What I dislike about Sonar (any workarounds ?)

[kp]

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,

Z and drag-mouse does work - you need to drag *round* the area you want to zoom into. Alt-Up arrow/down arrow (I think) does zoom in/out too, but don't quote me on that :-)

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 ?

Ah - misunderstood a bit. By default IIRC, plug-in windows have "Stay On Top" set. Click on the window icon (top left) in a plug-in window and unselect "Stay on top" (may be called something slightly different as I'm not in front of SONAR at the moment - should be obvious).

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.

Dunno :-) I'll have to try that later - I actually dopn't use Default Heights (one of those things I really wanted until I had it then found it didn't help me as much as I thought).

[daverich]

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.

And what was the question?

Seriously, the cake forum is the friendliest I've come across - if you had your question posted as a sig it was either a) very stupid or b)something that you could've obviously searched for and found the answer to in seconds.

The Cake forum isn't immune to being annoyed by lazy posters

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[fgimian]

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,

Z and drag-mouse does work - you need to drag *round* the area you want to zoom into. Alt-Up arrow/down arrow (I think) does zoom in/out too, but don't quote me on that

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 ?

Ah - misunderstood a bit. By default IIRC, plug-in windows have "Stay On Top" set. Click on the window icon (top left) in a plug-in window and unselect "Stay on top" (may be called something slightly different as I'm not in front of SONAR at the moment - should be obvious).

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.

Dunno I'll have to try that later - I actually dopn't use Default Heights (one of those things I really wanted until I had it then found it didn't help me as much as I thought).

Huge thanks for all your help mate

Fots

[EdHart]

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 notobivously 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

The point is: In one case when he starts singing, he hears his voice back with latency in the headphones.

Or in the other case, when you listen to the track in the control room you still hear the mike.

I was trying to find a nice way of working (because I really like to use Sonar) but every time
this happens I come back to Logic again.

[whyterabbyt]

And what was the question?

Seriously, the cake forum is the friendliest I've come across - if you had your question posted as a sig it was either a) very stupid or b)something that you could've obviously searched for and found the answer to in seconds.

The Cake forum isn't immune to being annoyed by lazy posters

Kind regards

Dave Rich

I think Hunter means that he used the response to his post as his sig, not that his question wound up in someone else's sig.
And I dont find it that helpful either, a lot of the time. Certainly, asking if other people can confirm bugs or problems can be a waste of time, and yes, it does seem to be related to your postcount.

http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.asp?m=629008

[daverich]

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 notobivously 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

The point is: In one case when he starts singing, he hears his voice back with latency in the headphones.

Or in the other case, when you listen to the track in the control room you still hear the mike.

I was trying to find a nice way of working (because I really like to use Sonar) but every time
this happens I come back to Logic again.

No, the singer has zero latency because the audio path doesn't even enter the ASIO engine.

Of course the singer then has to put up with no verb, or you use a hardware effects unit to give them a bit - I'm really not "getting" the problem here.

Does the Hammerfall not do this?

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[kp]

Isn't the "tape mode" monitoring a hold-over from days when you didn't have unlimited tracks, slip-editing and couldn't move date around from track to track easily? And with a multiple out soundcard, you'd monitor over one output (to headphones) and send your main mix out another, so the idea of hearing the vocal in the control room all the time seems unlikely.

Soundpalace: It's "Float Enable" - finally remembered :-)

[RTaylor]

The scary thing is that I'm only scratching the surface of Sonar but finding these problems with workflow, maybe it's just that I'm used to Cubase or maybe it is true that Cubase is more logical and efficient.

It's because you're used to Cubase.

[mojkarma]

The scary thing is that I'm only scratching the surface of Sonar but finding these problems with workflow, maybe it's just that I'm used to Cubase or maybe it is true that Cubase is more logical and efficient.

It's because you're used to Cubase.

