Why is Sonar still treated like the underdog?

[spaceman]

First full host with no limits on tracks, number of virtual instrument, number of insert or send effects?
First full host with unlimited, fully configurable buses?
First full host with ACID style looping for audio and/or MIDI clips?
First full host with full PDC on all tracks and buses?
First full host with support for MIDI-processing plugins?
First full host with built-in pitch correction?
First full host with built in non-destructive, multi-track audio quantization?
First full host with fully configurable dynamic control surface to plugin parameter mapping?
And as you say, 64-bit first host to run on 64-bit, first host with a 64-bit audio engine, first host to support 64-bit plugins, first host to support 32-bit plugins in a 64bit OS etc.
Nah, nothing really. That's why most of that sort of stuff gets copied by the other host developers.

but does it go to 11?

[mumpcake]

First full host with no limits on tracks, number of virtual instrument, number of insert or send effects?
First full host with unlimited, fully configurable buses?
First full host with ACID style looping for audio and/or MIDI clips?
First full host with full PDC on all tracks and buses?
First full host with support for MIDI-processing plugins?
First full host with built-in pitch correction?
First full host with built in non-destructive, multi-track audio quantization?
First full host with fully configurable dynamic control surface to plugin parameter mapping?
And as you say, 64-bit first host to run on 64-bit, first host with a 64-bit audio engine, first host to support 64-bit plugins, first host to support 32-bit plugins in a 64bit OS etc.
Nah, nothing really. That's why most of that sort of stuff gets copied by the other host developers.

but does it go to 11?

It has a plugin called Boost11 which will make your track king of the loudness wars!

[neverfall]

I personally think Cubase is totally vanilla, Reaper's interface sucks, FL fails for me as it doesn't have good recording/audio support, Live's "live" features are similarly useless for me (as well as not doing recording), Macs suck so Logic is out of the question.

See, we all have our own opinions!

Funny thing is your "opinions" are a bigger deal than "the first to offer 64-bit support".

That's actually not funny. Quite sad really.

My point was I can easily find fault with other DAWs. I can easily find ways in which they fail compared to Sonar. But I don't wander into other DAW threads scratching my head and saying, "gee, what does this program offer compared to others?" I leave them alone.

ANY OF US can easily find fault with other DAWS. Unlike what MANY KVR members fail to do...I actually READ what the OP wrote and simply asked a question relating to the thread's headline. Is my question not valid? I don't care to switch Daws again, but I do still have interest in what else is available. From the looks of things if I ever...EVER...chose to come back to PC which is highly unlikely, I don't think Cakewalk is in a position to bring me back on board as a customer.


Somehow...I'm not convinced that thousands of Cakewalk users are screaming, "WOW 64 BIT!!!! I just have to jump on board for that!!!!" Unless my forum observing skills are far underdeveloped it seems to me that for years Sonar has existed SIMPLY as an alternative for CUBASE. It hasn't really stood out from Cubase's shadow. Granted I haven't paid much attention to Sonar in the last two years, but if something has changed...I mean TRULY has made it stand out from CUBASE....


Then let me know. I have no issue being EDUCATED on what Daw A. has to offer V. Daw B. Just don't expect me to dance a jig and "Superman dat ho" because Sonar includes a pitch corrector...which I already own.


Or...because Studio One has a mastering page. I'm sure many of us already own mastering tools sooooo....is that all these hosts have to offer that I can't find in another Daw? I'm not arguing that we OUGHT to be persuaded to make a switch. Use whatever you're comfortable with. I'm just saying that if you jump in the game roughly a few years after your main competitor yet you spend practically 20 years playing catch-up with these guys....


Well no wonder so many people look at you as the underdog. Kinda funny though since Pro Tools LE is STILL playing catch-up to both Cubase and Sonar...yet...

