Jump to content
Noel Borthwick

Nice article on Cakewalk and BandLab

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Craig Anderton said:

From their legal and privacy tab: "All rights reserved. This site is not connected or affiliated with AVID or its associated companies/brands/trademarks."

Thanks, @Craig Anderton. I didn't mean to imply that the site is an official arm of Avid or Pro Tools. I should have made myself clearer. The site began life as an unofficial Pro Tools site, and they have now expanded to be an unofficial Logic and Studio One site. And they have apparently obtained copyrights on the notion that they are the "experts" on those DAWS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't really disagree with anything you're saying above  😉

 

I'd add that (in general), the more specific your use of any feature/plugins, the more tedious "collaboration" becomes.

As such, if I'm going to have someone collaborate on a project, I wouldn't send them the full "work-in-progress" project.

I'd send stems... and let the collaborating partner overdub/etc.

 

The only way you can effectively collaborate on full "work-in-project" type files is to have exactly the same plugins/libraries/etc installed.

We've got clients who work as writing partners (using multiple separate DAWs)... and those who have both commercial and home based studios.

To minimize issues, the machines are essentially "mirrored" (as far as software/plugins/drive configuration).

 

Even with "standards" there's always going to be deviation/issues (look no further than Web Standards).  😉

The more specific your project (tempo changes, edits, sounds/libraries, etc), the greater the risk that somethings going to be a little "off".

Hopping between apps in Adobe land is fairly painless (as you'd expect)... but there's no way I'm trusting a heavily edited EDL to be imported 100% intact when moving between NLE/Color/DAW applications.  Even simple audio fade in/out curves don't translate 100% between all DAWs.

 

On the video side, I've experienced enough issues in Premier, After-Effects, Davinci Resolve, Vegas Pro, etc... that I try to use each application for specific tasks... and keep things as simple as possible.  Though I find After-Effects slow/sluggish, I can get work done.  If I rely on Resolve for much more than cuts/transitions, I've experienced audio getting out of sync, EDL getting scrambled, etc.  Resolve's feature set is enticing...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Every positive remains the same, but isn't quite as good as it was in 2015 (just over 4 years ago). "

Yes CbB is similar to what it was then.  If by saying " isn't quite as good", you mean the omission of some 3rd party plugins from CbB that were included in Platinum, then maybe you have a point, otherwise I fail to see the point in looking at the improvements made to the software and saying little or nothing has happened.

In making a comparison to any other DAW out there, the same thing could be said, that many of the updates made since 2015 made were trivial and not really of any significance. In most software updates they deal with all of the trivial stuff......yeah, it's only trivial until it crashes your system, or someone didn't notice a windows update causes a serious problem. You can say ARA 2 and Elastique were trivial updates. I don't see it that way. Probably 90% of all updates are to keep software stable and running alongside OS and software generational changes. 

It was suggested to those who didn't want to change from Platinum to simply keep running Sonar Platinum on their machines as long as they can. I personally don't believe this is the best approach. It's what happens to keep the software running that we don't often notice but is so necessary.

I don't find fault with anyone who decided to keep Platinum and run it on a computer without updates, maybe even disconnected from the web. That isn't me though. I want to remain as current as possible with my system as much as I have the resources to allow it. The only exception to that is if I'm working on a large project for a friend or a client . In that case I'll wait until that project is completed.

Edited by Starise
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Starise said:

"Every positive remains the same, but isn't quite as good as it was in 2015 (just over 4 years ago). "

Yes CbB is similar to what it was then.  If by saying " isn't quite as good", you mean the omission of some 3rd party plugins from CbB that were included in Platinum, then maybe you have a point, otherwise I fail to see the point in looking at the improvements made to the software and saying little or nothing has happened.

In making a comparison to any other DAW out there, the same thing could be said, that many of the updates made since 2015 made were trivial and not really of any significance. In most software updates they deal with all of the trivial stuff......yeah, it's only trivial until it crashes your system, or someone didn't notice a windows update causes a serious problem. You can say ARA 2 and Elastique were trivial updates. I don't see it that way. Probably 90% of all updates are to keep software stable and running alongside OS and software generational changes. 

It was suggested to those who didn't want to change from Platinum to simply keep running Sonar Platinum on their machines as long as they can. I personally don't believe this is the best approach. It's what happens to keep the software running that we don't often notice but is so necessary.

