Cakewalk/Roland V-Studio

[Anderton]

I'll try to add some more photos tomorrow, but this was a big deal. Basically, it's a complete, turnkey studio based around Sonar 8.0, along with a hardware controller, audio interface, and Roland Fantom synth engine (built in the interface). As they are not exactly unknown quantities, it might not seem that impressive at first until you scratch beneath the surface.

The interface has tons of I/O, but what impresses me is that the mic preamps sound really good. Also, they have digitally-controlled gain, and you can control this directly from the console and store gain settings as a preamp. So you can have different presets for different miking situations.

Having the Roland synth built into the interface may seem gratuitous, but it's a zero-latency hardware synth with a bunch of excellent-sounding presets. It's very convenient to have a high-end synth that's ready to go as soon as you turn things on, and doesn't load down your CPU. But you can also add an ARX synth expansion board which isn't like a new ROM set, but another synth engine--more polyphony, more sounds, etc.

The controller has nine motorized faders, but to me, the star of that show are the 12 rotary encoders that tweak EQ or perhaps more importantly, control synth and signal processors via Cakewalk's ACT protocol. The choice of controls and buttons makes it easy to navigate through Sonar, especially the jog/shuttle wheel--great stuff. What Cakewalk didn't emphasize was that the controller is also Mackie-compatible, so if you use programs other than Sonar, odds are you'll be able to use the controller with it.

I was lucky enough to have a pre-production prototype controller to work with for an EQ feature article on controllers, and it really is a game-changer for Sonar...serious workflow mojo, thanks to well-executed hands-on control. The three images show various views from the Cakewalk press conference in the morning of the show.

[jmarkham]

Check out:

unIv2Gl1PAQ

Or higher res:

http://techbreakfast.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1739#post1739

[Lucky #9]

This new interface looks like a winner for Sonar users (like myself).

Problem for many of us is the $4,000 price tag I've seen posted with it.

Too bad there isn't a "lite" version.
4 Gs is out of the question, unfortunately.

[Anderton]

I know what you mean, but if you break the costs down, it's not as bad. The full package has not only the control surface (which definitely rocks), but also Sonar 8, the full version of Rapture (the non-V-Studio Sonar 8 only has the LE version), a really good interface--the eight mic pres sound excellent--and a Roland Fantom synth.

[sillyme]

That price tag is a real turn off. I was hoping for something more affordable. For the price they are posting, I can get into a used Oasys and get more bang for the buck IMHO. I am also a Sonar user and really like it alot but i just can't see the value in this yet considering the hefty price tag. As an example; I could get a Fantom X with 4 SRX cards and Sonar 8 for less and be better off, again IMO.

[MikeRivers]

One of the things that I noticed at this AES show is that there seemed to be more exhibitors who weren't afraid to show cool but rather more pricey products than those which the MI playing field has become accustomed. It will be interesting to see if this trend continues at the NAMM show or whether we'll see more cheaper products there.

[Anderton]

Good point. I've worked with a prototype of the V-Studio controller, and it speeds things up enough that I estimate within less than a year, it will have paid for itself given how many projects I do with Sonar. I'll definitely be buying the controller as soon as it appears...I'm sure it will last more than a year, so past a certain point, it will start making money for me.

[Alndln2]

That price tag is a real turn off. I was hoping for something more affordable. For the price they are posting, I can get into a used Oasys and get more bang for the buck IMHO. I am also a Sonar user and really like it alot but i just can't see the value in this yet considering the hefty price tag. As an example; I could get a Fantom X with 4 SRX cards and Sonar 8 for less and be better off, again IMO. If all you cared about is the built in synth I'd have to agree with you, but from what I've heard, the converters and mic pre's are fairly high end and there are people who care about that and not the synth. I think eventually Roland will probably sell the separate components individually, but as a Sonar user I'm contemplating the whole package as a future upgrade. Someone on GS stated they heard the converters were the same chips that Apogee uses, if that's the case and the mic pre's match that quality I can easily see how all 3 components go for 4G's.

[MikeRivers]

If all you cared about is the built in synth I'd have to agree with you, but from what I've heard, the converters and mic pre's are fairly high end and there are people who care about that and not the synth.
There are plenty of high grade mic preamps and converters out there, too, but what this gadget offers is a fully integrated system, including a hardware control surface. This means that instead of buying several pieces from different manufacturer and then have to make them work together, to the computer, it looks like just one piece of hardware and one piece of software that were designed to work together.

What you give up is the flexibility to make your own choices of input and output gear, control surface, and synthesizer (and DAW program, for that matter). The control surface will probably work with other DAW programs, and you can always add outboard preamps and converters, but they you're buying twice. But there's still an upgrade path.

