I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have held out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. Can anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: 1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making process? 2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". 3. Any other comments welcome Regards, Chris Forsyth
Also - I might add - I ask these questions in light of the new loop construction view tools and enhancements - where you have slice level control over gain, pan, and pitch. IOW - does it really add that much for someone who is not really into loop based music production? Chris "Chris Forsyth" <> wrote in message news:OWL_d.22529$... >I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have >held out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. >Can anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: > > 1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot > accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making > process? > 2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". > 3. Any other comments welcome > > Regards, > > Chris Forsyth >
Chris Forsyth wrote: > Also - I might add - I ask these questions in light of the new loop > construction view tools and enhancements - where you have slice level > control over gain, pan, and pitch. IOW - does it really add that much for > someone who is not really into loop based music production? > > Chris > > > "Chris Forsyth" <> wrote in message > news:OWL_d.22529$... > >>I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have >>held out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. >>Can anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: >> >>1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot >>accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making >>process? >>2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". >>3. Any other comments welcome >> >>Regards, >> >>Chris Forsyth >> > > > Try a demo. I can't see a use for it if you have Sonar. I tried the demo and I couldn't stand the layout. To me it's a product Cakewalk has to compete with Reason and Orion.
Thanks for the input - that is the way I was leaning also. Maybe I will give the trial a spin if I can find time. Thanks Chris Forsyth "kitekrazy" <> wrote in message news:... > Chris Forsyth wrote: >> Also - I might add - I ask these questions in light of the new loop >> construction view tools and enhancements - where you have slice level >> control over gain, pan, and pitch. IOW - does it really add that much >> for someone who is not really into loop based music production? >> >> Chris >> >> >> "Chris Forsyth" <> wrote in message >> news:OWL_d.22529$... >> >>>I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have >>>held out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. >>>Can anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: >>> >>>1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot >>>accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making >>>process? >>>2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". >>>3. Any other comments welcome >>> >>>Regards, >>> >>>Chris Forsyth >>> >> >> >> > Try a demo. I can't see a use for it if you have Sonar. I tried the demo > and I couldn't stand the layout. To me it's a product Cakewalk has to > compete with Reason and Orion.
In news: the killer robot kitekrazy <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... > Try a demo. I can't see a use for it if you have Sonar. I tried the > demo and I couldn't stand the layout. To me it's a product Cakewalk has > to compete with Reason and Orion. I know some people use it as a rewire device with synths from Sonar, but that's not anything I would probably ever use. I have boatloads of synth plugs and sample players, and I very seldom use them. It's always real guitar, real basses, real vocals, and fake drums with an occasional fake Hammond B3/Leslie for most of my stuff. -- Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to reply by email. _______ _____ ___ _____ ____ / ___/ / / __/ |/ / |/ / _ )/ __ \ / (_ / /__/ _// / / _ / /_/ / \___/____/___/_/|_/_/|_/____/\____/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Glennbo These go to eleven Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/jambits
Thanks Glennbo - thats what I thought. By the way - the new toon rocks! That is some seriously hard jammin - nice work to both you and Joey <who???> Regards, Chris Forsyth "Glennbo" <> wrote in message news:Xns961DE94CB59EEBrownShoesDontMakeIt@68.12.19.6... > In news: the killer robot kitekrazy > <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship cakewalk.audio and > pressed these buttons... > >> Try a demo. I can't see a use for it if you have Sonar. I tried the >> demo and I couldn't stand the layout. To me it's a product Cakewalk has >> to compete with Reason and Orion. > > I know some people use it as a rewire device with synths from Sonar, > but that's not anything I would probably ever use. I have boatloads of > synth plugs and sample players, and I very seldom use them. It's always > real guitar, real basses, real vocals, and fake drums with an occasional > fake Hammond B3/Leslie for most of my stuff. > > -- > Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to reply by email. > _______ _____ ___ _____ ____ > / ___/ / / __/ |/ / |/ / _ )/ __ \ > / (_ / /__/ _// / / _ / /_/ / > \___/____/___/_/|_/_/|_/____/\____/ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Glennbo These go to eleven > Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo > Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/jambits
