I am having a problem with Sonar crashing every time when inserting Waldorf Nave. I contacted the Waldorf and this is the reply I received:
 
"We are currently testing only on industry standard DAWs. Sonar belongs 
not to this. But it doesn’t mean generally, that our products won’t work
on Sonar, it only means, that we aren testing it.
 
We would need to be in collaboration with Cakewalk, but we aren’t.
 
When you like, you can record am movie and show us step by step this
behaviour, so maybe we can look and fix it. Thank you !"
 
This was shockingly unexpected, but I have to admit that in many circles Sonar is not considered industry standard. Every time I get a survey with the questions about DAW, it would say:
"Which DAW do you use?
1.Protools
2. Logic
3. Cubase
4. Abelton
5. Other
And I have to type in Cakewalk Sonar in to "Other" section and feel embarrassed for using it.
 
I guess I am ok with it, long as Sonar meets my needs- I can think about it as a "secret weapon" and be secretly happy about how good it became recently. but still...
 
Why Cakewalk does not advertise Sonar as an Industry Standard? Why are they not in collaboration with Waldorf and not making sure that all major software companies have ability to test their products in Sonar environment? What would it take for Gibson/Cakewalk to change this perception and become industry standard?  
 

The "industry" considers the Mac as the dominant music platform. Samplitude and Sequoia are excellent programs that are more capable than several Mac equivalents, but they're ignored as well. At the lower end of the scale, I'd take Mixcraft over GarageBand, but it's ignored too because it's Windows only. In video, Final Cut is considered an "industry standard" while Sony Vegas, which is Windows and I believe a better program, does not have the same cachet.
 
Until Windows is considered the "industry standard" platform, Windows-only programs will likely not be considered "industry standard," no matter how good they are. Meanwhile, the people running SONAR on Parallels or under Boot Camp have their own answer  

Snobs in the industry tend to use Macs...and , as most Mac users, would say theirs is better...
I had a mac and protools back in the 90s and got sick of having to pay tons of money for their products (had a 15k system and an 8k system both with used macs )when I could achieve the same thing for pennies on the dollar with a windows machine and sonar.
There are close to 90% windows computers out there...so don't sweat it. Just make your music and laugh at them

So it is the Microsoft to blame for losing the battle to Apple for being industry standard?
I build computers and I love Windows 10 on the latest hardware. I do not use Xeons processors, but Intel i7 is plenty for good performance. I don't see how Apple holds the monopoly so strong with the prices they have.
 
But I am thinking- is the ProTools that much better than Sonar? The ProTools is industry standard- PC or Mac, right, or just on Mac? I have been looking in to it and considering to install it and see if it really that much better.

That said...for the Mac users, whatever they use is fine...just use what you want and concentrate on making good music instead of labels.I've made a good living using Windows based programs for over 15 years...nobody really cares what the final product was made on , just what it sounds like in final mix..my humble opinion :)

I understand your concern, but I wouldn't worry about it, or feel embarrassed to admit to using Sonar.  It is as professional as any other DAW software.  The "Industry Standard" tag has questionable value these days as more and more artists and bands take the DIY approach rather than use commercial "Industry Standard" equipped studios.
 
In my experience, it's not uncommon for recordings made in "Industry Standard" DAW software such as Pro Tools, to be edited and mixed in other DAW software, such as Sonar, Logic, Cubase etc.  I can't tell you how many times people have been impressed with Sonar when I've been quickly editing and mixing some audio exported from a studio session.
 
Sure, Cakewalk could devote more resources to market their software more effectively, but I personally would much prefer those resources be focused on continually improving Sonar.

I agree, this is nothing but uninformed snobbery. Any DAW that allows you to create good music is "industry standard." In fact, Sonar is more complete than most, as it has a staff or notation editor, which Ableton and Bitwig and many others do not. (Reaper is about to release their first version with one). As has been said many times, it's how well you use the tools you have that is the biggest factor in your success. Sonar has all the tools, and in fact may be the most complete DAW in the world. But I agree, they should really promote themselves more. 

vladasyn
So it is the Microsoft to blame for losing the battle to Apple for being industry standard?

 
No, it is a combination of legacy and marketing. So Macs were there first when it came to audio production because there were all there was really. The original Pro Tools setup, which was the only realtime DAW there was, used MacOS. The Mac was just for GUI basically, all the work was done on dedicated ASICs, but it needed a Mac. That kind of legacy really got cemented in there. So you kinda had this situation of "We use Macs because we use Macs." They just keep on with the same thing because "that's how it's always been."
 
Also Apple was very successful in marketing their computers as being more "creative" and such. People bought in to it, and still do. They believe that if you are a cool, hip, artsy type you need to have a Mac because it'll help your creativity or something silly like that. It is not a logical position, but then brand marketing isn't about logic and it works very well in many cases.
 

But I am thinking- is the ProTools that much better than Sonar?

 
No, it's crap IMO. The reason it is so popular is, again, because it was the first. Another "we use it because we use it" situation. Studios started with it, so they kept using it because it is what they were familiar with, so more studios got on board because it is what everyone used and expected and so on. It holds on to its position because of inertia, not technical superiority.
 
 
For that matter, Sonar is actually more "standard" than some companies like to pretend. Cakewalk is a long time mainstay of MIDI production. Cakewalk 1.0 came out in 1987, in the REAL early days of computer audio. It and Cubase were pretty much the first MIDI trackers, and the only two I know that are still around.

vladasyn
But I am thinking- is the ProTools that much better than Sonar? The ProTools is industry standard- PC or Mac, right, or just on Mac? I have been looking in to it and considering to install it and see if it really that much better.

Well...I worked at a Pro Tools studio for almost all the classical projects I've recorded (including one award-winner). They had a big HD system, recorded at 96 kHz, etc. Great studio, actually, with a fantastic selection of mics and a room sound to die for. But once I'd recorded the files, the first thing I did was transfer them to a hard drive so I could bring the files into my own studio and do the editing and mixing with SONAR. The process was just so much smoother than with Pro Tools. 
 
Newer versions of Pro Tools have fixed some of the issues that drove me crazy (like all bounces having to be real-time - which gets old pretty fast with 20-minute classical pieces), but SONAR has also progressed since then, so AFAIC I'd still much rather use SONAR than Pro Tools for projects.

I won't be spending my money on Waldorf products then.

There is a workaround using NI's Komplete Kontrol software as a wrapper in Sonar.