Quinellipe Zorn

On 3/31/2023 at 2:32 PM, rkl122 said:

Ever solve this?  I've got the same issue.

If you understood the answer to this, please advise, thanks.  Obviously, there's events beyond the point; as the question goes, it remains "how to prevent."

On 7/27/2023 at 12:38 PM, Byron Dickens said:

What workaround? There's no workaround. The project ends where the data ends.  That's the cause.

Every time this happens it is because there is data beyond where you think the end of the song is.  And every time you delete that, you fix it.

It really isn't that difficult to understand. If the music ends at measure 100 but you have a CC event or automation node at measure 200, guess what. Your project ends at measure 200.

Okay, I was just trying to understand your "The answer is contained right within this year old zombie thread." comment, that's all, sorry I asked.

@Byron Dickens care to elaborate?  Are you referring to the workaround, or is there somewhere in this thread what the cause is and how to proactively ensure it doesn't happen?

25 minutes ago, Keni said:

To be fair, I feel you took what I said a bit differently than I intended.

I was stating that Cakewalk sold lifetime in good faith. The parent company shut them down. Not a decision of their own.

Company gone... all obligations terminated.

New day! Someone (Bandlab) bought the remaining properties and began making decisions of what they wish to do with it. Their' decision? Share it with the world for free and pay out of pocket to continue it’s development.

 Years ago by ...

Now, Bandlab  has decided to begin marketing new products. Yes they are based in the code they bought and continue the line.

Now while it would be a very nice gesture for them to create various deals to thank their' continuing followers, they are under no obligation either legally or morally.

Socially? Yes. It will be nice as they have shown themselves (Meng, Noel, Jesse, Morten, and all the other Bakers) to be caring, and giving repeatedly. So I’m guessing they will offer more than reasonable accommodations...

I think we're way off track...

All I can say is I was asking the question, I asked, I wasn't trying to make a point:  do you think Cakewalk's user will parse it as finely as you did in the particular post way back when?

PS - I think this was specifically re "lifetime" subscribers, not just "Cakewalk's users," rather, IIRC, but the lack of quote-in-quote makes it harder to go back, though I seem to recall that was the particular matter and subgroup at hand.

On 6/10/2023 at 5:37 AM, Keni said:

Do you believe that if Disney does something with Star Wars that the public doesn't like, that George Lucas would be held responsible?

???

Even aside from that I wasn't discussing what I, you, or any particular individual thinks, as it is about what might be reasonable expectations for Bandlab to face among some segment of their user base, however unfairly, I don't understand the relationship of this to the discussion at hand as we were talking about whether Bandlab should expect, fairly or not, people to hold them responsible to make things right with Cakewalk's history, abiding by the things that were "good" and fixing the things that were "bad" (e.g. accounting for Gibson's lifetime offers somehow).  What you seem to be discussing is whether Gibson would be held responsible for something that Bandlab does with Cakewalk, which seems out of the blue to me.  But if you want to know, for whatever reason, I doubt it very much.  Although I'm quite sure people are holding Disney responsible, probably rarely fairly but mostly unfairly, to "fix" as well as "honor" George Lucas' legacy with Star Wars.  That said, I don't know anything about Star Wars under Disney, about George Lucas outside of Star Wars and some wild rumors about his personal life, nor about Star Wars beside seeing 2 of the chronologically first released 3 (was never a fan, saw the first one as a kid and didn't care for it, saw the 3rd one with friends because it was with friends) and reading smatterings of the mythos around Star Wars, though not enough to remember exactly what a Sith is or how the Paladins or whatever separated from them, etc..  For the record, as you asked me.

On topic, I believe that Bandlab should expect that, fairly or not, a lot of people will hold them accountable to make good on the good and bad of Gibson's past.  Now, that doesn't mean they should just do what people want.  It just means they shouldn't be surprised about, e.g., people demanding consideration for their lifetime subscriptions.  So long as they can see a valid business direction which continues to turn a profit and/or, given contemporary expectations, grow their user base, what they do is yet another matter.  Whether I or any "right-thinking" person should or will hold Bandlab responsible is irrelevant; I don't, but, as said, I think they have to know - just as seen on this thread - people will, fairly or not (actually both I've seen, from my own opinion;  personally I think the fair thing they should do is give some sort of benefit to lifetime subscribers, some upgrade/crossgrade opportunity at a discount, or maybe, if their finances seem to make sense, some small discount eternally; I don't think it's fair or reasonable to hold Bandlab to lifetime subscriptions, especially considering that the business practice, even besides being inherently questionable, was undertaken by a failed company, so hardly seems reasonable to expect a successor company to repeat the same practices).

