Jim Roseberry

The issue with 13th and 14th Gen CPUs is *grossly* exaggerated. If you know how to configure the machine, you're not going to destroy the CPU. If you don't know how to configure the machine, get help from someone who does. Ryzen 9xxx series has just been released. The 9950x offers performance identical to the 14900k... at lower TDP. It's a great performer.

The issue with the 13900k and 14900k CPUs has been grossly exaggerated. Out of scores of machines, I've had to replace two 13900k CPUs. I've not had to replace any 13700k or 13600k CPUs. I've not had to replace any 14th Gen CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 9950x is the CPU that's on-par with the 14900k. Scores over 40k with Cinebench R23. TDP is lower than the 14900k. That's the significant advantage. Still needs large top-tier AIO cooling. Under stress-test type loads (100% load across all cores), it does run cooler/quieter than the 14900k. Both the 9950x and 14900k run quiet when working with audio. One down side to the 9950x: It's $150 more than the 14900k... and a commensurate high-end motherboard is about $50 more than the Z790 equivalent. One issue with the Ryzen 9xxx CPUs. The currently iLok Licence Manager is incompatible (Pace service will not stay running). They have a hot-fix available. I've tested it... and it works. If you end up with a Ryzen 9xxx based machine and use iLok, let me know... and I'll forward the hot-fix. I've been running the 9950x for a couple weeks. Aside from the issue with iLok (now resolved), it's running great. Thunderbolt works flawlessly.

Been in touch with folks from iLok/Pace. They have a hot-fix that addresses the issue. If anyone else experiences this issue, let me know... and I'll forward a link to the fix.

One BIG downer (until it's addressed). If you use an iLok, the "Pace License Services" currently won't run. The service tries to start... stops... tries to start... stops (in repeated loop). Can't open the iLok License Manager... or use any software/plugins protected by iLok. I've submitted a support ticket making them aware of the issue. I'm sure they'll get it squared away. Just a question of how long. It's not AMDs fault/issue... but compatibility quirks are (slightly) more common vs Intel. Wish it were something a bit more niche'. I've got a ton of software/plugin licenses on my iLok.

9950x is a great higher-end workstation CPU. Unlike the Threadripper series, ultra low latency audio performance is fantastic and TDP is far lower.

I've been testing the 9950x. Performance is nearly identical to the 14900k (but at lower TDP). Ultra low latency audio performance is also nearly identical to the 14900k. I can play The Grandeur at 96k using a 48-sample ASIO buffer size (0.9ms playback latency)... and audio is completely clean. (Even when stepping on the sustain pedal and glissing up/down the keyboard like mad... then releasing the sustain pedal) The 9950x needs large top-notch AIO cooler. I'm using a 420mm. Under stress-test loads (all cores maxed at 100%), it runs cooler/quieter than the 14900k. Working with audio, both the 9950x and 14900k run quiet. I'm running a higher-end Asus X670E motherboard (Five internal 4TB M.2 SSDs, Thunderbolt-4, etc). This build is about $200 more than the comparable 14900k build. Thunderbolt is working great.

Probably not what you want to hear, but if you're at all serious about recording/mixing, you really should use a dedicated audio interface that has a proper ASIO driver. You'll achieve significantly lower round-trip latency... and the driver will be much more robust. If you want the DAW to be rock-solid, this is the solution.

Have no idea... but it's easy to test. Copy/duplicate an audio track Assign a plugin to the first track (make sure it's enabled... but not set to actually process/change the audio) Invert the phase of the second track. If the sum doesn't null, there's no PDC.

I've built scores of machines using 13th and 14th Gen CPUs. If you know how to configure them... they're certainly not a problem. Especially if you're talking about the i9 13900k or 14900k, they're not what I'd call a "novice-build". If you just set everything to "Auto" and set memory to XMP Profile 1/2, you're going to have a machine that thermal-throttles under heavy loads... and will most likely be unstable (especially if using faster DDR5). Proper BIOS configuration will prevent thermal-throttling, instability, and potentially damaging the CPU.

In today's economic climate, I doubt you'll see much support for "fringe" development. DAW applications appeal to a miniscule segment of the overall computer user base. Of that miniscule segment of potential users, how many Sonar users will be running ARM processors? You're talking a tiny segment... of that original tiny segment of potential users. Cakewalk Sonar is a complex application, I seriously doubt they'll take the RISC.

For all fans other than the GPU (RTX video card), I prefer using the motherboard... as it offers more precise control. Regarding the GPU, I prefer to use video cards that have a 0dB fan mode (silent when working with audio). In a 0dB fan mode, the fans don't spin at all (absolute silence).

