What I dislike about Sonar (any workarounds ?)

[daverich]

a few things which come to mind.

1) the file organsiation. Use per-song folders - the idea of sonar taking care of all the audio for all the songs in one big audio folder quite frankly scares me

This really is very quick if you have a shortcut to your audiodrive on your desktop,- hell, you can even put it on your taskbar for quick access.

2) Using an audio editor.

Since the latest version of sonar (when the feature was sured up a bit) you can reliably use any audio editor of your choice. I use adobe audition in sonar and it works great - just put the .exe of the audio editor into your tools menu using the freeware SonarUtils program.

I bought cubase sx and never use it, sonar is way quicker for me. I did find the audio engine able to run at lower latencies at higher cpu load in cubase - but then I did find it quite humourous that Cubase gaps more now than sonar does. Ron and the guys have done a great job with the audio engine.

Sonar is a different paradigm from cubase. They both work differently. Personally I prefer sonar's flexible architecture rather than cubase's botched "hardware" paragigm.

Try slip-editing an 8-miced drum track in cubase, try using the track presets in cubase and try routing groups to other groups in cubase and then try the same in sonar.

I can see why people like cubase, but on the other hand I do think it'd be nice if folks dug a little deeper into sonar - it's almost like cubasers really don't want to like it sometimes (not saying that's the case here)

3)The sonar forum. someone said the forum was unhelpful and clique-y. This is just fantasy. It's only unhelpful and clique-y if you're obviously a warez user trying to get free support - otherwise it's the nicest, most helpful forum I've ever taken part in. (and you can have avatars )

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[EdHart]

The reason I still don't work with Sonar (coming from Logic 5 5 1 + RME Hammerfield Hdsp 9652) is:
I see no way to work with "tape style" monitoring.

[daverich]

The reason I still don't work with Sonar (coming from Logic 5 5 1 + RME Hammerfield Hdsp 9652) is:
I see no way to work with "tape style" monitoring.

what is tape style monitoring?

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[fgimian]

a few things which come to mind.

1) the file organsiation. Use per-song folders - the idea of sonar taking care of all the audio for all the songs in one big audio folder quite frankly scares me

This really is very quick if you have a shortcut to your audiodrive on your desktop,- hell, you can even put it on your taskbar for quick access.

2) Using an audio editor.

Since the latest version of sonar (when the feature was sured up a bit) you can reliably use any audio editor of your choice. I use adobe audition in sonar and it works great - just put the .exe of the audio editor into your tools menu using the freeware SonarUtils program.

I bought cubase sx and never use it, sonar is way quicker for me. I did find the audio engine able to run at lower latencies at higher cpu load in cubase - but then I did find it quite humourous that Cubase gaps more now than sonar does. Ron and the guys have done a great job with the audio engine.

Sonar is a different paradigm from cubase. They both work differently. Personally I prefer sonar's flexible architecture rather than cubase's botched "hardware" paragigm.

Try slip-editing an 8-miced drum track in cubase, try using the track presets in cubase and try routing groups to other groups in cubase and then try the same in sonar.

I can see why people like cubase, but on the other hand I do think it'd be nice if folks dug a little deeper into sonar - it's almost like cubasers really don't want to like it sometimes (not saying that's the case here)

3)The sonar forum. someone said the forum was unhelpful and clique-y. This is just fantasy. It's only unhelpful and clique-y if you're obviously a warez user trying to get free support - otherwise it's the nicest, most helpful forum I've ever taken part in. (and you can have avatars )

Kind regards

Dave Rich

I found this post very helpful Dave, thank you. Can I please ask, what exactly do you mean by slip editing ?

Cheers
Fots

[daverich]

a few things which come to mind.

1) the file organsiation. Use per-song folders - the idea of sonar taking care of all the audio for all the songs in one big audio folder quite frankly scares me

This really is very quick if you have a shortcut to your audiodrive on your desktop,- hell, you can even put it on your taskbar for quick access.

2) Using an audio editor.

Since the latest version of sonar (when the feature was sured up a bit) you can reliably use any audio editor of your choice. I use adobe audition in sonar and it works great - just put the .exe of the audio editor into your tools menu using the freeware SonarUtils program.

I bought cubase sx and never use it, sonar is way quicker for me. I did find the audio engine able to run at lower latencies at higher cpu load in cubase - but then I did find it quite humourous that Cubase gaps more now than sonar does. Ron and the guys have done a great job with the audio engine.

Sonar is a different paradigm from cubase. They both work differently. Personally I prefer sonar's flexible architecture rather than cubase's botched "hardware" paragigm.

Try slip-editing an 8-miced drum track in cubase, try using the track presets in cubase and try routing groups to other groups in cubase and then try the same in sonar.

I can see why people like cubase, but on the other hand I do think it'd be nice if folks dug a little deeper into sonar - it's almost like cubasers really don't want to like it sometimes (not saying that's the case here)

3)The sonar forum. someone said the forum was unhelpful and clique-y. This is just fantasy. It's only unhelpful and clique-y if you're obviously a warez user trying to get free support - otherwise it's the nicest, most helpful forum I've ever taken part in. (and you can have avatars )

Kind regards

Dave Rich

I found this post very helpful Dave, thank you. Can I please ask, what exactly do you mean by slip editing ?