Some like the idea of a turnkey system. Others will save half the bucks or throw in a really fine piece of hardware and take as much time as is necessary doing their own system engineering.

The V-Studio reminded me a bit of the TASCAM SX-1, and integrated audio and MIDI system built around a console. I don't think the world was ready for it when it came out (or maybe wasn't wealthy enough) so it didn't stay around very long, but apparently the few who bought into it found it to be a very productive system. The fact that it ran under BeOS, which also didn't stay around very long, probably kept a lot of skeptics away. Jeff was around TASCAM at that time. Maybe he has some good, or some really bad memories.

Someone on GS stated they heard the converters were the same chips that Apogee uses, if that's the case and the mic pre's match that quality I can easily see how all 3 components go for 4G's.
Lots of converters use the same chips as Apogee. That's just a small part of making a good converter-the-box. But Roland has always done digital pretty well, going back to their early samplers, so the converters are probably good enough so that they aren't going to stand in the way of making good recordings. They've been learning about mic preamps for a while and probably have them down pretty competently now.

[Anderton]

There are plenty of high grade mic preamps and converters out there, too, but what this gadget offers is a fully integrated system, including a hardware control surface. This means that instead of buying several pieces from different manufacturer and then have to make them work together, to the computer, it looks like just one piece of hardware and one piece of software that were designed to work together.

True, and it also lets them get away with things like being able to adjust mic preamp gains from the control surface itself, and save gain presets for different recording scenarios.

The control surface will probably work with other DAW programs...

It can do Mackie control, I've used it with Ableton Live and some other programs. If it didn't do Mackie control, that would have been a deal-breaker as I don't want two control surfaces on my desktop.

Lots of converters use the same chips as Apogee. That's just a small part of making a good converter-the-box.

Bingo! Spread the gospel, brother. Chips are pretty similar these days, but the "glue" varies considerably.

But Roland has always done digital pretty well, going back to their early samplers, so the converters are probably good enough so that they aren't going to stand in the way of making good recordings. They've been learning about mic preamps for a while and probably have them down pretty competently now.

Well I don't get excited about mic pres, but I will say these are very clean and "sweet" - no brittleness. They're better than most of the mic pres I have, and there are eight of them, so it would be a step up for my studio.

[JoseC.]

Craig, I've been trying to find out whether the integrated Fantom can sample or not...can you give us a clue?

[Anderton]

As far as I know it's playback only, but you can add ARX expansion cards for more sounds.

[JoseC.]

As far as I know it's playback only, but you can add ARX expansion cards for more sounds.

LOL, yes, as long as I need Electric Pianos or more drums...thanks for your fast reply, anyway, Craig :thu:

[MikeRivers]

I searched through your review for the meaning of ACT and didn't find it. I dug through the press release and found that it stands for Active Control Technology but I still don't know what that means. Isn't the purpose of every control (except for the WARM knob that you turn when the artist says "Can't you make that sound a little warmer?") to be active?

Is this something that every Cakewalk user knows and I'm just out of the loop?

{A}
{C}ontrived
{R}eduction
{O}f
{N}omenclature
{Y}ielding
{M}nemonics

[Mase]

How do you get music out of sonar v-studio 700 on to CD?

[Anderton]

Use the Make CD option.

[fuzzball]

Thanks, this seems like a cool device...I wish it worked with pro tools.

[Alndln2]

...I wish it worked with pro tools. You should be able to use it as I'm pretty sure PT supports the standard Mackie HUI mode.

[LatencyLover?]

I read there is compression on the inputs ,but for the price of this thing it should have included DSP processing similar to or better than the Steinberg MR816 CSX or even TC Studio konnekt 48. You're going to tell me with all that "power" of the included fantom, they couldn't allocate some for DSP??? I also feel that the ARX is going to the way of the dinosaur. Some will read this and say "oh thats why there is native processing for effects and plugs" true, but what about all the latency and buffer issues? Who wants to program a computer when one is creating music? I truly believe for that price they should of put some UAD/Powercore type of capability in the box.

[cbertels]

Craig, any idea if Cakewalk has any plans of releasing the components separately at some point? I have amassed quite a few mic pre's and outboard synths that I have little use for the I/O part of this system. I do LOVE the custom control surface that Pro Tools users have enjoyed for years. I have used the Mackie but found it not quite what I wanted. I have been waiting for a product like this forever and really hope to get the control surface on its own! I have been using Sonar since 2.0 and just found it suited my workflow the best.

