Freddie H

Pro Tools HD - a DAW that has lived under a rock the last 15 years.... Only DAW that only works on Windows 95 and XP32. Only DAW on the market that are still in x32bit only 2013 and have no new technology functions and totally outdated.
The latest features were non destructible faders and record and working with 32 bit files? All other DAW has had that since the late 90ths.
today you can't find any functions that Pro Tools do better then other DAW. Actually it's the opposite. all other DAWs do it 10 times better.

It just goes to show what kind of damage marketing hype can do. Referring to the whole 64-bit debacle.

Bub

Freddie H

Pro Tools HD - a DAW that has lived under a rock the last 15 years.... Only DAW that only works on Windows 95 and XP32. Only DAW on the market that are still in x32bit only 2013 and have no new technology functions and totally outdated.
The latest features were non destructible faders and record and working with 32 bit files? All other DAW has had that since the late 90ths.
today you can't find any functions that Pro Tools do better then other DAW. Actually it's the opposite. all other DAWs do it 10 times better.

It just goes to show what kind of damage marketing hype can do. Referring to the whole 64-bit debacle.

So 64bit is a "hype" to you?
....Bub...this is just getting worse.. 
  

Reaper? Please... allmost second from that list "black list"

Hi Freddie-


Which was the last version you tried? Some things do get better over time, and not to engage in "DAW Wars," but I don't think it deserves a bunny or any other facepalm at this point.


-Susan

Bub 
It's $225 dollars for a Commercial Use license for Reaper. I wouldn't call that cheap. And it's certainly not a 'no-frills' solution. There's a lot of plug-in's that come with Reaper, it's rock solid, you can run it natively on Mac, and it just works. You can even run it from a Thumb Drive. There's a robust community of users, there's a whole community that does Themes. We have Panup who had to hack Sonar to do what he does. Thanks Panup btw.

Thanks, 

Bub

Actually, Reaper is what I just moved away from. Not because it was not stable or anything like that, rather I just find it to be bla.  Sure you can create themes for it, but that only goes so far. The entire GUI in my opinion needs to be overhauled.  There are definite things I liked about reaper.  It seems very snappy, it is a relatively clean un-cluttered app and most of all, i like how you can manipulate it through some of it's scripting abilities.  I dunno, it just didn't inspire me.  

Studio One GUI is also not there yet. Grey grey 90ths more grey!
Its more then me that complain about Studio One GUI.

Now someone will say...GUI isn't it sound we working with? Yes but the GUI matters too working long hours 7 days a week. SONAR X2 as just sweet when it comes to GUI. One of the best GUI in the business!
 
After that Samplitude and DP.
Then perhaps Cubase and actually Pro Tools.

Pro tools GUI is the only thing they do good over there at AVID.

I took a quick look at the updates lists on Avid and Steinberg sites, and i saw that the problems are the same everywhere.

For example :

http://download.steinberg.net/downloads_software/Cubase_6_and_Cubase_Artist_6/6.0.7/VersionHistory_IssuesSolutions.pdf

About the Roland policy with Sonar, i remember that, when Yamaha bought Steinberg (2005, i guess),
i thought that Roland will do the same with CW (with which it had a strategic alliance since 2003).

These two major companies (Y et R) are tough competitors, and i think that we can be confident about the Roland support and development of Sonar, at least as long as Yamaha will support and develop Cubase and Nuendo.

The Imperial Theme for Reaper is what allowed me to make the switch. It can also be customized further. I switched out all the red for a dark teal, and it's my favorite interface of all the programs I've used.

http://www.houseofwhiteti...erial/wt_imperial.html

The only thing I miss from Sonar is CAL, but that's dead tech anyway.

That said, I still wish that Cakewalk would get their act together. 8.5.3 was the last version that gelled with me.

The dialog boxes, the very vanilla looking rea plugins.   it just doesn't feel polished like Sonar does.

Yeah, I have to agree with you there. There are some very unfinished parts to the GUI, so I avoid them! J/K. The ReaPlugins are by and large hideous to look at, but they by and large do what they're supposed to do.