On 6/10/2023 at 3:21 PM, Mark Morgon-Shaw said:

Off the top of my head ....

1. Proper sampler / sample based workflow

2. Chord track

3. Easier hardware integration for control surfaces etc

4. Negative offset

5. Bar zero

6. Spatial Audio Ready

7. Remote Control

8. Varispeed

9. Retrospective Midi Record

10. Scale constrain

11. MPE Supprt

12. Bounce/Renderin Place

13. Loudness Metering

14. Updated Browser

15. Scratch Pads

Thanks!

5 hours ago, Keni said:

 Is that like Disney making Star Wars movies? 

I'm not sure if that's rhetorical or a literal question, and if it's for me or the OP asked the similar question.  But if literal to me as asking whether I think that the situation is akin to Disney taking over Star Wars and that Disney, in that situation, should realize (whatever they decide) that they have to deal with the notion they take responsibility for the whole legacy of it, then, yes, I think it is similar as to the nature of the question/situation, though a key difference is, of course, the sort of industry and how that impacts expectations:  in the Disney/Star Wars case there's the whole additional question of the production of a story/narrative/mythos and questions around individual artistic expressions, etc..  

But, yes, I suppose it's similar, and, if we were talking about Disney and Star Wars, I would raise the same sort of question as shouldn't Disney expect to inherit all the issues of Star Wars, even though they didn't create those issues, again noting that this can still be totally unfair.  

On 6/8/2023 at 1:42 PM, Graham Rhodes said:

Lord Tim wrote

"That's an entirely different company who no longer exists, so I guess you need to ask Gibson about that rather than Bandlab."

The comment has validity, but the fact is that Bandlab acquired Intellectual Property from Gibson., so it is the terms of that acquisition which determine any liabilities to licensees of that IP, not the fact that Gibson dumped it. It is not uncommon, and in most cases the norm, for an acquirer to, say, take over responsibilities like ongoing service agreements. Your point is valid in that there probably aren't any. Gibson have zero responsibility since the sale agreement would have negated any such obligations.

What is interesting is where someone has a perpetual licence, as that right exists  whether of not the grantor is still in existence. Ihave the right to use all my Sonar and related products (frozen in time) as long as I wish.

It seems to me that if Bandlab have a set of Sonar users it would be dumb just to dump them, or they have thrown away an open goal sales opportunity. What matters now is how they price any conversion, and weigh jam today against future money. IMHO if they had any sense they would not simply drive them away; Ableton and co would just be rubbing their hands in disbelief.

PS I have a image  on my screen of a floppy disc labelled "Cakewalk Professional for Windows 2.01 /  Copyright Gregg Hendershott 1987 - 1994. I bought this in 1992 when I was in Boston MA, and have used it ever since - strewth 31 years ! I'd be slightly sad to be driven elsewhere.

I wonder how technically true that is legally re old Sonar software?  The only reason I wonder is that a lot of abandonware isn't technically legal to run, but as it is abandonware, it really doesn't matter, unless, of course, as happens, the publisher or some successor is actively exerting control over that (which a few do, which I find ridiculous in most situations).  Along these lines, even if it's legal to run, it's usually illegal to "mess with" the software (e.g. the owners of PARIS, at least as of a couple years ago, were still forbidding third party redevelopment and hacking of the old licensing).

I don't mean to dispute the fact of being able to run Sonar "forever" (hardware, OS, etc. permitting), and I don't mean any argument over the point you make there, I was just musing having known of the legal idiocies around abandonware.

 Love to see the old disks, I think that's the one I started on, though I may have had "1.3" or something that a friend first turned me onto back then, can't recall well anymore.

On 6/8/2023 at 8:17 AM, Milton Sica said:

I think most of us still don't realize that the relationship has completely changed.

When the programs are free/free, what is created is a participatory, collaborative community, where everyone seeks the same end, which is the constant improvement of the program.

The company, unilaterally, which is its full right, will change this relationship.

It's kind of like a marriage where the couple owns a joint business and one of them files for divorce but wants to keep the business.

The relationship changes completely. It is no longer partnership/collaboration, but consumption with completely different relationship rules where even that affectionate codename (BAKERS) no longer makes sense.

