what about making sonar x2 stable?

I feel a bit ripped off lately honestly. there are still major bugs with X2 and they have already released X3? what about getting take lanes working properly in X2? as far as i know this is something that hasn't been resolved.. I submitted it to CW and they said "submitted to development" and never heard back, now apparently the only way to get them to work is to spend another 150 bucks? seriously, that's an awful thing to do to your customers.. I have been a customer for 3 generations now, but this is awful. I expected at least to have this thing working by now.... so my choice is either go back to x1 or upgrade to x3?
 
I hope somebody can help me figure out this thing.
 
x2a build 351
 

wow.. i hope CWs response isn't as bad. No offense I know you are only trying to help, but seriously.. their product is not working... if this is the answer i might leave the family... 

Edit: Dayum! In the time it took to type this there were two other responses!
 
+1... I truly understand your point (since I had issues with X2 that made me step away from any DAW for months)... but I did jump on the X3 bandwagon and found it incredibly stable. Unfortunately, there is no "solution" here... X3d will be out this week, so will see soon where it stands.
 
FWIW, X3 adds a LOT of things worth the upgrade... stability, VST3, ARA, and all the goodies... so the price is worth it IMHO. You can jump up to X3 Studio and keep the ProChannel, etc., without jumping to "Producer."

>I would never let my customer keep a defective product.
 
All software is defective. Even the windows you are using has updates once a month because it is defective. The planes you fly on can have defective software. Fork out your $150 or go to Cubase or Pro Tools, which is also defective (just defective in different ways), your choice.
 
Cheers...

Everybody want to have their Cakewalk, and eat it too...

http://forum.cakewalk.com/FindPost/2892692

I think Andrew was mentioning a free X3d trial was on the horizon, fwiw...
 
penny wise/pound foolish i am hearing... ain't nothin' on the planet comparable to X3 and the upgrade price is peanuts given the new tools... or u can pay 3xs more and start complainin' elsewhere!
 
If I spent this much time arguing about stuff I no longer used because way better stuff evolved... I'd still be on that pogo stick which I had so many problems with...
 
think of it as... rapid evolution... 
 
I bought my first piece of Cake back in Sonar 5ish days... in all that time have never seen the geniuses on this forum so pleased (albeit nits here and there) as with X3...
 
And just deal with it... your timing sucked!  I could sit here complaining about how much I spent on all the vids that are now way cheaper...  OY!!! 
 

Companies change. Do you think anyone is going to fix the bugs in Venom now that M-Audio has been purchased by another company?
 
Look at what Cakewalk is doing now. Since X3 was released in late September, there have been three updates with a fourth coming any day. There's free content being given away to users. The bakers are being very responsive in the forums. Bugs are being identified, prioritized (you simply can't fix everything all at once, so you go for the ones that the most people are concerned about) and squashed, and features are being added. Users are happy, and showing that with their support of the program. This in turn provides more resources for Cakewalk to keep doing updates and improving X3, which makes for happy users, which means more support, etc...it's a positive feedback loop.
 
If Cakewalk was to divert its attention to moving backward and making changes in X2, that would not allow X3 to move forward at its current pace, if at all. X3 is a superior program in many ways compared to X2 which is why it is doing well. Even if issues are fixed in X2 (and I personally haven't encountered any showstoppers), it still won't have the speed comping, VST 3 support, ARA integration, engine efficiencies, flyout EQ, and the like that make X3 so compelling.
 
I think if you asked the people on this forum whether Cakewalk should allocate its resources to continue making X3 an amazing piece of software or fixing a few remaining bugs in X2, most people would vote in favor of devoting resources to X3.
 
 

Danny Danzi
I'd never bash on anyone that has a legit problem with Sonar or any other software. I've been down that road and have paid for newer versions from companies in order to fix what was broken and never working in the old version. This is totally unfair no matter who it happens to. It sucks, and I feel your pain eli. Unfortunately, there's not much you can do other than contacting support to see if they can fix your issue or possibly offer a work-around. I don't use take lanes in Sonar X2 or in X3. Why? Because I simply don't need them and can do the exact same thing creating multiple tracks that give me bigger windows to work with and then I can just create one track and combine all the good comps. I've been doing it for years without take lanes....I came into this world without them, I could care less if they ever fix them right. I couldn't even tell you how they are in X3. I prefer punching in until I get it right personally, so this feature isn't something that concerns *me*.
 
