Yeah... this is what I was saying earlier. Look at (and please forgive me for using actual competitors product names here which I generally try to avoid) Cubase vs. Nuendo. You can get the top tier version of Cubase for a little more than you can get Sonar for and it, like Sonar Producer, is a full on professional audio production application. If you want the pro VIDEO stuff (and apparently some networking things that I don't really understand) you have to pay SIGNIFICANTLY more for Nuendo.
 
I have a family member who does video stuff (exclusively) and he has to pay through the nose for his stuff. Like WAY more than I do for my audio stuff. I've also worked (as a manual labor droog) at a film production company and the rigs and accompanying software they bought was just unfathomable amounts of money to a guy like me.
 
Personally I am ecstatic that I can purchase a pro software package like Sonar for almost half of what I could have bought an old Fostex/Tascam cassette based multitrack deck a mere 15-20 years ago that can do CRAPTON more and get FAR better results. Granted I have to provide my own interface and computer which can be quite costly if you want absolutely no barriers but with liberal use of resource saving features and techniques you can use the program no problem on a $300 computer through a $100-150 interface which would basically bring the price back up to what those old multitracks cost back then anyway (not even accounting for 20 years of inflation).
 
I also don't have to have a drumkit, tons of expensive mics, a special room to record in, a bunch of amps or even a herd of unreliable drunken musicians to babysit.
 
If I need to do video stuff... well I'll just have to either figure out a way to buy the right programs, use some of the freeware solutions or just admit to myself that perhaps video isn't my thing and get someone else to do the heavy lifting for me and use the tools I DO have to create my score.
 
As it stands I'm not even sure what kind of barriers even exist in this day and age in regards to splicing together video considering all the options out there that are free, come with any crummy little camera you buy or are just plain inexpensive enough to snag for a hundred bucks or so. I mean unless you need to create CGI stuff or have some weird high end demands all the cheap/free stuff works at the same resolution and file formats as the pro stuff so what's the difference? If the actual producer/editor isn't finished their job to the point of scoring the audio guy shouldn't even have the project yet or if they are just fleshing stuff out then you should be getting a revised final copy of the video to tighten up your part anyway.
 
So basically that's a really long, and perhaps douchey, way to say... Sonar isn't a video editor.

Sonar is without question as professional as any other DAW and completely capable of making hit records.
 
Regarding instruments and plug-ins:
• Yes on plug-in effects
• On instruments, it depends on what your music requires, although Sonar has more bundled content than most or all others.  For what I do, I need added guitars (at a minimum) like RealGuitar, RealLPC, and RealStrat.  If the acoustic guitar is not exposed, you could use the bundled AAS.  For orchestration, the stuff that comes with Sonar will cover the basics, but you probably need to add other instruments for very serious orchestral scoring.  I have other basses and drums, but what comes with Sonar is great.  I think the SI-Elec Piano is really good.
 
In my opinion, Sonar comes with more instruments and plug-ins than its competitors (if you go with Producer) and that is one of the main reasons to buy it.
 
If you going to make an album of acoustic guitar and voice, almost anything will work if the interface and mic are good.

One thing that can be added is the PRO CHANNEL. I think it made audio processing not only very easy, but also more similar to real hardware recording. I love the integration of so many nice features in just the Pro Channel area.
Enjoy making music! 

zblip
 I was head sound designer for Ubisofts Batman revenge and we were receiving tones of clips, sometimes one second long, clips we had to loop for the purpose doing ambiance loops, many scenes in one single clip, that we had to cut in different individual clips etc etc... 
Never would I have been able to do this inside the present form of Sonar's video app. 

what I don't understand why you even asked your original question in your OP
"can sonar produce a professional album" ?
 
if you were a head sound designer, shouldn't you already know the answer to questions like that ?
I would think a head sound designer, (someone that oversee's the audio score)
you know digital audio workstations are all the same except the features and hardware.
 
or do you not know that?
 
I wouldn't buy sony vegas for its audio features, I surely didn't buy sonar for its video features.
 
as you also pointed out, almost everyone you know started with dreams of being a pop star has moved on to TV jingles.
(forgive me if I interrupted that wrong)
but everyone I know started out with dreams of being a pop star but now are producers in professional recording studios using digital audio work stations for audio not video.
everyone is different and though in your corner of the world you may think the perfect daw includes all video support.
In my corner of the world I think the perfect DAW is for Audio. with some support for video score, like it is now.
 
I do hope you find what your looking for though ;-)
 
 

Anderton

CakeAlexS
Sonically Sonar is no different to Pro Tools. It's your hardware that matters. The work flow isn't that different either.