[Anderton]

I read there is compression on the inputs ,but for the price of this thing it should have included DSP processing similar to or better than the Steinberg MR816 CSX or even TC Studio konnekt 48. You're going to tell me with all that "power" of the included fantom, they couldn't allocate some for DSP??? I also feel that the ARX is going to the way of the dinosaur. Some will read this and say "oh thats why there is native processing for effects and plugs" true, but what about all the latency and buffer issues? Who wants to program a computer when one is creating music? I truly believe for that price they should of put some UAD/Powercore type of capability in the box.

Well...the UAD Quad, which is what you'd want for a system like this, ranges in price from $1,900 to $2,500 list. And that's not including the optional plug-ins. Raising the V-Studio price an additional 50% or so would make no sense, especially for those who had already invested in PowerCore or UAD systems (read the preceding post - people don't like to pay for something they already have).

The Fantom is, as far as I know, not a general-purpose DSP device made to act like a synth, but uses dedicated synth chips. These don't lend themselves to being re-configured the same way that, say, a SHARC can.

Wouldn't it make more sense not to pay extra for the V-Studio, and instead just buy whatever system you want - PowerCore, Duende, UAD, Sonic Core, etc.?

[Anderton]

Craig, any idea if Cakewalk has any plans of releasing the components separately at some point?

I've asked about this, and so far, it's a no...I can't speak for Cakewalk, but their whole point is the integration aspect and I think they don't want to mess with that.

At this point I've used the system for a while. It's not fully functional, and as it's a production prototype, it needs to go back to the factory soon. However, I've been using it virtually every day in some capacity, and the integration thing is a big deal. However, I'm with you: It would be nice to release the control surface by itself, as long as people were aware that the "mic preamp gain trim" parameters on the console aren't going to do anything unless you're using the Cakewalk interface....

I have amassed quite a few mic pre's and outboard synths that I have little use for the I/O part of this system. I do LOVE the custom control surface that Pro Tools users have enjoyed for years. I have used the Mackie but found it not quite what I wanted. I have been waiting for a product like this forever and really hope to get the control surface on its own! I have been using Sonar since 2.0 and just found it suited my workflow the best.

My first reaction was also "what a waste, I already have an interface and preamps." My attitude has changed somewhat after using it. First, for whatever reason (Sonar 8's revamped engine? Better drivers? Interface hardware?) the latencies I'm getting are much lower than I've had before. Second, the mic pres are extremely "clean" and neutral. However, they can't replace some of the more "colorful" pres I have. But, if I want color, that's what I'll use regardless of what's in the V-Studio.

On the other hand I'm getting really excellent detail with condenser mics, and with sources like synth and bass, the detail also shows through. So, while I could do just fine without the pres, they've added another option to the studio that works very well with certain sources.

Lately I've been using it as a Mackie Control and been pretty happy with that, too. So far, so good...

[cbertels]

The package overall seems really great. Maybe after a little demoing when the final product is released, selling off some of the "cleaner" pre-amps and less useful gear for the v-studio package may make the cost worth while, especially considering the time savings with specific controls along with saving mic pre settings for different applications really brings a new meaning to templates and pre-sets.

Maybe a lower cost control surface only similar to that of the V-studio could help bridge the gap between Pro-level and that of the hobbyist looking for an alternative to the Mackie control. I'm not downing Mackie products in anyway, but you can't beat the integration of hardware and software manufactured under the same roof. What do ya say Cakewalk? :)

[Anderton]

The package overall seems really great. Maybe after a little demoing when the final product is released, selling off some of the "cleaner" pre-amps and less useful gear for the v-studio package may make the cost worth while, especially considering the time savings with specific controls along with saving mic pre settings for different applications really brings a new meaning to templates and pre-sets.

Maybe a lower cost control surface only similar to that of the V-studio could help bridge the gap between Pro-level and that of the hobbyist looking for an alternative to the Mackie control. I'm not downing Mackie products in anyway, but you can't beat the integration of hardware and software manufactured under the same roof. What do ya say Cakewalk? :)

Again, I can't speak for Cakewalk, but I hear ya: I love the Euphonix Artist Series, for example, and Sonar IS EuCon compatible...but you need a Mac to run the Euphonix software, it's not out for Windows yet...and you need an applet for Windows that can listen to what's being sent by the Mac, and I don't think that's out yet, either. Overall, that's too klugey for me right now with Sonar. If the Artist Series controller worked with Sonar as well as it does on the Mac with Logic or Cubase, you'd have your option right there.

