I will continue to use Sonar and probably forever, but for those of you who really feel the need to switch I vote for Cubase. I bought Cubase elements 7  a while ago and Fire it up from time to time. I need to spend more time with it and I appreciate you posting these tutorials, thank you. If I can get a little better at it I might use it more and upgrade someday. It's just without the smart tool and a few little things like that keep me with Sonar. 
 
I remember running Cubase on an Atari. I also Have Cubase 5 LE came with my Tascam.  I have always used Wave Lab, probably logged more hours on it than Sonar. I now own Elements 7. I rate Steinberg software as the highest quality I've ever used. And it's cross platform so if you buddy runs a Mac your not screwed. Steinberg is assosiated with Yamaha another company I support. All my Yamaha gear still works and some of it is 35 years old. 
 
Which brings up a question , Frank why has Yamaha never put out a Cubase control suface,, or have I missed this? That would really win me over. 

On one of the many threads I promised to add my comments on "The Complete Guide To Music Technology Using Cubase 9" by Darren Jones.
 
In a bid to avoid duplication, my initial thoughts are here:
 
http://beyondcakewalk.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=979 

AllanH
 Not sure why, other than Cubase seem to not hold onto a selected notes to the same extent Sonar does. I often find that I need to re-select a note, whereas in Sonar that was never the case.

Hmm, weird. So you select an event and if you want to edit it, it becomes deselected?

Cactus Music
 
Which brings up a question , Frank why has Yamaha never put out a Cubase control suface,, or have I missed this? That would really win me over. 

You're right. Yamaha hardware is nearly unbreakable. I still own devices from the 80's like the O2R or TX802. I've never had problems.
Back to your question- we have a dedicated controller - the CC121. That unit is build by Yamaha. Super sturdy. For controlling Cubase, I don't need anything else. Works nicely with the controlroom section when you want to switch and controlling monitors (speaker).
Cheers,
Frank

Frank-US

Cactus Music
 
Which brings up a question , Frank why has Yamaha never put out a Cubase control suface,, or have I missed this? That would really win me over. 

You're right. Yamaha hardware is nearly unbreakable. I still own devices from the 80's like the O2R or TX802. I've never had problems.
Back to your question- we have a dedicated controller - the CC121. That unit is build by Yamaha. Super sturdy. For controlling Cubase, I don't need anything else. Works nicely with the controlroom section when you want to switch and controlling monitors (speaker).
Cheers,
Frank

Frank - I've actually been looking at the CC121.  My only concern is the age of these - going on 10 years now.  Do you have any idea how long they will be supported? Cubase 10?  11? 12?  That seems to be the only issue with this unit.

husker

Frank-US

Cactus Music
 
Which brings up a question , Frank why has Yamaha never put out a Cubase control suface,, or have I missed this? That would really win me over. 

You're right. Yamaha hardware is nearly unbreakable. I still own devices from the 80's like the O2R or TX802. I've never had problems.
Back to your question- we have a dedicated controller - the CC121. That unit is build by Yamaha. Super sturdy. For controlling Cubase, I don't need anything else. Works nicely with the controlroom section when you want to switch and controlling monitors (speaker).
Cheers,
Frank

Frank - I've actually been looking at the CC121.  My only concern is the age of these - going on 10 years now.  Do you have any idea how long they will be supported? Cubase 10?  11? 12?  That seems to be the only issue with this unit.

There are no actual plans to take this product of the market. And if it would be replaced in the future, we would support the unit for the upcoming years anyhow.

Thank you.

I am on Cubase 9.5 after many years absents. My last version was Cubase SX 3. I did not upgrade to Cubase 4. Now I am please to say Cubase 9.5 pro is very good indeed.  Many of the things I didn't like about Cubase have been fixed with much easier ways of doing things. The PRV is far better now. It is at least as good as Sonar's. The Mixconsole is a fun thing to use and look at. Though not as useful as Sonar's its very good. The Project view( the main view) Has a lot going for it. Nearly every good feature of Sonar's Track View is included in Cubase's Project view it used to be called the Arrange View). Here you can setup a split view divided where you would like. There is a Navigation window like Sonar's. What Sonar never had Cubase has an arranger track that lets you change the order of sections of the project playing back. With it you can play back different versions of a song with repeated sections and the order a section plays.  Very cool feature. You can have a stationary cursor which I prefer.     
 
 
All my hardware is supported in Cubase and is simple to setup.  
 
All in all Cubase 9.5 pro is a mature DAW with a  lot to offer Sonar users. Performance is very good on my very old system. 

Frank-US
Hey everyone,
As announced, here is our third article for Sonar users. This article puts focus on what is exclusive available in Cubase and has no equivalent in Sonar.
https://www.steinberg.net..._special_features.html

I very much appreciate this.  And it is good marketing too.  I'd suggest it would be smart to maintain similar references in comparison to all the major products (StudioOne, Reaper, FL, Live, etc.)
 
I think you are selling yourself short with the depth of the chord support.  You mention Chord Pads, but that seems to me to be a very small part of the chord support.  The whole idea of enabling MIDI entries to follow the chord structure is quite significant.
 
And it would also be nice to have an article listing the things where Cubase is lacking.  That would at least let the potential customers know you are aware of the difference and you might suggest a work-around.  For example, lack of ARA support is a biggie.

cparmerlee
And it would also be nice to have a paper listing the things where Cubase is lacking. That would at least let the potential customers know you are aware of the difference and you might suggest a work-around. For example, lack of ARA support is a biggie.

I might bite, but I already have Studio One and Ableton and I know the problems/missing features with these.

Anybody care to list some more? That way I can compare holes.