Agree with the first part, disagree with the second. I've run sessions on just about all DAWs and find that the workflows vary considerably depending on what you want to do. For example I always recommended Pro Tools when people wanted to transition from 2" 24-track to a DAW, as the workflow was the most similar. Reason is like a fully-realized MIDI sequencer with digital audio for those who want it. For composition, songwriting, and creating sample libraries and other content, I haven't found anything with more fluid workflow than Sonar.

 
You chopped off my full point (feel like I've been taken out of context  ):
 
Sonically Sonar is no different to Pro Tools. It's your hardware that matters. The work flow isn't that different either. A DAW is a DAW really, quite boring and they all more or less do the same thing, just with different flavours. Decide what is best for you.
 
What I've highlighted in bold sort of emphasises your point really.
Anyway I don't disagree with your points at all so the point is moot.

I did the [at least semi-] pop star thing back in the 60s...three albums, toured, played Carnegie Hall, headlined as well as opened for a bunch of headliners, blah blah blah. Also did a lot of session work in the 70s, and in the 80s, had a string of successes with several new age albums...had some cuts on dance music compilations in the 90s. I consider it freakishly lucky that I even got that far, because my musical tastes are not really mass market.
 
So, much of my career even when I was doing music revolved around music in some way. That includes doing music for multiple industrial, product, tutorial, and kiosk videos using Sonar, as well as two movies (not family friendly...but hey, my neighbors had this deadline, the original guy canceled, and the pay was great). So maybe I wouldn't be able to score "Lord of the Ring Modulators, Episode IV" with Sonar, but for everyday video work and YouTube releases, it does what I need.
 
IF you check out the YouTube channel in my sig, the music videos are nothing but Sonar + Vegas, and the videos were really done just to provide some visuals while the music was playing...I was able to put them together really fast.
 
Many of the musicians I know who use DAWs are into the direct-to-fan thing. I think they're making more bucks than I did selling a quarter million albums...

John
Interesting how the thread has evolved. Perhaps the answer is in the acronym DAW. Sonar is a DAW. It is not a DVW. It can host video for scoring while composing original content, though. Can a user use it for making quality music for whatever the purpose? 
 
I think the answer is rather apparent and to belabor the point is rather senseless.   Nor can I fathom the purpose of the questions being asked. No one on this forum that is a Sonar user will ever say it wont be able to produce great quality music. I'm pretty sure that if this were asked on any forum dedicated to music or the use of computers in such an endeavor would answer any differently.
 
My conclusion is that this thread is a royal waste of time and server space. 

I'll quote the late, great John Simonton as a summary: "Give a real musician two spoons, and he'll make music."

Spoons would work.

I notice that there is not one softsynth that emulates spoons. Not one.
I see a gap in the market.

I wonder if the Ford forums have people asking why their Ford Mustang isn't a Chevrolet SUV?

Chuck..there have been people who bought Sony Vegas primarily for it's audio functionality. These days it is a step behind the major DAWs and even a step behind products like Harrison Mix Bus which have no midi capabilities, but one could easily use the audio portion to record and mix a song

I'm a "head sound designer" and a Producer (whatever that means as it changes from project to project) and I have chimed in time and time again that Sonar is the absolute bomb for audio creatives, IMHO it totally outshines PT but then again, every persons DAW of choice is their choice. What makes a project successful is the Operator and not the software......Well, until Sonar come up with that magic button "make my project sound like the absolute **** without me having to do anything" 

Its a bit of a silly thread this one.

as mentioned many times in this thread. The software is super powerful (on the right machine etc)!  It is only limited by your skill!

Chuck.  I didn't say it was common.  Noticed that I used past tense.  Vegas was once an audio only application.  As a modern DAW it would be awful.  it's not even capable of side chaining .  When Vegas added video features the DAW market was a lot less advanced.  Vegas, even with the new video additions was somewhat of a poor man's Nuendo.  It is wise that they focused on the video aspect because they have not made any major core updates to the audio core of any of their programs in ages.

I am by no means a "BIG-TIME" producer but many of my projects have gone directly to copy. No mastering house, no mastering engineer. I have had other producers and mastering houses comment about not having to do anything at all to my finished products. Also, they are always asking about the quality of the sound I'm getting. Of course, I have played music, engineered, and co-produced with some of the heroes in this industry. I take no credit for my knowledge. Everything was learned from sitting next to the BIG guy and soaking stuff in like a sponge.
As for Cakewalk, if you had asked this question several years ago I would have said " No, it's not there yet!" But around the time Sonar 8.5 came around, I didn't have to send my stuff off to be mastered anymore. I was able to do it all with that. X1 changed the game all together. 
One of my clients got a deal in hip-hop and his first project was done with X1. Sony released it as is! Another one of my clients landed a deal in Nashville, outlaw country style. The first album I did for him was responsible for getting him that deal. It was also released as it was. Also, done with X1!
As I said many times before, if you have good solid tools and the know-how you can get whatever you want out of what is at hand.