Cheers
Fots

Sonar allows you to have as many audio files on a track as you like - you can use either track Lanes to organise them, or you can have them all overlapping each other - and even fading into each other using sonars very good auto crossfade feature.

You can then resize and move the audio clips how you like and also just drag the top corner of any audio file to add a clip Fade in or Fade out. Aslo selecting a clip and pressing Q will mute it (Q for Quiet heh)

Take this a stage further and for drums you would have say 8 mics on 8 separate tracks.

Stick all of the tracks in a track folder so you can select them all together and you can then slip-edit the whole lot in one go - meaning they never go out of phase and you can move individul hits around - cross fading them so it never ever clicks and always sound natural as long as you're a little careful where you put the splits.

You may well be able to do this in cubase but after a few days playing around I found sonar was much quicker.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[fgimian]

a few things which come to mind.

1) the file organsiation. Use per-song folders - the idea of sonar taking care of all the audio for all the songs in one big audio folder quite frankly scares me

This really is very quick if you have a shortcut to your audiodrive on your desktop,- hell, you can even put it on your taskbar for quick access.

2) Using an audio editor.

Since the latest version of sonar (when the feature was sured up a bit) you can reliably use any audio editor of your choice. I use adobe audition in sonar and it works great - just put the .exe of the audio editor into your tools menu using the freeware SonarUtils program.

I bought cubase sx and never use it, sonar is way quicker for me. I did find the audio engine able to run at lower latencies at higher cpu load in cubase - but then I did find it quite humourous that Cubase gaps more now than sonar does. Ron and the guys have done a great job with the audio engine.

Sonar is a different paradigm from cubase. They both work differently. Personally I prefer sonar's flexible architecture rather than cubase's botched "hardware" paragigm.

Try slip-editing an 8-miced drum track in cubase, try using the track presets in cubase and try routing groups to other groups in cubase and then try the same in sonar.

I can see why people like cubase, but on the other hand I do think it'd be nice if folks dug a little deeper into sonar - it's almost like cubasers really don't want to like it sometimes (not saying that's the case here)

3)The sonar forum. someone said the forum was unhelpful and clique-y. This is just fantasy. It's only unhelpful and clique-y if you're obviously a warez user trying to get free support - otherwise it's the nicest, most helpful forum I've ever taken part in. (and you can have avatars )

Kind regards

Dave Rich

I found this post very helpful Dave, thank you. Can I please ask, what exactly do you mean by slip editing ?

Cheers
Fots

Sonar allows you to have as many audio files on a track as you like - you can use either track Lanes to organise them, or you can have them all overlapping each other - and even fading into each other using sonars very good auto crossfade feature.

You can then resize and move the audio clips how you like and also just drag the top corner of any audio file to add a clip Fade in or Fade out. Aslo selecting a clip and pressing Q will mute it (Q for Quiet heh)

Take this a stage further and for drums you would have say 8 mics on 8 separate tracks.

Stick all of the tracks in a track folder so you can select them all together and you can then slip-edit the whole lot in one go - meaning they never go out of phase and you can move individul hits around - cross fading them so it never ever clicks and always sound natural as long as you're a little careful where you put the splits.

You may well be able to do this in cubase but after a few days playing around I found sonar was much quicker.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

aahh, I see, yep I think you're right, this would indeed be much harder to do in Cubase, especially since I don't believe Cubase has autocrossfading.

Cheers
Fots

[EdHart]

what is tape style monitoring?

When you arm an audio track (singer), the singer hears himself with zero latency directly through the audio card.
When you start "rolling the tape" the singer now doesnot directly hear his voice, but only what's on the track (say his former recording).
Now when you punch in, he hears his direct voice with absolutely no latency, directly through the card, so he/she can get the best timing possible.

[fgimian]

what is tape style monitoring?

When you arm an audio track (singer), the singer hears himself with zero latency directly through the audio card.
When you start "rolling the tape" the singer now doesnot directly hear his voice, but only what's on the track (say his former recording).
Now when you punch in, he hears his direct voice with absolutely no latency, directly through the card, so he/she can get the best timing possible.

This ia a great point which also touches on the 0ms latency monitoring in Cubase. Cubase ASIO drivers have a feature called Direct Monitoring which Cubase supports, but most other hosts don't (including Sonar to my knowledge). I use this all the time in Cubase, on around 95 % of recordings and would have to manually switch input monitoring in my sound card audio panel if using Sonar.

I haven't done any recording in Sonar yet, but I would definitely have noticed this one immediately if I had.

Is there a way to perform direct monitoring or tape style monitoring in Sonar ?

Cheers
Fots

[daverich]

cool.

obivously with RME cards you have hardware latency free monitoring, the only difference being is that the singer will always hear their voice whether they're punched in or not - which personally I would prefer as they can get used to the sound of their voice before they go.

But yeah, I don't think sonar alone can do what you describe - but I do think nearly all soundcards have latency free monitoring these days.