In news:JhO_d.22550$ the killer robot "Chris Forsyth" <> grabbed the controls of the spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons... >> I know some people use it as a rewire device with synths from Sonar, >> but that's not anything I would probably ever use. I have boatloads >> of synth plugs and sample players, and I very seldom use them. It's >> always real guitar, real basses, real vocals, and fake drums with an >> occasional fake Hammond B3/Leslie for most of my stuff. > Thanks Glennbo - thats what I thought. > By the way - the new toon rocks! That is some seriously hard jammin - > nice work to both you and Joey <who???> Thanks Chris! -- Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to reply by email. _______ _____ ___ _____ ____ / ___/ / / __/ |/ / |/ / _ )/ __ \ / (_ / /__/ _// / / _ / /_/ / \___/____/___/_/|_/_/|_/____/\____/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- Glennbo These go to eleven Non-Linear Sound http://www.soundclick.com/glennbo Hear My Music http://www.soundclick.com/jambits
Hi Chris- >2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". Have it, hate it<g>! I know some folks think P5 is a very cool and intuitive compositional tool, but I have to say it's the only music app I absolutely can't get my head around. I'd be willing to say it's because I'm so used to linear sequencers, except that I do get FL, no problem. It's the only Cakewalk app I regret having purchased, and I started with them back in the old DOS days, FWTW. It does have some neat concepts (such as the "Take Bin" -- I think that's what it's called), but overall I found it so frustrating to work with that I haven't bothered with it in months. Other than that, I highly recommend it!<g> -Susan On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 02:15:11 GMT, "Chris Forsyth" <> wrote: >I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have held >out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. Can >anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: > >1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot >accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making >process? >2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". >3. Any other comments welcome > >Regards, > >Chris Forsyth >
Thanks Susan - boy.....with all of these raving reviews - i guess its a no-brainer! ;-) Chris "Susan G" <> wrote in message news... > Hi Chris- > >>2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". > Have it, hate it<g>! I know some folks think P5 is a very cool and > intuitive compositional tool, but I have to say it's the only music > app I absolutely can't get my head around. I'd be willing to say it's > because I'm so used to linear sequencers, except that I do get FL, no > problem. > > It's the only Cakewalk app I regret having purchased, and I started > with them back in the old DOS days, FWTW. > > It does have some neat concepts (such as the "Take Bin" -- I think > that's what it's called), but overall I found it so frustrating to > work with that I haven't bothered with it in months. > > Other than that, I highly recommend it!<g> > > -Susan > > On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 02:15:11 GMT, "Chris Forsyth" > <> wrote: > >>I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have >>held >>out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. Can >>anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: >> >>1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot >>accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making >>process? >>2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". >>3. Any other comments welcome >> >>Regards, >> >>Chris Forsyth >> >
Chris Forsyth wrote: > Thanks Susan - boy.....with all of these raving reviews - i guess its a > no-brainer! ;-) > > Chris > > > "Susan G" <> wrote in message > news... > >>Hi Chris- >> >> >>>2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". >> >>Have it, hate it<g>! I know some folks think P5 is a very cool and >>intuitive compositional tool, but I have to say it's the only music >>app I absolutely can't get my head around. I'd be willing to say it's >>because I'm so used to linear sequencers, except that I do get FL, no >>problem. >> >>It's the only Cakewalk app I regret having purchased, and I started >>with them back in the old DOS days, FWTW. >> >>It does have some neat concepts (such as the "Take Bin" -- I think >>that's what it's called), but overall I found it so frustrating to >>work with that I haven't bothered with it in months. >> >>Other than that, I highly recommend it!<g> >> >>-Susan >> >>On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 02:15:11 GMT, "Chris Forsyth" >><> wrote: >> >> >>>I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have >>>held >>>out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. Can >>>anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: >>> >>>1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot >>>accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making >>>process? >>>2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". >>>3. Any other comments welcome >>> >>>Regards, >>> >>>Chris Forsyth >>> >> > > I bought P5 for the softsynths, of which I didn't have too many at the time. As far as using the app goes, I agree with Susan G. I can't get my head around it either. I guess it depends what kind of music you do, too.
