hi folks,
 
i am leaning towards sonar (if anything because this forum is quite impressive!) but i am not sure if it matters but if one could choose cubase or sonar what would you choose? (sonar plat, cubase pro 9)
some of preferences:
1. company /forum support
 
2. access to learning (pdf manuals,videos)
 
3. Audio engine quality 
 
4. which is easier to learn? (most likely a personal preference) any experiences..
 
5. I plan to use Dorico (steinberg and i do have the usb license thing..) after more updates, but that doesn't mean I HAVE TO use a steinberg DAW..just sayin..
 
6. lastly the lower price and forum help will win! and my gut is leaning towards calkwalk..
 
 
thanks all this is a big move for me and want to be smart about it!
 
 

Hi. As you say, this choice is a personal one. I'm very partial to SONAR. I used Cubase / Steinberg in 06-07 (Nuendo and SX3, on a school I attended), but I ended always up recording and doing basic leveling in SONAR, and then exported to the other DAW. I always have / had SONAR installed, and as my main DAW.
This forum, is second to none when it comes to being helpful and knowledgeable. There is always someone willing to help.
SONAR has really grown these last year or so.
I cannot think of anything I cannot do in SONAR, but that could be because of me, and my skills
My choice is and always have been SONAR, and I recommend with all my heart.
All the best.
Edit:
I forgot the bonus of getting lifetime updates.
Several user made utilities for SONAR.
I think it is more user friendly than Cubase (was when I used it).
E-zine every month with detail of the update +++
A massive manual (online, or local).
http://www.cakewalk.com/CakeTV for videos.
http://www.cakewalk.com/CakeTV/SONAR-University
 

The forum and the amount of content (VIs, FX's, etc) are big plusses in the Sonar column.  I am not familiar with Cubase, though.

Yes, it is a big decision. The good news is you can't go wrong either way.
 
There is a 99% functional overlap between the two applications. The list of things one can do that the other cannot is actually quite short if you list them out. You can make a great record with either one (audio engine quality is not an issue). Both have helpful user communities. Both have lots of online resources available. Both products are mature and reliable. Both will require a significant investment of your time in order to master them.
 
Obviously, the folks who frequent this forum have already made their choice and will mostly recommend SONAR, including yours truly. There are many here who also use a second DAW in addition to SONAR, mostly for convenience when collaborating with others. There's never been a formal poll, but my sense is that for most of them, SONAR is their primary platform.
 
One thing that distinguishes SONAR is this forum, which is open to everyone. We have a number of regulars here who don't even use SONAR at all, but hang out on this forum anyway to talk about third-party plugins, techniques, deals and bacon. I believe the congenial atmosphere is why you find such a high proportion of experienced users here, as opposed to other forums that are heavily weighted toward beginners who then move on once they don't need the forum's help anymore.
 
The other thing that distinguishes SONAR is the vendor, and the high regard they have for their users. Steinberg is famous for being indifferent to user requests and for imposing sudden incompatibilities. Unlike the majority of DAWs, Cubase and Nuendo require a dongle, which to me is indicative of the disdain the company has for its customers. Cakewalk staff frequent this forum often, including its principle engineer, who is not only a guru among gurus when it comes to Windows audio but also an exceptional musician and all-around good guy.
 

Both of them are very good i just chose Cakewalk and kept with it.
Peace

I've been using Sonar for a few years now, starting with X1 Studio, but recently I tried Cubase LE 8 as a freebie that came with a new laptop.  I sure didn't like the user interface...confusing.
 
The Console View in Sonar made sense to me.  Therefore the I/O Menu in Sonar made much more sense to me.
 
The ProChannel modules and the plugins are very good too, and the experts on this forum are invaluable.
 
There are pros and cons to every DAW, but I'm sold on Sonar.
 
 

wow, folks. thanks! yeah i the dongle thing! heck i just need to pick one!! what a great problem to have!
 

Both have demo versions available. Work with each one for two weeks, and see if you have better "chemistry" with one or the other.

bitflipper
Yes, it is a big decision. The good news is you can't go wrong either way.
 
There is a 99% functional overlap between the two applications. The list of things one can do that the other cannot is actually quite short if you list them out. You can make a great record with either one (audio engine quality is not an issue). Both have helpful user communities. Both have lots of online resources available. Both products are mature and reliable. Both will require a significant investment of your time in order to master them.
 
Obviously, the folks who frequent this forum have already made their choice and will mostly recommend SONAR, including yours truly. There are many here who also use a second DAW in addition to SONAR, mostly for convenience when collaborating with others. There's never been a formal poll, but my sense is that for most of them, SONAR is their primary platform.
 
One thing that distinguishes SONAR is this forum, which is open to everyone. We have a number of regulars here who don't even use SONAR at all, but hang out on this forum anyway to talk about third-party plugins, techniques, deals and bacon. I believe the congenial atmosphere is why you find such a high proportion of experienced users here, as opposed to other forums that are heavily weighted toward beginners who then move on once they don't need the forum's help anymore.
 
The other thing that distinguishes SONAR is the vendor, and the high regard they have for their users. Steinberg is famous for being indifferent to user requests and for imposing sudden incompatibilities. Unlike the majority of DAWs, Cubase and Nuendo require a dongle, which to me is indicative of the disdain the company has for its customers. Cakewalk staff frequent this forum often, including its principle engineer, who is not only a guru among gurus when it comes to Windows audio but also an exceptional musician and all-around good guy.
 

This. +1.

There's little any of the top DAWs, including Sonar, can do that the others can't and all can produce professional results. Where the differences come in is in the user interface, the plugins provided and how you interact with them.

Sonar, as has been said, has by far the best forum, and if you browse round for a while you'll get an idea of just how good it is here. Even if you go with Cubase the non-Sonar specific parts of this forum are still worth looking at because they cover a huge amount of ground and even when we disagree we tend to do so in a friendly way.

Downloading demos to see which DAW you prefer is really the best way to find out what suits you. And don't be afraid to ask questions. There's also the issue of what runs best on your particular PC how you want to have it configured. Because there are thousands of differently configured WIndows PCs, using a huge range of hardware from lots of manufacturers audio in Windows is a bit more complicated than it is on Macs and sometimes one DAW might have a slight edge on a particular system.

Which isn't a recomendation for using a Mac, even though that's what I'm almost entirely using at the moment. The cheapest computer to use is the one you already have, PCs have more power per buck spent and Windows can do a perfectly good job.