batsbrew

azslow3
 I do not have S1, so I do not know about build-in features ....

then why are you in a thread about what you like about S1P?

I am on Cakewalk forum to learn something new, about Sonar or something else. And help with something when I can. Not so long time ago, people was forced to look in different directions. I also have looked toward S1 and hit several show stoppers. Still, I have found that looking around is a good idea. So I keep an eye on other DAWs discussions.

(S1 owners here write whatever, except technical details...)

Since you have S1, you could answer on the original question about X-Ray.
Or make technical comparison, which I have proposed before.
 
So far the DAW name in the title of this thread can be changed to another 3-4 DAWs and everything written will stay 80-90% valid. A half of "awesome features in S1 3 compare to Sonar 6" exists in recent Sonar.
 
So I can only ask counter question: if you have decided to stop on Sonar 6, what are you doing here?

Stand by for a commercial interruption ... and a flashback to what the OP of this thread originally stated:
 

I am really excited to see that Sonar found a new home and has a new team, it is a relief to see that all this work will continue its journey. Meanwhile, I did buy Studio One and while there are features I miss in Sonar, there are few key things in S1 that I am hoping to see in Sonar

 
This sounds like a constructive comment, not intended to be a DAW vs. DAW comparison.  But invariably, the discussion has moved sideways into which DAW is best.
 
I think that looking around at what other DAWs may do better, in order to improve the one that you use, is always a good thing. 

azslow3

batsbrew

azslow3
 I do not have S1, so I do not know about build-in features ....

then why are you in a thread about what you like about S1P?

I am on Cakewalk forum to learn something new, about Sonar or something else. And help with something when I can. Not so long time ago, people was forced to look in different directions. I also have looked toward S1 and hit several show stoppers. Still, I have found that looking around is a good idea. So I keep an eye on other DAWs discussions.

(S1 owners here write whatever, except technical details...)

Since you have S1, you could answer on the original question about X-Ray.
Or make technical comparison, which I have proposed before.
 
So far the DAW name in the title of this thread can be changed to another 3-4 DAWs and everything written will stay 80-90% valid. A half of "awesome features in S1 3 compare to Sonar 6" exists in recent Sonar.
 
So I can only ask counter question: if you have decided to stop on Sonar 6, what are you doing here?

Aslow, I have switched to S1.  The reason I am still here is this community is more expansive in terms of topics.  Presonus sells hardware (of which I don't own any) so their hardware discussions are focused around their gear.  There is no software forum to talk about other software and no techniques forum to talk about techniques.
 
Also, the S1 forums are more business-like, where as the Sonar forums are a little looser with a little more humor and witty banter.

Also, the S1 forums are more business-like, where as the Sonar forums are a little looser with a little more humor and witty banter.
 
Witty banter? I went back to look and all I saw was childish comments and low brow humor...wait a minute, those were all my posts... nevermind.

To say " I don't miss Sonar" is probably a given no matter what you decide to do. If a person makes their mind up to use something else, they will no longer be concentrating on what they had before and they will use what they have.

Currently I run several instances of 4 different programming editors. And that is my usual working environment 
 
Yes, BUT- Are you making music and tracking? Are you a musician? Programmer?
 

I don't understand the comment " how far daws have come" when comparing Studio One to Sonar.

For that you have to try them..
 
@ Azslow3, I have the most recent copy of Studio One 3 professional. So I have tried them both. 
 
There is DAW with weekly updates, some are significant and there can be intermediate updates with fixes. Report real bug - get it fixed next day.
Sonar has some advantages in the work-flow and offered functions (f.e. see the comparison I have mentioned before). But the list of functions it does not have compare to other is also not empty.
 
@Azslow3, I think there is a slight translation error here. If I understand this statement, which I think is saying that Sonar also leaves much to be desired.What do you want it to do that it doesn't do?
 
Try to start some "other" DAW on old computer and then again Sonar. The difference in performance will be obvious.

Also working with Sonar, I have learned never modify the project structure while transport is not stopped. In "other DAW" I can make new project, press "Play"/"Record" and build the whole project without completely stopping it(add tracks, FXes, Synthes, record parts, etc.). I will call that a "stress test" for gapless audio engine.
(do not try to enable "allow record arm with working transport" in Sonar, there was a thread about that... you can get your SSD filled quickly )
 
I think this is a great feature to have. I would ask, how many things does the average user do at once? Speaking for myself. I don't typically throw effects into my chain while my mix is running. Maybe others do more of this and so this would be more appealing to them. When I build a mix I do it in a systematic way which doesn't involve throwing elements in while the program is running.. Most DJ's use Ableton Live. I don't see a DJ running for a copy of Studio One. This doesn't mean I don't make adjustments to plug ins while Sonar runs.Sonar is more than capable to do that unless we have a bad plug in.
 