Just to add a few notes to this discussion, I'm another one who has Project5 1.5, but hasn't fully gotten my arms around it, though there are some things I like a lot, too, and wish were added to SONAR. I'm not really sure how to describe what it is as of V1.5, though the announcement for V2 (http://www.cakewalk.com/Press/01-20-05-Project5V2.asp) gives me a bit clearer sense of what I think it's potential should be, and that is a remixing tool. In particular, the ability to bring in "normal" audio (i.e. not just loops) was not there in V1.x, but the V2 announcement mentions multitrack audio, even recording. I'd think that should allow you to take, say, vocal tracks from an existing recording, and build a remix around them, whereas P5 V1 really wasn't conducive to that sort of thing. (It's been awhile since I've tried anything like that with it, and I don't recall if it just flat out didn't worked, let you do it but didn't work very well, or what.) Of course, I'm not suggesting that is the way Cakewalk sees it -- they call it a "performance workstation" in the above-mentioned press release. Actually, that is another area I can see it having some uses. That is, if you want to use a software based keyboard rig in a live scenario, where you have a MIDI controller and a notebook PC, and a bunch of DXi or VST softsynths, I think it would be a fine choice for serving as your rack/patch bay/mixer. It is much easier to configure with softsynths than SONAR is in terms of just setting things up, playing around with patches, etc. thanks to one of the features I wish SONAR had -- "Replace Synth". For example, if you're looking for an analog synth sound, you might be starting with, say, NI's Pro53, and find that it wasn't quite doing what you wanted to, and maybe you want to try something like PSYN or one of the Arturia products, or whatever, instead. In SONAR, you'd have to add new elements to the synth rack, delete the ones you had in there, connect the new elements to the MIDI and audio tracks in SONAR (or, alternately, have SONAR configure new tracks and you then manually delete the old ones). If you've already got MIDI information on the MIDI track, that is another thing to consider as, in SONAR, you'd need to either do the MIDI track reconnection or move the MIDI information from the old track to the new track before you delete the MIDI track. And what if you want to go back to Pro53, or check a third synth? With Project5, that is easy. You just use the Replace Synth command, pick the synth you want to try next from the menu, pick patches, and you're there. Replacing the synth is pretty much as easy as changing a patch. I also think Cakewalk sees it as something to compete with Reason, FL Studio, and a few other packages of that sort. I never quite got my arms around Reason, either, but there are lots of people who have. One big advantage Project5 has over Reason is the ability to use any plug-in synths, not just ones it comes with. Of course, I imagine some people buy Reason just as much for its synths as for the environment. Still, what if you like everything in Reason, including the environment, but you want to do one track of, say, DFH Superior or something? With Reason, you'd end up having to use SONAR (or some other DAW) and ReWire Reason into SONAR and plug DFHS in directly. With Project5, if you liked its environment for doing things like you'd do in Reason, you could just plug DFHS into it directly. One area where Project5 can be a somewhat useful adjunct to SONAR is as a "synth rack on steroids" -- i.e. essentially the equivalent of a hardware synth rack, only where the synths are softsynths instead of hardware. Let's say you want to build a layered sound for a SONAR production, where one of the sounds is from Pro53, another from FM7, and another from, say, TTS-1. To do that in SONAR without Project5, you'd have to have three audio tracks and three MIDI tracks. Each of the MIDI tracks would be identical since you're creating a layered sound, so anytime you changed something on one, you'd have to make equivalent changes on the others. (I think you might be able to use the linked clip feature to avoid this, but I'm not positive, and you'd still need the three MIDI tracks anyway.) With Project5 in the picture, you could just have one MIDI track sent to Project5, then map the synths you want to use inside Project5 to all listen to the one MIDI channel being sent from the specific SONAR track. You could also use Project5's effects to process each synth individually, if you like, and could either submix it to a single stereo output from Project5 or send each synth back to individual audio tracks inside SONAR. For just this particular 3-layer sound application, I'd think the submixed stereo out from Project5 would be the easy way to go. The key things I do like about Project5 have to do with how quick it is to set up a softsynth track and get playing, and also to play with sounds by using the Replace Synth capability mentioned above. That side of things is a lot more streamlined than in SONAR, though the downside is you give up some of the flexibility of SONAR, and ease of use in a few areas. For example, if you have a multi-timbral synth, like TTS-1, and you want to use multiple channels in a single instance of it, it is pretty confusing in Project5 to deal with managing the multiple outputs and multiple MIDI tracks since Project5 only has one MIDI track per synth instance (in SONAR you can configure as many as you want on separate tracks, with each feeding a different MIDI channel). I have never really been able to get my arms around the editing and programming interface, though. While its P-SEQ editor is similar to in concept to SONAR's Piano Roll View, somehow I find SONAR's Piano Roll View much easier to use and manipulate. (For example, I don't like