You don't want more cores at the expense of significant clock-speed. That's why Xeon processors are typically not great choices for a DAW. In a perfect scenario, you want highest possible clock-speed... AND maximum number of cores. If it's a choice between fewer cores at much higher clock-speed (vs more cores at much lower clock-speed), go with the higher clock-speed.

I don't think it says much of anything that a post on Gearsluts (now Gearspace) didn't generate a lot of responses. In 35 years, I've never gone to that forum to discuss DAW applications. I've been on audio "forums" since they were Newsgroups on CompuServe.

What's actually changed??? Cakewalk Sonar (new version) has been available exclusively via BandLab membership for a good while. Noel mentioned weeks ago that it was beyond beta status. Cakewalk has formally/publicly announced the Sonar release. ? Why the doom/gloom? I don't love the idea of subscription, but I understand the underlying business reasons for it. $150/year (if you use the tool regularly) is not terribly expensive. A high caliber guitar is now $4000-$6000 (and that's not even a "custom shop" model). A boutique tube amp-head is ~$4000. A top-tier guitar modeler is ~$1700. A top-tier 88-key workstation keyboard is over $4000. One could say we've been spoiled by the likes of Reaper and CbB. Those aren't realistic business models for the vast majority of companies. In a normal business scenario (where expenses are incurred each month), imagine trying to stay in business selling a product that costs $40. If you sold 100,000 copies, that's 4 million. Lets say that this company has a dozen employees with an average salary of $80k. Payroll alone is about 1 million. Recommending FL Studio as a replacement??‍♂️ Two extremely different products. The new Cakewalk Sonar works just fine. It's Sonar Platinum (or CbB) with many enhancements/improvements. I've got most of the major DAW applications. Throw out any DAW application... and a seasoned DAW user can find fault in it. That same seasoned DAW user could also successfully make music with any or them. Studio One is now a great DAW. Even if it's not your primary recording/mixing application, the "Mastering" and Delivery options are worth the cost. Keep in mind that Presonus was recently bought by Fender. Thus far, that doesn't seem to be a negative endeavor. Same with Steinberg and Yamaha (though that's now been 20 years) Let's hope Fender doesn't repeat the mistakes of Gibson... by spreading themselves too thin... and getting into business scenarios where they have no real experience/expertise. Gibson was hemorrhaging money... after many bad business decisions (ie: Robotic Tuners on a Les Paul). Gibson had to restructure (and refocus on making heritage guitars) to stay in business. It wasn't a Cakewalk failure. If you're a long-time Cakewalk user, IMO it's worth $15 (one month subscription) to check out the new Sonar. Worst case, you're out $15. In today's economy, that's about the cost of a fast-food "value meal".

If they're anywhere in the same ballpark as the originals, these will be very popular. Great entryway into outboard... Warm Audio WA-273 EQ isn't exactly a Neve 1073, but it's close enough. I have two of them. Use them almost every day. Keyboards and guitar processors (Helix in particular) sounds great thru them. Helix can sound a tad "digital"... and the Neve style preamp helps curb that. My real Neve channels strips are a pair of Portico-II and a Shelford channel. Want to get a second Shelford at some point, but they're now $4000. I believe I paid $2800 (several years back) at GearFest. If they can clone Neve reasonably well... here's hoping API is next.

I'm not sure how the comparison lacks the real point? ?‍♂️ If you go to an auction and buy a company's property (tools/land/building)... but you don't actually buy the business (including clientele), you are in no way responsible for said failed business. It's not legally the same company. ie: The Federal Tax ID would not be the same. The LLC would not be the same. The failed company's financial load/debt would not be incurred. I get that you feel "gypped" out of the Lifetime License. Many of us feel that way. But it's not BandLab (or development employees) who gypped you (us)... it's Gibson. I can certainly understand feeling "gun-shy" about the future. There are no guarantees. All you can do is more forward. I'm glad to see Noel, Morten, and other longtime Cakewalk employees back... and further developing Sonar.

Another perspective: Say you bought the property of a struggling Auto Collision Repair business; all the tools and the property/building... but not the actual business/clientele. Let's say the previous company offered free lifetime collision repair to all their customers. Should you (the new property owner) be expected to take over the debt, warranty, and lifetime collision responsibilities of the failing business? I think the distinction is that "you" bought the property, not the actual full business. It's not exactly a 1:1 comparison... as Cakewalk Sonar is software (not a physical product)... but I think it makes the point. Perhaps BandLab could offer a discount (or other incentive/s) for Lifetime license holders. That would help bridge-the-gap.

