Nuendo vs Sonar again

[LoRez]

LoRez wrote:

I'll give you one: Midi groove clips...and they're freakin' cool. No equiv in Cubase

In fact, you can "draw" in Cubase the number of repetitions of one clip. It is fast and as easy as in Sonar. The difference is only that you can't draw back (from right to left).

Ah but this is stil not equivalent as Midi Groove Clips allow a pitch and tempo to be applied to the clip and then these clips automatically follow pitch markers. It's not a simple case of repeating clips. Midi groove clips actually do more than that.

Sonar is the last (big) sequencer, where you can select multiple events only if you draw a lasso arround them. In Cubase, Logic, whatever you don't need to draw the lasso all around a clip or multiple clips. It is enough if the clips get touched by the lasso. You can even "draw" a line and all touched clips are selected.

Good point and I actually agree with you here, as I find this frustrating...but there's things i find frustrating in all programs. But I do agree that this should be changed in Sonar. Believe it or not, there are still some things I miss from Cubase/Nuendo...but not enough to make me go back.

(Sonar3 was mainly a cosmetical update, Sonar4 finally has an audio metronome and significant improvements in the audio part of the program. But, I am not eager to pay for their updates and to wait when they will finally decide to catch up with another program (mainly cubase).

Oh but c'mon now. Sonar3 was WAY more than a cosmetic update. The entire buss structure and audio engine were completely revamped not to mention a slew of other features which anyone can go read about so that's not a fair argument at all. And Sonar4 did add an audio metronome but it is bussable and way more flexible than the Cubase audio metronome.

Now let's talk about "catch up to Cubase":

Cubase only now added support for:
1)Acid clips
2)Relative Snap (my god it's super important and only shows up in SX3)
3)Clip based envelopes (only shows up in Nuendo3)

And I could go on and on like that until recently even in Nuendo you couldn't extract the audio to a track for an imported video. You can't re-arrange or re-order your plugs on the mixer at ALL. Sonar lets you copy and reorder insert effects by simply dragging them around. And let's not even get into the surround support.

My point here is that you can make the case for Cubase OR Sonar playing catch-up if you focus on the right features.

[LoRez]

Server freaked....double post...sorry.

[LoRez]

im not too bothered but what fetures for surround does sonar ahve that cubase doesn't ?

1) up to 8.1 surround support
2) Surround Bridge
3) True surround busses and meters
4) Built in (quality) surround effects plugs (8.1 comp and surround reverb from Lexi)
5) Surround and Stereo mixing in the same project
6) A much better surround panner as far as I'm concerned (it's not a plugin...wow!)

This was just a quick list off the top of my head and exactly why I point out that the comparison of Nuendo to Sonar4 is just as valid as a comparison to Cubase, if not moreso.

[RoyNoahJones]

you can continue looking out for which apps has a feature that another don't until the end of times, which we'll be useful to you , if you're working for the R & D or Marketing of a sofware company.

Though as a musician, i don't see where all this thing leads .

Unless your public comes for your 486 Bits, 792khz talent.

time to move on and make some music.

[LoRez]

you can continue looking out for which apps has a feature that another don't until the end of times, which we'll be useful to you , if you're working for the R & D or Marketing of a sofware company.

Though as a musician, i don't see where all this thing leads .

Unless your public comes for your 486 Bits, 792khz talent.

time to move on and make some music.

LOL. Agreed.

Gonna go bust out some 792K jams!!!! I used to only be able to play at 192k, but I've been practicing and my technique is much better now.

[ericj23]

1) no-one in their right mind uses - if you can find more than 5 full 8.1 surround mixes i will be amazed
2) this allows you to convert 5.1 to stereo and vice versa ? - cos that was in sx 2
3)? cubase has these too - but im guessing im missing something
4)cubase has a surround verb, which is actually OK - nothing else admittedly -
5)? must be missing sonething again - cubase can do that
6)Thats as insane as people complaining that sonars vst support isn't good because they use a wrapper - it works

Really not buying that sonars ability to use 8.1 surround and having a surround compressor makes it a much better multimedia option - does it have surround dither ? but then i only work in stereo so what does it matter

cant nuendo actually do the dolby digital encoding (with an extra plug) - that surely puts it miles ahead of sonar or cubase if working in multimedia

[RoyNoahJones]

you can continue looking out for which apps has a feature that another don't until the end of times, which we'll be useful to you , if you're working for the R & D or Marketing of a sofware company.