[Klemperer]

As someone using not so expensive hosts I would really be interested in sales figures for cubase, logic, ableton live and sonar. I always read since ages that Sonar would be number one in the USA, and logic and cubase in the rest of the world (the parts where you can afford such luxuries like we have at our disposal, that is)

[C-note]

Wow, that's really great, you don't like Sonar. Bravo!

Sonar wasn't for me. I'd really love to sell my copy of V.6, but unfortunately I can't. I've just always been under the impression that for years Sonar has been playing catch-up to Cubase. From what I've read I think it's finally accomplished that feat by V.7 by improving its midi features.


I could be wrong, but maybe that's one particular reason why Sonar is still seen as the underdog. It's always had to stand in Cubase's shadow.

Seriously, what does Cubase do that Sonar doesn't? (other than having a dongle? ) It seems that Cubase has been stagnating while Sonar has been aggressively improved over the past few years.

Personally Sonar does all the MIDI and audio tasks I require, so it's all right by me.

I am glad that Cubase doesn't have the "Best" plugins - because I have the best and they work perfectly in Cubase.

Cubase 5 - Superior notation, VST expression (another new standard like the many Steinberg has invented), Superior workflow, Superior Midi features-Love the global transpose track of audio and midi, Media Bay (yes I actually like it), The way C5 handles instrument tracks, group stem export, Project handling (multiple large projects open at once), the new drum/loop tools are truely creative and easy to use. Control Room, Nuendo automation, More more more...

If Sonar works for you and you have time invested in it's workflow - great. Make some fantastic music...

[neverfall]

Educate me on something...

If you're using a 64-bit system then is it impossible to rewire Project 5 to Sonar?
Being that both tools are Cakewalk products...ummm isn't that a bit well...silly?
Yes...this 64-bit Sonar feature is looking mighty spectacular!

Goalpost shifting, then?

Is it your expectation that I can answer for Cakewalk? Are you trying to ply that my failure to do so would somehow discredit my previous answer?

Is it your inference that the existence of a specific Rewire issue (or indeed any other bug, or lack of point-by-point feature parity) somehow negates an answer to a completely unrelated question?

Is it your contention that none of the above features could ever have been considered to 'set Sonar apart from the rest' as you actually asked?

Can you let me know why you are blaming Cakewalk for an incompatibility in a technology which is not their own, given that Rewire is a technology which is licensed from Propellorheads.

Can you refer to any tests which have been done to establish which other 64-bit application will Rewire to other 32-bit applications?

It is my expectation that you cannot list a particular SONAR FEATURE which would honestly arise again and again to stand out in a stadium the size of a milk carton where you could easily say, "Yes I hit a homerun with this particular listed Sonar feature".


It is my inference that for YEARS granted we both have 20/20 sight and common sense that researching Sonar...and Cubase...or even Pro Tools has NEVER...EVER truly led to Sonar setting itself apart from the rest. Had you been so easily ready to list such features as oh let's say...

"The Environment"..."Warping"..."Known for its step sequencer and beloved piano roll"...I would have simply agreed and thought, "Well shit I've missed out of something HUGE here. I could really benefit from going back to Sonar".


WHAT I WILL LET YOU KNOW is no matter how far...how long...you wanna go back and forth...you will NEVER be able to argue that for as many years as Sonar has played CUBASE'S BITCH....

...Sonar has long stood in its own rightful place without having to be seen as the alternative to "that/those dongled sequencer(s)"


I don't see why you just didn't say..."Well shit the copy protection ALONE sets it apart". If you're convinced that you're list screams, "MUST-HAVE, INNOVATIVE, OR GAME CHANGING" to show that Sonar does indeed set itself apart then who am I to argue with your opinion?


Notice I NEVER said..."You're wrong".



Just as you're NEVER going to state why by some..perhaps many...still look at Sonar as the underdog.

[Arglebargle]

What I'd like to know Neverfall, is why you're so adament about bashing Sonar, when you don't even use it.

I mean, save that energy for something more important, yes?