I would not mix "work arounds" and alternative ways. The first is lengthy replacement for something not working. The second is different approach.
 
You can cut it any way you want. If I have a client and they nave an Mp4 track I need to find a work around in Studio One. So neither is immune to it.
 
But sorry, this forum is not "unique in openes" and sometimes prided "developers feedback" was never top it its class. The community is mostly "self servicing".
 
I guess most people here still run Sonar for one or another reason. And I guess many people have good feeling doing that, from "feeling home" and "nostalgia" to "that is simpler/quicker to do in Sonar...". But I do not think that refusing the fact the program shows some "aging" effect is a good idea.
 
I can't speak for anyone else but myself. I know a few here so I believe I can confidently say "we" when referring to the group here sometimes because there is an "us" among the "them".
 
I don't have a good feeling about what happened to Cakewalk. I don't have a good feeling about seeing one of my favorite daws kicked around like a soccer ball between owners these last 10 years. I believe the forum is unique in that there is an open environment here. If the environment were not open I seriously doubt this thread would exist.
 
My answer for using Sonar is simple really. I know how to do everything in it in half the time it would take me to do it in something else. As long as it is kept the way it is I see no reason to change that. After resizing  a few graphic blocks around on two monitors I have it the way I like it, usually with console view on the second monitor.One keystroke hides all the things I don't need to see while mixing. It doesn't get any better than that for me in mixing really. I have typical plug in chains. No need for me to drag in anything while it runs. 
I would hate to see so much blood sweat and tears go down the drain in thinking about all of the effort that has gone into the program.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

BassDaddy
Also, the S1 forums are more business-like, where as the Sonar forums are a little looser with a little more humor and witty banter.
 
Witty banter? I went back to look and all I saw was childish comments and low brow humor...wait a minute, those were all my posts... nevermind.

LOL - my standards for witty banter are admittedly low.  :-)

Starise

To say " I don't miss Sonar" is probably a given no matter what you decide to do. If a person makes their mind up to use something else, they will no longer be concentrating on what they had before and they will use what they have.

Currently I run several instances of 4 different programming editors. And that is my usual working environment 
 
Yes, BUT- Are you making music and tracking? Are you a musician? Programmer?

How many musicians develop 4 different programs in parallel?
I am a programmer. And I have no problem to work with different editors and so with different shortcuts, menus, compilation and run options.
I mean (pro) musicians also can use several DAWs (and according to this forum, some do).
 

I don't understand the comment " how far daws have come" when comparing Studio One to Sonar.
For that you have to try them..
@ Azslow3, I have the most recent copy of Studio One 3 professional. So I have tried them both. 

I do not have S1. My DAW of choice is "far" in many aspects. Reading this forum, I assume S1 is also "far" (but owners keep most details  in "secret")
 

There is DAW with weekly updates, some are significant and there can be intermediate updates with fixes. Report real bug - get it fixed next day.
Sonar has some advantages in the work-flow and offered functions (f.e. see the comparison I have mentioned before). But the list of functions it does not have compare to other is also not empty.
 
@Azslow3, I think there is a slight translation error here. If I understand this statement, which I think is saying that Sonar also leaves much to be desired.What do you want it to do that it doesn't do?

I want it react faster, replace MIDI engine with something "modern", make API working with features introduced in the last 10 yeas. But from everything else, I most tired by its endless list of MIDI related bugs (from input devices, throw timing up to control surfaces API). Also I have a philosophical wish my DAW is accessible.
 

Try to start some "other" DAW on old computer and then again Sonar. The difference in performance will be obvious.

Also working with Sonar, I have learned never modify the project structure while transport is not stopped. In "other DAW" I can make new project, press "Play"/"Record" and build the whole project without completely stopping it(add tracks, FXes, Synthes, record parts, etc.). I will call that a "stress test" for gapless audio engine.
(do not try to enable "allow record arm with working transport" in Sonar, there was a thread about that... you can get your SSD filled quickly )
 
I think this is a great feature to have. I would ask, how many things does the average user do at once?