Though as a musician, i don't see where all this thing leads .

Unless your public comes for your 486 Bits, 792khz talent.

time to move on and make some music.

LOL. Agreed.

Gonna go bust out some 792K jams!!!! I used to only be able to play at 192k, but I've been practicing and my technique is much better now.

HAHAHAH

[LoRez]

1) no-one in their right mind uses - if you can find more than 5 full 8.1 surround mixes i will be amazed
2) this allows you to convert 5.1 to stereo and vice versa ? - cos that was in sx 2
3)? cubase has these too - but im guessing im missing something
4)cubase has a surround verb, which is actually OK - nothing else admittedly -
5)? must be missing sonething again - cubase can do that
6)Thats as insane as people complaining that sonars vst support isn't good because they use a wrapper - it works

Really not buying that sonars ability to use 8.1 surround and having a surround compressor makes it a much better multimedia option - does it have surround dither ? but then i only work in stereo so what does it matter

cant nuendo actually do the dolby digital encoding (with an extra plug) - that surely puts it miles ahead of sonar or cubase if working in multimedia

Dude...honestly no offense but you are displaying some ignorance here of Sonar4:

1) plenty of people use higher than 5.1 mixing. Why do you think Nuendo goes to 10.2? Plenty of 7.1 theatres, etc.

2) Surroundbrdge has nothing whatsoever to do with converting surround to stereo. It lets you use stereo plgins in a surround format and if you read any reviews or see it in action you will see what the hoopla is. No program has an equivalent feature to this currently. Go do the research.

3. No they don't have them (true surround busses and meters). Notice it takes six separate busses in Cubase to achieve 5.1? In Sonar? One. TRUE surround bussing.

4)Yeah the built in surrond plugs in Sonar I think are better and Surroundbridge allows you to expand this greatly.

5) Maybe I'm wrong but I really didn't think you could do a stereo mixing and surround mixing in the same project due to the buss limitations. I could be mistaken. If so my apologies in advance.

6) Better surround panner. No it's not insane as if you connect a channel to a surround buss it becomes surround. I realize adding a plug surround panner is not that big of a deal but I bring it up as an indicator of how "surround-ready" the app really is.

Not sure what you mean by surround dither. Do you mean downmixing? If so, yes Sonar4 has it.

Yes Nuendo can do Dolby encoding with an extra plug. So can Sonar4 as it has full support for external surround encoders (Dolby, DTS, etc). So it doesn't put it miles ahead at all. And you could get Sonar4 with a surround encoder and surround effects for substantailly less than Nuendo with the same options.

[ericj23]

1) you didn't actually fulfill my simple request - find 5 mixes of anything at all over 5.1 -

2) you can use stereo plug-ins in a surround format since sx 2 - you just choose which of the 5.1 channels they affect - sure they dont have linked parameters ala surround bridge - but its hardly the most taxing workaround to copy settings - how often are you using an effect over the whole surround mix (apart from reverb and compression)rather than on the mono or stereo input channels ?

3) cubase has true surround buses - i.e the bus has 5.1 inputs - anything stereo or mono connected to it is automatically set up with a surround panner

6) see answer to 3

surround dither is nothing to do with downmixing - it's applying dither to your final 5.1 mix to maximise the sound quality of the output - i guess you can just use the surround bridge thing and a stereo dither

and as for supporting dts and dolby digital encoders - sonar does no such thing - it can output as 6 mono waves that can be imported in to a suitable encoder - i could do that with almost any peice of audio software - nuendo does it from within the project -

i think you are the one displaying the ignorance of cubase here - you are talking about a lot of sx 2 features

[spaceman]

I think Nuendo is good but if you want professional results you need Storm 3

Sonar is more for making loops

[LoRez]

1) you didn't actually fulfill my simple request - find 5 mixes of anything at all over 5.1 -

If I had time I'd do that. And still will. But by your argument you are saying that Nuendo's 10.2 support is useless? IMAX films and movies in theatres are beyond 5.1 Notice those extra speakers?

