At the moment I am using Cantabile to host VSTi's backing tracks and mic (vocal) effects. However I have been thinking lately that the CWP layout is a little more intuitive and as I work solely in Sonar for all audio work, perhaps doing the whole render down, convert formats etc etc and then transfer thing might be too muhc doubling up?
 
Don't get me wrong Cantabile is a fantastic app, but, yeah, I'm thinking maybe using Sonar live might be a bit easier with less hoops to get through....what do others think as I really am finding it tough to jump one way or the other. Any opinions are fine
 
Thanks

Well, I have Cantabile, and another similar program called Forte, from Brainspawn.  I also have been a Sonar user since the dinosaur days.
 
I use Cantabile/Forte for live performance situations, where I can stack layers of VST synths into really easy to call up presets, and either program REALLY fits the bill for live performance.
 
IF you are talking about continuing to use Cantabile or some other VST host wrapper rack emulator for LIVE performance, then I would vote for that, rather than for trying to get Sonar to serve up presets in any kind of timely manner for live performing.  
 
Sonar EXCELS at being recording software.  Cantabile/Forte EXCEL at being live performance VST hosting software.
 
In my opinion, Sonar has way too much overhead to effectively act as a VST host for live performance - it takes too much time to switch presets using Sonar, as it is just not built to do the kinds of things programs like Cantabile or Forte do in support of live performance.
 
So, perhaps you can elaborate on what you DO do, using Cantabile, and what you want Sonar to be able to do?
 
I'll try to help, as I have over 10 years of live performance using both Forte and Cantabile, and somewhere around 30 years of Cakewalk software use.
 
Bob Bone
 

I reread your post - IF you are using Cantabile as some sort of composing/arranging scratch-pad, and then when you get things the way you like, you then have to transfer it all into a Sonar project, then by all means just do the whole thing in Sonar.
 
What you could do in Sonar would be to set up some stock Track Templates that have a lot of setup stuff done already, and then it would very quickly be able to be tweaked for whatever new pieces or changes to existing setup you would need.
 
It really all depends on what exactly you are trying to do, so I look forward to some additional elaboration on your goals/needs.
 
Bob Bone
 
 

Thanks Bob.
 
Essentially I have created backing tracks to go along with my live keys/vocals/ bass playing. Mostly just drums and some guitars. I also want to use vocal efx with the mic. I hear what you are syaing about the jobs both do, but I do like the way Sonar lays out the tracks, and it alos makes it far easier to "edit on the fly" or to drop tracks out if I add a drummer or guitarist (live). Other folks have extolled the virtues of the Playlist as a live tool, and these comments got me thinking that perhaps it would be easier to run it all from one app. As it is now I need to bounce down tracks to wav, convert those to MP3, then export them t o the laptop, then setup multiple players in Cantabile, with the required VSTi's and efx and so on and so forth haha!...if I use Sonar it is a once only setup cost. Set the CWP and then its good to go.
 
Stilll your thoughts are good and I will definitely take them onboard.
 
Cheers
 
Dennis

I'm not looking for live performance support. I only want to be able to play VST VIs that don't include a standalone player. Cantabile and Forte are both way more than I need. SAVIhost also is not my favorite (having a LOT of copies of a renamed SAVIhost.exe littering my HD is not appealing).
 
Is there anything out there simpler than Cantabile or Forte, but runs as a single executable?
 
Thanks.

Yes VSTHost http://www.hermannseib.com/english/vsthost.htm

joden
Yes VSTHost http://www.hermannseib.com/english/vsthost.htm

Doh. So THAT'S the difference between VSThost and SAVIhost. I thought SAVIhost was newer, and was a replacement for VSThost. Wrong.
 

 

hahah!  Easy to do. VSTHost is an excellent app if all you want is a simple interface with a very VERY low footprint. I do like the way you can draw lines between plugs which gives a good visual of what is going where. And for free? It does not get better IMO!

Plus it has an easy name to remember

robert_e_bone
Well, I have Cantabile, and another similar program called Forte, from Brainspawn.  I also have been a Sonar user since the dinosaur days.
 
I use Cantabile/Forte for live performance situations, where I can stack layers of VST synths into really easy to call up presets, and either program REALLY fits the bill for live performance.
 
IF you are talking about continuing to use Cantabile or some other VST host wrapper rack emulator for LIVE performance, then I would vote for that, rather than for trying to get Sonar to serve up presets in any kind of timely manner for live performing.  
 
Sonar EXCELS at being recording software.  Cantabile/Forte EXCEL at being live performance VST hosting software.
 
In my opinion, Sonar has way too much overhead to effectively act as a VST host for live performance - it takes too much time to switch presets using Sonar, as it is just not built to do the kinds of things programs like Cantabile or Forte do in support of live performance.
 
So, perhaps you can elaborate on what you DO do, using Cantabile, and what you want Sonar to be able to do?
 
I'll try to help, as I have over 10 years of live performance using both Forte and Cantabile, and somewhere around 30 years of Cakewalk software use.
 
Bob Bone
 

Hi Bob - curious about Forte versus Cantabile. Can you recommend one over the other? Why both? I am also using SPlat with a live DAW but would like to try something more robust live.