the dual function scroll bars in Project5 -- they are used to both zoom and move, which I guess can be handy if you want to try and do it in one step, but I find them awkward for my sometimes-mouse-challenged hands, and would prefer having dedicated zooming capabilities.) There is one area I do like about P-SEQ, though, and that is the ability to draw controller values, including velocity, right behind the note representations in P-SEQ. It does make it easy to see those things and see how they align with the notes, whereas in SONAR you have to actually go into the note properties to see velocity, and run your eyes up and down between the note pane and the controller pane to see CC value alignments with notes. I just find the Project5 interface to be cluttered and cramped compared to SONAR. Also, I use SONAR's notation view quite a lot for reviewing my arrangements to figure out what is going on when something doesn't sound right -- I've never managed to get to the point of being able to look at a piano roll view and quickly see what is going on musically -- and Project5 doesn't have a notation view at all. Oh yeah, one other thing that Project5 adds to SONAR is several softsynths and effects plug-ins. The PSYN synth is pretty nice, and relatively unique-sounding. Depends on what you have already how much value there is in the rest of the slate. For example, Velocity and nPulse are both drum machines (Velocity is sampled sounds and nPulse is an analog drum machine along the lines of the Roland TR-808-type stuff) that could be useful, but I already had FXpansion's DR-008, which covers both functions quite well, and felt like a superset of both of these. They also announced a new "multi-mode sampling synthesizer" with Project 5 V2, and they say that was engineered by rgcAudio in the announcement. Reading a paper description of a synthesizer doesn't do much to describe its sound, so I guess we'll have to wait to hear it until Project 5 V2 is out. It's at least conceivable, though, that a high quality synth (or sampling synth) could be worth the upgrade price in and of itself. That is probably the biggest thing I'll be looking at with respect to my own decision on whether to upgrade or not. Rick -- ===================================== Rick Paul Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) Web: http://home.earthlink.net/~rickpaul MP3s: http://www.soundclick.com/rickpaul ===================================== "Chris Forsyth" <> wrote in message news:OWL_d.22529$... >I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have >held out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. >Can anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: > > 1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot > accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making > process? > 2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". > 3. Any other comments welcome > > Regards, > > Chris Forsyth >
Thanks for the detailed input Rick - it is very much appreciated. Regards, Chris "Rick Paul" <> wrote in message news:0A2%d.14873$... > Just to add a few notes to this discussion, I'm another one who has > Project5 1.5, but hasn't fully gotten my arms around it, though there are > some things I like a lot, too, and wish were added to SONAR. > > I'm not really sure how to describe what it is as of V1.5, though the > announcement for V2 > (http://www.cakewalk.com/Press/01-20-05-Project5V2.asp) gives me a bit > clearer sense of what I think it's potential should be, and that is a > remixing tool. In particular, the ability to bring in "normal" audio > (i.e. not just loops) was not there in V1.x, but the V2 announcement > mentions multitrack audio, even recording. I'd think that should allow > you to take, say, vocal tracks from an existing recording, and build a > remix around them, whereas P5 V1 really wasn't conducive to that sort of > thing. (It's been awhile since I've tried anything like that with it, and > I don't recall if it just flat out didn't worked, let you do it but didn't > work very well, or what.) > > Of course, I'm not suggesting that is the way Cakewalk sees it -- they > call it a "performance workstation" in the above-mentioned press release. > Actually, that is another area I can see it having some uses. That is, if > you want to use a software based keyboard rig in a live scenario, where > you have a MIDI controller and a notebook PC, and a bunch of DXi or VST > softsynths, I think it would be a fine choice for serving as your > rack/patch bay/mixer. It is much easier to configure with softsynths than > SONAR is in terms of just setting things up, playing around with patches, > etc. thanks to one of the features I wish SONAR had -- "Replace Synth". > For example, if you're looking for an analog synth sound, you might be > starting with, say, NI's Pro53, and find that it wasn't quite doing what > you wanted to, and maybe you want to try something like PSYN or one of the > Arturia products, or whatever, instead. In SONAR, you'd have to add new > elements to the synth rack, delete the ones you had in there, connect the > new elements to the MIDI and audio tracks in SONAR (or, alternately, have > SONAR configure new tracks and you then manually delete the old ones). If > you've already got MIDI information on the MIDI track, that is another > thing to consider as, in SONAR, you'd need to either do the MIDI track > reconnection or move the MIDI information from the old track to the new > track before you delete the MIDI track. And what if you want to go back > to Pro53, or check a third synth? With Project5, that is easy. You just > use the Replace Synth command, pick the synth you want to try next from > the menu, pick patches, and you're there. Replacing the synth is pretty > much as easy as changing a patch. > > I also think Cakewalk