Considering migration back to Sonar from Cubase

I haven't used Cubase in ages so I can't really compare specifics but you could easily download a trial version of Sonar Platinum to check out things like track height and track freeze/hide/archive.
I don't know anything about EuCon control but I would say that Sonar Platinum has on the whole been quite stable as long as you stay in the 64 bit realm. The least stable feature (for me) is 3rd party, namely Melodyne. And even that is mitigated pretty well by bouncing down edits when you're done.

The video engine is still very limited, but we don't really know what your needs are? Do you have any other video software to make adjustments?

Narrow track height.  I suppose this could depend on your screen size and resolution.  At the most zoomed-out, i can probably see around 20 tracks on my 15" laptop monitor.  However, by grouping your tracks in to Track Folders, you can fold up the ones you don't want to see with a single click.
 
Disabled Tracks.  By "a track fully set up and routed to a VI," do you mean a MIDI track with the corresponding Synth/Audio?  You can go into the Browser View and turn off the power icon to the VI.  That shuts it off and frees up the RAM. To re-add it, simply click the power icon again.
 
EuCon control of Midi CCs.  Not sure what "EUCON" means...
 
General Stability inc video engine.  Can't help, i don't use the Video features.
 
Having said that, Sonar has come a LOOONNNGGG way in the last 6 years.  The trial version should definitely help.

Thanks Matt and Anderton.  Sounds like track height could still be an issue for me - surprised that Cakewalk haven't addressed that.  It was a game-changing difference about the switch to Cubase.  I do routinely use folders, but having something like 70 tracks on a 1920 display - and still be perfectly legible and workable - is a big deal.  It's probably the single biggest reason why media composers and those running large templates gravitate away from Sonar.
 
Disabled tracks is something I'll definitely be investigating.  How Cubase works - and it's far from perfect or glitch-free - is you have an instrument track with a VST loaded, all routed how you need it, than disable, and it takes up almost zero RAM.  Then you just hit your key command of choice - mine is a simple "e" - and up it pops.  Again, great for working with large templates, and having everything ready to go on launch.  I'll check out the various options in Sonar to see how efficient and how many clicks it takes.
 
That would be a pain if you couldn't move a MOV on the timeline, I'll have to investigate.
 
Sadly, the chances are I won't switch back, I have a feeling my few remaining features will be very stubborn.  Its such a shame, as I think my heart still belongs to Sonar, I do very much like so much of the way it does things, and it still seems faster to work with than Cubase in so many ways.
 
 

noiseboy
Thanks Matt and Anderton.  Sounds like track height could still be an issue for me - surprised that Cakewalk haven't addressed that. 

Actually I think they have, there's a feature called Auto-Zoom which i absolutely love. Basically, it allows you to resize all track heights simultaneously except for the selected track, which can be as high as your monitor if you want. So my typical workflow is to have the selected track be quite high, and I set the other tracks to minimum height so they all fit on the screen. Then when I select a new track to work on, it auto-magically zooms to the height I specified, while the previous track shrinks to the same height as the other tracks.
 
As to MOV files, it's more of a speed bump than a roadblock. There are plenty of converters and if you're doing the video, you can always render a WMV or AVI file. 
 
Download the trial version and check it out. What you may be missing in your evaluation are all the features in SONAR you don't know about that are very useful like Mix Recall, Upsampling, VocalSync, FX Chains, ProChannel, Lenses, etc.

Thanks again for everyone's input - alas, one demo session later and Sonar is still not yet for me, despite a huge number of positive attributes.  Lack of EuCon midi CC support and a narrowest track height that is too durned high (yes, I actually measured - it's very nearly twice Cubase's minimum height) are the dealbreakers.
 
I'll keep an eye on Sonar though.  All the promise in the world, if they ever address my issues I'll be right back.

chuckebaby
The track height is easily adjustable. (all at once or 1 at a time)
EuCon ? not sure really but Midi CC has never been a problem here.
in fact I much prefer it over some of the other DAWs out there.

 
Yes indeed, I did find the height adjuster - the point is Sonar cannot go narrow enough, it's limit is way too wide for me.
 
Its a real shame no DAW has followed Cubase's lead on controlling midi CCs by EuCon - not even Pro Tools, owned by Avid, can do it.

Hi, Guy!  nice to see you over here from VI Control... there are a few other threads on this which I've responded to...in this sector of the forum... might wanna take a look as there are a lot of other differences than track sizing.  I too wish for a few improvements in foldering and sizing but my screens handle it and the other attributes of sonar far outweigh this for me.
 
Still trying to find a decent semi-weighted 88, like you...Have all but given up on Akai listening to all of us who are still hoping;  might actually just bite the bullet and get both the NI Kontrol 88 AND the new Nektar 88 so I have both the light guide, which I love... and the semi weighted when needed...