[fandango]

What I'd like to know Neverfall, is why you're so adament about bashing Sonar, when you don't even use it.

Basically this:

Sonar wasn't for me. I'd really love to sell my copy of V.6, but unfortunately I can't.

This really is the meat and potatoes of it.

Seriously, take the CD, box and manual to the dumpster, throw them in, forget you ever purchased Sonar. Take a deep breath (away from the dumpster), breath out, and vouch to move on. You really are protesting a bit too much and a bit too energetically for someone who found Sonar "wasn't for me".

[neverfall]

What I'd like to know Neverfall, is why you're so adament about bashing Sonar, when you don't even use it.

I mean, save that energy for something more important, yes?

Jesus this is why Daw comparison threads rarely ever work. This isn't bashing. It's just a question you refuse to answer.


No I don't use Sonar these days.

Yes I wish I could sell Sonar...holding on to it gives me yet another reason to dislike it, but...

What I didn't say is once switched from Cubase SX to Sonar. Two words. Emulated ports. Two more words....Cubase forums. I'm sure I've mentioned this before on KVR. Instead of focusing on my "negativity"...try answering the following question...



"Why is Sonar still considered the underdog when hosts are so obviously copying/stealing ideas from one another?" I'm ASSUMING that Sonar has finally come head to head with Cubase. So as the OP asked...your thoughts?

[neverfall]

What I'd like to know Neverfall, is why you're so adament about bashing Sonar, when you don't even use it.

Basically this:

Sonar wasn't for me. I'd really love to sell my copy of V.6, but unfortunately I can't.

This really is the meat and potatoes of it.

No. The meat and potatoes were found in Logic/Live. I just didn't see Sonar ever coming into its own...not for my needs. So I switched.

[djanthonyw]

What's Sonar?

[Stupid American Pig]

What's Sonar?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonar

[whyterabbyt]

It is my expectation that you cannot list a particular <insert any DAW here> FEATURE which would honestly arise again and again to stand out in a stadium the size of a milk carton where you could easily say, "Yes I hit a homerun with this particular listed <insert any DAW here> feature".

fixed that for you.

It is my inference that for YEARS granted we both have 20/20 sight and common sense that researching Sonar...and Cubase...or even Pro Tools has NEVER...EVER truly led to Sonar setting itself apart from the rest.

And yet it does, sufficiently enough for me.

Had you been so easily ready to list such features as oh let's say...

"The Environment"..."Warping"..."Known for its step sequencer and beloved piano roll"...I would have simply agreed and thought, "Well shit I've missed out of something HUGE here. I could really benefit from going back to Sonar".

Why the hell would I care about trying to get you to agree? I dont give a toss what you use, or why.

I did pick Sonar over the others for at least two of the factors I mentioned, which were sufficiently HUGE for me, at the time I was making the decision.

And, just so you know, none of the 'features' you mention are 'HUGE' in my opinion.

WHAT I WILL LET YOU KNOW is no matter how far...how long...you wanna go back and forth...you will NEVER be able to argue that for as many years as Sonar has played CUBASE'S BITCH....

Actually I could argue that quite easily, despite your somewhat AOLish reliance on capitalisation.

I don't see why you just didn't say..."Well shit the copy protection ALONE sets it apart".

Because I said something else. Amazing, huh?

If you're convinced that you're list screams, "MUST-HAVE, INNOVATIVE, OR GAME CHANGING" to show that Sonar does indeed set itself apart then who am I to argue with your opinion?

Some disingenuous asshole on the internet? Sorry, INTERNET.

[Arglebargle]

Jesus this is why Daw comparison threads rarely ever work.

I COULDN'T AGREE MORE!! They're doomed to failure, as is any X vs Y thread, which is why I think they're totally stoopid.

[mellotronaut]

oh, the usual host-illity

is there a host, which works well in every aspect? No.
... and that's the reason, why you have this tuning dispute here.

m