As to a lower-cost control surface, I think that the main expenses are in the casing, tooling, moving faders, and rotary encoders rather than the electronics. So the main way Cakewalk could cut costs would be to reduce the number of moving faders and encoders, but one of the big strengths of the console is having all those controls at your fingertips. I dunno...maybe someone from Cakewalk could chime in.

My guess is that they needed to bring out the "pro level" product first. Sonar has made tremendous inroads into the marketplace, but needed something like the V-Studio if they wanted to displace users of other high-end DAWs. I suspect if the V-Studio does well, there would likely be downmarket versions. But again, let me stress this is all speculation.

[cbertels]

I love the Euphonix Artist Series, for example, and Sonar IS EuCon compatible...If the Artist Series controller worked with Sonar as well as it does on the Mac with Logic or Cubase, you'd have your option right there.

I couldn't agree more there! The Euphonix controllers look and feel amazing from the brief amount of time I had to demo with them. And you can't beat the tiny footprint given the amount of control.

As to a lower-cost control surface, I think that the main expenses are in the casing, tooling, moving faders, and rotary encoders rather than the electronics. So the main way Cakewalk could cut costs would be to reduce the number of moving faders and encoders, but one of the big strengths of the console is having all those controls at your fingertips. I dunno...maybe someone from Cakewalk could chime in.

I hope to see something in the new year. I love the direction Sonar is going and hope to continue to see the big progress being made.

[Lucky #9]

As to a lower-cost control surface, I think that the main expenses are in the casing, tooling, moving faders, and rotary encoders rather than the electronics. So the main way Cakewalk could cut costs would be to reduce the number of moving faders and encoders, but one of the big strengths of the console is having all those controls at your fingertips. I dunno...maybe someone from Cakewalk could chime in.


Not to be a doubting Thomas...and there certainly is no comparison between the two items...but are moving faders and encoders that expensive to implement? Even cheap products like the $200 Behringer BCF2000 have moving faders.

[Anderton]

Not to be a doubting Thomas...and there certainly is no comparison between the two items...but are moving faders and encoders that expensive to implement? Even cheap products like the $200 Behringer BCF2000 has moving faders.

There are large differences in costs among moving faders, based on their mean time between failures and overall reliability. I suspect Cakewalk is using the high-priced spread.

[cbertels]

A little off topic, but are there any QWERTY keyboards that work with Sonar 7 and/or 8 with the pre-printed shortcuts on them? I know they make them for Pro-Tools and Logic and I would love to grab one for Sonar. It may help bridge the gap between my less than stellar control surface and the mousing through menus.

Any estimated release dates for the V-Studio or availability for the general public to have a look at them?

[Anderton]

A little off topic, but are there any QWERTY keyboards that work with Sonar 7 and/or 8 with the pre-printed shortcuts on them?

Not that I know of, but this might be something you want to ask in the Cakewalk forums.

Any estimated release dates for the V-Studio or availability for the general public to have a look at them?

At AES, V-Studio was announced as "1st quarter 2009." I believe they are sticking to that, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was earlier in the quarter rather than later.

[Lucky #9]

A little off topic, but are there any QWERTY keyboards that work with Sonar 7 and/or 8 with the pre-printed shortcuts on them? I know they make them for Pro-Tools and Logic and I would love to grab one for Sonar. It may help bridge the gap between my less than stellar control surface and the mousing through menus.

Any estimated release dates for the V-Studio or availability for the general public to have a look at them?

If you shoot over to ebay, you can find a couple of listings with Sonar Stick-ons to cover the basics.

Do a search for "Cakewalk Sonar Keyboard Stickers" and you come up with no listings in the general availability areas but in the stores listing that comes up with it you'll find the stickers for $6.50 (or "Best Offer") plus $3.50 shipping.

Also, do a search for "Editing Keys for Cakewalk" and you come up with a listing for Editors Keys, sold in the UK that you can buy.

I think the stickers can be found via www.editorskeys.com.

[fretwizz]

I searched through your review for the meaning of ACT and didn't find it......Is this something that every Cakewalk user knows and I'm just out of the loop?
From the SONAR help files:
""Active Controller Technology (ACT) allows you to control whatever plug-in effect or soft synth currently has focus. The controller/surface mappings for a particular plug-in work the same on each instance of that plug-in, whenever that instance has focus. You can change the focus to a particular plug-in by clicking either the plug-in's interface, or its name in an FX bin."

Which means you can save different controller setups for each VST/i or
even for SONARS mixer etc etc

[fretwizz]

Am I missing something here?
Where's the computer?

[Anderton]

Am I missing something here?
Where's the computer?

You need Windows XP, Vista 32-bit, Vista-64 bit, or Intel Mac running boot camp.