Cubase and Sonar: Input From Members Requested

[bassman]

Hello All,

I am looking to purchase music production software within the next month and am requesting input from folks who have had hands-on experience. Please understand that I am looking for any useful views, objective and subjective. I'm interested in knowing what anyone finds useful or not useful, efficient or non-efficient, or any workflow comments that you may have.

Just a bit of info and background that may be useful. . . .

I am quite literate computer-wise, so I am not afraid of having a bit of a learning curve. I am retiring from 27 years in the IT business and will now have more time to dedicate to music endeavors. I was a Bass player looking for a day gig. . . . which turned into a 27 year gig.

I am very familiar with hardware based sequencing and dealing with Midi editing, etc. Actually, I prefer working with Midi at this time more so than dealing with Audio alone; but wish to become proficient in both environments. I have a home studio setup which includes a Tascam 2488 DAW, so I am staged to produce fairly decent audio productions.

I will be purchasing a MacBook Pro, and currently own a variety of Windows based desktops and laptops; so having a program that crosses platforms is a plus, though not a necessity. I have used software based sequencers quite a bit, though not much in the past 5 years or so.

I wish to have a program that allows for an 'intuitive' workflow. In other words, I want to be able to easily view and switch between Midi and Audio environments, or to view both simuntaneously. I don't wish to spend a lot of time preparing to get to work, I want to be able to get ramped up and into the flow fairly quickly.

I have visited Cubase and Sonar forums and read a number of reviews. I was leaning towards Cubase because it is a cross-platform product and seemed stronger in the area of Midi implementation and editing. Sonar seemed to be known for a more intuitive interface and workflow, and the audio snap feature was intriguing. I may see about downloading some demos, if possible.

That's it in a nutshell. Any input from experienced users here on either product would be appreciated. Please give me as much detail as you can or have time for. I will be using whatever product I purchase in a working environment (home studio) and probably using most of its features.

Thanks in advance for any responses.


(Just as an aside, I will also be purchasing M-Audio Pro Tools
M-powered just because it's garnerned good reviews and doesn't cost much; and I have an M-Audio interface. Any Pro Tools folks can pipe in if they wish. I'll be playing around with this, though not as my main tool.)

Bassman

[bassman]

OK. . . . .

I'll give this one of two bumps.

Bassman

[Silver Dragon Sound]

Ok I'll bite. I use Sonar for a few reasons over Cubase. To me it was easier to learn than Cubase. I used both LE programs when trying to decide which on to get and I found Sonar more intuitive for my uses. Cakewalk also seems to be ahead of the curve when it comes to new technology. Sonar has been ready for Vista for a while now (even though Vista might not be ready for DAWs). It supports multiple processors and multi-core processors. There is a 64-bit version that you can use with Windows XP Pro X64 as well. That will give you a stable platform without the memory limitations of 32-bit XP until Vista is ready for prime time. Also, didn’t Cubase drop support for DX plugins without any prior announcement? I seem to remember an up roar over that. I cannot remember Cakewalk pulling any stunts like that.

Cubase is certainly a competent program and has many users which favor it over Sonar. In some circles, Cubase has more of a pro reputation than Sonar. Both are good programs though and I don't think you'll go wrong with either one. Of course the hard part is deciding which is best for your needs. I'm not sure if Cubase has a demo but there is a free demo of both Sonar and Sonar Producer on their site. The Sonar Producer demo doesn't come with some of the cool stuff that make it the producer edition so you may want to keep that in mind.

[bassman]

SDS,

Thanks for your feedback.

You bring up some interesting points concerning Vista/XP. I will definitely go to the Sonar site and find the demo to download. It won't allow me a direct comparison with Cubase, but it will allow me to see how the basic program feels to me. And that is a very important criterium. . . . . .

