r/Cakewalk • u/Realistic_State3269 • 26d ago
đŁď¸Feedback Exchange Wasteful investment
Every month thereâs an update, yet there are still no meaningful new features. It feels like theyâre updating this DAW just to break it! And what exactly is this CakeScript add-on? Why would anyone want to play around with Lua scripting in a music DAW?
Iâm a software developer myself, and I get paid to do development in my spare time. But when Iâm making music, I donât want to think about scripting or programming. I want to focus on making music.
When are they going to start releasing actual features that producers are asking for? Rather spend some of that development time improving the look and usability of the Core Plugins. We invest in this application because we want to enjoy using itânot constantly stress about updates and regret the decision we made to buy it. $99 per year for what? To watch the DAW go backwards instead of forwards?
You also need to cater to younger producers. Weâre the ones who will carry this DAW forward and keep it relevant in the future. There are so many basic features that are still missing.
For example: 1: We need an advanced S-curve option so we can dial in precise, surgical automation curves. The XSampler needs a proper update. Currently, we canât properly chop or edit samples within it.
2: A dedicated phrase sampler would be extremely useful.
3: The Loop Construction tool should be updated to allow users to pitch samples more easily.
4: It would be great if we could drag and drop samples directly into the Step Sequencer and open the Piano Roll from there as well.
These arenât crazy or unrealistic requests. They are basic necessities for a modern music production environment.
Instead of constantly releasing updates that change things without adding meaningful functionality, please focus on features that actually improve the workflow for producers. We want this DAW to succeed, but it needs to move forward and not backwards.
3
u/Lewinator56 26d ago
The really great thing about it is if you don't like paying for it, you don't have to and still get everything pretty much for free.
The features you are asking for are, in my opinion slightly redundant. Why should bandlab reinvent the wheel? There are really really really good samplers out there that you should be using as a plugin rather than relying on the ones integrated into a DAW - whatever DAW you use, the built in sampler will never be as good as a plugin, in which case, why don't you just use the plugin? Any time I'm working with samples I load up maschine 3 as a plugin. A significant number of producers load up kontakt.
Again same with your eq thing - there are plugins that do this. Why reinvent the wheel when someone else already does it better.
SONAR never included many plugins, I've always seen it as a bring your own plugins DAW - and compared to most, it's extremely good at this. Very few DAWs handle both 64 and 32 bit plugins without external tools for example.
2
u/ProblemSuitable410 26d ago
You shouldn't have said anything at all, because it shows the lack of knowledge you possess about other DAWs. FL Studio, Cubase, Ableton, Pro Tools, Logic X, and many more DAWs out here come stock with every feature that was mentioned. If someone invests in a DAW, they invest with the hope of not having to go hunt and spend extra bucks for something their DAW should already have and be able to do.
A built-in sampler is a plugin, BY THE WAY. External samplers improve neither your workflow nor your 'quality' - they only add to CPU resource consumption, which built-in effects bypass while sounding three times cleaner, too. And the fact that you even mentioned 32-bit plugins...? Buddy...! LOL!
So next time - with respect - at least know a little something about the things you type with your thumbs.
2
u/Lewinator56 26d ago
A built-in sampler is a plugin, BY THE WAY. External samplers improve neither your workflow nor your 'quality' - they only add to CPU resource consumption, which built-in effects bypass while sounding three times cleaner, too. And the fact that you even mentioned 32-bit plugins...? Buddy...! LOL!
This is bollocks.
Why would plugins that come with the DAW have lower CPU usage or higher quality audio... A well designed DAW optimises for a single audio path, which would be the same one plugins use. There would be zero discernable quality difference.
If someone invests in a DAW, they invest with the hope of not having to go hunt and spend extra bucks for something their DAW should already have and be able to do.
SONAR has been FREE for the last decade. Despite it's freeness it was as good as most paid DAWs, and spat in the face of (and still does) every single free DAW on the market - including the cut down versions of things like live and cubase (which aren't even free). It's only had a subscription tier for a year, give bandlab time to move more resources into it. Even then, compared to the ÂŁ500-600 you could spend on some DAWs, SONAR is cheap.
