ProTools fail - Sonar succeed

I don't know, I think a lot of it is in the skill of who is behind the machine. I'm happy with my workflow in Sonar but I've seen guys work really fast in ProTools. Knowing a lot of shortcut keys make a huge difference (in any DAW, really).

brconflict
I do love their larger faders, larger meters, and stereo pan...

3 feature requests in half a sentence, which many of us would love to see: larger meters and faders should be somehow customizable in size and color, track faders possibly following colors of channels they output to
 
BTW, mixbus 4.0 also now brings a stereo width knob on the console view, so Sonar will need to follow.
 
As regards other comments on PT vs Sonar - what you know best will always work best. Through the years I've learned Sonar inside out, which is really handy for any kind of work now ... that's why e.g. in my case mixbus has its place for certain tasks, but will not replace Sonar anytime soon ...

A month ago I tried using Pro Tools First, it worked for one weekend just fine, the second weekend I tried to use it, it would not open properly, plus everytime I tried to open it, I got a different error. I'm now on a 30 day trial of Sonar, and, so far, have seen only very minor problems. For me, the Sonar workflow is very logical, but like any good software, you have to use it and learn the process.
To be clear, I am running Windows 8.1 on an i7 dual core laptop computer. Perhaps I would have had more success with PT if I was running it on a Mac.

Rob[atSound-Rehab]

brconflict
I do love their larger faders, larger meters, and stereo pan...

3 feature requests in half a sentence, which many of us would love to see: larger meters and faders should be somehow customizable in size and color, track faders possibly following colors of channels they output to
 
BTW, mixbus 4.0 also now brings a stereo width knob on the console view, so Sonar will need to follow.
 
As regards other comments on PT vs Sonar - what you know best will always work best. Through the years I've learned Sonar inside out, which is really handy for any kind of work now ... that's why e.g. in my case mixbus has its place for certain tasks, but will not replace Sonar anytime soon ...

Was it just me or did the PT faders not work in real time, the changes didn't happen until after I set the fader? lot of good that is if you want to hear what you're setting. and no mouse rollover wheel action at all.

gswitz
One of Craig's tips shows how to build your own stereo width control with channel tools and an FX chain. I know this isn't what you want, but it might help.

Flux Plugins has a great free plug-in for Stereo width.

This is embarrassing but I totally missed that feature - how do you get those faders to show up??

Haha dammit, I've been exposed! Thanks, Craig, point well made!

So...
 
Just a quick refresher for me...
 
I tried what you show here and it's pretty cool. I did notice that when Width changes Angle, the angle value doesn't update on the channel strip (only in the UI for the Channel Tools Effect).
 
It also brought back the need to understand what Width does verses Angle.
 
It appears to me that Width is basically volume suppression for the signal paired with moving the angle. When you spread the width, the channel gets softer. The signal gets routed to both left and right according to the Angle value which moves as you increase the width. The Increasing width shows how much the volume of that signal gets reduced. When you spread the width 100% you get so quiet it's hard to hear (but some does come through).
 
I don't think there is any polarity flip or phase inversion happening. The phase stays vertical slanted according to the angle. If there were a phase inversion, it would go more horizontal than the position of the angle would call for.
 
Am I missing anything?
 
 

gswitz
 
I tried what you show here and it's pretty cool. I did notice that when Width changes Angle, the angle value doesn't update on the channel strip (only in the UI for the Channel Tools Effect).

 
I have tried the "Options > FX > Show Assignable Controls" thing a while ago, but I think I remember running into the same issue as gswitz.
 
 
IMHO there is no convincing argument against a width control which is a single knob right next to the pan knob AND also controlable from a control surface e.g. via SHIFT+pan because then it would be cleary visible, directly accessible and intuitive ... but that I doubt will ever happen with Cakewalk's interest in control surface functionality
 
So I will stick to inserting plugs like WAVES S1 where I can control rotation (=pan) and width via ACT by only 2 knobs (and can even go asymmetrical if I need to)
 
http://www.waves.com/plugins/s1-stereo-imager#
 
 

gswitz
It also brought back the need to understand what Width does verses Angle.

 
Some of this depends on whether the track is mono or stereo. Also, check out Alternate mode for the pan controls, which keeps the width fixed as you move angle, rather than have it adapt automatically. However note that this works only with the Channel Tools UI; the assignable faders do not respond to alternate mode. I recommended clicking on the Channel Tools GUI and typing F1 to bring up the documentation, which explains all this in detail.
 
Also note that the assignable controls are affected by lenses. If you want the settings to persist from one project to the next, you need to either save the lens with the assignments, or simply set lenses to "none" before making the assignments, and have it set to none when saving the project.
 

Rob[atSound-Rehab]
IMHO there is no convincing argument against a width control which is a single knob right next to the pan knob AND also controlable from a control surface e.g. via SHIFT+pan because then it would be cleary visible, directly accessible and intuitive ... but that I doubt will ever happen with Cakewalk's interest in control surface functionality.

 
The Assignable Faders can be controlled by an external controller. In fact with some effects, it's the only way to allow real-time MIDI control (e.g., a footpedal) instead of automation.
 

So I will stick to inserting plugs like WAVES S1 where I can control rotation (=pan) and width via ACT by only 2 knobs (and can even go asymmetrical if I need to)

 
The S1 is not really an equivalent plug-in, it's about stereo imaging in addition to placement. It's kind of like what would happen if you combined Channel Tools with the BT Stereo Imager, and added a few more features (like the S1's Shuffle option). Whether it does enough in addition to what you can do in SONAR to justify $130 is of course up to the individual's needs.



 

Just to chime in, Pro Tools is very stable for me on my PC, while Sonar crashes from time to time. So it might be something else. With my previous audio interface, Sonar was more stable than PT.