sees it as something to compete with Reason, FL > Studio, and a few other packages of that sort. I never quite got my arms > around Reason, either, but there are lots of people who have. One big > advantage Project5 has over Reason is the ability to use any plug-in > synths, not just ones it comes with. Of course, I imagine some people buy > Reason just as much for its synths as for the environment. Still, what if > you like everything in Reason, including the environment, but you want to > do one track of, say, DFH Superior or something? With Reason, you'd end > up having to use SONAR (or some other DAW) and ReWire Reason into SONAR > and plug DFHS in directly. With Project5, if you liked its environment > for doing things like you'd do in Reason, you could just plug DFHS into it > directly. > > One area where Project5 can be a somewhat useful adjunct to SONAR is as a > "synth rack on steroids" -- i.e. essentially the equivalent of a hardware > synth rack, only where the synths are softsynths instead of hardware. > Let's say you want to build a layered sound for a SONAR production, where > one of the sounds is from Pro53, another from FM7, and another from, say, > TTS-1. To do that in SONAR without Project5, you'd have to have three > audio tracks and three MIDI tracks. Each of the MIDI tracks would be > identical since you're creating a layered sound, so anytime you changed > something on one, you'd have to make equivalent changes on the others. (I > think you might be able to use the linked clip feature to avoid this, but > I'm not positive, and you'd still need the three MIDI tracks anyway.) > With Project5 in the picture, you could just have one MIDI track sent to > Project5, then map the synths you want to use inside Project5 to all > listen to the one MIDI channel being sent from the specific SONAR track. > You could also use Project5's effects to process each synth individually, > if you like, and could either submix it to a single stereo output from > Project5 or send each synth back to individual audio tracks inside SONAR. > For just this particular 3-layer sound application, I'd think the submixed > stereo out from Project5 would be the easy way to go. > > The key things I do like about Project5 have to do with how quick it is to > set up a softsynth track and get playing, and also to play with sounds by > using the Replace Synth capability mentioned above. That side of things > is a lot more streamlined than in SONAR, though the downside is you give > up some of the flexibility of SONAR, and ease of use in a few areas. For > example, if you have a multi-timbral synth, like TTS-1, and you want to > use multiple channels in a single instance of it, it is pretty confusing > in Project5 to deal with managing the multiple outputs and multiple MIDI > tracks since Project5 only has one MIDI track per synth instance (in SONAR > you can configure as many as you want on separate tracks, with each > feeding a different MIDI channel). > > I have never really been able to get my arms around the editing and > programming interface, though. While its P-SEQ editor is similar to in > concept to SONAR's Piano Roll View, somehow I find SONAR's Piano Roll View > much easier to use and manipulate. (For example, I don't like the dual > function scroll bars in Project5 -- they are used to both zoom and move, > which I guess can be handy if you want to try and do it in one step, but I > find them awkward for my sometimes-mouse-challenged hands, and would > prefer having dedicated zooming capabilities.) There is one area I do > like about P-SEQ, though, and that is the ability to draw controller > values, including velocity, right behind the note representations in > P-SEQ. It does make it easy to see those things and see how they align > with the notes, whereas in SONAR you have to actually go into the note > properties to see velocity, and run your eyes up and down between the note > pane and the controller pane to see CC value alignments with notes. I > just find the Project5 interface to be cluttered and cramped compared to > SONAR. Also, I use SONAR's notation view quite a lot for reviewing my > arrangements to figure out what is going on when something doesn't sound > right -- I've never managed to get to the point of being able to look at a > piano roll view and quickly see what is going on musically -- and Project5 > doesn't have a notation view at all. > > Oh yeah, one other thing that Project5 adds to SONAR is several softsynths > and effects plug-ins. The PSYN synth is pretty nice, and relatively > unique-sounding. Depends on what you have already how much value there is > in the rest of the slate. For example, Velocity and nPulse are both drum > machines (Velocity is sampled sounds and nPulse is an analog drum machine > along the lines of the Roland TR-808-type stuff) that could be useful, but > I already had FXpansion's DR-008, which covers both functions quite well, > and felt like a superset of both of these. They also announced a new > "multi-mode sampling synthesizer" with Project 5 V2, and they say that was > engineered by rgcAudio in the announcement. Reading a paper description > of a synthesizer doesn't do much to describe its sound, so I guess we'll > have to wait to hear it until Project 5 V2 is out. It's at least > conceivable, though, that a high quality synth (or sampling synth) could > be worth the upgrade price in and of itself. That is probably the biggest > thing I'll be looking at with respect to my own decision on whether to > upgrade or not. > > Rick > -- > ===================================== > Rick Paul > Closet Cowboy Music (ASCAP) > Web: http://home.earthlink.net/~rickpaul > MP3s: http://www.soundclick.com/rickpaul > ===================================== > > "Chris Forsyth" <> wrote in message > news:OWL_d.22529$... >>I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have >>held out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. >>Can anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: >> >> 1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot >> accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making >> process? >> 2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". >> 3. Any other comments welcome >> >> Regards, >> >> Chris Forsyth >> > >