To make it clear. For me, any DAW is just a hobby "music instrument". When I play my DP, I do not have to think "before I switch to EP I should not forget to stop accompaniment and release all keys, otherwise it will crash or get notes stuck". I want the same from the DAW, drop new synth or effect without thinking much about technical details, preferably from controller. I am 2m away from the keyboard when I sit near my keys/drums/guitars, I do not even see the monitor (so I have some benefits from accessibility, when married with controller).
 
At work, I was sometimes loading everything I need into 100GB RAM disk (on 128GB RAM server...  SSDs have solved the problem), waiting 5min till the program compiles after small change is absolute "no go". So the DAW reaction speed has value for me.
 

I would not mix "work arounds" and alternative ways. The first is lengthy replacement for something not working. The second is different approach.
 
You can cut it any way you want. If I have a client and they nave an Mp4 track I need to find a work around in Studio One. So neither is immune to it.

Not that I need it, but from what I know, my DAW of choice support any format... And if something is not yet supported, it is easy to add (yes, I am a programmer... it was not supporting Sonar projects, so I have added that )

My answer for using Sonar is simple really. I know how to do everything in it in half the time it would take me to do it in something else. As long as it is kept the way it is I see no reason to change that. After resizing  a few graphic blocks around on two monitors I have it the way I like it, usually with console view on the second monitor.One keystroke hides all the things I don't need to see while mixing. It doesn't get any better than that for me in mixing really. I have typical plug in chains. No need for me to drag in anything while it runs. 

When I was switching from Borland development environment.... oh that was hard... nothing worked the way it SHOULD, not even simple Copy/Paste!
First run of "vi" under BSD... how to EXIT this black screen??
Windows on 8086... why someone can consider to wait 2 minutes for some dumb graphics?
 
I mean changing modern DAWs is not so hard   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The secret of Studio One is ...
 
Take a few former Cubase programmers and let them write a DAW without the bloat of many years accumulation.
 
S1 may lack a few features yet at version 3.5, but in my opinion it is sleek and responsive.  Must be the young code base.  I have heard other users comment on the tight timing with MIDI and audio.  No lag or delays in updating the session.  Stability and lack of crashes.  Must be a secret.  Hmmmm. 

abacab
The secret of Studio One is ...
 
Take a few former Cubase programmers and let them write a DAW without the bloat of many years accumulation.
 
S1 may lack a few features yet at version 3.5, but in my opinion it is sleek and responsive.  Must be the young code base.  I have heard other users comment on the tight timing with MIDI and audio.  No lag or delays in updating the session.  Stability and lack of crashes.  Must be a secret.  Hmmmm. 

Studio One is VERY sweet.  I'll be following this one VERY close.

I have been enjoying solid stability from day one for me in 2010.  It was young then but did the job real well for me. It has evolved into a magnificent program now.  They have quite a long road map and they are adding things in all the time as they travel. V4 will be pretty awesome I can guarantee it.  There might even be an update prior too. 
 
I push the audio side hard for days on end as I have just done mixing 9 songs.  Many hours.  Never flinched once. Had Scheps Omni here there and everywhere.  Good source of bundled plug-ins too.  In composing music mode I drive the external setup pretty hard all day long too.  Up to 10 hardware synths and never an issue.  Plays back perfect from anywhere.  Great external midi timing to the metronome.  The midi timing externally feels independent.  It just does its thing.  As you work the audio side harder e.g. with virtual synths as well as audio, with all the external midi going on for me, you just adjust the buffers and things to get playback smooth with the audio.  The external midi is always in sync with that. 
 
I love the gapless performance.  I am someone who is often doing something while it is in play or record.  The other day I was visually editing audio events while the cursor was just behind playing everything I had just edited.  All without any issues. You can loop sections drag effects in and audition patches while it is in play or  record.  I was dropping EQ's and things onto individual events all while in play and looping.  Setting up reverbs at the same time and tuning the spaces etc..
 
It never crashes for me under any of these conditions.  My RME audio interface and Steinberg Midex 8 midi interface all work seamlessly with the software.  I would use it all live too without hesitation.  Although Ableton is fantastic live.  It has a similar solid audio gapless engine as well.  It is becoming more linear in its own way though.  It would be the only other DAW I would be interested in learning.  It's way different.  Jarre is doing his current albums using Live controlling external midi as well as in the box.  
 
I am excited about the integration between Presonus digital mixers and Studio One.  (DAW Mode)  Some real interesting things are happening there.