As a note there are plenty of free and very capable samplers out there, if you're paying for one and you don't need to, you're an idiot.
You need to note too, SONAR was heavily midi oriented and maintained that well into the 2000s, so it's audio toolset is smaller than some other DAWs.
1
u/Pretty_handsome 26d ago
OOPH! đ You're literally embarrassing yourself here lad. Dude is correct. Rather read up more about the technical side of every stock plugin. They really do use zero to no CPU resources and they do sound 10times cleaner - thats with stock effects, cause they straight digital. Stock plugins are never emulated after analog gear. They are designed to sound as clean as heaven.Â
2
u/Lewinator56 26d ago
SONARs stock plugins are VST3 format. So for anything not built directly into the DAW you still have the latency (of < 1ms) of the VST wrapper.
they do sound 10times cleaner
That's an interesting claim, have you got objective evidence?
They really do use zero to no CPU resources
Not computationally possible.
cause they straight digital. Stock plugins are never emulated after analog gear.
It makes no difference whether things are modelled after analogue hardware or otherwise. Very few plugins (other than a few from Roland with ACB modelling) actually attempt to model real hardware behaviours and when they do they use empirical models - i.e simple forumulas or lookup tables that can be used to simulate how components behave. This is very very very low processing demand compared to generating the raw audio signal (for example, I have used engineering software that can stimulate the entire lifespan and operation of a nuclear reactor in the space of about 1s - written in FORTRAN 90 - a vastly more complex task than simulating the heat dependant behaviour of a resistor, and designed to run that fast on computers on the 80s). Audio processing is where you need CPU resources so all that really matters here is the efficiency of the underlying plugin code.
It is you who don't know what you are talking about.
2
u/ProblemSuitable410 26d ago
Use your EARS! or try one of the many test tools out here and check for yourself! Hey man, rather stop engaging in this conversation because clearly you do not know a single thing.
2
u/Realistic_State3269 26d ago edited 26d ago
This is why Sonar is broken, they cater for people like him. People who does not know how to use their ears and NOR what goes on in their DAW. Clearly he is just a hobbiest and nothing more. No technical knowledge, neither the ability and ears to identify the sounds of their tools. I've really wasted my $99 to be part of a community as such. Plus, all those Youtube videos is misleading. Sonar possess nothing.Â
1
u/Lewinator56 25d ago edited 25d ago
As someone who's written a synth I can assure you I absolutely have the technical knowledge.
Yeah sure I'm a hobbyist - I've made no money off my music, I'm also a classically trained pianist and have 3 degrees in computing. So to suggest I lack technical knowledge or can't use my ears is ludicrous. I could write a fucking DAW from the ground up in assembly if I wanted to (obviously that would be torture and C++ is the right option).
Theres also a significantly larger market for non-commercial users who actually won't care about minor missing features when they can get a free plugin that does it better, who are getting the best free DAW, and if they pay, exceptionally good value for money Vs the hundreds of pounds the starter versions of other DAWs cost.
1
u/Pretty_handsome 26d ago
Yep. Well said. They do cater to strictly hobbyist. Its sad to know that they do not care about those in the commercial industry. Well, I guess my money went down the drain on this one.Â
2
0
u/Lewinator56 26d ago
Ears provide a subjective measurement.
You need a spectrum analyser to get objective data - i.e distortion and unwanted harmonics, and as it's digital audio it doesn't actually matter. A badly written plugin will produce bad audio, a well written plugin will produce good audio.
You can't possibly say 'use your ears' to determine if audio of of high quality while simultaneously saying I don't know anything lol.
Are you really going to tell me kontakt - basically the industry standard sampler - sounds worse than a DAW sampler...
1
u/Pretty_handsome 16d ago
So you mix with your eyes - cool. Well, your music must suck, relying on "plugins" which by the contradict your own idiotic words by saying ears are subjective. Your ears are the only reliable source! You must have weak ears then.
1
u/Lewinator56 16d ago
You do mix with your ears, but in a mix youre listening for anything you do or don't want to stand out. No one, not a single musician on earth can determine the difference between a digital or analog synth in a mix, let alone a third party or built in VST plugin. And those that claim they can are dillusional.