Sometimes a DAW will not work the way YOU want it to. When that happens you either search for work-arounds or you invest in another DAW. Seriously. I use Sonar 8.5, X2 and X3 6 to 7 days a week for more than 12-14 hours a night. Trust me when I tell you, if this software was broken, I'd be using something else. I have a business that is relentless thank God. I need a DAW that works and never lets me down. The second Sonar starts to let me down, I'll contact support and see if they can help me. While I'm doing that, I'll switch to a version of Sonar that I know will get me through like X1 or 8.5. Those have always worked fantastic for how *I* use the program and X2 and X3 are doing the same for me. Again, that is not to discredit you or anyone else having problems. It made me sick to read a few of the responses above. People think because they are having 0 problems or may have the money to upgrade every year without fail that they should show a lack of compassion for someone that may be experiencing problems. That's not only unfair, it shows a lack of respect for another person's opinion.
 
Like I said, I can relate totally...just thankfully, not with any Cakewalk products as they have never failed me even with a few bugs. We had a few early versions of Sonar that had a few show stoppers but the Bakers fixed the important ones faster than you can say Jackie Robinson. So if you have legit gripes, call tech support after 1 pm tomorrow and see if they can sort you out. I've gotten through every time in 5 minutes or under. Good luck.
 
-Danny

Thank you Danny. That was very well stated.  I find quite a lot of disrespect for people that have problems with Sonar on this forum.  Sort of a love it or leave it mentality.

Hi Craig,
 
I can totally agree with that and see where you're coming from. But allow me to play devils advocate for a second...and I swear, I'm not trying to be confrontational.
 
So you have this software that you paid for. You have problems with it. You contact support and nothing can be done to help you with your problem. Because it's software, one of the only things in this world that we CANNOT return, you are stuck with it.
 
Now, a year later, you get an email telling you that for such and such a price, you get version 2. In version 2, this that this this this and this has been fixed and this that this and this has been added. Though it's at an appealing price with really good stuff, you are STILL left with a piece of software that may not work for you that may have things in your workflow that will not ever work for you. And you're just supposed to chalk it up and suck it up. Think about that for a second while being in a financial situation to where upgrading may not be possible for you. And, maybe switching DAWs may not be an option. What do you do and how fair is that?
 
I've gotten screwed in this situation after spending oh, about $14,000 with a company that just could not accommodate me. What's the difference if a person spends $150 or $14,000 on something? When it doesn't work, it doesn't work. If you exhaust everything possible and contact support and they still can't help you and know you have a legit problem, shouldn't a refund be issued so that you can maybe move on to something that works for you? But because this is software, we're just supposed to allow that to happen. To me, this is unfair as well as people that chime in and make the person that is experiencing the issues feel like a crybaby.
 
If I told you what I did to the company that jacked me for 14k, you'd remove my post...so I'll keep that to myself. But let's just say, they'll never jack me again. :)
 
But what are your thoughts about a situation like that? Can you see where it may change things considerably? Again, I'm not trying to argue or start anything. I just have noticed that like Vintage said, quite a few people really get attacked for stating that they feel a bit...well, sort of let down that there was no X2 update. I'd be one of them if the functions it is lacking were not working for me. I was a bit upset when I read there would be no patch for X2 as well. I understand they have to move on and all that goes with it. But in an economy where people are really struggling, asking them to suck it up when they take a chance on something and lose is way too much to ask in my opinion.
 
Now if someone is just a troll that wants to bash on Sonar who hasn't taken the right steps to try and remedy problem, by all means....I can understand some hostility from people supporting Sonar. But you've seen it man...far too many just lash out with sharp tongues when maybe a person may have a legit problem. Even if there is a work-around, that is not the same as having the damaged feature fully working. I love and support Sonar as much as the next guy...but when they do something wrong, I have to call a spade a spade. I don't EVER feel an upgrade that fixes broken issues in an older version should be the reason you buy new software. I'm not saying stay on a version for life and keep on fixing it...but man, anything else in life we buy that doesn't work right has options. In this situation, your option is to go frig yourself and save MORE money to buy the upgraded daw or find another one. Think about it....it's totally ludicrous really. I can't see it any other way man.
 
-Danny

i think CW didn't help by taking a stable programme (8.5) and then producing X1 - not only was it a bit wonky, but of course there was the total redesign. I think if at THAT point they had overhauled the audio engine/VST3 as for X3, then there would have been pain for one release, rather than 2 consecutive ones. I'm sure hands were tied by Roland though. Then the almost radio-silence through X2 on these forums really cheesed a lot of people off.
 