I can't really understand this.  I mean, yes, clearly, the move from a payment-by-email/usage information and payment-by-money model is a relationship changer in some way, but I don't get this notion that somehow we were "in this together" when we paid by usage and email and now this is  divorce.  We gave them usage information and helped them decide on their commercial next steps thereby; their decisions from our input until now wasn't out of any pure good will as a part-time hobby in off hours, Bandlab paid the "bakers"/engineers and designers and so forth, not us.  

PS - I am saying the first sentence literally, this is a question, not an argument back or such, as I really don't understand the point being made about, how the relationship is changing because the price of the product is changing from "free"/identity and usage tracking to money.  I don't understand the meaning of " what [was] created [was] a participatory, collaborative community, where everyone [sought] the same end, which [was] the constant improvement of the program."  I mean, I'm quite familiar (despite my extremely low prior engagement) with the close interactions of the Cakewalk users and the Cakewalk engineers, but I'm not aware of how that became a "participatory, collaborative community" where "everyone" sought the "same end" these last 5 years versus the prior decades, where (most of the time) I saw the same back-and-forth between users and engineers, and it has always been in the interest of the engineers, even if not management necessarily in certain critical times, to "improve the product."  So I really just don't understand, I'm not trying to argue, I'm trying to express why I don't understand.  I thought I should edit and elaborate given a couple reactions.

On 6/7/2023 at 9:34 PM, Peter Morgan said:

As a long-time user since Cakewalk Pro Audio, through Sonar and Gibson, and into CbB...   I welcome the news with some trepidation.  Hopefully Cakewalk by Bandlab team and leadership have done some market research and understand their customer base well.  If not, I have concerns for the future of development.  Once you start charging it really matters where the development focus goes.  Just my point zero two dollars.  Here are some development wishlist ideas - this is an off-the-cuff and very incomplete list of thoughts:

• Update the workflow in several areas where things haven't moved in years.  Other DAWs have much easier ways to do various things.  Cakewalk does it the multi-click/multi-step way "just 'cause" - this doesn't scale well into the future.
• Provide some sort of well-supported/hooked API/scripting support.  This would enable a whole cottage industry of supporting tooling or processing options.  CAL was visionary back in the day, but it's abandoned ideologically.  Bringing back support for a simple scripting toolkit(python or javascript api?) would enable all kinds of workflows that could really move things forward.
• Enhancing the MIDI generation/editing tools (see Cubase)
• Machine/learning or AI support for mixing/tracking/mastering or midi generation...
• Give some service to the scoring engine - or leave it behind and let it go to waste.  I don't use it, but for those who do and would, it's (afaict) a huge drawback that it's archaic.  To have a well-developed scoring engine with client support (look forward another comment) would kick Sonar into next-gen territory
• Develop a mobile app that can talk to a session and be delegated certain views or layouts.  For example:  lyrics to a tablet device (this could be web-based so it doesn't require so much bespoke/multiplatform code).  Music score parts to instruments in an orchestra that would move along in sync to the clock so singers or players could read their parts in time during a tracking session.
• About the mobile app idea: even to provide support for a local network discovery so client apps could be web-based and have limited but critical functionality like transport control or score/lyrics views would be, IMHO, very useful.

As I said, I fully recognize this opinionated list depends on the customer base for the product.  Who is that base?  Does Bandlab know?  Let's hope so...  otherwise I worry that things could spiral downward in a hurry.  Lots of competition in the paid space.

Bandlab:  I wish you well, and I'll most likely stay with you unless the pricing is whacked.  But really, if you're going paid, you have to at least keep up with the competitors, and in many ways you're not there.  It was easy to paper over while you were free.

Peter

Good points.

Re "Update the workflow in several areas where things haven't moved in years.  Other DAWs have much easier ways to do various things." - I'd love to hear what things people want in this regard.  I think it makes sense, but with my history, I don't personally have great ideas of where to update the workflow.  (And I'd hope improvements wouldn't render the "less efficient" steps from being possible, if only because at least it seems to me what I'm doing is what's intuitive, even if there's going to be much better ways.)

Agree especially re API/javascript/something modern to replace CAL, and re improving MIDI generation and editing (it's a little sad that the once-upon-a-time MIDI flagship no longer is.  and I still find MIDI manipulation quite valuable).  And re scoring.

On 6/7/2023 at 4:29 PM, Craig Anderton said:

FWIW, some people prefer subscriptions. This isn't only about people who don't have enough cash upfront. For example, if you're collaborating on mixes with someone who uses Steven Slate's plugins but you don't have them installed on your machine, you can subscribe for a month or two, finish the mixes, and move on. Similarly, if you use Pro Tools Artist but need to do something more advanced for a particular project, you can subscribe to Pro Tools Studio for a month for $30. 