> I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have held > out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. Can > anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: > > 1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot > accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making > process? > 2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". > 3. Any other comments welcome > I haven't opened it in a long time, but it is an extremely powerful softsynth tool. You can open softsynths in it and edit any parameter in any synth and also record songs in "sequences" like the old days of the C64. Think of it as a cross between the synth rack and Midiquest, with sequence recording thrown in. If you don't use alot of softsynths all at one time forget it. Sonar is easier. If you want to layer the hell out of your softsynth's sounds and tweek them *GRAPHICALLY* all on one screen then it's a killer app. I don't have the upgrade, and don't really know what's in it, but whatever is in it has to be well thought out improvements. RM
Thanks Richie - much appreciated. Regards, Chris <Richie Miller> wrote in message news:... >> I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have >> held >> out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. Can >> anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: >> >> 1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot >> accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making >> process? >> 2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". >> 3. Any other comments welcome >> > I haven't opened it in a long time, but it is an extremely powerful > softsynth > tool. You can open softsynths in it and edit any parameter in any synth > and > also record songs in "sequences" like the old days of the C64. > > Think of it as a cross between the synth rack and Midiquest, with sequence > recording thrown in. > > If you don't use alot of softsynths all at one time forget it. Sonar is > easier. If you want to layer the hell out of your softsynth's sounds and > tweek > them *GRAPHICALLY* all on one screen then it's a killer app. I don't have > the > upgrade, and don't really know what's in it, but whatever is in it has to > be > well thought out improvements. > > RM
I have P5. If it's a performance workstation, Ableton Live is better. MUCH better. If it's a synthrack composition tool, Reason is better. MUCH better. If it's a composition tool, I really don't see what it does that's different from Sonar, which is better MUCH better. As much as I want it to succeed because it looks so cool, I don't get it. But I'll probably by V2 because I have to have all the new toys. Best, MW P.S. Ableton Live is just an awesome piece of software. My best guess it that's what P5 was shooting for. Swing and a Miss! Chris Forsyth wrote: > I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have held > out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. Can > anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: > > 1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot > accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making > process? > 2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". > 3. Any other comments welcome > > Regards, > > Chris Forsyth > > -- T ..-"-. | ___| | (.\/.) MX West | ,,,' www.sonarama.com | '### '----'
Thanks for the input! Chris "MX West (Tera2)" <> wrote in message news:1111468746.10736a83238f25c27a5ae87ea43f479a@teranews... >I have P5. > > If it's a performance workstation, Ableton Live is better. MUCH better. > > If it's a synthrack composition tool, Reason is better. MUCH better. > > If it's a composition tool, I really don't see what it does that's > different from Sonar, which is better MUCH better. > > As much as I want it to succeed because it looks so cool, I don't get it. > > But I'll probably by V2 because I have to have all the new toys. > > Best, > MW > > P.S. Ableton Live is just an awesome piece of software. My best guess it > that's what P5 was shooting for. Swing and a Miss! > > Chris Forsyth wrote: >> I got the email for the "Buy now - get the free upgrade" offer. I have >> held out thus far - but I have to admit I am intrigued by this product. >> Can anyone who reads this pitch in with an opinion: >> >> 1. What is it ....... What exactly does this product do that I cannot >> accomplish in Sonar 4 Producer - how does it enhance the music making >> process? >> 2. For those who have it - Do you love it, hate it, or is it just "ok". >> 3. Any other comments welcome >> >> Regards, >> >> Chris Forsyth > > > -- > T > .-"-. > | ___| > | (.\/.) MX West > | ,,,' www.sonarama.com > | '### > '----'
Chris Forsyth wrote: > Thanks Susan - boy.....with all of these raving reviews - i guess its a > no-brainer! ;-) Well I guess I'll have to go against the grain and say I like it. I've used it with a laptop as a synth rack for a live gig once - I use it occasionally to just mess around with to get ideas (of course, I also do that with BIAB...). I doesn't really do anything that you can't do in Sonar - but it does do some of the soft synth midi things easier than Sonar. I have used it as a synth rack for Sonar too. On the other hand - I have say I don't use it much. But when I do, I always think "that's pretty cool" and vow to use it more. I'm on the fence about if I'm going to upgrade though...
