If there would be an embedded tool to build the sfz and doing basic stuff like looping etc. everything would be fine. Than you can use e.g. Rapture or Dimension like expected. There are tons of free editors, but something integrated into SONAR would be great: Like a plugin, an additional windows in Rapture, what ever.
 
I bought a MPC, because the workflow is so much easier to understand. But it is not the first choice, if you want to use your OWN synth within your SONAR projects. From my point of view, creating sample sets is something creative. I don't want to use the notepad or a similar looking freeware tool, if I am creating something. I would like to have the UI I am looking to all the time...
 
I honour people like Craig who have the patience to create these great SFZs... SONAR is a fantastic tool to create samples and always my first choice for recording/editing them. But the last step... §$%$§%$§$
 
(BTW: Where do I find the actual SFZ2 documentation?)

subtlearts

Glyn Barnes
I suggest the TX16WX a free and very powerful sampler http://www.tx16wx.com/

This was worth reading the whole thread for. Wow, that's seriously a pretty deep looking sampler for no money at all!
 
 

I saw this earlier and downloaded this, watched some videos on it. great free app to use in Sonar.
thanks for putting this up (mentioning it/posting the link) im really digging this.

telecharge

TranceCanada
 
 
There is a very basic sampler included in Sonar, with SFZ, even Rapture is a very good sampler

I saw your previous post. Thanks, but it's not the same.

You can't even do basic waveform editing like setting the start and end point of a sample in those programs which is a pretty basic and essential function of a decent sampler.  I won't even get into more advanced functions like layering, slicing, and mapping multisamples b/c it's kind of pointless if you can't even do that basic function. 
 
I did not start this post without first exploring all the available options already in Sonar.  It's kind of like the pieces are there, but they're not in one cohesive package/program.  The functionality is scattered throughout different plugins.

If I had to name one thing which completely changed the way I work when I switched to Logic, it would be the integrated sampler, EXS-24. Keyword here is integration.
 
It's the first thing that comes to mind when I think of reasons why I could never switch to another DAW. I can't tell how many projects I've done from start to finish using nothing but EXS-24.
 
That being said, I don't think that users like me are part of a majority.

killerbee1985

bladetragic

samson7842
Bruh, I've been saying the same things for years. But, Sonar seems to cater more toward traditional musicians than those of us who use this kind of sampler as the base of our creations. Nevertheless, it's a hole that the bakers should plug if they want to move beyond the perception of Sonar not being up to snuff for serious music/beat making.
 
Don't get me wrong, I love Sonar. And, I'm hoping this will get addressed soon. Here's my original post about the topic:
http://forum.cakewalk.com/Please-Please-Please-Give-Us-A-Pad-Based-Drum-Sample-Player-m3197050.aspx

This is kind of my point.
 
I'm honestly speaking from the stand point of wanting to see Sonar grow and draw in more people.  Since Sonar is at the center of my productions and I have a lot invested in it, I see it as a good thing if you draw in more users b/c that means more revenue for the company.  So this is not even so much for my specific needs, but just an observation of a demographic that Cake may be able to draw in a bit more with the addition of a few of the right tools.  I really don't see how that could be a bad thing. 
 
There are 3rd party options available for a lot of things that Sonar does.  VocalSync, Drum Replacers, Pitch Correction, Synths, compressor plugins, EQs, Live Drum programs...and the list goes on.  There are 3rd party options available for ALL of those things, but it hasn't stopped Cakewalk from developing and including tools in these areas, b/c it makes the program stronger, adds value, and appeals to new users when they see that the tools they need are right there and they don't have to go searching elsewhere.
 
Like it or not, outside of Pro Tools, a BIG reason a lot of the other big named DAWs have soared in popularity is because they strongly appeal to the "beat-making", electronic, hip-hop, R&B, EDM crowd and this is a tool that is very important in drawing in new users in that crowd.  I'm not saying that Cakewalk should only focus on those types, but I don't think that they should totally overlook them either.