It's a not-so-silly argument, IMO, about how important the GUI should be. I hear the "Why should it matter? Trust your ears" argument all the time, but it does for sure matter to most folks.


-Susan

This thread has a stupid title. Why not do a little research on when the updates came out for X1 and then form some sort of rational estimation. Development and testing takes time.... Be patient. We've already had about 4 threads like this, this is hardly gonna make cake hurry up.

Are you on the right thread guitardood? There's another I'm happy with sonar 7 debate going on elsewhere... Cheers...


BTW 64 bit works way better than 32 bit. Way better. Its not just the memory. And besides I suspect 64 bit versions get tested more nowadays.

I get the feeling a certain someone doesn't use half of what he's slating.. or hasn't used it enough to be objective. It just comes across as some sorta snobbery.

very few will use reason on it's own.. it's been that way for YEARS.. but compared to everything else, it's a quick proto typing tool / sketch pad..  much like say how people will still use fruityloops rewired in..

could you do a full tune and master it in reason ? yep.. but that's down to skill regardless of if you use $10 or $2000 DAW.

it's a tough call.. if the functions you want are broke in a program.. then yet it's more annoying.. if they don't matter to you, because you don't use em.. that's different again

AT's post is a good one and I think very accurate and very well received by me.

 
+1

guitardood

Freddie H

Bub

Freddie H

Pro Tools HD - a DAW that has lived under a rock the last 15 years.... Only DAW that only works on Windows 95 and XP32. Only DAW on the market that are still in x32bit only 2013 and have no new technology functions and totally outdated.
The latest features were non destructible faders and record and working with 32 bit files? All other DAW has had that since the late 90ths.
today you can't find any functions that Pro Tools do better then other DAW. Actually it's the opposite. all other DAWs do it 10 times better.

It just goes to show what kind of damage marketing hype can do. Referring to the whole 64-bit debacle.

So 64bit is a "hype" to you?
....Bub...this is just getting worse.. 

Personally, I do believe that the whole move to 64-bit is hype.  From a DAW perspective.  Does anyone really have any projects, "without memory-starved soft synths", require more than 2gb of RAM?  As a programmer, I would find that very hard to believe.  This is the reason I asked the question the other day about being able to run BFD2 or Machfive 64-bit versions under 32-bit Sonar.  Would get rid of the whole flaky bit-bridge on 90% of my plugins and allow my two memory pigs to operate in 64-bit (found out this is possible with jbridge but haven't tried yet).

I mean seriously.  I had multiple 75+ track projects using tons of both native and UAD plugs and NEVER ran out of memory under Sonar 7.

Best,

When the day comes that Sonar (or any other DAW on the planet) will not stream a sample from an HDD and stop working due to lack of RAM, then I'll accept that 64 bit is a necessity and "makes a difference".

I have never been restricted by my DAW not being 64bit. If anything, it's been one big headache transitioning to it.

I'm primarily a guitar guy, I saw no benefit in latency when I switched to 64bit. Actually, one of the biggest disappointments when I made the transition was the fact that I saw no real benefits. Latency was the same, I heard no difference in sound quality, it still took just as long to bounce, freeze, and export.

Yes, Sonar maybe loaded a bit faster ... but it didn't function faster. A 3 minute 25 second song, is still a 3 minute and 25 second long song. 64 bit doesn't make it sound better, or play quicker so I can record it in less time.

If you're working at Lucas Sound Ltd using 5TB orchestral samples, well, yeah, maybe you'll see a difference.

As a matter of fact, I just checked it out. www.skysound.com.

Technology

Presently, we have a fibre channel infrastructure that allows sharing of files and data quickly and easily throughout the Technical Building and around the world. An editor can work on a session in a private suite using one of our 80 ProTools digital audio editing systems while the mixers are mixing the exact same material on one of our six dubbing stages. Simultaneously, another editor can browse our proprietary library of more than 100,000 unique sound effects to find just the right sound.