As a user and owner of both programms, I have to say that the workflow of cubase is much better laid out than sonars. Sonar surely has some strong points and features in the audioarea (let's not forget that Steinberg actually didn't realease a new version last year like Cakewalk) but I always have the feeling that almost everything in Sonar is just unfinished or uncompleted, especially regarding the workflow.
Just one point that I have tried minutes before. For example, setting a screenset/layout in sonar:
You have to go into the layout menu, add the screenset, then you have to switch to the keybinding menu, search for your named screenset (what a waste of time, there isn't even a search function there) and bind your layout with a shortcut.
But there is no way to update an existing layout if you change it a little. You have to go thru this whole process again.
Now, try to do it for 7 or 8 screensets!
Also, there is no way, at least I didn't find it, to activate/deactivate the metronome while the song is playing. It seems for some people not like a big deal, but even sequencers for about 100 bucks offer you this function.
Or just another thing when you have a client with his guitar and you want to start an empty song with the metronome playing, just to set a tempo for the new song. It is impossible in sonar. There are a lot of things that you would as a cubase user potentially miss: the lack of an audio editor, a completely absent audio pool to manage, rename, delete your audiofiles and the midi functions in sonar are hardly better then those of protools. I'm working a lot with midi and in sonar it is totally screwed up. Not to mention, that you draw every automation over the same clip. After 3 automation lines, regardless if it is a midi or audio track, you will hardly know, which line belongs to which automated parameter. Not to mention, that you can disable automation only globally for the whole song, not individually.
Or the mixer in sonar: when you work on two monitors and select a track in the track view, this track will not be selected in the mixer like in cubase. Cubase even scrolls automatically to the selected track if it is not visible. Not to mention that cubase has 3 mixer views which you can accomodate to your needs (for example: one mixer for audio tracks only, another for midi and vst instruments, and the third for busses, groups and outputs). All this is absent in sonar: just one mixer and a lot of scrolling and clicking to see what is what.

Soundpalace, I would highly suggest you, to reconsider the eventually move from cubase to sonar. I have nothing against sonar, may main sequencer is actually logic on a mac, but my personal experience with sonar is, that it is far away from the - more or less - very well considered workflow of cubase.
At least, Cakewalk is kindly enough to offer you a demo, so my advice would be, you'd better play some week more with sonar and really try every function that you consider as a must for your work in sonar. The choice is yours and I wish you luck.

BTW, I see that you use that you use cubase sl. Maybe you should consider an upgrade to sx which on the other side offers you a lot more features and functions.

[fgimian]

Isn't the "tape mode" monitoring a hold-over from days when you didn't have unlimited tracks, slip-editing and couldn't move date around from track to track easily? And with a multiple out soundcard, you'd monitor over one output (to headphones) and send your main mix out another, so the idea of hearing the vocal in the control room all the time seems unlikely.

Soundpalace: It's "Float Enable" - finally remembered

Oh yeah cool, I'll give this a try

Cheers
Fots

[fgimian]

The scary thing is that I'm only scratching the surface of Sonar but finding these problems with workflow, maybe it's just that I'm used to Cubase or maybe it is true that Cubase is more logical and efficient.

It's because you're used to Cubase.

As a user and owner of both programms, I have to say that the workflow of cubase is much better laid out than sonars. Sonar surely has some strong points and features in the audioarea (let's not forget that Steinberg actually didn't realease a new version last year like Cakewalk) but I always have the feeling that almost everything in Sonar is just unfinished or uncompleted, especially regarding the workflow.
Just one point that I have tried minutes before. For example, setting a screenset/layout in sonar:
You have to go into the layout menu, add the screenset, then you have to switch to the keybinding menu, search for your named screenset (what a waste of time, there isn't even a search function there) and bind your layout with a shortcut.
But there is no way to update an existing layout if you change it a little. You have to go thru this whole process again.
Now, try to do it for 7 or 8 screensets!
Also, there is no way, at least I didn't find it, to activate/deactivate the metronome while the song is playing. It seems for some people not like a big deal, but even sequencers for about 100 bucks offer you this function.
Or just another thing when you have a client with his guitar and you want to start an empty song with the metronome playing, just to set a tempo for the new song. It is impossible in sonar. There are a lot of things that you would as a cubase user potentially miss: the lack of an audio editor, a completely absent audio pool to manage, rename, delete your audiofiles and the midi functions in sonar are hardly better then those of protools. I'm working a lot with midi and in sonar it is totally screwed up. Not to mention, that you draw every automation over the same clip. After 3 automation lines, regardless if it is a midi or audio track, you will hardly know, which line belongs to which automated parameter. Not to mention, that you can disable automation only globally for the whole song, not individually.
Or the mixer in sonar: when you work on two monitors and select a track in the track view, this track will not be selected in the mixer like in cubase. Cubase even scrolls automatically to the selected track if it is not visible. Not to mention that cubase has 3 mixer views which you can accomodate to your needs (for example: one mixer for audio tracks only, another for midi and vst instruments, and the third for busses, groups and outputs). All this is absent in sonar: just one mixer and a lot of scrolling and clicking to see what is what.