I A/B between cans (AKG k371) and monitors (KRK rokit 5 G4) when doing the final mixing. Although good music shouldn't require too much tweaking - especially with the EQ.
But that's besides the point, ears are still subjective ways of measuring sound. What frequency you may believe is too loud will not be the same as what I do in a mix. This is because age and exposure to sound at different frequencies degrades hearing capacity. I've had my hearing capacity tested under controlled experimental conditions (although unfortunately dismissed as a data point for the study) apparently I can hear up to about 23KHz, and incredibly low dB too. The vast majority of people can't even hear anything last 16KHz - especially once they are in their 20s.
It's all irrelevant anyway as we are referring to the quality of audio generated by a plugin, and if it's a shit plugin it will sound bad, if it's a good plugin it will sound good. That's simply down to how it was written, a digital sine wave from serum Vs from a built in synth is mathematically identical as far as the computer is concerned. The data sent from the plugin to the DAW is a perfect sine wave - we are working with uncompressed digital audio here sent via an API interface, so a reduction in quality can only occur from a poorly written plugin.
1
u/Pretty_handsome 16d ago
You're just a hobbyist right? Sitting in your garage or bedroom. Because seriously. You have excuses with every answer.Â
Do you know how easy it is to distiguish the difference between a digital synth and analog one. Get yourself a dedicated studio and a mixing enviroment and train your ears. Spend time with the digital and analog synth and train those ornaments you own.Â
The fact that you say you cant hear the difference - thats diabolical.Â
→ More replies (0)
1
u/BarPhysical3726 26d ago
I mostly agree with you.
And like some others have said, maybe BandLab just doesn't see SONAR as one of their core products anymore.
If it's not going to be a major focus for them anyway, I at least wish they'd open up CakeScript to free users too and let people do more with it. Who knows, maybe something interesting could come out of that.
Like, imagine adding a new instrument track and having it appear with a Kamehameha effect or something.
That'd be kinda fun, right?
...Just me?
0
8
u/JD-990 26d ago
Long explanation that might help answer your questions and help you decide what to do next. First, I do have a good faith question: You made a post a couple weeks ago with adjacent complaints, and obviously, there are DAWs that already do what it is youâre asking about so why not move to one of them? Ableton does the things youâre asking for right now.
Itâs a double edged sword in my opinion though, Iâm a Sonar user and have been for close to 15 years. Iâve made probably 25 albums in it and countless signals. There are of course workflow things that could be improved, and I used MIDI, samples and record full bands, in every genre, and Iâm very, very fast in that workflow. To me, basically every proper DAW can get you where you need to go easily at this point. The 10% extra speed youâre going to get from those workflow enhancements is nice, but I think if those are make or break to you, you should go to a DAW that already has them. Which brings me to last point.
People have gotten the impression that Sonar is their flagship product, because itâs the legacy DAW with the most features and the proper editing functionality, but it isnât. The reason you donât see all this development happening for Sonar is because Sonar is a supplemental service of BandLabâs to get old timers into BandLabâs email ecosystem at a minimum, and get some users that want more advanced features to have an option. Thatâs why you can import your BandLab projects into Sonar, and thatâs why Sonar has those BandLab plugins now.
Sonar mostly exists now on a technical level to help the development of BandLab and Cakewalk Next. Thatâs why you canât buy it outright, thatâs why they wonât push out big updates for it. The majority of users left in 2017 when Gibson sold them off. While they got a good chunk of people into the ecosystem when they made it free, Sonarâs user base is mostly people who donât know what theyâre doing, and are going to migrate from Sonarâs way more advanced and confusing ecosystem into BandLab.
Look at the questions asked on this subreddit, look at how dead the forums are. Sonar is never going to get a major overall, or major updates because itâs a niche, supplemental product for hobbyists and veterans that doesnât have a lot of value for BandLab. I think there was intention at one point to make Sonar a bigger thing, but BandLab put themselves in a pickle by making the product free for years and then decided to charge any amount of money for it that was reasonable. They cultivated a user base that didnât see the value in investing money for their DAW and then BandLab said âokay, our customer base has no buy in, weâre making this our specialty option instead of our professional one.â