I run SONAR on an i7 2600K with 16 gigs of RAM and I have just about one crash every 7-8 months. That crash is almost always because of me doing something stoopid like inserting a massive latency plug while the project is running.
 
I have plugs and synths from at least 60 vendors. I run a 64bit OS, 64bit SONAR and 64bit plugs. FWIW, I almost *never* use a 32bit plug.

There are two weak areas that need to be improved before Sonar can be regarded by the pro community as being in the same league as certain other DAWs. One is video. The other is notation.

bapu
I run SONAR on an i7 2600K with 16 gigs of RAM and I have just about one crash every 7-8 months. That crash is almost always because of me doing something stoopid like inserting a massive latency plug while the project is running.

This sounds exactly like me in a nut shell.
Like my last crash was "Cloning" a track. The problem was I had all 64 tracks selected .
So it cloned all 64 tracks, totaling 128 tracks (with data). It worked well until I hit play.
was wondering why it took 15 seconds to clone 1 track.
 
Sonar has been Super stable for me. Even when using older 32 bit plug ins and plug ins from different vendors.
 
I first learned about Cakewalk in 1999. The studio I was working in (in Boston, MA) decided to go half Digital/half Analog. Basically heading all Digital but not all at once. They handed me Cakewalk Pro Audio and told me to learn it. I spent days and nights reading the manual (Yes it came with a softcover manual back then). When I finally decided to go Digital in my own private studio at home, I choose a product I was familiar with, Cakewalk Sonar.
 
Ive walked out on the limb many times and tried other DAW software. Cakewalk almost lost me as a customer in the early stages of Sonar X1.Im sure many of you remember what that was like. I was excited for the new look but I really enjoyed certain things about Sonar 8.5 and stability was a factor before Sonar released its first patch (Sonar X1 A) Autosnap was basically broken.
Besides that, I've never had a stability issue or crashes that come in multiples. Only the occasional crash brought on by something stupid I have tried to invent, like saving while the transport is running.

Sonar seems to have missed out on the dance music scene. In the UK it really kicked off in the early 90's, when I got Cakewalk on '93, everyone was cubase or logic, and when I was asked which of the two I used, they were baffled by the answer 'Cakewalk'. Chart record sales may have kicked off of dance music later in the US, but when Chime peaked at number 17 in 1990, when the singles charts meant something, it was a big sign. They used a fourtrack, but it gave rise to the significance of the bedroom producer. just a few later, the UK dance scenes importance has spilt into multiple genres. Over the 90's record sales grew, but more importantly home sequencers exploded. Sure people were using cracked versions, but not cracked version of Cakewalk, but logic and Cubase, which from a European perspective, made cakewalk irrelevant.
 
I think musicians from a rock background really ignore the significance of dance music, and it's effect on software development, but in my opinion it's been key to much of it. When Propellerheads made ReBirth in '97 it really set the scene for modelling old synths. Sure prog rockers may have been interested, but it was the dance market that created the demand.
 
Then from that Reason, fruityloops, Acid, Ableton, all created for the dance market. This forum seems to be in denial of it's size and importance. The term EDM was coined in the early 2000's when americans really started to take note. but the Europe, it just been Dance music for over a decade and half before then, despite the detriot scene.
 
When logic dumped PC after being acquired by apple, it was big thing. So many logic users were on PC's. So yeah, cakewalk not being on Macs has cut it's market, but I think it's failure to invest capture the hearts on dance producers, has basically left it out of the conversation. I probably would have never joined this gang if it was for the bundling with soundblaster 16.

In 1992 my college roommate was working at Guitar Center and gave me an illegal copy of Twelve Tone System's Cakewalk 3.1.  I needed something to help me score a hour long cable TV show I was hired to score.  It was the only DAW that would lock to SYMPTE TC at the rate I needed.  At the time we called Macs "Crashintoches"  Things went well and I spent the next 17 years scoring shows literally working 7days a week.  I maybe took 5 days off a year and was on "Sonar" and all it's incarnations constantly.  How anyone could or would say it crashes is insane to me.  During that time I was always ahead of tech advances, (random access video cause I could play AVI files inside the computer, 64 bit allowing me not to need a slave computer for Gigastudio, fast bounce allowing rendering as fast as the computer would go and not render things real time)  All these things happened way before my friends on ProTools or Apple DAWs could.  And it was not "Crashing".
 
That said, my son just bought a Macbook Pro (against my advice) and here is the thing.  His laptop does not need an external sound card for Logic to work.  Score Editor appears to pretty cool in Logic...I'm going to have to check that out.   It has some cool synths and features.
 
I'm hoping Sonar heads over to Mac so I can turn him into a Sonarite,  but I am seeing the draw to the "otherside".
 

