jamesmh
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10
- Joined: 2011/06/30 11:06:26
- Status: offline
MC5 -> Sonar X1 a good idea for casual use?
Not sure if this is the right forum or not, but...
I recently bought Music Creator 5, after using N-Track for some years, because I thought N-Track was too complex for my very simple and casual needs. So far I'm not sure MC5 is any improvement in that respect, but I haven't had time to work with it very much. As far as general capability is concerned, I'm sure it more than meets my needs.
However: I'm getting a lot of emails offering deals on upgrades to Sonar X1, which has me worried that maybe the end-of-life for MC5 is in sight. I don't want to commit a lot of time to an orphaned software package. So I'm considering the upgrade. I guess my question is: is SX1 a whole lot harder to configure, use, and generally master than MC5? And are more resources likely to be available for SX1?
I am a very casual user--songwriter just trying to make adequate voice, guitar, bass demo-type tracks. Knowledgeable input appreciated.
|
Karyn
Ma-Ma
- Total Posts : 9200
- Joined: 2009/01/30 08:03:10
- Location: Lincoln, England.
- Status: offline
Re:MC5 -> Sonar X1 a good idea for casual use?
2011/06/30 12:06:42
(permalink)
Hi James,
For your use as described MC5 will do everything that you want and more.
Sonar X1 is top of the range studio production software.
They both do exactly the same thing, but Sonar is in a different league ... Only you can decide if you would make use of all the extras that Sonar gives.
Mekashi Futo. Get 10% off all Waves plugins.Current DAW. i7-950, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, 12Gb RAM, 1Tb SSD, 2x2Tb HDD, nVidia GTX 260, Antec 1000W psu, Win7 64bit, Studio 192, Digimax FS, KRK RP8G2, Sonar Platinum
|
LHousehold
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 163
- Joined: 2009/02/02 15:39:04
- Status: offline
Re:MC5 -> Sonar X1 a good idea for casual use?
2011/06/30 12:25:05
(permalink)
I use Sonar X1 Producer casually. Honestly even as an amateur you will find uses for nearly all the extra features. Personally, I got it because I hate to feel limited and I happened to have the money for it. Things like pro-channel and the extra plugins included are essential to me now, even if I don't use them all to their absolute full ability, but only a true professional audio engineer would. You can use it without using everything, and personally I find it rather easy to use (if you read the help files). Then again, I'm different than you since I take great joy in learning how to use new pieces of software and also use both MIDI and audio. I guess my conclusion for you is that if you've got nothing better to spend your money on, it certainly won't harm your production process to go for X1, but you certainly shouldn't feel compelled to if what you have is good for you. Maybe one day you'll want to expand your tools for making music, and when that day comes X1 should be perfect.
Windows 7 64 bit Cakewalk Sonar X2 Producer Cakewalk A-500PRO MIDI controller
|
Beagle
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 50621
- Joined: 2006/03/29 11:03:12
- Location: Fort Worth, TX
- Status: offline
Re:MC5 -> Sonar X1 a good idea for casual use?
2011/06/30 12:48:49
(permalink)
In your situation I would continue to use MC5 until you determine that it is not "enough" for your needs and that you need more out of your DAW software. X1 has a very different workflow, but even the X1 Essentials has more features and plugins than MC5.
my advice - if you don't know you are missing it, then you don't need it.
|
jamesmh
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10
- Joined: 2011/06/30 11:06:26
- Status: offline
Re:MC5 -> Sonar X1 a good idea for casual use?
2011/06/30 15:34:22
(permalink)
Thanks to all three of you for the feedback. I'm quite sure I don't need Sonar, as I'm sure MC will be sufficient for my needs for some time. I'm just concerned that I might invest a lot of time in it only to have Cakewalk stop updating it or decide not to port it to the next version of Windows, or something like that. And then I would have to move to some other product, with another steep learning curve.
I guess I'm a little paranoid about this kind of thing because my external sound processor (Creative Extigy) won't work on Windows 7. To tell you the truth, I've been a little uneasy about MC5's future since I installed it and found that the documentation didn't match the software in several places. It sounds like Cakewalk is more committed to Sonar. But anyway...I guess for now I'll keep my $60 or whatever.
|
Re:MC5 -> Sonar X1 a good idea for casual use?
2011/06/30 19:18:51
(permalink)
jamesmh
Thanks to all three of you for the feedback. I'm quite sure I don't need Sonar, as I'm sure MC will be sufficient for my needs for some time. I'm just concerned that I might invest a lot of time in it only to have Cakewalk stop updating it or decide not to port it to the next version of Windows, or something like that. And then I would have to move to some other product, with another steep learning curve.
I guess I'm a little paranoid about this kind of thing because my external sound processor (Creative Extigy) won't work on Windows 7. To tell you the truth, I've been a little uneasy about MC5's future since I installed it and found that the documentation didn't match the software in several places. It sounds like Cakewalk is more committed to Sonar. But anyway...I guess for now I'll keep my $60 or whatever.
I'm not trying to sway you one way or another, but I can assure you that our future versions of SONAR (and Music Creator) will work with future versions of Windows. When Windows 8 rolls around in a year or two we'll be ready for it, just as we were ready for XP, Vista, and Win7. For example, SONAR 6 was released in 2006, a few months before Vista hit the market. Just after Vista was released we released a free update, SONAR 6.2, that adhered to all the changes in Vista and made it officially compatible. Depending on the release time of a new Windows version and our current or soon to be released product, we'll either release an update to an existing product to make it compatible with the latest Windows, or make sure our upcoming product is compatible with it, or both. We are, after all, Microsoft and Intel partners, so we've got compatibility on those fronts pretty well squared away.  SP
|
Karyn
Ma-Ma
- Total Posts : 9200
- Joined: 2009/01/30 08:03:10
- Location: Lincoln, England.
- Status: offline
Re:MC5 -> Sonar X1 a good idea for casual use?
2011/07/01 06:31:55
(permalink)
Seth, it's nice to know that the current version of Sonar or MC will always work with the current version of Windows, but I think James is worried that if he lays out now for Sonar X1 that it won't work in just two years time in Windows 8.
You'll be on X2 or X3 by then and past experience (S 8.5.3) shows that once you move on to a new version ALL updates for the last and previous versions stop.
Mekashi Futo. Get 10% off all Waves plugins.Current DAW. i7-950, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, 12Gb RAM, 1Tb SSD, 2x2Tb HDD, nVidia GTX 260, Antec 1000W psu, Win7 64bit, Studio 192, Digimax FS, KRK RP8G2, Sonar Platinum
|
pbognar
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 720
- Joined: 2005/10/03 16:22:03
- Status: offline
Re:MC5 -> Sonar X1 a good idea for casual use?
2011/07/01 16:54:52
(permalink)
Beagle
In your situation I would continue to use MC5 until you determine that it is not "enough" for your needs and that you need more out of your DAW software. X1 has a very different workflow, but even the X1 Essentials has more features and plugins than MC5.
my advice - if you don't know you are missing it, then you don't need it.
+1 Upgrading can be a slippery slope. There is something to be said for a very basic program especially when you are starting out. You could end up spending a lot of time learning features instead of making music. You will know when you NEED more features.
|