Bassman

[V-CeeOh]

Hi bassman

thought to come in just to tell you a little about my own experience.
I've used Cakewalk since the old DOS versions. I can also tell you that the Sonar is the main reason why I keep using Windows (besides the dificulty to buy a Mac in the near future) for my music work. If Cakewalk ever decides to go into Mac OS, I'll gladly dump my PC. If this is an issue for you, you obviously have to go to to Cubase.
Besides that, everytime I tryed to switch to another program I always came back to Cakewalk. I'm currently using Sonar 4 and I'm just waiting for a GOOD reason to update. The total integration of the VST plug-ins may be that reason. But I'm not an heavy audio track user. I mainly use the MIDI tracks. I like to keep the possibility to change everything at any given time and just add the "acustics" and the individual track I what to "audio edit" in the end. That's why I don't really understand why anybody can say that Cubase can be more powerfull in MIDI editing. I don't really see how/what else is needed there. One thing I most aprecciate is the CAL (Cakewalk Application Language) routines to automate tasks. You can do just about everything from "unduplicate" events to "split" events to tracks. You can also program your own routines if you ever want to go into it. I don't know if Sonar 6 keeps this but I must believe it does.
Another aspect I would like to mention is the easy of use to wich the "layouts" are really helpfull. In a "I can do everything" software, I find very usefull to have just the things I need at hand. This prevents you from beeing "distracted" and provides the ease of use. So, you can customize your toolbars and also save several layouts that go along with the song file. Really handy for someone working on a 17" display like me.

Also, as a Roland fan I'm happy that Cakewalk and Roland has joined forces and expect to get the "best of both worlds" from there. Frankly, I don't the see the same happening from the Steinberg/Yamaha "reunion". Steinberg seems to have a more "disturbed" life lately.

Now, as you might understand, this is not and objective oppinion cause I've been using Cakewalk for to many years and Cubase may have gained points meanwhile but it does not seems to be the case.

In the end I think you woud be quite happy using Sonar if you don't really need to use the Mac.

Cheers

[bassman]

Hello V-CeeOh,

Thanks for your input. This was quite helpful.

I will be getting the MacBook Pro regardless of my choice, and will run Windows XP along with the Mac OS. There are issues with running Vista on the Intel Macs at this time.

Like you, I am primarily a 'Midi' guy, so what you talked about was very useful to me. Give me the basic Midi tools and I can get a lot out of them.

CAL is still there in Sonar 6 from what I can see. Also, the idea of being able to do layouts is a good thing. Craig Anderton had an excellent review at Harmony Central on Sonar 6 and he is both a Sonar and Cubase user.

I was leaning toward Cubase initially because of the cross-platform and Midi capabilities, but I've read a lot about issues with Cubase 4, some of which could greatly impact my workflow. I'm also beginning to think that the Midi capabilities of Sonar may be quite adequate. I downloaded the Sonar demo and will try to check it out in the next few days.

Thanks for responding Solitary man and V-CeeOh. It's much appreciated. If any Cubase users wish to add input, please do.

I'm just trying to spend my hard earned money wisely!

Bassman

[TOTAL]

I can tell you about my adventure with Cubase.

It started with sx. I switched to sx from Rebirth (+plus a short epizode with trackers and reason inbetween), so it was quite big change. I immediately started making music.

The key shortcuts I now have in my sx3 make complex operations a breeze.

I have tried Live, Logic, Tracktion, but none of these appeals ot me- probalby because I expect them to be Cubase

Be careful with new versions. Let them mature, give'em one year or more, at least with Cubase. But this might be the general tendency on the soft and hardware market - to sell unfinished products. Be warned - I talked two months ago to a guy who had Cubase 4 and he was still "fighting".

Now, to the clue. If I were to take this decision I would do as follows:

1. make a list of the essentials
2. discuss the differences on the fora (you could try kvraudio.com for a big cross-application forum without registration restrictions (like Steinberg's)
3. try demo versions of all the candidates - if the producer does not provide a demo, get a crack - the choice is too serious, buying sh*tte will cost you much more than money
4. see which one you LIKE - without rationalizing - the one YOU everyday want to see and touch and more

Final thought


Do at least consider the last but one version, of whatever you chose, MB a "second hand"... Ask others if necessary.

SX3 works flawlessly for me in everything: audio, video, midi, usbmidi, import, export.
The only thing I can't do is slave SX to external ardware like Yamaha rm1x or Roland mc-808 (mb somebody could help? total666 *at* wp.pl).

