For me, Geist - at least the first one because I don't like Geist 2 so much - has always been the benchmark in the kind of beat/sequence creation tool that Sonar is sadly lacking. Of course there is nothing in Geist that you can't ultimately do in Sonar using different methods, but it's the workflow that set Geist apart. Over the years I've heard older users dismiss the complaints of younger electronic oriented musicians by saying "but you can do that in Sonar, you simply have to....." and then go on to describe some long-winded method or workaround. What this misses is that convoluted workflows and workarounds interfere with the kind of spur of the moment creativity that requires a fast moving workflow which translates ideas into music quickly.

Call me crazy, but I thought the VSTi spec was invented so people could add instrument functionality that didn't already exist in a DAW.
 
Geist costs $200. Cakewalk could create something with Geist's functionality and raise the price of SONAR $200 (while not spending their efforts on improving the core feature set). Or, those who want that functionality can spend $200 and buy Geist.
 
As to workarounds, maybe someone doesn't use a particular functionality enough to merit spending $200. Or maybe they don't want to spend $200. I think it's helpful, not dismissive, to tell people how to do something via an alternate method that doesn't cost anything. It's the users' choice to avail themselves of whatever option they want. 
 
That's why the VST spec is so great: You can customize a DAW to provide the functionality you want. There's even ReWire so you can merge a program like Reason or Live with SONAR. Sure, it costs more to add sophisticated functionality. Until developers work for free, that's a fact of life.
 
So...what's the downside in giving customers the power to choose what they want via the VSTi spec?

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

I disagree. It's not that there's the choice of either you use a particular elevator or you use the stairs. You can use the VST elevator instead of either one.
 

forkol

Anderton
I think it's ironic that Cakewalk was ahead of the curve on the beat thing, but got blowback. Now that EDM has reached the mainstream (it sure took long enough, eh?)

 
You know, I've seen this sentiment before.  I see if often used to knock EDM as the 'Johnny come lately' de jour of music.  IMHO, it was the 'E' part of EDM that had to come up to speed. We have always had the 'D' part - Disco, R&B, Funk, Rock, Jazz. But had to get to a point where the 'electronic' part was good, cheap and easy enough to use.  We've had synths for at least 60+ years, but I think the 80's brought forth the TB-303 and DX7, small, relatively in-expensive synths that were much easier to use.  And if you listen to most 80's music, you will hear those synths and drum machines, quite a bit.  That's really early EDM.  So, 'EDM' was already pretty mainstream even back in the 80's, we just didn't call it that then. 

 
It existed, sure. Kraftwerk was "mainstream' long before the 80s, but by any objective metric that involves the purchase, airplay, or streaming of music, dance music based on electronics was a niche part of the mainstream at best. It's only really taken off in the US in the past decade, with Europe having about a five year lead.
 

If money were no object, I would probably build my virtual studio around a "core" DAW like Tracktion or Reaper with a bunch of 3rd party plug-ins. To me, that seems most ideal as your can choose the features and tools that best suite you. However, the "best in class" plug-ins are still too expensive for your average hobbyist/enthusiast/amateur.
 
Cakewalk offers great value with the various flavors of Sonar, in my opinion. That's why I'm here.
 
I'm all for a healthy debate, and I'm not really surprised at the pushback, but the amount of rancor over the suggestion of a basic, integrated sampler seems a bit much.

telecharge
I'm all for a healthy debate, and I'm not really surprised at the pushback, but the amount of rancor over the suggestion of a basic, integrated sampler seems a bit much.

I don't think it's rancor, it's I think it's more like people saying "if there are great alternatives for free, why insist that Cakewalk re-invent the wheel when they could spend their resources on something uniquely useful?" I can understand why someone who doesn't get, say, some matrix view fixes because CW was off re-inventing the sampler might get upset.
 
But...although speculation is always fun, I think we’ve reached a point in the conversation where it’s time for some facts.
 
First of all, the assumption that Cakewalk isn’t working on beats-oriented or notation features is quite simply false. They are…so let’s stick a fork in that one. As to when they’ll appear, I do believe that Cakewalk is correct to prioritize program elements that affect as many different types of users as possible. But at some point, they’ll be done and…we’ll see what happens next.
 
Second, the “beats” people saying “If only SONAR had more beats tools, it would appeal to FL Studio and Ableton users” has the same validity as people who say “if only SONAR had great notation, it would cause Cubase users to switch.” Neither one makes sense in the context of today’s music software market.
 
The concept of “market share” is essentially meaningless. What’s valid is looking at both unit share (percentage of the total universe of products in that market) and dollar share (the percentage of the total universe of revenue that market receives). Unit share may help a company, but dollar share is what keeps a company alive. For example Garageband has a huge market share on the Mac because it ships with the Mac for free, but it also probably has close to 0% dollar share. A heavily-pirated program will have a unit share that’s way out of proportion with dollar share.
 
The recording software market is a declining market. Because it’s not being fueled by a lot of new users, taking away overall market share from other companies is another way to fuel growth. But, it’s not easy to get people to switch.
 
I can’t give a lot of stats because the material from market research firms is proprietary. But I can give some generalities. Avid has about five times the dollar share of any other DAW company in this industry. So for any company that wants to take dollar share, Avid is the most logical target because that’s where the dollar share is. Everyone else is fighting it out at a much lower level, and there are more similarities than differences in dollar share among those contenders than you might think. The good news for Cakewalk is that in a declining market, SONAR has managed to hold its own.
 
As to the actual growth of EDM, the global EDM market is now worth 7.1 billion dollars, 60% more than it was only three years ago. It truly has reached the mainstream only relatively recently. However, google search trends show the trend for EDM is flattening and actually declining (at 90% of its peak), whereas pop—a genre for which SONAR has a good fit—has gone up a relative 50% in the past month alone. Long-term, though, bear in mind that EDM is the only genre that has undergone significant growth since 2009.
 
Now, another stat. For 2015, shares of streams by genre in the US was 21% hip-hop, 18% rock, 15% pop, 9% Latin, 5% dance/EDM, and 4% country (with the rest as "other" - classical, jazz, folk, new age, etc.). So if SONAR wants to go after a particular musical genre, rock, pop, hip-hop, and Latin—for all of which SONAR is well-suited—are where the action is, which mirrors other aspects of the market (e.g., CD sales, or rather, what’s left of them). Now, this doesn’t at all negate that EDM has experienced significant growth in the past few years, and continues to do so, particularly internationally in places like Viet Nam, the Philippines, etc. But when you look at it in a totality of all music, it remains a niche—a healthy niche to be sure, and one that can likely support Ableton, FL Studio, and Reason. But can it add significant numbers to SONAR, given how the former three applications are firmly entrenched, and the genre is flattening? IMHO, it’s doubtful at best.
 
And for those who have opinions about “old people,” on this subject I have stats only for 2014, but interest in EDM on YouTube (the world’s single largest music delivery platform) among 35 to 49-year-olds grew 80%. You could argue that’s because they just became aware of its existence so no wonder there’s interest, but that’s consistent with helping to account for the explosive growth over the past three years.
 
It's obvious I'm a huge EDM fan, so I'm not saying EDM's minority status makes me happy. But I have to live in a fact-based world...and think accordingly.