This can all be done while we seamlessly connect the mix stage remotely to anyone with an internet connection using the APT WorldNet Skylink, a device that represents the culmination of a joint development program between APT and Skywalker Sound. In addition to the Skylink, we provide Dolby®FAX via ISDN Telestream, FTP, Digidelivery, Polycom view stations, and Conduit.

Our Scoring Stage offers the best of analog and high bit rate digital by maintaining in house the best selection of microphone pre-amps of any studio, and a wide range of converters for multichannel 24 bit/192k recording and editing.

The Scoring Stage also has the ability to connect to any stage or editing suite in the building or anywhere in the world using the APT WorldNet Skylink technology.

Freddie, I think your a great guy ... but if you're really going to sit here and argue about Pro Tools up against a billion dollar studio ... and put it at #20 on your list of DAW's ... well, I think there's no more point in talking about it with you anymore. You're never going to see the forest through the trees.

Thanks,

Bub.

JonD

guitardood

 

Personally, I do believe that the whole move to 64-bit is hype.  From a DAW perspective.  Does anyone really have any projects, "without memory-starved soft synths", require more than 2gb of RAM?  As a programmer, I would find that very hard to believe.  This is the reason I asked the question the other day about being able to run BFD2 or Machfive 64-bit versions under 32-bit Sonar.  Would get rid of the whole flaky bit-bridge on 90% of my plugins and allow my two memory pigs to operate in 64-bit (found out this is possible with jbridge but haven't tried yet).


I mean seriously.  I had multiple 75+ track projects using tons of both native and UAD plugs and NEVER ran out of memory under Sonar 7.


Best,

 
Huh?  You just gave yourself as a contradiction to your own argument...
 
Why do "you" need BFD2 and Machfive in 64-bit versions?  Answer honestly, and you'll have the answer to the question why others need their "Memory-starved soft synths" too. (You "need" your BFD2 and MachFive. Others "need" their Omnisphere. Kontakt, etc...).
 
Given that, how is it all hype?   (I honestly don't get your point).
 
 

After typing 12 responses that were in ALL*CAPS, I decided to try and mind my tone.  My whole point was that Sonar, in and of itself, is an extremely streamlined application that, in and of itself, has no direct need for 64-bit.  Neither do EQ's or Compressors or delays or gates or even the 20-40%-Better-Super-Deluxe convolution reverb of the week.

The only need for 64-bit, IN A DAW APPLICATION AS STREAMLINED AS SONAR, is for the memory-starved synths.   Can anyone possible disagree with that statement and keep a straight face?   My point is that is the ONLY reason for needing 64-bit.   And pardon my forgetfulness as I was only coding assembler instructions yesterday, if you can dig up some x86-64 specific op-codes that do some special special 64-bit voodoo that no other programmer is aware of when the processor is in 64-bit mode other than the ability to access more memory, I'l eat every computer in my office (talk about when good sentences go bad).

The bit-bridge solution has caused quite a few crashes, FOR ME.  So ME-MYSELF-AND-I don't like it!  I have plugs for which I paid good money that are rendered useless by bit-bridge bugs.  My point was that the jbridge solution allows the 64-bit synths to be 64-bit  and use all the memory that you can throw at them, without the requirement that every-freaking-thing else in my DAW system be 64-bit as well, or glued together with the bit-bridge solution which has turned my monitor a lovely shade of white glow on more than a couple occasions, in the middle of a creative spurt.  If it works for you, wonderful!!!


I believe that a lot of people are believing that their 64-bit low-memory-usage-apps are running better, only because the overly-bloated Windows receives the most benefit from it being in 64-bit and that if you were to subjectively benchmark the same apps 32-bit-version-vs-64-bit-version there would actually be NO DIFFERENCE in performance.  But I've only been programming for 30 years, what do I know about these complex bit-banging-fluter-hickies?

It would be nice, however, if you could limit your personal attacks to yourself.


Best,

SteveStrummerUK


 

Next update SONAR X2B...when?

 
 
3.41pm GMT, March 17th 2013.

Too early. It will be after lunch.