I'm not saying subscriptions are better, just that they work for some people even though they don't work for others. I think the most successful option for companies by far is offering both - subscriptions that include periodic minor updates or goodies, but these don't become available to owners of the "perpetual" version until they do the next major update.

For me, the HUGE problem with subscriptions is if your work is held hostage when you stop paying. That's why I thought the old Sonar rent-to-buy approach of "if your subscription stops, keep using the program...you just don't get any updates" made a lot of sense. It was also quite generous compared to other companies of that era (I'm looking at you, Adobe).

But putting all the pricing issues aside, the fact that Cakewalk continues moving forward and progressing is ultimately what matters. And it's much better news than "Thanks for your support over the years, we just sold Cakewalk to Wal-Mart, have a nice day"

100% with this.  

I'm professionally familiar with software in enterprise as well as small business and personal contexts.  The notion of bug fixes beyond some shelf life is so rare that I find it unrealistic to expect.  I'm happy wherever that exists and for those with the benefit.  I believe the marketplace expectation these days is that a software deliver its so-called "material" obligation, i.e. that it delivers essential functionality while it normally (for a software of any complexity) has ongoing bugs which, while annoying, should not present an intolerable breach of functionality.  Should life be different?  Probably.  Nature "should" be fair too...but reality...

On 6/7/2023 at 1:58 PM, Bruno de Souza Lino said:

Considering some of the words said by people like Noel are not official statements despite them working for Bandlab, let's call everyone who did that unreasonable because they can't keep their mouths shut. Sounds fair.

But since we can always add yet another gallon to said fire, who knows if the statement was half delivered on purpose so this partially dead forum would have some traffic?

I imagine it's trial-ballooning a bit, and I hope that Bandlab is hearing how many want a "perpetual" license and that many support the notion of paying an "annual" fee only once (or in installments) resulting in said "perpetual" license.

On 6/7/2023 at 1:56 PM, Teksonik said:

Yes you are! It's just a DAW. I'm not talking smack about your Mother.😆

Calm down, I'm just giving my opinion on the matter. If that triggers you then it's out of my control.

What do you expect coming  at people with statements such as and in particular "Anyone who thinks it through long term will come to the same conclusion."?  You are stating no opinion at that point, you are claiming an absolute fact and with not an implication but a declaration that anyone believing otherwise is just plain wrong, no matter what their situation.  

On 6/7/2023 at 11:09 AM, Einstein R said:

Sorry, I meant to say an actual person to talk to for techsupport since now that's what people might want paying for the software.....instead of waiting a day or two for emails or virtual chat....

 

Ah thanks!  Apologies (to everyone) I posted my question too soon.

DELETED

I see no urgency to find out more about the coming commercial model.  Now or 6 months or a year from mow, so long as until then the software continues to at least function as it does today.

On 6/7/2023 at 6:19 AM, Teksonik said:

You realize of course that whatever you do is going to have to add value to the current free version commensurate to the cost of purchase or upgrade.

So let's just pull a number out of the air...let's say the cost to upgrade from the current free version to the new paid Sonar is $200. So now you've got to add $200 of value to the new Sonar in order to make it worth upgrading.

A new UI with a "few extra feature enhancements" is not likely to cut it at least for me and I'm probably not alone. 

But we're seeing in this thread the problem with partial announcements with the "important details" to follow.  All it does is spark rampant speculation and fear mongering. ("oh my god they're going subscription") and so on.

So I suggest putting all your cards on the table now. Just tell us what the price will be. Just tell us if there will be discounts for paying customer of the old Sonar and so on.

Clearing the air now will help you and the user base as well.

To clear things up from my end I will never subscribe to software so if that's the way things are going tell me now so I can move on and focus on the other 5 DAWs I own, one of which has lifetime free updates.

While that's cool to express, personally I believe I've gotten so much value out of CbB compared to the cost of my email information and having paid again for Sonar many years ago that $200 for no change at all except for a financially-based right to use with clear terms is just fine.  

On 6/7/2023 at 3:10 AM, msmcleod said:

This is correct.  It'll be just CbB with new images, high dpi support and a few extra feature enhancements.

There is obviously some difference between rendering vector based images vs static bitmaps, but we'll be monitoring the performance of this closely as more of the application is converted over.  There are a few approaches we can take to mitigate any adverse performance effects of rendering vector based images, should it become a problem.