I don't find fault with anyone who decided to keep Platinum and run it on a computer without updates, maybe even disconnected from the web. That isn't me though. I want to remain as current as possible with my system as much as I have the resources to allow it. The only exception to that is if I'm working on a large project for a friend or a client . In that case I'll wait until that project is completed.

It isn't as good insofar as the competition has gotten better, while SONAR stood still.

If you have to choose software, and your choices were:

  1. One that hasn't gotten a decent upgrade in 4-5 years (but got  small bugfix updates here and there)
  2. One that received 3-4 version upgrades in the same amount of time.

I know exactly which one you would choose... if you were approaching it with a fresh mind.  Put yourself in the shoes of others, and try to understand why they may see things the way they do.  You wouldn't have much confidence in the former, and you may even view its lack of development as a potentially limiting factor for you - as your needs may grow in ways that it cannot accommodate in the future.

I own multiple DAWs, the changes for Cakewalk - even in the bug fixes, are miniscule compared to what I'm seeing with those other packages.  And now, it's not "because they're buggier."

People call it "abandonware" because of the laggard  development momentum and lower level of support compared to commercial DAWs, not because it's "literally" abandoned - although it was for a time (which had only exacerbated the issue).  Additionally, given how small the community is [now], they cannot advocate for it as effectively as the Reaper and Studio One users, who seem to take up all of the oxygen in every room.

DAWs are not a great expense to a musician, producer, or audio engineer.  Many own multiple, so adding something like ARA2 and Elastique is not going to shake up the way they use their tools, or even dictate what tools they use.  More is needed.

And I forgot to mention that the Cakewalk Drum Replacer is an ARA Plug-In.  So it does have utility beyond auto-tune plug-ins in Cakewalk.  Still waiting for more generally practical applications to be used with that API...

It's good to see that there is more coverage of CbB, because the news did seem to hit a fever pitch when Gibson sidelined it, but the BandLab acquisition wasn't given as much press, IMO.  SO, more coverage can help rehabilitate the product's reputation.

Plug-Ins and Instruments are not a huge issue.  I'm talking about features and functionality.  Not sure you realize how much development has been put into other DAWs in the 4+ years that SONAR has been stagnant...  Not just the number of features, but also the quality of them.

Edited by SomeGuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/4/2019 at 1:02 AM, Jim Roseberry said:

On the video side, I've experienced enough issues in Premier, After-Effects, Davinci Resolve, Vegas Pro, etc... that I try to use each application for specific tasks... and keep things as simple as possible.  Though I find After-Effects slow/sluggish, I can get work done.  If I rely on Resolve for much more than cuts/transitions, I've experienced audio getting out of sync, EDL getting scrambled, etc.  Resolve's feature set is enticing...

Going between Resolve and NLEs (Premiere Pro, Avid, VEGAS Pro, FCPX) was flawless with AAF or FCP XML (7 or X, depending on the application).

Going from Premiere Pro CC, Avid Media Composer, VEGAS Pro, and Resolve 16 to Samplitude Pro X4 Suite, Logic Pro X or Cubase Pro 10 with [Pro Tools] AAF was flawless in every case.

Going between the DAWs was also flawless.

^^- Just Checked.  But that is why many of us have been asking for AAF support (But I think this requires licensing from Avid?  So perhaps it will be a while...). 

The video side of Cakewalk isn't really about how those NLEs perform, though.  It's about how Cakewalk performs when you import video into it, and whether or not it can even accommodate the video you are handed (and without significant performance  loss or impact to DAW stability).

After Effects is slow on weak machines.  Quad Core DAW PCs aren't optimal for that software, for example (don't know what you run it on).  It's VFX/Compositor, not PaintShop Pro.  It's CPU and RAM requirements are probably a good 80-100% higher than Premiere Pro, for optimal usage.

 

Edited by SomeGuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SomeGuy said:

I own multiple DAWs, the changes for Cakewalk - even in the bug fixes, are miniscule compared to what I'm seeing with those other packages.  And now, it's not "because they're buggier."

I'm sorry you feel this way. There has been a huge amount of bug fixes just in the last year and thousands since the old article you quote. Just looking at our internal issue log we have over 500 issues resolved since we started. I don't see how that could be considered miniscule in relation to any other competitive DAW. Not sure if you have seen our public changelogs since we started last year: 
See prior release notes.
Check out all new features released to date.