I use X2 (not often these days...kids=no time!) and it's pretty stable for me, but then I don't do much advanced MIDI work, and I got it not far before X3 was coming out, on sale, so I knew at that point there wouldn't be any further development.  Likewise, I will probably get X3 next August time.
 
I hope they do stay afloat and the Gibson tie-in is successful, and like everyone says, ALL software companies have these moments at times; Logic going Mac only, Cubase going SX then dropping SX etc.

I can sure relate to problems with Sonar. X1 was an absolute nightmare for me. Until X1C I couldn't even get it to load.
While I got sympathy from many of the forum old timers I also copped heaps of negative feedback in response to my complaints. I was even accused of lying at one stage and being a serial pest or some such.

That was when I learned that inexplicable incompatibilities do occur between different versions of the same software on the same hardware. This same computer ran 8.5.3 perfectly well, sucked until X1C came out and has been fine since even X2a is pretty good with no deal breakers. X3 has been a gem all the way.

Living in the land of oz, phone support isn't really practical and I've got to admit that email support leaves a lot to be desired. At that time I did move to a different daw until Sonar was sorted out. Since then I've used what works and live firmly in the real world where I accept that all software has problems, I don't like it and agree with Danny when he was playing devils advocate about how we are forced to accepting things about software that just aren't tolerated in other commercial areas. Yet I confess I don't have an answer.

I do know that this forum has once again become a useful resource again, many of the oldies have returned those that never left are positive again and there's this spirit of cooperation in general that is great to be part of.

Complaint as means of venting, to get it off your chest is fine, just say that's what it is. Stating problems and asking for help is what this forum is best at and above all, take responsibility for your own education about your software and the many resources at your disposal. Constant complaining about the unchangeable seems pointless, if it's that bad use something else and make music, after all it's all about the music isn't it?

Anyway that's my 2 bobs worth!

I find quite a lot of disrespect for people that have problems with Sonar on this forum.  Sort of a love it or leave it mentality.
 
It's not disrespect, if people want to jump ship - jump. We're here to help when we can, discussions can be interesting as well within the product as long as they are specific or within expectations. Otherwise it's a waste of our time.
 
I regard Cakewalk now as two different companies, the pre X-3 company and the current X-3 company. The time around X-2 esp sucked, X-3 company is looking good and has learnt or is learning from its mistakes. If people have had enough of their Sonar version, come into X-3 land, or jump ship (whatever). Just not interested in debating about it whatsoever. You are either in or you are out.
 
Cheers...

The most important thing for software is that it works. All else is meaningless if the program you are using is unstable. Crashing is not something we as users should become accustom to.  It shouldn't matter who is developing it or how much we may like the developers. Instability should never be viewed as part and parcel of using software. 
 
True bugs will be found in just about any software out there. That does not mean that its OK to produce a product that will not run without crashing at very inopportune times. BTW all crashing is inopportune.
 
Its also important to note whether its really the software that is causing instability. We need to be very careful in pointing fingers at what may turn out to be wrong culprits.
 
Before we make a claim about instability we need to be very sure that it is in fact the software that is the problem. One clue that this may be the case is that others don't have the same problems even though they are doing the same things. 
 
When a poster sets up a recipe for finding a bug I find it very useful if others can replicate the same action. 
 
We also need to distinguish true bugs from poster dislike or a different way of doing things that the poster may not know about.
 
None the less none of us should be required to live with unstable software.  
 

John
The most important thing for software is that it works. All else is meaningless if the program you are using is unstable. Crashing is not something we as users should become accustom to.  It shouldn't matter who is developing it or how much we may like the developers. Instability should never be viewed as part and parcel of using software. 
 
True bugs will be found in just about any software out there. That does not mean that its OK to produce a product that will not run without crashing at very inopportune times. BTW all crashing is inopportune.
 
Its also important to note whether its really the software that is causing instability. We need to be very careful in pointing fingers at what may turn out to be wrong culprits.
 
Before we make a claim about instability we need to be very sure that it is in fact the software that is the problem. One clue that this may be the case is that others don't have the same problems even though they are doing the same things. 
 
When a poster sets up a recipe for finding a bug I find it very useful if others can replicate the same action. 
 
We also need to distinguish true bugs from poster dislike or a different way of doing things that the poster may not know about.
 
None the less none of us should be required to live with unstable software.  
 

Well said, John, as usual.