• SONAR
  • Cakewalk Announcement (p.115)
2017/12/15 00:04:01
LNT11K
Just new to the forum, but not to Sonar. It revolts me, just bought Platinum 1 month ago going strong with my new setup !! Cakewalk's Sonar is a great DAW and it's been faithul to Microsoft even thought the main Audio/Video community switched to Mac I don't understand Microsoft don't buy it like Mac did with Logic. Maybe they will try to sell it and we will be the last to know... maybe we should do a petition and a big shout out to Microsolf or Bill Gate as a wake up call. He worth 90 billions !!! He could pay the debt of Gibson and not be affected by it, but that's not what we want. He could buy it, maintant a small team and the needed serve. Why not sell it 5000$ lol if you are shutting it down ? Why don't we do a kickstarter so the user of Sonar buy the company ?! Me, I'm in !!! I'm sure there's something we can do ! There's some people from cakewalk lurk aroujd the forum. Please give us cue !! Let's include them.
2017/12/15 00:11:29
marled
michael diemer
Matron Landslide
anydmusic
 
My guess is that keeping the servers running will help Gibson if they try to monetise the Cakewalk assets as the activity on them is evidence that might support the viability of Sonar Phoenix to a prospective buyer.
 



SONAR wasn't viable for Roland, it wasn't viable for Gibson, how many more examples are needed before someone says, "hey, there's something not quite right here" instead of blaming everyone and everything else except Cakewalk. People on these forums have been making excuses for Cakewalk for years, and that's part of the problem.
 
The buck has to stop with Cakewalk, lay the blame where it should be, they failed to develop a product that people in the outside world (outside this little bubble) thought was good enough compared to the available alternatives, they failed to develop a product that wowed those in the outside world, there wasn't a huge stampede of new users knocking down the doors hungering to use SONAR. Cakewalk and SONAR have a massive reputation problem, and have had for years, take a walk outside the comfort of these insular forum walls if you want to see what people think of Cakewalk/SONAR, you are not going to like what you see and hear, that's just how it is.
 
When the topic is DAW's, SONAR is pretty much always left out of the conversation, most times it doesn't even get a mention, why is that? 3rd party devs often leave SONAR out of the 'tested with' lists and don't test on SONAR (yes there are those that do, but if you are to be honest . . . ) why is that? Users on these forums frequently post things like they don't actually know anyone else that uses SONAR (in real life). When they say to people that they use SONAR, the other person either gives them a weird look, or hasn't got a clue what SONAR is. Users have frequently over the years posted things like "I'm tired of having to make excuses for using SONAR" or "Why isn't SONAR considered as a professional product"or "why isn't SONAR listed in Compatability lists" and on and on it goes. Why is that? If SONAR really was as good as people here seem to think it is, it would be taking over the world, be on everyone's tongue, be making that much money no one in their right mind would want to get rid of Cakewalk. Unfortunately for Cakewalk and it's users, the majority of people in the outside world do not agree with the insiders opinion, most seem to have a low opinion of Cakewalk and SONAR, again that's just how it is.
 
Roland buys Cakewalk, Cakewalk loses money, is not viable, Roland ditches Cakewalk,
Gibson buys Cakewalk, Cakewalk loses money, is not viable,  Gibson ditches Cakewalk,
can you see a pattern emerging? can you see a common denominator? Instead of blaming everyone and everything else, lay the blame where it is desereved, lay it at Cakewalks feet, it's time to let go of the delusion that Cakewalk can do no wrong, the buck should and must stop at Cakewalk. You can continue blaming Gibson if that makes you feel better, or the phase of the moon, or global warming, or the fact that every day's name ends with a 'y', or whatever you like, but like Mr Anderton said, Gibson didn't kill Cakewalk/SONAR, they just buried it. Also as Mr Anderton pointed out, Gibson probably extended Cakewalks life by a few years. I think the fact is Cakewalk/SONAR have been terminally ill for some time for many various reasons, and the blame must be laid squarely at Cakewalks feet, they failed in creating a product that captured enough peoples minds to make it viable. In the end, they could not compete with the opposition regardless of how good insiders think SONAR is, the majority of those outside disagreed, and disagreed strongly.
 