What generative AI features will be added?     (JUST kidding/commenting on the AI-everywhere hype, not actually making any comments on generative AI or the like, nor implying any sort of thoughts at all re Sonar and AI).

I want to add:  I was not so interested in Cakewalk when Gibson ran it and was uncommitted.  ONLY with Bandlab's curation and in particular not only fixing bugs but improving the software, after years of neglect and what I would even characterize as abuse, did I come fully back to using Cakewalk/"CbB".  

If Bandlab had treated this like "any" software and hadn't committed not only to the software but even the customer base and prior valued designers/engineers, and shown an interest in making up for the history and catering to unusual expectations, I doubt I'd be engaged now.

On 6/7/2023 at 1:38 AM, Lord Tim said:

No you don't if you only purchase their intellectual property, which Bandlab did. They didn't purchase the company at all, just the code to make the program. They also hired the programmers that Gibson fired. But this is 100% a new unrelated company otherwise.

 But, and I'm only curious here, do you believe that the company (in this case Bandlab) should expect its user base to have the same fine parsing  / respect of legalism that you have of this, as opposed to accept that popular perception will see them as inheriting all aspects (however unfairly)?  At least/especially when said company expresses itself via a famed brand name (i.e. Cakewalk in this case)?

On 6/7/2023 at 12:08 AM, flangad said:

 

and what would you think of such pricing model:

release different versions of the software, based on a number of monthly usage hours. example:

- if you need less than 15 hours/month of Sonar usage, it remain free (you are a very casual user)

- if you need less than 50 hours/month of sonar usage, you have to pay a "small user" price

- if you need more than 50 hours of usage/month, you are an advanced/professional  user, so you have to pay a higher price.

don't you think such model could be fair and acceptable for everyone?

You could also have another "dimension" in pricing:

- one shot subscription: you get the software with time unlimited bug corrections but no future functional updates (you have to pay another 1 shot "upgrade subscription" to go from version N to N+1 or get a pack of new major features) , community support

-Premium yearly or monthly subscription: include functionnal updates as long as you renew your subscription , community suport

- professional yearly or monthly subscription : add premium support with SLA, chat/webconferencing, if possible multilingual

 

so you will get a price matrix like this: (see attach file)

 

Although I really like this, I can see any organization not tolerating the complexity of this.  I would be highly conflicted were I an internal architect working on this, and would depend primarily, therefore, on the company strategy.  If the company is product-centric, it probably isn't a good idea, I believe.  But if a company is customer-centric, I think it is worth embracing the complexity.  

On 6/6/2023 at 11:56 PM, Mark Morgon-Shaw said:

It effectively expires as it's eventually rendered obsolete by O/s & hardware incpompatibility. I mean techinically I still have a licence for Pro Audio 9 but  I can't run it with any of the gear I own now. 

 No. Only people that make bad analogies 

Wow.  Nope.

Just to give my own input to Bandlab, I'd like to see both a subscription model and the prior ownership model.  I don't see subscriptions as bad, I see them as "a" viable option, the ideal company providing both "ownership"/perpetual licensing and "rental"/temporary licensing models.

On 6/6/2023 at 7:22 PM, RBH said:

Very much looking forward to Sonar specific Plug-in and VSTi development. It's really great to see a long term plan moving forward - and great team of Bakers staying dedicated to the product. You folks really are stand outs in your field.

I missed the "feature" of "Sonar specific Plug-ins".   Not a fan of proprietary/DAW company-sponsored singular platform plugins.  No disrespect to the greatness of the Cakewalk strip!

On 6/6/2023 at 6:59 PM, Teksonik said:

Right....here we go. We all should have seen this day coming.

In one way having Sonar generate a revenue stream is beneficial as it funds future development and current support. Hopefully it will succeed so a day like this one doesn't happen for it, finding out development has stopped. 

So on one hand I'd like to support the new endeavor but.....having been a paying customer up to Sonar X3 I don't know how much I'd be willing to pay to get back on the train.

Knowing this day would come eventually I never let myself fall too much in love with CbB so it's not one of my most frequently used DAWs.  But I wouldn't want to lose it because it does serve a purpose although not a critical one. Hopefully the last free update of CbB will continue working on Windows for the foreseeable future but of course once development stops on a piece of software you're on your own.  

So for me to purchase an update of something that has been free, that update has to bring something of value equal to the update price.  We'll see what the future holds.....

I'm just curious what purpose CbB fulfilled for you?