Jump to content

Why is Cakewalk by Bandlab free?


synkrotron

Recommended Posts

On 2/5/2019 at 8:32 PM, SomeGuy said:

Yes.  BMD reduced the price of the paid version from thousands to $999, then to $299 and released a Free Version that's better than any consumer NLE and many Prosumer NLEs for free.  It's basically the industry-standard color grading platform, and they purchased Fairlight and EyeOn and integrated Fusion (VFX/Compositing) and Fairlight (Audio Post) into the NLE... then added collaboration features.

So it's very hot and it's being recommended to any and everyone because it's "Free" and people are tired of paying super high Avid prices or Adobe subscriptions, among other things.  Available for Windows, macOS, and Linux.

The hype train is at a fever pitch.

Theoretically, something like this could have happened with Cakewalk, but I think the purchase coming after the shutdown hurt (so many people may still view it as a "dead" product)... and also the  DAW market isn't as ripe for disruption as the NLE market is/was.  DaVinci's standing as a premiere color grading platform also helped it, as people are using that aspect to sell others onto it (Since LOG and HDR are FADs now, even with Smartphone apps like Filmic Pro ?.  SONAR never really had a selling point like that, and a lot of the really good stuff was stripped out of the package, anyways.

The DAW market is also full of "Competitive Upgrade" offers.

I would say, though, that this should have basically killed Audacity on Windows ?  No point in using that over Cakewalk, unless you value HDD space that much (or need to import/export formats Cakewalk doesn't support).

One of the big issues with DaVinci  Resolve is that it is EXTREMELY  demanding of resources.  Especially GPU.  The forum is chock full of people with 10 year old low end laptops  complaining that it crashes all the time. Or that it won't even open.  They never bothered to look at the system  requirements and then come unglued when they get told "Windows 7 is not supported.  Can't help you, upgrade to 10 first"  or "512mb of GPU memory ? 4GB is the minimum recommend.  You need to upgrade. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Byron Dickens said:

One of the big issues with DaVinci  Resolve is that it is EXTREMELY  demanding of resources.  Especially GPU.  The forum is chock full of people with 10 year old low end laptops  complaining that it crashes all the time. Or that it won't even open.  They never bothered to look at the system  requirements and then come unglued when they get told "Windows 7 is not supported.  Can't help you, upgrade to 10 first"  or "512mb of GPU memory ? 4GB is the minimum recommend.  You need to upgrade. "

The DaVinci systems requirements are vage at best.  

I've got a modern Lenovo T470 with SSD, etc. and it doesn't run it properly.  I also have an older machine (but win 10 with SSD and lots of ram and an older Graphics Card, and it won't even open yet I can run multicam productions in Premiere Pro all day long.  

 

Two machines with Win10, plenty of RAM, and SSD but will not run properly.  Graphics Card requirements can be unknown unless you are using something they specifically spell out as compatible.  Davinci needs to work on system compatiblity instead of "you have to have a brand new computer with all top shelf components."  My machines run multiple HD videos playing at the same time without issue....in other NLEs.  

But I get your point, however Davinci isn't a great example.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jonathan boose said:

My guess is that the company also wishes to exploit user content. They make it easy for you to "share", i.e. give away, your work. That way, they have free music as opposed to platforms that have to pay for content.

Note that you don't "give away" the work, you retain the rights. If a record company hears your music and wants to sign you, they have to negotiate with you, not BandLab.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Larry Jones said:

First: It's free because it's being used as a marketing tool. There are other parts of the company that are supposed to make money.

Even in the absence of any real numbers, I'll go along with your assertion that people just weren't/aren't that into Cakewalk/SONAR/CbB. Which is weird, because it's at the very least a really good product, and for some of us it's perfect. Who knows why it didn't "strike a chord" with the masses? Maybe because it's geared more toward musicians, writers and producers who actually know what a chord is, and that's not the way the masses are going.