 


I disagree with the thrust of your argument. Sonar is a great DAW, arguably the best, because it's the most complete. Audio. Midi. Mixing. Mastering. Notation. Great VST and VSTi.  Something for everyone. If anything, it was bad management that killed it. Sometimes companies just fall behind and don't know how to compete. Perhaps the management simply did not have an aggressive enough posture. Not enough outreach to places like Sweetwater. Whatever, the reason is not the software. It's a bit of a misconception that the best product always survives, simply because it is the best product. There are many other forces at work. The market is not as perfect a sorter of products as we would like to think. The best does not always win. The race is not always to the swift. Human nature gets in the way. Trends develop, people jump on bandwagons, etc. I think you are just looking for a scapegoat, and your analysis is simplistic. Not to mention insulting to the Bakers.


That is excactly what I think, too!
There are a lot of great ideas in Sonar. For example just search a DAW that gives you such a good overview on a small laptop screen without having an ant font! Where you have such good access to everything on a small space! And it's difficult to find another DAW where you can precisely define your exports like that, even for track export. And so on ...
2017/12/15 00:21:29
mudgel
Jim Kalinowski
CoteRotie
jyoung60
 
Try installing it on a new machine in a couple years. See if the license will validate if there's no server to call.


Or reinstalling it when Windows gets corrupted somehow or your hard drive dies.




If you keep an image of the drive (assuming SONAR is installed on that drive), a hard drive crash or Windows corruption shouldn't be a problem.  Install the new drive, restore the image, and you're back to making music.  The day Cakewalk made the announcement I made an image of my C: drive and labeled it "SONAR Last Install Backup Image".  If my HD dies or Windows breaks SONAR, I'm restoring that image and taking my machine offline forever (and probably looking for a new DAW).


And when you open Sonar the first thing it will want to do is get activated which as things stand now, you won’t be able to do if there’s no server.
2017/12/15 02:09:35
Jim Kalinowski
Mike, I don't think that's true.  If you restore a hard drive image, the activation info you already got from the server (before you made the backup) will be restored.  There's no need to get to a server to reactivate.  I had to replace a hard drive using this method and did not have to reactivate.
 
Now, if you buy a new computer or replace whatever it is that SONAR is using for the computer ID (which I think is motherboard related and not hard drive), then yes, you'd need access to the server (or the promised off-line approach if/when the servers go away).
2017/12/15 02:57:18
frankbaker
 
 
Thanks so much Cakewalk people, have been making music on your platform since midi only. Sonar is still the greatest and might actually keep working for many years before we are forced to convert. Might want to consider a kickstarter or something if we could only get rights to the source code somehow. Is it possible that all of the "lifetime subscribers" might have some legal rights to it? Might be a fun project for a hungry lawyer.
 
I too am stranded by this and have hundreds of recordings mixed and mastered in Sonar. Converting to something else is quite overwhelming (not to mention very expensive).  Any thoughts?  (I have no love for Pro Tools)
 
I too am stranded by this and have hundreds of recordings mixed and mastered in Sonar. Converting to something else is quite overwhelming (not to mention very expensive in terms of time and learning curve).  Any thoughts?  (I have no particular love for Pro Tools can't see that it offers any improvements and its $600.
 
Anybody tried Presonus Studio One?
 
2017/12/15 03:37:28
Earwax
michael diemer
Matron Landslide
anydmusic
 
My guess is that keeping the servers running will help Gibson if they try to monetise the Cakewalk assets as the activity on them is evidence that might support the viability of Sonar Phoenix to a prospective buyer.
 



SONAR wasn't viable for Roland, it wasn't viable for Gibson, how many more examples are needed before someone says, "hey, there's something not quite right here" instead of blaming everyone and everything else except Cakewalk. People on these forums have been making excuses for Cakewalk for years, and that's part of the problem.
 
The buck has to stop with Cakewalk, lay the blame where it should be, they failed to develop a product that people in the outside world (outside this little bubble) thought was good enough compared to the available alternatives, they failed to develop a product that wowed those in the outside world, there wasn't a huge stampede of new users knocking down the doors hungering to use SONAR. Cakewalk and SONAR have a massive reputation problem, and have had for years, take a walk outside the comfort of these insular forum walls if you want to see what people think of Cakewalk/SONAR, you are not going to like what you see and hear, that's just how it is.
 