I agree with pretty much everything Rick said - I got P5 when it first came out on the "existing cake customer special" price. I though there was a lot of value there just from the soft synth side - I didn't have much at the time. My favorite soft synth I have is the Z3ta+ (favorite free one is Crystal) - PSYN was written by the same guy. And it is easier to use for soft synths and midi work - I just don't do much of that. I guess I want to keep working with it becuase I want to get better at it!! Rick Paul wrote: > Just to add a few notes to this discussion, I'm another one who has Project5 > 1.5, but hasn't fully gotten my arms around it, though there are some things > I like a lot, too, and wish were added to SONAR. > > I'm not really sure how to describe what it is as of V1.5, though the > announcement for V2 (http://www.cakewalk.com/Press/01-20-05-Project5V2.asp) > gives me a bit clearer sense of what I think it's potential should be, and > that is a remixing tool. In particular, the ability to bring in "normal" > audio (i.e. not just loops) was not there in V1.x, but the V2 announcement > mentions multitrack audio, even recording. I'd think that should allow you > to take, say, vocal tracks from an existing recording, and build a remix > around them, whereas P5 V1 really wasn't conducive to that sort of thing. > (It's been awhile since I've tried anything like that with it, and I don't > recall if it just flat out didn't worked, let you do it but didn't work very > well, or what.) > > Of course, I'm not suggesting that is the way Cakewalk sees it -- they call > it a "performance workstation" in the above-mentioned press release. > Actually, that is another area I can see it having some uses. That is, if > you want to use a software based keyboard rig in a live scenario, where you > have a MIDI controller and a notebook PC, and a bunch of DXi or VST > softsynths, I think it would be a fine choice for serving as your rack/patch > bay/mixer. It is much easier to configure with softsynths than SONAR is in > terms of just setting things up, playing around with patches, etc. thanks to > one of the features I wish SONAR had -- "Replace Synth". For example, if > you're looking for an analog synth sound, you might be starting with, say, > NI's Pro53, and find that it wasn't quite doing what you wanted to, and > maybe you want to try something like PSYN or one of the Arturia products, or > whatever, instead. In SONAR, you'd have to add new elements to the synth > rack, delete the ones you had in there, connect the new elements to the MIDI > and audio tracks in SONAR (or, alternately, have SONAR configure new tracks > and you then manually delete the old ones). If you've already got MIDI > information on the MIDI track, that is another thing to consider as, in > SONAR, you'd need to either do the MIDI track reconnection or move the MIDI > information from the old track to the new track before you delete the MIDI > track. And what if you want to go back to Pro53, or check a third synth? > With Project5, that is easy. You just use the Replace Synth command, pick > the synth you want to try next from the menu, pick patches, and you're > there. Replacing the synth is pretty much as easy as changing a patch. > > I also think Cakewalk sees it as something to compete with Reason, FL > Studio, and a few other packages of that sort. I never quite got my arms > around Reason, either, but there are lots of people who have. One big > advantage Project5 has over Reason is the ability to use any plug-in synths, > not just ones it comes with. Of course, I imagine some people buy Reason > just as much for its synths as for the environment. Still, what if you like > everything in Reason, including the environment, but you want to do one > track of, say, DFH Superior or something? With Reason, you'd end up having > to use SONAR (or some other DAW) and ReWire Reason into SONAR and plug DFHS > in directly. With Project5, if you liked its environment for doing things > like you'd do in Reason, you could just plug DFHS into it directly. > > One area where Project5 can be a somewhat useful adjunct to SONAR is as a > "synth rack on steroids" -- i.e. essentially the equivalent of a hardware > synth rack, only where the synths are softsynths instead of hardware. Let's > say you want to build a layered sound for a SONAR production, where one of > the sounds is from Pro53, another from FM7, and another from, say, TTS-1. > To do that in SONAR without Project5, you'd have to have three audio tracks > and three MIDI tracks. Each of the MIDI tracks would be identical since > you're creating a layered sound, so anytime you changed something on one, > you'd have to make equivalent changes on the others. (I think you might be > able to use the linked clip feature to avoid this, but I'm not positive, and > you'd still need the three MIDI tracks anyway.) With Project5 in the > picture, you could just have one MIDI track sent to Project5, then map the > synths you want to use inside Project5 to all listen to the one MIDI channel > being sent from