My DAW is 512 MB Win XP Athlon 2500+
The version is 3.11 build 911, and that's what I call it: 911

(means Porsche)

Good luck and come back to say what you picked.

T


EDIT
944 - that's the build no. Porsche all the same

[bassman]

TOTAL,

Thanks for the reply.

I also have heard that SX3 is far more stable than Cubase 4, and that there are still some major issues for some users of version 4. I may try to find SX3 and see what it is like. I have also considered getting a copy of Cubase SE (only $149) and seeing if I like the 'feel'. This would give me an idea of Steinberg's approach.

I will definitely peek in at kvraudio.com and see what I can find; thanks for providing the link.

I'll post whatever decision I make and let others know what led me there. . . . .

Bassman

[SammyJames]

Yeah, Cubase 4 does still need some updating. It will crash on me from time-to-time, so I save when I remember to, and I have auto save on every five minutes right now. The thing is that when they get these issues under control, I think that Cubase 4 is going to be a monster program. It already works pretty well with the MacTel platform and with the 64 bit thng, so I am going to stick with it and stick it out.

- Sammy

Sammy James has been approved for use by people who need approval.

http://www.sammyjames.com/music.htm

[bassman]

Well, what I wound up getting was a version of both. Academic discounts allowed me to do a 'two for one'.

I purchased Sonar Producer Editon 6 and Cubase Studio 4 (not the full featured Cubase 4). Getting both will allow me to get a feel for each. How the workflow and interface fit me are the biggest deciding points in terms of which program I eventually camp on.

All I need now is the MacBook Pro that I ordered last week. Hoping to get it in 2-3 weeks. Then I can check things out. I look forward to adding something new to my arsenal.

Thanks to everyone who responded. . . . . . . the input was invaluable. I'll have some insight as to what to look for with each program. By the way, I went with XP on the Mac on the Windows partition because of some limitations on the Sonar end and because of possible incompatibilities with either Parallel Desktops or Apple Boot Camp, both of which I will install.

Bassman

[thunderkyss]

bassman, take that Cakewalk Sonar back.


It's PC only dude.




They're both pretty good programs, once you get them going. It'd be nice, if someone would take the best of both, and make one app.....

But if you're getting a Mac Book, check out Garage band, it's free, and I hear it's pretty good.

Take both Cubase & Sonar back, and get your money back.


That's what I'd do.

FantomX8
FantomS
AW4416
Now all I need is talent.
Anyone selling any talent??
member # 55
registered 21 May 2003

tundrkys98@yahoo.com Yahoo messenger: tundrkys98

[bassman]

tk,

Running Parallels Desktop or Boot Camp utilities will allow me to port over my Windows apps and to install new Windows programs. That was a BIG factor with me going with the MacBook instead of staying with a Windows PC that I could have gotten for half the price (discounted). I'm curious to see if the Mac is indeed the mack-daddy that I've been hearing about.

I haven't had the chance to check out GarageBand. . . . but I'm thinking I'm going to want something more robust if I really start liking a software based DAW.

And I've already opened the Sonar package, so I can't send it back . . . . .

Bassman

[SammyJames]

Yup! That is the coolest thing (well, one of 'em anyway) about the new INTEL Macs. You can run PC software too.



And I'm really curious to know your perspectives on Sonar versus Cubase. I'm almost as excited as you are for you to get your Mac, so that you can post about it and tell us what you think!

- Sammy

"I don't suffer from insanity; I love every minute of it!"

http://www.sammyjames.com/music.htm

[bassman]

Yep, I'm eagerly awaiting my Mac. Unfortunately, I got an e-mail today informing me that there is still a constraint on the 15" Macs and my vendor isn't expecting it until July 12-13 at the earliest.

Whenever. . . . . .

Bassman

[SammyJames]

Just a few more weeks then.

By the way -- Cubase 4 wasn't to blame in the case of its crashing. I have discovered that there must be something else going on with the Mac. There is probaby a bug in the OS, or maybe some other program on my system. Anyway, it isn't that big of a deal. I just remember to save my work, and when it crashes on rare occasions, it isn't the end of the world. At least it hasn't happened during recording.

- Sammy

"I don't suffer from insanity; I love every minute of it!"

http://www.sammyjames.com/music.htm