When the topic is DAW's, SONAR is pretty much always left out of the conversation, most times it doesn't even get a mention, why is that? 3rd party devs often leave SONAR out of the 'tested with' lists and don't test on SONAR (yes there are those that do, but if you are to be honest . . . ) why is that? Users on these forums frequently post things like they don't actually know anyone else that uses SONAR (in real life). When they say to people that they use SONAR, the other person either gives them a weird look, or hasn't got a clue what SONAR is. Users have frequently over the years posted things like "I'm tired of having to make excuses for using SONAR" or "Why isn't SONAR considered as a professional product"or "why isn't SONAR listed in Compatability lists" and on and on it goes. Why is that? If SONAR really was as good as people here seem to think it is, it would be taking over the world, be on everyone's tongue, be making that much money no one in their right mind would want to get rid of Cakewalk. Unfortunately for Cakewalk and it's users, the majority of people in the outside world do not agree with the insiders opinion, most seem to have a low opinion of Cakewalk and SONAR, again that's just how it is.
 
Roland buys Cakewalk, Cakewalk loses money, is not viable, Roland ditches Cakewalk,
Gibson buys Cakewalk, Cakewalk loses money, is not viable,  Gibson ditches Cakewalk,
can you see a pattern emerging? can you see a common denominator? Instead of blaming everyone and everything else, lay the blame where it is desereved, lay it at Cakewalks feet, it's time to let go of the delusion that Cakewalk can do no wrong, the buck should and must stop at Cakewalk. You can continue blaming Gibson if that makes you feel better, or the phase of the moon, or global warming, or the fact that every day's name ends with a 'y', or whatever you like, but like Mr Anderton said, Gibson didn't kill Cakewalk/SONAR, they just buried it. Also as Mr Anderton pointed out, Gibson probably extended Cakewalks life by a few years. I think the fact is Cakewalk/SONAR have been terminally ill for some time for many various reasons, and the blame must be laid squarely at Cakewalks feet, they failed in creating a product that captured enough peoples minds to make it viable. In the end, they could not compete with the opposition regardless of how good insiders think SONAR is, the majority of those outside disagreed, and disagreed strongly.
 
 


I disagree with the thrust of your argument. Sonar is a great DAW, arguably the best, because it's the most complete. Audio. Midi. Mixing. Mastering. Notation. Great VST and VSTi.  Something for everyone. If anything, it was bad management that killed it. Sometimes companies just fall behind and don't know how to compete. Perhaps the management simply did not have an aggressive enough posture. Not enough outreach to places like Sweetwater. Whatever, the reason is not the software. It's a bit of a misconception that the best product always survives, simply because it is the best product. There are many other forces at work. The market is not as perfect a sorter of products as we would like to think. The best does not always win. The race is not always to the swift. Human nature gets in the way. Trends develop, people jump on bandwagons, etc. I think you are just looking for a scapegoat, and your analysis is simplistic. Not to mention insulting to the Bakers.


Matron Landslide – you are, indeed, absolutely correct. I think your assessment of the situation, in concert with Craig Anderton’s comments, are closer to the truth than anything else I’ve read.
 
Michael Diemer, I think you missed the thrust of Landslide’s statement (or it missed you). Read it again. The “argument” (not really) talks about the product’s inability to resonate with the buying public. It wasn’t a slam against Sonar as a functional, usable DAW. It was a slam against Sonar as a viable, saleable, marketable product. They are two completely different things. Whether it is the “best”, “most complete” product on the market is largely irrelevant. It simply didn’t win enough hearts in the buying public, and thus didn’t sell enough. Period. And, if the product doesn’t sell, the people behind the product don’t make money, they lose it. And, if they lose enough…………..
 
As for Landslide’s reference to Craig Anderton comments, here’s the part that, if I didn’t understand human nature, would absolutely astound me. Craig has long held guru status on this forum, and rightly so. Guru, that is, until he speaks positively of Gibson (after his firing), and lays the blame for Cakewalk’s demise not solely at Gibson’s feet, but intimates there was more than enough blame to go around. Damned if that knowledgeable guru status didn’t just evaporate! I mean, what the heck does he know about big companies/small companies stuff, right folks?? Great guru when it comes to music and electronic stuff, but small potatoes hack when comes to dealing with businesses (Roland, Gibson, and Cakewalk), right folks??
 