2) you can use stereo plug-ins in a surround format since sx 2 - you just choose which of the 5.1 channels they affect - sure they dont have linked parameters ala surround bridge - but its hardly the most taxing workaround to copy settings - how often are you using an effect over the whole surround mix (apart from reverb and compression)rather than on the mono or stereo input channels ?

This is not the same at all. Do it in Cubase and then do it in Sonar. And it has NOTHING to do with putting the effect on the whole mix...it could be an aux send, etc. And I'm sorry but not having linked parameters and the way you have to route this in Cubase is way more difficult and taxing. Maybe we can agree to disagree here but I stand by my argument.

3) cubase has true surround buses - i.e the bus has 5.1 inputs - anything stereo or mono connected to it is automatically set up with a surround panner

Then why when i create a 5.1 project in SX2 does it bring up 3 stereo busses? With stereo metering on each?

surround dither is nothing to do with downmixing - it's applying dither to your final 5.1 mix to maximise the sound quality of the output - i guess you can just use the surround bridge thing and a stereo dither

I see, but I think you answered your own question here.

and as for supporting dts and dolby digital encoders - sonar does no such thing - it can output as 6 mono waves that can be imported in to a suitable encoder - i could do that with almost any peice of audio software - nuendo does it from within the project -

So What?

i think you are the one displaying the ignorance of cubase here - you are talking about a lot of sx 2 features

This would be odd since the first version of Cubase I used was on an Atari. I also happen to own SX2 and have it open in front of me right now. Do you have Sonar in front of you so you can compare?

Also, whenever the argument suits you, you switch between Cubase features and Nuendo features. You are interchanging them and the original question was what does Sonar do with surround that CUBASE doesn't do...and the aswer is "a lot". It's quite unfair to selectively throw Nuendo in whenever Cubase doesn't have the feature you are looking for, don't you think.

For those of you thinking you are talking to some SOnar zealot who has never used Cubase, Logic, DP, etc...you're wrong. I used to hate Sonar "back in the day". But it ain't the same program it was five years ago, whether you want to admit it or not, it has surpassed many of it's competitors in many ways. If I didn't think so I wouldn't be using it as I am in no way forced to do so. Funny, many of the magazines lately have been noting the same thing...

[Stupid American Pig]

I hear that the Ps3 will have a new EJAY that will blow away everything out there now- for 69 bucks.

I hear it may even include drum loops.

[ericj23]

I think Nuendo is good but if you want professional results you need Storm 3

Sonar is more for making loops

[LoRez]

I think Nuendo is good but if you want professional results you need Storm 3

Sonar is more for making loops

LOL.

Actually the funny thing is when I find myself embroiled in these debates (god knows why I do it) it invariably makes me want to pull out my trusty Tascam 414, go down to 7-11 and buy some cheap cassettes, and start writing 4 track guitar based love songs to my girlfriend


And sorry, I have to bow out of this truly stimulating discussion for a bit, cuz I actually have to go do something productive (and probably a lot less fun).

[WillieJenkins]

The other thing I'd say is that the charge that Sonar is always playing catch-up is a bit erroneous as well.

Now, dont get me wrong, Sonar has played alot of catch-up in its time, but lets not forget that Cubase/Nuendo (or any other host for that matter) still don't have a UBA (Universal Bus Architecture) or SurroundBridge.

Since I started using Cakewalk products at Sonar 1.0, it already had a 'bounce-to-disk' with the ability to archive tracks, which was essentially a 'Freeze' feature, years before it was 'all-the-rage'. Also, full PDC has been supported since Sonar1.0 (maybe before). This too is a seemingly a 'must-have' feature.

My only point is that, it goes both ways