While we do have feature work in our pipeline, we are focusing on workflow improvements and stability, not feature bloat. This is what the majority of our users want from us as opposed to shiny new toys. 


 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/3/2019 at 11:25 PM, SomeGuy said:

This is why businesses tend to standardize on the tools they use (NLEs, DAWs, Color Correction Software, etc.).

I would send my NLE timeline to a colorist with an AAF.   I will not collaborate with another editor using an interchange format.

This is why many professionals own more than one DAW or NLE.

@SomeGuy,

I am not familiar with the abbreviation, NLE as you are using it.  Will you define NLE as you are using it?  Thank you in advance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someguy...whoever you are and whatever DAW you use, we will have to agree to disagree. My opinion is based on the facts. I'm not sure what you base your opinion on.

CbB hasn't been standing still. Not by a long shot. If you want to compare DAWS obviously they all have their strengths and weaknesses. I  know Cakewalk has a lot of strengths. I could bring up a few well known DAWS  as a comparison that haven't had as many changes as CbB has had in the same amount of time. 

You think I don't own multiple DAWS? I know how they work dude. lol.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fogle622 said:

@SomeGuy,

I am not familiar with the abbreviation, NLE as you are using it.  Will you define NLE as you are using it?  Thank you in advance!

Non-Linear Editor

Video Editors like Premiere Pro, Media Composer, etc.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Noel Borthwick said:

While we do have feature work in our pipeline, we are focusing on workflow improvements and stability, not feature bloat. This is what the majority of our users want from us as opposed to shiny new toys.
 

Amen to this, the sight of Studio One 4's 70 new features, zillions of tiny cryptic icons and menus, utter disaster, together with the ever deepening blackness the deeper you go into the program, completely put me off the program. I have Studio One 3 but I won't be upgrading to 4 and it will eventually disappear from my computer back into it's box.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SomeGuy said:

After Effects is slow on weak machines.  Quad Core DAW PCs aren't optimal for that software, for example (don't know what you run it on).  It's VFX/Compositor, not PaintShop Pro.  It's CPU and RAM requirements are probably a good 80-100% higher than Premiere Pro, for optimal usage.

FWIW, I've built high-end Audio/Video workstations professionally for the past 25+ years.  😉

Even with a i9-9980xe (18 cores), 64GB RAM, RTX-2080Ti, and M.2 Ultra SSDs as both work/cache drives... After-Effects is still slow.  😁

 

FWIW, For apps to import advanced edits perfectly, they'd have to support ALL the features of the other software (identical).

Even for something as simple as fade-in/out, the fade types and contours have to be 100% identical... or the conversion isn't 100% accurate.

If you're familiar with Samplitude Pro X, you're aware of its Object based editing/processing.  BTW, I wrote the English user's manual for Samplitude 2496 (v5 I believe).

Reaper offers similar features with its Item-based processing (cherry-picked from Samplitude - myself and numerous others lobbied to get that into Reaper)

Pro Tools 2019 (Standard) doesn't support processing per-Object (Clip).

Pro Tools 2019 Ultimate does offer processing per-Object, but it's limited to their Channel-Strip and Dynamics (no 3rd-party processing per Object/Clip).

Most DAW applications have no similar feature.

 

With advanced edits/mixing, there's no way I'd trust OMF or AAF to get 100% of the details 100% correct.

Far too much room for error...

Far too many variations between applications...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SomeGuy said:

It isn't as good insofar as the competition has gotten better, while SONAR stood still.

Are you sure about that?  I note that nearly all of the new features that users are going nuts about in the Studio One 4.5 update have been in Sonar for YEARS.  I had to chuckle as I watched the videos on youtube touting the wonderful new features.  And in case you think I'm biased, I own a fully paid-up license for Studio One 4.x

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm seeing a considerable uptake in CbB chatter on Facebook. Quite a few recording and sound engineering groups have mentioned it in the last while. Many former users are however still not aware of CbB's rebirth, and I think the quickest way to educate the masses is for us users to spread the word on these FB groups. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Great Idea 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bill Ruys said:

Are you sure about that?  I note that nearly all of the new features that users are going nuts about in the Studio One 4.5 update have been in Sonar for YEARS.  I had to chuckle as I watched the videos on youtube touting the wonderful new features.  And in case you think I'm biased, I own a fully paid-up license for Studio One 4.x

Same here, Studio One 4.5 Pro with the latest updates. I would have to agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that AAF should be in Cakewalk. I don't agree that  Cakewalk is standing still. Right now Cakewalk is the best it has ever been. It will only get better. 