Please excuse my poor english:
 
I am with you 100% Most other Daws offer usable, current Samplers. My perception with Sonar, is when you ask about a utility which other DAWs have built in you will be forwarded to a third Party Application. When Cakewalk wants that Sonar is a modern DAW, it should a little bit overhauled(they do it already). From my perspective its a traditional DAW for Rock Bands and classic music. Sonar has Drop Zone and i used it until it stopped to work 100% ok after a Sonar Update(tested on different PCs and with different Buffer Settings. Only Dropzone has the Problem). For Example: Loading a Kick Drum for electronic music and freezed the Audio.
The Audio is not on time with a slightly shift. Its unusable in this form for me.
I swithed to a working (free) Sampler. As electronic musician i feel that something is wrong when i have to load my Samples for every Instrument in Session Drummer with an Acoustic Drum Set in Front of me.  But that is a feeling i personally have.
Other Daws have more modern Tools. Sonar has except a few new things "Year 1998" looking tools which some are in 32 Bit. I have a Powerful PC but when i use Sonar and compare it to other DAWs the drawing of the UI feels slow. I think its because of the old Software Framework. I also think that midi editing is more uncomfortable than in other DAWs. I also own Studio One and it's a lot faster. I think sonar has some good Tools and approaches but it's made for Rock Bands in my opinion and 50 % looks outdated. If Cakewalk wants more Sonar customers they also should look at a broader customer base(They already do a little bit with Sonar Steam Edition).
 
When you surf on the Net and look for Music Production techniques(electronic) there is often a sampler involved. Drum Layering, Sample mangeling etc. With Stock Tools, with DAWs that cost nearly the same. Logix Pro X costs 199 € and is great.
 
Maybe they overhaul the Software Framework for the Mac Release, i think they have to.
 
Now you can say "Then don't use it". But i am to 100% not the only one who thinks so. But i am one of the people who takes the time and writes their toughts down. Pls Sonarians, don't take this personally i am purely objective.
 
The solution should't be to get free or bought alternative tools as workaround.
 
As an musician who makes electronic Music, Studio One or Fl Studio has better Options to work with. But i use Sonar because it has the Vst Bridge and i have some older Projects i have to work on.

The part in bold is part of what lead me to this post.  I was doing my own searching and studying on some sound design and production techniques for some inspiration and I noticed so much of the content that was available was for work in other DAWs.  This, in addition to knowing so many producers and musicians who work on these other platforms, piqued my curiosity a bit. 
 
One thing I noticed is that pretty much all of these programs had their own "in-house" or integrated tools for triggering, editing, mapping, and manipulating samples and loops.  I'm sure the competition is aware of the "3rd party options" out there as well, but they are not relying on that. They are including these tools for a reason! This is not to "praise" the competition, but it would be very remiss to completely ignore what your competitors are doing when they are having success.
 
Maybe it won't come anytime soon (as Craig has indicated) but I do think it's an area that needs to get a little attention some time in the near future, which is why I created the thread.  I knew it would be met with resistance and naysayers.  I also knew I would be directed to various third party apps.  I don't post here often, but I visit from time to time and I kind of knew how this would play out.  The point was to shed light on an area that seems to get overlooked or abandoned (for whatever reason) in the grand scheme of things.  And clearly there are other users who share my sentiments.

killerbee1985

mdages
I don't think that Sonar really needs a sampler. There are so many good of them on the market.
Most people working much with samples, own NI Kontakt, Motu MachFive, UVI Falcon or Air Structure.
 
 
-Markus
 

If you put it that way then sonar also doesn't need an Equalizer or Compressor, Reverb Plugins because there are plenty on the market and many people use Waves Bundles or Fabfilter Plugins.

I think the difference is that equalizers, compressors, reverb, and similar plug-ins are accepted as essentials that every user of a program needs. Therefore they need to be included in the program. It's like back in the hardware days, mixers had EQ and often compressors built in, even though engineers had outboard racks with more specialized versions.
 
Generally the more variations there are in a product category, and the more each one concentrates on a particular specialty, the more that implies it's a choice that should be left up to individual users. I can picture someone saying "I don't want Addictive Drums, I don't use drum modules" but not saying "I don't want EQ, I don't use EQ." Beats-oriented stuff, as Cakewalk found out the hard way, was in that minority space many years ago...but I think it no longer is. It hasn't reached the "necessary" level of EQ, but it's a big part of how music is made today.

vdd
 
(BTW: Where do I find the actual SFZ2 documentation?)

I found this thread. The PDF link is still working, but the documentation is 10 years old.
http://forum.cakewalk.com/RGCAudio-SFZ-User39s-Guide-m2379309.aspx

bladetragic

killerbee1985

mdages
I don't think that Sonar really needs a sampler. There are so many good of them on the market.
Most people working much with samples, own NI Kontakt, Motu MachFive, UVI Falcon or Air Structure.
 -Markus
 

If you put it that way then sonar also doesn't need an Equalizer or Compressor, Reverb Plugins because there are plenty on the market and many people use Waves Bundles or Fabfilter Plugins.

