sonarman1

I bought S1 the Monday after Gibson Killed Cakewalk.
But I am on Cubase now.
I dont want to be on a minor DAW anymore, with all the insecurity about it.
Now I want to stay on the standard.
Now even my Native Instuments Komplete S61 works as it should.
I still have the S1 and might play with it sometimes tho.

Well I don't think you can be more secure with cubase than S1. S1 is doing very good in hardware sales than Steinberg. They bring in more revenue than software. Even if you consider only the software S1 is doing very good for a new daw. What changes will happen in the daw market after 5years you will never know.

I think the issue is install base / user base.  I haven't ever seen reliable market share numbers, but I expect that Cubase is 10 times the market share of either SONAR or Studio One.  OTOH, Steinberg did sell out to Yamaha.  Was that because Steinberg was under duress or did Yamaha make them an offer they couldn't refuse?  Obviously Yamaha has the resources to keep Steinberg alive as long as they choose to.
 
For a person who depends heavily on a DAW for more than occasional hobby work (meaning that some significant part of one's income depends on the work one does with the DAW), I think it is a pretty good strategy to use BOTH Cubase and StudioOne.  They are both great products, and each has some strengths.  On balance I think Cubase is a bit more mature and has some major functional areas that are not in StudioOne, but StudioOne is very intuitive and also has some strong points. 
 
There was a thread here asking is the DAW market is over-crowded.  I expect that five years from now, some of the products that look viable today will either have been killed altogether, or will have slipped into the purgatory of minimal development and support.  I have no reason to expect either Cubase or StudioOne will be among the casualties, but one never knows.
 
Users talk a lot about new features they want.  IMHO, the most important new feature we should be demanding is an open interchange standard, similar to what MusicXML does for notation, so that we can have a better safety net when products to disappear.  And that interchange standard would be great for collaborations too.

As someone who does depend on using a DAW for professional reasons you don't actually need two DAW's such as Studio One and Cubase.  In fact with the time pressures involved in such situations the last thing you actually want to do is involve more than one DAW.  It is a myth and in fact can get in the way and waste unnecessary time transferring stuff back and forth between two DAW's.  It does not look good in front of clients either.  They are going to say things like why do you need to do that.  When they are paying good money on a per hour basis it can have a negative effect.  Also you will never be as proficient in the second DAW as you are in your main DAW either.  Key commands will clash and you tend to make mistakes in the 2nd DAW under pressure.  It can be confusing. 
 
Studio One is very much more than capable at handling pro jobs by itself.  It actually does a brilliant job of it.  Especially in front of clients where you will never see any crashes and you can get things done very quickly.  The macros are also amazing.  Many tasks that require multiple steps can be set into a macro and then assigned to a single key stroke. 

I second what Jeff is saying , reaper or cibase are Superior in a lot of areas to studio one , but globaly i see myself from pre production to mastering , being confortable in studio one more than others ... my main issue being CPU mukltithread handling ....i will have to make concessions , but i grew up with limitations so it's part of my DNA ... i bought pretty all the Overloud , mcdsp ect ...for that exact purpose ...on low optimised auido engine  (initially for PT ) lol
 
Jeff talking about macros , do you know if we can have ddiffrent macros panel from the main one and the editor view (a contextual one) , that would be top !!

danbottomburp
The metronome in studio one 3 is garbage, the sounds it makes is worse than I could program on my old commodore 64.
Im really liking the actual Daw and the work flow but the metronome sounds are really really really poor. 

This was my experience with Studio One.  The metronome and the tempo track are very primitive and have limited functionality.  Hopefully they'll really spend some time overhauling these functions in future updates.

Metronome sounds can be changed and imported as already noted.
 
Tempo track is fine for most duties e.g. tempo changes and ramp up and down etc. For creating a tempo map to music not recorded to a click then Melodyne Essentials handles all that.  Better than most DAW's.  Tempo maps can be created and imported easily into Studio One.

Kinda don't understand these "snap" claims about a piece software you've only just tried and then give up. Studio One is a whole hell of a lot deeper them it's documentation. Sure it does things different but you can figure it out with a little time, seems like some are throwing up their hands way too soon in my opinion.

You may want to post these issues as a question rather than as a statement cause your most likely wrong if your not up to full speed and know for sure that want you are expiriencing is all there is, and then pass it on to others barely scratchin the surface with the software themselves.

CTStump
Kinda don't understand these "snap" claims about a piece software you've only just tried and then give up. Studio One is a whole hell of a lot deeper them it's documentation. Sure it does things different but you can figure it out with a little time, seems like some are throwing up their hands way too soon in my opinion.

You may want to post these issues as a question rather than as a statement cause your most likely wrong if your not up to full speed and know for sure that want you are expiriencing is all there is, and then pass it on to others barely scratchin the surface with the software themselves.

Very true! Just ask a question and I will do my best to answer it.  

I have two questions regarding Sonar v Studio 1:
 
1. Does Studio 1 use a similar copy protection to Sonar or does it use i-Lok or similar?
2. In Sonar we have an option to disable the Start Screen. Does Studio 1 have a similar option to disable their start Page.
 
Thanks.

"it's like learning a new application!"

Michael.b
I have two questions regarding Sonar v Studio 1:
 
1. Does Studio 1 use a similar copy protection to Sonar or does it use i-Lok or similar?
2. In Sonar we have an option to disable the Start Screen. Does Studio 1 have a similar option to disable their start Page.
 
Thanks.

1. Studio One doesn't need iLok. It's registered to a user's computer. You don't need to be on line to launch the application.
2. To the best of my knowledge, the Studio One start screen can't be disabled. It is however very useful as it checks for updates, provides feedback on PreSonus news and event, and also provides SoundCloud feedback. It's an easy way to launch your songs or projects.