Soundpalace, I would highly suggest you, to reconsider the eventually move from cubase to sonar. I have nothing against sonar, may main sequencer is actually logic on a mac, but my personal experience with sonar is, that it is far away from the - more or less - very well considered workflow of cubase.
At least, Cakewalk is kindly enough to offer you a demo, so my advice would be, you'd better play some week more with sonar and really try every function that you consider as a must for your work in sonar. The choice is yours and I wish you luck.

BTW, I see that you use that you use cubase sl. Maybe you should consider an upgrade to sx which on the other side offers you a lot more features and functions.

Thanks a lot for taking the time to write this. I feel you are correct with regards to workflow, Cubase is significantly more well thought out and easy to use. All these little things would drive me nuts in Sonar I think

What I really wanted to do with this forum topic is pinpoint exactly what I disliked about Sonar and see if there are ways to workaround them, but it seems as though for most points, there aren't.

I will be upgrading to SX when v4 is released and I have no doubt that SX4 is going to be incredible. I'll still be keeping an eye on Sonar though, because I think it has great potential.

After going through this, it feels as though Cakewalk spend more time on bells and whistles than the core of the program. For instance, why are sends starting at 0 db ? Why is everything wrapped as a DX plugin ? Why is there no audio editor / pool ?

I'm hoping that the next Sonar version focuses more on the essentials.

Thank you all
Fots

[kp]

After going through this, it feels as though Cakewalk spend more time on bells and whistles than the core of the program. For instance, why are sends starting at 0 db ? Why is everything wrapped as a DX plugin ? Why is there no audio editor / pool ?

In order...

Why not? Honestly, this is the first time in maybe 10 years of reading Cakewalk/SONAR newsgroups and forums that anyone has mentioned it - it's a totally arbitrary value and 0dB is as valid a choice as -INF or +6dB or -3.141592...dB. It's presumably for similar reasons that so many plug-ins/soft synths of all flavours default to a 0dB when you double click on their volume knobs to reset it - I suppose you'd expect them to be -INF too?

CW was always DX based (as the native Windows plug-in format). Fine, it didn't take off as well as VST, but it's as "good" a plug-in format. That plug-ins are wrapped as DirectX effects is a non-issue: sure, there can be specific VST plug-ins that have problems in SONAR, but are you saying that no other host ever has problems with a particular plug-in (without knocking Tracktion, remember that huge thread on the RMS forum here listing incompatible plug-ins?)?

Audio pool: because - try this - you don't need it. It's a clunky system that should never have been implemented anywhere. It's a solution to a problem that doesn't need to exist. I shouldn't have to micromanage my data ever (rename an audio file? why for god's sake?) when the computer has plenty of power to do that forme transparently (and if you really feel the urge to look at audio files outside SONAR, you've got lists available within SONAR, per-project audio folders keeps the data in one place and you can export/import to an editor while SONAR is running, or export audio for whatever reason you may want to).

[headquest]

Having converted from Tracktion to Sonar last autumn, there is loads that I could say in praise of SONAR - it's a fantastic powerful piece of software that for the most part works brilliantly. However, there are some niggles:

• MIDI Hardware Control of VST parameters for recording in automation - I just don't get how to do this. It was so easy in Tracktion, and for that matter in Ableton Live. And the ReMote in Reason is fantastic. I can easily use my MIDI controller for SONAR's mixer console, but can't work out (even after reading both the manual and the SONAR Power book) how to get this working for (e.g. a filter sweep) VST automation.

• The need for both a MIDI out and an Audio return track for VST/DX instruments. I can see there may be advantages in terms of flexibility, but "instrument Tracks" as in ProTools, Tracktion, Ableton are surely more straightforward…

• Unnecessarily Complex learning curve - at times I have been left scratching my head when doing simple things because a hidden setting somewhere was out of place…

• Colour Schemes. I'll be blunt - most of them suck. What were they thinking? For example - it is indeed hard to make out some automation curves, mostly because the pastel colours don't show up well against the waveform.

• ReWire - inability to sum two mono audio returns from Reason as a stereo pair.

• CD ripping - isn't there which is strange

• Most of the bundled synths. The only one that I really like is Pentagon I. I guess that GrooveStation and TTS-1 are decent enough if you want GM sounds. But Cyclone is butt-ugly and fiddly to use, Dreamstation is terribly dated now, SFZ causes CPU spikes, RXP is nowhere near as good as DrRex, and as for PSYN II - can anyone here get this thing to sound any good at all? I really hate the sound it makes!