I'm going to list all the audio and video programs I use and have actually bought and own. 

Cakewalk

Cubase Pro 10

Sampiltude Pro X4 

Studio One 4.5

Fruity Loops Studio 22

Sound Forge Pro 12

Waveform 10

Vegas Pro 13

Davinci Resolve 16 Free Beta It isn't ready for prime time yet.

Pinnacle Studio 22

Of the above Cubase and Cakewalk are the most used by me. 

Samplitude is a disappointment. Studio One is Studio One and is really not geared to my way of working.

I don't view a DAW as a commitment  to one developer. I use the one I find the most in tune to my way of working. Any one of those will do a good job of recording, mixing and producing music. 

To me the only thing Cakewalk lacks is AAF support. 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gee John, you didn't want to give Traktion,  Bitwig or Ableton a shot?  :)

I guess I just get tired of the lone masked snipers that sometimes drop by.  We have a positive thread about CbB and here comes the wicked witch of the west to try and stick a hole in the balloon.  Never could understand why a person would expend so much time cutting on something  they have no intention of using or don't like. Just go have fun doing whatever it is you like to do, unless it's DAW bashing lol.

  • Like 2
  • Great Idea 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its when one goes deeper into a DAW that its flaws come out.  For example in Cubase with freeze it really sucks.  Cakewalk freeze is fully useful for editing, adding FX and its treated like any other audio track. In Cubase which invented freeze, it becomes a hidden track with no access. You can hear it but you can't touch it. 

Editing in the PRV in Cakewalk is simple and powerful. In Cubase one can do the same things but its not as simple. In Cakewalk to edit a MIDI track is simple because Cakewalk is track oriented. In Cubase its clip oriented. One has to select all the clips on a track to edit all of them.  This is unnecessary in Cakewalk. 

One area where Cubase shines is in its  Mixconsoles.  They are a work of art.  Cakewalk has ProChannel Cubase has Channel Strips. Not identical but much the same idea. 

I'm sure any one of us can pick out a feature in a DAW, any DAW that is not well implemented. Overall does that DAW do what you need it to do when you need it done? If it does its a good DAW for you.  Right now Cakewalk is the best deal in DAWs. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2019 at 5:32 PM, Noel Borthwick said:

While we do have feature work in our pipeline, we are focusing on workflow improvements and stability, not feature bloat. This is what the majority of our users want from us as opposed to shiny new toys. 

 

YEs. I agree here. When I want a new toy, I'll go look for what I want and get it. I don't need or want my DAW to provide every tool I need. That's what vst's are for!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Grem said:

YEs. I agree here. When I want a new toy, I'll go look for what I want and get it. I don't need or want my DAW to provide every tool I need. That's what vst's are for!!

Same here Grem! Don't get me wrong, I liked many of the toys in Platinum. It would be great if one day we could get some of the non 3rd party ones back, even if it's a paid sort of thing. I don't think it's healthy for the user base to come to expect this all the time when that really just isn't practical.  That said, I agree that for a DAW it's mainly workflow and  stability that are of main importance. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Starise said:

Never could understand why a person would expend so much time cutting on something  they have no intention of using or don't like. Just go have fun doing whatever it is you like to do, unless it's DAW bashing lol.

I know, right? 🤣They've been around as long as there's been online communication, though (or maybe as long as there has been mass communication, in the form of letters to the editor). The "tell" is usually the sweeping generalizations (often about other people's opinions and behavior, along the lines of "that's why the rest of the industry has been abandoning platform X in droves!") on topics where it's impossible for anyone to show evidence for or contrary.

One thing I can say is that I've never met anyone in person who will admit to being one, so either they don't go out and interact with people IRL very much or they lie about doing it!

I once got rid of a very nasty troll by counseling all the regulars on a BBS to start answering all of its outrageous statements with a brief "no it's not" or "that's not true" and leaving it at that. Registration on the BBS was open, so you couldn't kill filter it, and it was beyond the will power of any sane and rational person to merely not answer it, so I came up with that solution and it got rid of the problem in less than a week. I knew the battle had turned when, frustrated, it tried using it against other people a few times, then it simply crawled back under whatever slimy rock it originated from.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...