Why would this feature stop you working with sonar? (just curious)

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[fgimian]

Alrighty, I've tried all suggestions (I hope I didn't miss any, please let me know if I did).

-= Worked =-

3. Is there a way to show a grid in the main arrange window ?

After searching the Sonar forums, I believe if you right-click in the track pane, you can choose "Show Gridlines." However, I think it's only quarter notes, ATM.

This works well although as mentioned, I must admit that Cubase does a better job on this end, grid lines are provided at high resolutions depending on how much you have zoomed in (upto 16th notes).

10. Is there a way to unmute or unsolo all channels at once ?

If you click on the "S" or "M" in the Recording Toolbar, this will toggle all tracks that are in that mode.

Perfect, yep this is in the "Playback State" toolbar.

11. Isn't there an easy way to zoom into the cursor in the timeline of the arrange window ?

Press Z, while holding, drag mouse.

This works, I had to press Z, then hold Ctrl and click. While holding control, the vertical zoom is not affected, if not, then I get both vertical and horizontal zooms. This is a little better in Cubase to be honest, I just put the mouse anywhere on the timeline and drag up or down to zoom in and out. But it's still awesome to know Sonar can do this.

-= Didn't Appear to Work =-

4. Why is there a dialog every time I copy / paste ?

In the dialog box, there's a check box that says "Ask every time?" -- just uncheck that.

I can't seem to find this, see below the Copy dialog and the Paste dialog (with Advanced options displayed)...




13. Why are synth /effect windows always on top ? I can't switch between them properly.

Ctrl-tab works for me.

Cltr-tab allows me to switch through plugin windows but when it takes me back to the console, all plugins windows are still on top of it. If I wish to view the console properly again, I must hide all plugin windows by closing each. Am I missing something ?

14. When creating a new track and setting the height, I then right click and choose "set Default Height". If I then create another track, the height is correct, but if I minimise and maximise the track, the height of the track is lost. Why ?

Because maximise does exactly that - sets the current height to maximum. Use restore height.

Sorry, I actually did use the "Restore" option and this still happens, I think it might be a minor bug. Give it a try...
1) Create a track, restore size and set it to a small height
2) Right click on the track and choose "Set Default Height"
3) Now create a new track and minimise then restore it. You will notice that the track loses the saved track height we saved in step 2, and instead uses the default Sonar height for tracks, which is very large.

Cheers
Fots

[torhan]

4. Why is there a dialog every time I copy / paste ?

In the dialog box, there's a check box that says "Ask every time?" -- just uncheck that.
[/b]
I can't seem to find this, see below the Copy dialog and the Paste dialog (with Advanced options displayed)...





Fots

Ok -- double check the under Options/Project (IIRC), I believe it can be set there as well.

[daverich]

Sorry, I actually did use the "Restore" option and this still happens, I think it might be a minor bug. Give it a try...
1) Create a track, restore size and set it to a small height
2) Right click on the track and choose "Set Default Height"
3) Now create a new track and minimise then restore it. You will notice that the track loses the saved track height we saved in step 2, and instead uses the default Sonar height for tracks, which is very large.

Cheers
Fots

Try pressing F.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[Hunter]

3)The sonar forum. someone said the forum was unhelpful and clique-y. This is just fantasy. It's only unhelpful and clique-y if you're obviously a warez user trying to get free support - otherwise it's the nicest, most helpful forum I've ever taken part in. (and you can have avatars )

have to disagree with you there. what makes someone an obvious warez user? if this is the case then I guess anyone with less than 300 posts, who is having a problem, must be a warez user, by sonar forum standards

OK so thats an exaggeration, but it is hardly an easy place to get peer help unless you are 'in the gang', just check out the amount of barely'unanswered threads by n00bs. Also if you complain about a feature I've seen some frankly unbelievable replies, I had one copied and pasted as my sig once, something long the lines of "How dare you come into our forum with 100 posts and pick holes in sonar"


they guys at the walk are great on email though.

[fgimian]

4. Why is there a dialog every time I copy / paste ?

In the dialog box, there's a check box that says "Ask every time?" -- just uncheck that.
[/b]
I can't seem to find this, see below the Copy dialog and the Paste dialog (with Advanced options displayed)...





Fots

Ok -- double check the under Options/Project (IIRC), I believe it can be set there as well.

Thanks for that buddy, I think you guys might be getting confused between Copy / Paste and Drag & Drop. There is a way to disable the popup in Options / Global for Drag & Drop but not for Copy / Paste. I have also checked out Options / Project.

If you could please double check for me, that would be awesome.

Thanks
Fots

[fgimian]

Sorry, I actually did use the "Restore" option and this still happens, I think it might be a minor bug. Give it a try...
1) Create a track, restore size and set it to a small height
2) Right click on the track and choose "Set Default Height"
3) Now create a new track and minimise then restore it. You will notice that the track loses the saved track height we saved in step 2, and instead uses the default Sonar height for tracks, which is very large.

Cheers
Fots

Try pressing F.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

Cool feature, not quite the same as I'm thinking, but still very useful.

Thanks
Fots