Something that I haven't seen mentioned (regarding Cakewalk when owned by Gibson): Gibson got into numerous side-businesses (purchasing companies where they had no background/expertise). Gibson was also making bad business decisions... like putting robotic-tuners on a classic "heritage" guitar (Les Paul Standard). Most folks don't buy a Les Paul looking for ground-breaking new features. They buy a Les Paul... wanting a traditional Les Paul sound/experience. Gibson was hemorrhaging money... and on the brink of bankruptcy. To survive, they decided to cut anything that wasn't bringing in significant profit. Point being... the issue wasn't, "Cakewalk went out of business because they were doing a poor job or made poor decisions." The mother company turned off the lights... and let everyone go. Similar to what Creative Labs did when they purchased Emulator. If you're upset about Sonar Platinum Lifetime Updates (I purchased that myself), your anger/disgust should be directed toward Gibson. I understand that some folks don't like subscriptions. I'm not crazy about them... but have a few. For a company, the subscription model is a more predictable stream of revenue. Perpetual licenses... with a paid update every year or two is a lot more difficult to gauge/predict/manage. Moving into the future, it's important for Cakewalk to be monetized. That ensures the rest of the industry takes it seriously (tests for compatibility, officially supported by 3rd-party plugin vendors, etc). Personally, I would like to see more of a hard release. That said... I'm glad to see Cakewalk Sonar available... and being further developed. In today's economy, $150/year isn't too bad. If you use the product and stay up-to-date for a decade, you're out $1500. Maybe BandLab could offer a perpetual license after a particular subscription period. ie: After a year... you have a perpetual license for that current version.

From what I've watched/heard, the Behringer doesn't sound 100% identical... but it's certainly in the ball-park. At $400, it's not much of a risk. I'm also curious about their 1273 (two channel 1073 preamp clone). At $700, that's about half the cost of the Warm Audio WA-273 EQ. Behringer is a company some folks love to hate (and I can see why), but they've been releasing some good/useful products... especially the past decade. The X32 series (and spin-offs) are widely used for live events. Midas as well... and they tend to be in higher-end venues/scenarios. Klark Teknik processors are surprisingly good for the cost. The new UB-XA 16-voice analog synth is another example. It sounds good to me (not amazing)... but it's about 1/5th the cost of an OB-X8 (and has double the polyphony). IMO, it's fantastic for users to be able to experience Neve style outboard at such low cost. Higher-end outboard preamps can make a significant difference... but are a bit like buying nice tires for an automobile. A new instrument (guitar/bass/keyboard/etc) is typically a more exciting option. Quality outboard channel-strips were one of the latter (more significant) pieces that I acquired. In hindsight, I should have gotten them sooner. Things like recording passive Fender style bass via DI (which can sound anemic/weak with a cheap DI) immediately sounds better. ie: It's not a struggle to get it to sound full/tight and have enough "weight" to properly sit in a mix. I struggled with this for years... trying to fix the anemic DI bass tracks with plugins. It sounded OK... but never great. Getting the sound "right" (up-front) is always going to work out better than trying to fix-it in the mix. A small handful of nice outboard can make a huge difference. You can also run existing tracks thru the outboard... and record the result to a separate track. Some times... the extra D/A A/D is worth it... to have the character/impact from the outboard.

Hi David, Just responded to your Email. Give me a call Monday... and we'll get it squared away. ?

With a laptop, you won't really have much choice in hardware. ie: The shell will determine the motherboard. With a mobile CPU, you're going to take a performance hit (vs a desktop CPU)... so I'd go with the 14900HX (fastest currently available). You'll (of course) want to use a dedicated external audio interface. If the laptop has Thunderbolt, I'd go with a Thunderbolt audio interface. That'll yield the lowest possible round-trip latency.

Current TB Audio Interfaces are Thunderbolt-3. Thunderbolt controllers have been Thunderbolt-4 for a good while. No bandwidth difference between TB3 and TB4. Differences between TB3 and TB4 (Intel site): https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/thunderbolt/thunderbolt-3-vs-4.html

The OG Presonus Quantum series (connected via Thunderbolt) are able to achieve 1ms total round-trip latency. 96k using a 32-sample ASIO buffer size That won't be the case with any USB unit. If you've got a fast well-configured machine (13900k, 14900k, 7950x): You can run ToneX (similar to Kemper but a plugin) at 1ms total round-trip latency You can run advanced sample libraries like The Grandeur at sub 1ms playback latency

Was a big Logic fan in the early days. Things like realtime non-destructive Quantize were ahead of their time. Not the same (IMO) since bought by Apple.

Read what's new... For many DAWs, that would be more of a .x (point) release.