Having said all that, I still think that SONAR is a fantastic piece of recording software, with great mixing and editing tools and very nice audio effects.

I could provide a large pile of things I hate about Cubase in response to those who have posted on that subject, although it is slightly off-topic for this thread. So I'll limit it to the real biggies:

• Poor audio effects
• Routing (struggle to get my head around it)
• Mixing paradigm with multiple mixers (very confusing)
• Unnecessarily complex implementation in general
• Dongle copy-protection
• Customer Support

And finally, by the way, I have found the SONAR forum generally helpful, and Dave Rich is one of the good guys there

[RTaylor]

The scary thing is that I'm only scratching the surface of Sonar but finding these problems with workflow, maybe it's just that I'm used to Cubase or maybe it is true that Cubase is more logical and efficient.

It's because you're used to Cubase.

As a user and owner of both programms, I have to say that the workflow of cubase is much better laid out than sonars. Sonar surely has some strong points and features in the audioarea (let's not forget that Steinberg actually didn't realease a new version last year like Cakewalk) but I always have the feeling that almost everything in Sonar is just unfinished or uncompleted, especially regarding the workflow.
Just one point that I have tried minutes before. For example, setting a screenset/layout in sonar:
You have to go into the layout menu, add the screenset, then you have to switch to the keybinding menu, search for your named screenset (what a waste of time, there isn't even a search function there) and bind your layout with a shortcut.
But there is no way to update an existing layout if you change it a little. You have to go thru this whole process again.
Now, try to do it for 7 or 8 screensets!
Also, there is no way, at least I didn't find it, to activate/deactivate the metronome while the song is playing. It seems for some people not like a big deal, but even sequencers for about 100 bucks offer you this function.
Or just another thing when you have a client with his guitar and you want to start an empty song with the metronome playing, just to set a tempo for the new song. It is impossible in sonar. There are a lot of things that you would as a cubase user potentially miss: the lack of an audio editor, a completely absent audio pool to manage, rename, delete your audiofiles and the midi functions in sonar are hardly better then those of protools. I'm working a lot with midi and in sonar it is totally screwed up. Not to mention, that you draw every automation over the same clip. After 3 automation lines, regardless if it is a midi or audio track, you will hardly know, which line belongs to which automated parameter. Not to mention, that you can disable automation only globally for the whole song, not individually.
Or the mixer in sonar: when you work on two monitors and select a track in the track view, this track will not be selected in the mixer like in cubase. Cubase even scrolls automatically to the selected track if it is not visible. Not to mention that cubase has 3 mixer views which you can accomodate to your needs (for example: one mixer for audio tracks only, another for midi and vst instruments, and the third for busses, groups and outputs). All this is absent in sonar: just one mixer and a lot of scrolling and clicking to see what is what.

Soundpalace, I would highly suggest you, to reconsider the eventually move from cubase to sonar. I have nothing against sonar, may main sequencer is actually logic on a mac, but my personal experience with sonar is, that it is far away from the - more or less - very well considered workflow of cubase.
At least, Cakewalk is kindly enough to offer you a demo, so my advice would be, you'd better play some week more with sonar and really try every function that you consider as a must for your work in sonar. The choice is yours and I wish you luck.

BTW, I see that you use that you use cubase sl. Maybe you should consider an upgrade to sx which on the other side offers you a lot more features and functions.

Thanks a lot for taking the time to write this. I feel you are correct with regards to workflow, Cubase is significantly more well thought out and easy to use. All these little things would drive me nuts in Sonar I think

What I really wanted to do with this forum topic is pinpoint exactly what I disliked about Sonar and see if there are ways to workaround them, but it seems as though for most points, there aren't.

I will be upgrading to SX when v4 is released and I have no doubt that SX4 is going to be incredible. I'll still be keeping an eye on Sonar though, because I think it has great potential.

After going through this, it feels as though Cakewalk spend more time on bells and whistles than the core of the program. For instance, why are sends starting at 0 db ? Why is everything wrapped as a DX plugin ? Why is there no audio editor / pool ?

I'm hoping that the next Sonar version focuses more on the essentials.

Thank you all
Fots

I guess I'm just used to Sonar. I like the workflow much more than in Cubase.

{I own them both as well. Granted, it is VST.}

[EdHart]

No, the singer has zero latency because the audio path doesn't even enter the ASIO engine.

Of course you are right about that (that's what I mean with "in the other case"), but now in the control room the mike remains on and has to be switched off manually.