jude77

LeBassist
Just thinking out loud...
 
1) Capsulize your previous CW work.  Get an export method down-pat. (I have DOS stuff, so lots of work to do)
2) Find your new DAW.  (Seem's like Studio 1 v3 is a fav for Win & Mac).
3) Take your butter Plugins (I have a love grip on Z3TA & Dim, and anything Anderton did,<thks Craig>)
4) Learn what you new DAW like in the was of work flow
5) Figure out where we are all going to meet-up?

That's a very organized plan.  Here's mine so far:
1.  What? SONAR is defunct?!?!?!  How cow, I need a new DAW!!!!  RIGHT NOW!!!!!
2.  Bought Studio One because it was on sale at a great price.
3.  Can't bond with Studio One.
4.  Bought Samplitude because it was on sale at a great price.
5.  Can't bond with Samplitude.
6.  Return to SONAR.

Take a look at Tracktion T6 (free) or Tracktion Waveform. https://www.tracktion.com/products/t6-daw
 
It is object oriented, but a completely different workflow from Sonar.  It is an intuitive one screen workspace, but there is a lot under the hood to dig into. There are manuals and videos to cover most of the features...
https://www.tracktion.com/training/videos

abacab

jude77

LeBassist
Just thinking out loud...
 
1) Capsulize your previous CW work.  Get an export method down-pat. (I have DOS stuff, so lots of work to do)
2) Find your new DAW.  (Seem's like Studio 1 v3 is a fav for Win & Mac).
3) Take your butter Plugins (I have a love grip on Z3TA & Dim, and anything Anderton did,<thks Craig>)
4) Learn what you new DAW like in the was of work flow
5) Figure out where we are all going to meet-up?

That's a very organized plan.  Here's mine so far:
1.  What? SONAR is defunct?!?!?!  How cow, I need a new DAW!!!!  RIGHT NOW!!!!!
2.  Bought Studio One because it was on sale at a great price.
3.  Can't bond with Studio One.
4.  Bought Samplitude because it was on sale at a great price.
5.  Can't bond with Samplitude.
6.  Return to SONAR.

Take a look at Tracktion T6 (free) or Tracktion Waveform. https://www.tracktion.com/products/t6-daw
 
It is object oriented, but a completely different workflow from Sonar.  It is an intuitive one screen workspace, but there is a lot under the hood to dig into. There are manuals and videos to cover most of the features...
https://www.tracktion.com/training/videos

Very Cool.  Thanks!

Keep saying CUBASE is the way to go and the only Intelligent answer
Just takes a little to get used to ,but If you have the brains to work out Sonar, then Cubase is no different.
It has Sys ex support for keyboard players to get their onboard sounds sequencing nice.
If you want just vst use ,then Mixcraft is a great option.Very easy to master.

Cubase is probably an excellent choice for some, but probably not for everybody.  I really like the Elements package for $99, plenty of MIDI stuff in there, if you don't really need all the Pro bells and whistles!
 
I tried the demo of Mixcraft last year, and found it fairly easy to use, with plenty of similarity to Sonar plus some nice new features.  My only issue with it is that it is Windows only, and has no competitive niche to keep it around for the long run.  I would hate to put all my marbles in that basket and up like Cakewalk did again, someday...

I am working to make a bit different "migration plan" possible:
a) download 11M DAW
b) open your Sonar project in it, check it is fine (that is the part I try to prepare...)
c) continue using Sonar, with a good feeling that in case Sonar stuck you can run another DAW to finish your project(s)
d*) at free time try to learn a bit another environment, just in case you will be forced to switch fast

igiwigi
Cubase has Sys ex support for keyboard players to get their onboard sounds sequencing nice.
 

This implies that unless you have Sysex support you cannot get your external keyboards sequencing nice which of course is not true at all. I have got 8 external synths and with Studio One trust me I am getting everything sequencing nice! 
 
Sysex only allows you to dump sounds into your synths on the fly and edit them on the fly which is not something you always have to do. If you are someone who either creates patches or edits them, then you can still do this with Studio One and just sequence the final sound you end up with.  One of my synths is a Roland JD800 and I can easily edit patches on the fly as well manually while Studio One is sequencing it.
 
You can use an editor program for your synths and often the editors use Sysex to communicate with the synths. Studio One allows you to run an editor tandem with Studio One itself i.e. the editor and Studio One can address the same synth at the same time. 
 
Sysex support (or lack of) alone is not enough reason to not even consider a DAW.  Studio One for some may be a million times better and nicer than Cubase.  Many Cubase users have migrated to Studio One in fact. 
 
The real trick in a migration plan is be prepared to learn a new DAW. Many here are ranting that they will never be able to do it but that is not true.  After 6 months of learning a new DAW and using it you will be just as fluent as you were in Sonar.  You will totally forget Sonar and basically never look back.  The human brain is pretty powerful.  Stop underestimating it. 
 
It gets back to the power of your subconscious mind. Keep telling yourself that you will never be able to learn a new DAW as well as you know Sonar and then you never will.  Start sending the right messages into your subconscious instead which is I can and will learn a new DAW and I will be as good as I ever was in Sonar or better. You might just surprise yourself.
 
 

i got cubase pro 9.5, the "industry standard" Pro Tools and I already had ableton. These are the three with the most professional users and since young people tend to go with what they hear their favorite artists use i figure they have a good chance of surviving the red sea DAW wars.
 
Cubase is a beast

Jeff Evans
Sysex support (or lack of) alone is not enough reason to not even consider a DAW.  Studio One for some may be a million times better and nicer than Cubase.  Many Cubase users have migrated to Studio One in fact.

By itself, a lack of something is not a big problem (especially when not required for particular use case). But

From Presonus Q&A
It's unbelievable that Studio One still does not record sysex. It's basic MIDI 1.0

When someone start to ignore one standard, independent from the intention (not common, almost obsolete, etc.) it will not take long till something else is "half made" or declared obsolete. F.e. one day 32bit was dropped. Sure, everything is done as a "care about users"

Jeff Evans
Studio One for some may be a million times better and nicer than Cubase.  Many Cubase users have migrated to Studio One in fact. 

Better and nicer depends on usage, not generally ;)

Jeff Evans
 
Sysex support (or lack of) alone is not enough reason to not even consider a DAW.  Studio One for some may be a million times better and nicer than Cubase.  Many Cubase users have migrated to Studio One in fact. 

Since no former Cubase customer give us a call to let us know, that he will leave us, I can't judge the fact that many have switched. Actually, I personally know just one (Teddy Riley) but he switched back to Cubase, as for him the feature set was not deep enough.
Due to nesscary processes, I can only see customers migrating from other DAW's to Cubase. Studio One unsers are amongst them and therefore are no exception.
Where I agree is, that the DAW should fit the customers demand.
Not the market position, not the price or the brand.
Both products Sonar and Cubase have their history and a fully fleged feature set that has developed over time. Which can't be re-build in a short time period by others.
And I'm convinced that this is the main reason why quite a number of Sonar useres took the plunge and have chosen the crossgrade offer and Cubase in the meantime.