Uhhh, wait, before I go further, for those too thick to understand, I think Craig has formidable knowledge in music, electronics, and business. Got it?
 
I would suggest to all that think this situation is all Gibson’s fault, please go back and read Craig’s take on the matter. Re-read MLandslide’s assessment while you’re at it. With an open mind. You might learn something.
 
I am sad to lose Sonar as an evolving DAW. I am sad that Cakewalk employees lost their jobs. I am sad that all of us as Sonar users find ourselves in a quandary not of our choosing.
 
Having said that, the truth in the face of adversity is rarely insulting to anyone – even “The Bakers”.
2017/12/15 03:48:00
Jwaterstreet
I wouldn't worry too much about the whole authentication thing.  Likely Gibson will offer the means for those that "own" versions of Sonar the ability to reinstall without the servers.
 
If Gibson doesn't honor their word or goes belly up, then I for one will break the authentication if I am still using Sonar at that point.  Then I will simply put out the broken version for public use.
 
Note that I have always paid for software I use even though I know how to get around any licensing scheme, because I run a small company that sells a software-based product.  I wouldn't want anyone to crack my product and take money out of my pocket.  Sonar is no longer sold, no longer generating money for anyone.  And if Gibson doesn't live up to their word about supporting people that bought their stuff, I will have no qualms about breaking their licensing scheme and putting out the cracked software for others.
2017/12/15 04:12:42
FakeItTillUmakeIt
Jwaterstreet
I wouldn't worry too much about the whole authentication thing.  Likely Gibson will offer the means for those that "own" versions of Sonar the ability to reinstall without the servers.
 
If Gibson doesn't honor their word or goes belly up, then I for one will break the authentication if I am still using Sonar at that point.  Then I will simply put out the broken version for public use.
 
Note that I have always paid for software I use even though I know how to get around any licensing scheme, because I run a small company that sells a software-based product.  I wouldn't want anyone to crack my product and take money out of my pocket.  Sonar is no longer sold, no longer generating money for anyone.  And if Gibson doesn't live up to their word about supporting people that bought their stuff, I will have no qualms about breaking their licensing scheme and putting out the cracked software for others.


already been done.
2017/12/15 04:43:23
SandlinJohn
Jwaterstreet
I wouldn't worry too much about the whole authentication thing.  Likely Gibson will offer the means for those that "own" versions of Sonar the ability to reinstall without the servers.
 
If Gibson doesn't honor their word or goes belly up, then I for one will break the authentication if I am still using Sonar at that point.  Then I will simply put out the broken version for public use.
 
Note that I have always paid for software I use even though I know how to get around any licensing scheme, because I run a small company that sells a software-based product.  I wouldn't want anyone to crack my product and take money out of my pocket.  Sonar is no longer sold, no longer generating money for anyone.  And if Gibson doesn't live up to their word about supporting people that bought their stuff, I will have no qualms about breaking their licensing scheme and putting out the cracked software for others.




I've noticed it for sale on a few websites. I think only Sweetwater redirects searches for Sonar to an announcement. Everyone else happily pops up the "retail box" version - which probably just has a serial number and a URL to download the Command Center. They even say, as of a moment ago when I checked, "In Stock & Ready To Ship" for only $499.00. I did not try to add it to my cart, so maybe it would stop before money passed hands - but I'm not checking that closely with my own money.
 
 
2017/12/15 08:35:48
ChrisMat
what bad and sad news!  
I bought Sonar Platinum with the selling point: update for life! for life ??? just one year. if i had known ... even if i love this software and it is my favorite, i may have bought something else. 
Sonar is a great DAW, arguably the best, because it's the most complete. Audio. Midi. Mixing. Mastering. Notation. Great VST and VSTi. 
Do the development could resume someday?
 
W7 pro / 24 Go / Sonar platinum / RME fireface / Makie control universal
© 2025 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1

Use My Existing Forum Account

Use My Social Media Account