Exactly. 
I have said this multiple times but people want to disregard that fact.  For what reason, I don't know.  Maybe because it doesn't fit their particular needs.  Or perhaps they just haven't read through the comments.  Who knows?  But the logic is flawed.

Some tools and effects are neccessary for an audio software to call it a DAW and some aren't. I don't think that a sampler is one of the tools a DAW should have. In my opinion also instruments not necessarily belong to the basic equipment of a DAW software. It is nice to have, but not absolutely necessary.
Today DAW software is sold not by it's functions and features, but more through additional instruments and effect plug-ins.
Basic sampler functionality is included in Sonar with plugins like Dropzone. If you want more or better, there are plenty of good 3rd party. It's the same with EQ, Compressor or Reverb.

Manufacturers such as "Waves" are specialized in effect plugins, others on synthesizer or sampler, and Cakewalk on DAW software.
If you want to have better meat, you shouldn't go to the baker.
 
-Markus

mdages
Some tools and effects are neccessary for an audio software to call it a DAW and some aren't. I don't think that a sampler is one of the tools a DAW should have.

In my opinion this is wrong. My Expectation(as a customer which makes electronic Music) for a modern Daw (for 524 €) is an included Sampler which has 64 Bit compatibility.
 

mdages
In my opinion also instruments not necessarily belong to the basic equipment of a DAW software. It is nice to have, but not absolutely necessary.
Today DAW software is sold not by it's functions and features, but more through additional instruments and effect plug-ins.
 

You mean that Sonar is not primary sold because of its DAW Features (Notation, Aux Tracks, Matrix view etc) but more through additional Instruments like DropZone, Sonitus Effects, Guitar Amps, Session Drummer etc..? There are plenty of other less expensive DAWS which offer that Instruments which are all 64 Bit. For example 32 Bit Sonar Instruments: If you want 64 Bit Functionality you need to buy JBridge because the included Bitbridge is buggy and doesn't work like it should.
 
I only wanted to show that a beginner in producing who decides to buy a DAW for "Beat" Music maybe won't choose Sonar Platinum but some other DAW like FL Studio 12 (incl. Lifetime Updates), Ableton Live, Studio One(also has Melodyne integrated). And if everyone can live with it, everything is fine. But i think there are more Changes needed.

Anderton

bladetragic
Like it or not, outside of Pro Tools, a BIG reason a lot of the other big named DAWs have soared in popularity is because they strongly appeal to the "beat-making", electronic, hip-hop, R&B, EDM crowd and this is a tool that is very important in drawing in new users in that crowd.  I'm not saying that Cakewalk should only focus on those types, but I don't think that they should totally overlook them either.

 
And those programs are part of the reason why Pro Tools is slipping, too. It's a shame that SONAR was so ahead of the curve on this at one point (and also Project5), and when it didn't get traction, they just let it sit. I've been pushing for some enhancements along these lines but realistically, I don't think anything's going to happen until they get comping, ripple editing, and workspaces implemented. Those are major efforts. But I agree completely that even just a few beat-oriented tweaks would make a big difference. 
 

 
I would tell the history of Project 5 another way.  It was not the pioneer, it was Cakewalk's answer to Ableton Live, and although it was a good product, I think the (initially) fast pace of feature development of AL, and the fact that they were in Mac space and had lots of producers/dj's using it doomed Project 5.
 
And the slippage that's happened to Pro Tools could happen to Sonar as well, especially in the Mac arena.  If Cakewalk wants to expand their user base on the Mac side, then I feel they are going to have to address feature shortcoming that the OP, myself and others have pointed out.  Assuming that the cost of Sonar remains about the same or higher on a Mac, why would you choose Sonar over Logic, a $200 program?  The only good reasons are that you don't like Apple (so why do you have a Mac in the first place?) or you use Sonar on a PC, and now want to move to Mac (which is not any additional revenue).
 
But, I'm glad to see that you seem more amenable to adding enhancements like the one's mentioned by the OP than you have in the past.  At least, your gravitas should at least give more credence to these types of features than the rest of us can seem to muster by putting in a Feature Request.