the specific SONAR track. You could also use Project5's > effects to process each synth individually, if you like, and could either > submix it to a single stereo output from Project5 or send each synth back to > individual audio tracks inside SONAR. For just this particular 3-layer > sound application, I'd think the submixed stereo out from Project5 would be > the easy way to go. > > The key things I do like about Project5 have to do with how quick it is to > set up a softsynth track and get playing, and also to play with sounds by > using the Replace Synth capability mentioned above. That side of things is > a lot more streamlined than in SONAR, though the downside is you give up > some of the flexibility of SONAR, and ease of use in a few areas. For > example, if you have a multi-timbral synth, like TTS-1, and you want to use > multiple channels in a single instance of it, it is pretty confusing in > Project5 to deal with managing the multiple outputs and multiple MIDI tracks > since Project5 only has one MIDI track per synth instance (in SONAR you can > configure as many as you want on separate tracks, with each feeding a > different MIDI channel). > > I have never really been able to get my arms around the editing and > programming interface, though. While its P-SEQ editor is similar to in > concept to SONAR's Piano Roll View, somehow I find SONAR's Piano Roll View > much easier to use and manipulate. (For example, I don't like the dual > function scroll bars in Project5 -- they are used to both zoom and move, > which I guess can be handy if you want to try and do it in one step, but I > find them awkward for my sometimes-mouse-challenged hands, and would prefer > having dedicated zooming capabilities.) There is one area I do like about > P-SEQ, though, and that is the ability to draw controller values, including > velocity, right behind the note representations in P-SEQ. It does make it > easy to see those things and see how they align with the notes, whereas in > SONAR you have to actually go into the note properties to see velocity, and > run your eyes up and down between the note pane and the controller pane to > see CC value alignments with notes. I just find the Project5 interface to > be cluttered and cramped compared to SONAR. Also, I use SONAR's notation > view quite a lot for reviewing my arrangements to figure out what is going > on when something doesn't sound right -- I've never managed to get to the > point of being able to look at a piano roll view and quickly see what is > going on musically -- and Project5 doesn't have a notation view at all. > > Oh yeah, one other thing that Project5 adds to SONAR is several softsynths > and effects plug-ins. The PSYN synth is pretty nice, and relatively > unique-sounding. Depends on what you have already how much value there is > in the rest of the slate. For example, Velocity and nPulse are both drum > machines (Velocity is sampled sounds and nPulse is an analog drum machine > along the lines of the Roland TR-808-type stuff) that could be useful, but I > already had FXpansion's DR-008, which covers both functions quite well, and > felt like a superset of both of these. They also announced a new > "multi-mode sampling synthesizer" with Project 5 V2, and they say that was > engineered by rgcAudio in the announcement. Reading a paper description of > a synthesizer doesn't do much to describe its sound, so I guess we'll have > to wait to hear it until Project 5 V2 is out. It's at least conceivable, > though, that a high quality synth (or sampling synth) could be worth the > upgrade price in and of itself. That is probably the biggest thing I'll be > looking at with respect to my own decision on whether to upgrade or not. > > Rick
> But I'll probably by V2 because I have to have all the new toys. Jeez - probably me too. I think you and I are dangerously alike <g> Ableton live is that much better?? hmmmmmm.....
Vinny wrote: > Chris Forsyth wrote: >> Thanks Susan - boy.....with all of these raving reviews - i guess >> its a no-brainer! ;-) > > Well I guess I'll have to go against the grain and say I like it. I've > used it with a laptop as a synth rack for a live gig once - I > use it occasionally to just mess around with to get ideas (of course, > I also do that with BIAB...). I doesn't really do anything that you > can't do in Sonar - but it does do some of the soft synth midi things > easier than Sonar. I have used it as a synth rack for Sonar too. > > On the other hand - I have say I don't use it much. But when I do, I > always think "that's pretty cool" and vow to use it more. > > I'm on the fence about if I'm going to upgrade though... 1) the fact you still use it seldom despite using it for quite a while - is something that should seriously give you pause before upgrading, to start. 2) if its interface really does make it simpler to do some of the things you'd ordinarily have done in Sonar or some other audio app, you can't go wrong keeping what you've got and enjoying it unless the upgrade offers advantages the tips the cost/benefit balance.
