bitman
Ruh-Row.
 
I swear if Cakewalk created new matter nobody would give more than a cursory glance.
Some companies seem to just be doomed to cult status.
 
I honestly don't get it.
Someone do a study.
It's gotta matter now.
 
 

I push Sonoar on my forums a lot, but even though I talk about all the cool features are and how much I like it, people are still goofy for Garage Band and Cubase even though I've suggested downloading the free Sonar demo.
 
Odd...

Honestly, most Cubase users are not Mac users, and folks running VEpro slaves are not running OSX for that.
 
The problems most folks complain about with Sonar are
 
1. No expression maps. Big problem.
2. Video handling.
 
Those two items are often cited for why folks do their mockups on Cubase and maybe mix down to protools if they need their project in that format for the production studio.
 
IMO, it is a conceit that these things are not important and that it is only  a Mac vs pc thing that forces a lot of pros and those aspiring to work on projects involving film, possibly working with a real orchestra for part of the final product, and so on ... to look to Cubase.  It is the DAw of choice in that market segment.
 
Chances are if they are using Cubase now, they are not coming to Sonar, but Sonar drives away film and game composers by not taking their workflow considerations seriously.
 
 

gbar
The problems most folks complain about with Sonar are
 
1. No expression maps. Big problem.
2. Video handling.
 

 
In these forums?... Er nope..
There are plenty of other complaints going on, but these are way at the back of the list.... I can't even remember a single expression maps thread (of course there are some but hardly a hot topic), we might get one video thread every 3 months...
 

lingyai
I know he's revered, and does seem like a nice guy, but I get far less from his "lessons" than I do from, say, Graham at the Recording Revolution or the lesser-known but superb instructor Bobby Owsinski.  

Yes Graham at Recording Revolution is excellent, you always come away from his tutorials with something useful to think about. I especially liked his little series where he mixed an album with a DAW he wasn't familiar with on crappy headphones in a noisy Starbucks. 
 
Bobby Owsinski is also excellent, watched a couple of his courses on Lynda. There's another guy on Lynda who is well worth a watch, Brian Lee White. He's this kind of young nerdy hipster type but his courses on EQ and compression are fantastic, I watched those all the way through when I was just starting out and learned the foundations of mixing from them.
 
There's another couple of YouTube channels I like - MixbusTV with David G - a lot of his tutorials give you a completely different angle on familiar subjects and make you think about approaching things in ways you never thought of. He has some really unique ideas. And if you're into electronic styles, then Point Blank Music on YouTube has a number of extremely insightful videos on mixing EDM, some of which are upwards of an hour long. 

The irony of a site called gear slutz being so selective! At the very least a glaring example of misnomenclature, which is not entirely surprising given that they can't even successfully pluralise the word slut:)
 

John T

John
I'm not sure what one expects. Is it that we want people to bow down when we mention the DAW we use?

I want people to bow before I've said anything. Just as soon as I walk in the room.

i ike to carry a bugle, and play a little riff before entering a room

I'd argue the 3 most important gaps for SONAR in terms of getting more credible are:

1 - Performance. It shouldn't be the be all and end all but, like cars having great 0-60 figures, it matters. SONAR needs a decent audio/VST performance boost so it can compare favourably with others (which it doesn't in the unfortunately commonly quoted performance tests).

2 - Compatability. There are issues with VST compatability still - it's not bad, but there do appear to be more issues with SONAR than other hosts from reading various forums, and SONAR's methods seem to be criticised (wasn't it Acoustica who recently said that SONAR's thread handling was just wrong which caused problems with their plug-in?). This then reflects in plug-in companies testing with SONAR, which reflects on its popularity which reflects on companies testing with SONAR which... Same applies to control surfaces: Cakewalk should bite the bullet and write the surface dll'ls, not expect the controller manufacturer to do (I'm pretty sure that it's usually the DAW manufacturer who does this).

3 - Reliability. This is a tricky one as - apart from the rare issue I've seen, usually due to plug-in compatability and the Bakers erring on the side of caution with dealing with errant plug-ins - SONAR is no less stable than anything else (hell, I get Windows Explorer crashing more than SONAR!). But there's a perception of it being more unstable, crashing more easily and being more picky about hardware than other platforms. On shared forums, I don't see reports of DAW x stuttering and glitching with one or two audio tracks: I do see these reports about SONAR. This probably ties in with performance above to some extent.

All of these are technical issues that have a direct impact on word of mouth marketing and advertising (especially point 2). They're non-trivial to solve or they would have been, but would need a technical, marketing and charm (money?) offensive to address - eg. Pick a big plug-in manufacturer who doesn't currently support SONAR and work with them to get is supported, learn from them why SONAR is 'difficult', pay for their testing/technical expertise and re-write parts of the code accordingly.

Financial investment in plug-ins is probably greater than that in the DAW itself (all of which are ridiculously cheap for what they offer), so a professional (in terms of making a living from recording/mixing) will choose to follow the plug-ins rather than the DAW, so getting that relationship and compatability right is probably the first step.

So You Want a Little Respect While Using SONAR ?  
Just Go out and bust You're  A$$ and Win A few Grammys .  
that's what it's gonna take , 
 
Kenny 

Mac has always focused on creative apps - DTP, Music & Video. Windows has always been a mainstream OS multipurpose OS, with all the good & bad that comes with it.
One thing that really helps Music on macs is the multiclient MIDI driver & low latency audio at the OS level.
It's really so much better than Windows (I know Microsoft are working on it) but on the massive down side, with MAC OS changing every year, requiring plug in manufacturers to update their code super regularly, it creates a compatibility nightmare. I have a huge variety of plug ins some from manufacturers that are out of business but my projects still open & work on my PC even if they were created years ago.
So I switched from mac to windows a while ago to get some breathing space from the constant plug in & OS upgrade treadmill. I still have a mac & like Logic + Pro Tools but honestly can do everything I want on a PC with very few exceptions.
 
I really think Microsoft are working hard to address our ( creatives) needs  in an OS.
 
the features of Sonar are great & deep but i agree it's hard to break into the bubble of ignorance. you just need to keep sharing your knowledge & it will seep in over time.
Chuck

Anderton
 
And Cakewalk has done tutorials in the past. This gives you not only a tutorial on mixing in SONAR, but the files needed to go through the tutorial and learn how to do by yourself instead of just watching someone else say how they do things.
 

 
Craig, I downloaded the files, expecting the guide would be included in the download, but it wasn't -- there are only the Sonar files and the audio files. Then I noticed that the page starts off by thanking for already having downloaded the guide. I googled "Mixing with ProChannel in SONAR X3 Producer guide from Disc Makers" but no joy. Is the guide itself still available?