Brian Walton

eph221

ampfixer
Like most other folks around here, I have purchased other DAW's and occasionally look at other DAW's. The only one I've been really comfortable with is Sonar. It is a mystery why it isn't the one that everybody talks about. Nothing else really has the scope of Sonar. Then I had a thought (it does happen).
What if Sonar was the new contender? Imagine if we had never seen Sonar and it was dropped on the music world as it sits today. Same price, same features. I think the recording community would be gob-smacked. No one would believe that a DAW with all its features could be released at a competitive price point.
I'm positive that Sonar's biggest drawback is that it's been around forever and we just take it for granted.

I write in Sonar.  It has so many great features that pro tools doesn't.  BUT, it crashes WAY to often.  That's the reputation it has, and IMHO it's deserved.  I don't go through a day when it doesn't crash.  My setup is totally fine too, i7 20 gigs ram etc.  I hear excuses from cakewalk about compatibility with plug ins...etc.  That's not the consumer's problem.

Are you using any 32 bit plugs in 64bit sonar?  
 

 
no

ampfixer
Like most other folks around here, I have purchased other DAW's and occasionally look at other DAW's. The only one I've been really comfortable with is Sonar. It is a mystery why it isn't the one that everybody talks about. Nothing else really has the scope of Sonar. Then I had a thought (it does happen).
What if Sonar was the new contender? Imagine if we had never seen Sonar and it was dropped on the music world as it sits today. Same price, same features. I think the recording community would be gob-smacked. No one would believe that a DAW with all its features could be released at a competitive price point.
I'm positive that Sonar's biggest drawback is that it's been around forever and we just take it for granted.

Interesting thoughts. I have wondered why it doesn't get the same press as some others too. I have no answers to that. It is my goto DAW. No other DAW works as well for me. Perhaps that is an answer. How a DAW works for one.  All DAWs have a philosophy. That is they come to the market with a point of view that the developers think will please users. Sonar started out as the only non destructive DAW. Its point of view was and still is to not do anything that is going to cause the user to loose what they have created. One big reason Sonar dropped the audio editing ability of Pro Audio. The ofter big deal when Sonar was first released was to have everything on one screen. What other DAW has buss tracks?  
 
Many DAWs have adopted Sonar's way of doing things without giving credit. To a degree each DAW is aimed at a segment of the market. I don't think Sonar does. I think it tends to be a general purpose DAW. This may mean to some that its not the best tool for a specific type of music. We know that it can and will do any form or type music. Yet many don't. 
 
I think this new year can be a watershed moment for CW if they are able to show that Sonar can do anything.
 
Also keep in mind that Sonar is an American DAW that was unknown in Europe. I recall when CW started worldwide distribution. When they started multi language versions. Why they enlisted Roland and so on. I have no data on sales or where Sonar is most popular but I have noticed for a long time the English connection as well as an Asian connection that is in my view a strong move for growth.
 
Let us hope that people will give Sonar a fair test because it is a great DAW.    

ampfixer
Like most other folks around here, I have purchased other DAW's and occasionally look at other DAW's. The only one I've been really comfortable with is Sonar. It is a mystery why it isn't the one that everybody talks about. Nothing else really has the scope of Sonar. Then I had a thought (it does happen).
What if Sonar was the new contender? Imagine if we had never seen Sonar and it was dropped on the music world as it sits today. Same price, same features. I think the recording community would be gob-smacked. No one would believe that a DAW with all its features could be released at a competitive price point.
I'm positive that Sonar's biggest drawback is that it's been around forever and we just take it for granted.

 
Interestingly, in the early days of computers for live performance, whilst most were using hardware based midi players like the Yamaha  QX3 or Roland MC 500,  Cakewalk Live for DOS was probably the most popular PC based sequencer. 


I too am perplexed, given its functionality, why Sonar is not more commonly used.  That said, when I first made the transition from Cubase to Cakewalk for sequencing rather than just live playback I did find it's commands and tool set slightly convoluted. That was of course a very long time ago:) 
 

Kev999
There are two weak areas that need to be improved before Sonar can be regarded by the pro community as being in the same league as certain other DAWs. One is video. The other is notation.

Right, except there are DAWs that have neither notation or video and still get more press. I would love Sonar to improve its notation and its video but that still doesn't explain why other DAWs get press without them and Sonar doesn't. There could be something else in play here that we don't know about.

Those are usually DAWs that have specialized a specific workflow, like Ableton. Sonar is more of a general purpose "classic" DAW to me. I'd pitch it against Cubase, Logic, StudioOne, Reaper, maybe ProTools. But not Ableton, Reason, FruityLoops. They earn their place because they do a certain workflow really really well, not because they're supposed to offer an alternative to ProTools.

I hate to say it but I honestly believe the Sonar move to Mac is doomed unless they price it like Logic and include a bunch of unique features (like ARA) off the bat. I'm never going to convince any of my Mac friends to switch, for sure. I may be sounding like a Logic fanboy here, but I have used it extensively and while it doesn't trump Sonar in every aspect, it's a really powerful package and very competitively priced.