@Craig Andertonused to say on the old forum that he actually did have real numbers, that is, sales figures on all the DAWs, but it was proprietary information and so he couldn't divulge it to us. So we users never had an opportunity to judge SONAR's popularity using the only metric that matters in the world today: money. Craig, if you happen to read this, perhaps now that you don't work for Gibson, and now that SONAR's sales figures are receding in the rear view mirror (because it's no longer for sale), maybe you could give us a clue just how our DAW ranked in the past several years.

The information was from MI Sales Trak, and so I still can't discuss specifics. What's more, MI Sales Trak only tracked retail during the time I was checking it. I can tell you that there were "bumps" when new versions were released, and Sonar Artist did pretty well, sometimes reaching the Top 10 at retail. But overall, Sonar never reached the same level of sales over time as most other programs. I think a major problem was ineffective marketing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cakewalk never had that many of the cool kids in their corner either.   The next big thing never seemed to be using Cakewalk products.  They had to trot out guys like someone who won a Grammy for Best Native American Album, or the guy who won season 1 of "The Voice".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also slightly frustrating for SONAR users was when looking into various pieces of hardware or software SONAR was rarely ever on the list of tested/trusted DAWs.

Roland used to package a "lite" version of SONAR with their interfaces, presumably because they owned it at the time. They now give away licenses for Live lite.

So I have always felt like I've been using the "poor man's" digital audio workstation, although I have to add then  I have NEVER felt the it was in reality, if you know what I mean. If a discussion came up about, "which DAW do you use" on non-DAW forums, I'd be the odd one out using SONAR.

Never put me off though...

 

 

Page 11

I feel another video coming on.......

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of my friends who are audio pros used Pro Tools, but they also complained bitterly about the need for, and cost of, upgrades. Others used Logic, but that required a Mac. That left Nuendo, Sonar, Digital Performer, and probably a couple of others that don't spring to mind.

Bandlab is free largely because many of us paid $500 for Sonar (or whatever, I got the PE versions), allowing the developers to make it happen. Then Reaper came along and mostly eliminated  the monetary value of Sonar, etc. and here we are.

I don't regret paying the $500 for a minute. Money well spent.

Edited by jonathan boose
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jonathan boose said:

Bandlab is free largely because many of us paid $500 for Sonar (or whatever, I got the PE versions), allowing the developers to make it happen.

Hi Jonathan :)

I'm not sure how that works to be honest. I mean, the money that we all spent in SONAR, Platinum, lifetime and all that would have gone straight into the Cakewalk owners (Roland or Gibson, I'm not sure who was the owner at that time) pot and paid for wages/bonuses for staff at that time. There is no way that BandLab would have benefited from any of that money.

And when BandLab got the code from Gibson, did they get it free?

 

cheers

andy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, synkrotron said:

Hi Jonathan :)

I'm not sure how that works to be honest. I mean, the money that we all spent in SONAR, Platinum, lifetime and all that would have gone straight into the Cakewalk owners (Roland or Gibson, I'm not sure who was the owner at that time) pot and paid for wages/bonuses for staff at that time. There is no way that BandLab would have benefited from any of that money.

And when BandLab got the code from Gibson, did they get it free?

 

cheers

andy

Pretty sure that he means there would have been no sonar without people paying for it for decades. And no Sonar would mean no Cakewalk by bandlab. 

Daw history is pretty interesting. Old ableton guys peeled off and formed bitwig, studio one was modelled heavily off cubase/nuendo. lots of people said reaper would one day be the de facto standard. but the actual situation for professionals as far as I can see is exactly the same as when I got interested in daws about 15 years ago. 90% pro tools with a few cubase and DP users. Must have something to do with tight hardware integration I'm beginning to feel

Edited by backwoods
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
34 minutes ago, zac said:

Hello folks! ?

I've been reading from the very interesting discussion about why this DAW Cakewalk by BandLab is free, and I wonder why it has to be delivered exclusively via BandLab Assistant, run as demo prior to activation and then call home every 6 months. I mean, it's 100% free! - why can't I just download the installer, do a relaxed offline install, accept the terms and agreements etc ...and then enjoy this 100% free DAW?

zac

As there are no sales figures to monitor, the only way of knowing the active user count (and how many people are using the most up to date version) is to do so via BandLab assistant.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
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...