Lanceindastudio


It isnt a crap shoot with a nice forum like this ;)
Within 5 hours, you can have a good working recommended hardware setup, or, for less than the price of a mac, a pro DAW maker can set u up like ADK or Studio Cat Jim Roseberry.

Their are variables on PC, and I prefer to keep it that way so I HAVE A CHOICE>

Variables, yes! Crap Shoot? Absolutely not if you actually research what you buy.

I would love to see sonar running on a much more stable MAC

Jim Roseberry

        
IMO, Avid is making the whole-sale move to native because the writing was on the wall.
Dedicated DSP is too expensive (and not necessary) for many of their clients (and potential clients).
LE and MP had too many limitations... and HD was just too much.  
Look at the ProTools migration to x64 with version 8.  It was a real mess... (still being ironed out).
Avid lost many users due to these issues... and soured the moral of many others.
Version 9 looks to put ProTools on par with the better native solutions.
That said, you still don't have VST support, no off-line bounce-down, no input-monitoring, etc.
 
Another thing worth mentioning...
Back in the day... I used to complain (a lot) about DAW apps that didn't focus first and foremost on "Professional" end users.
I remember talking to an Antares rep (many years back when AutoTune was first released) and he told me (bluntly) that there simply aren't enough "Professional" end users to keep a growing software company in business.  IOW, Like it or not... the casual/hobbiest/week-end warrior end-users are an extremely important part of a company's success/survival.
Sometimes business decisions have to be made with that part of the market being a priority.   

mikespitzer


I am a SONAR user so don't think I am trying too hard to defend Pro Tools ............  but let's face some reality..

If it was as unstable and problematic as some of you make it sound,   75% of the professional world would not be using it everyday.

mike_mccue


I think that now, more and more people will have real life head to head comparison experiences and the partisan ship may relax as everyone realizes that we are all sort of just trying to find the best ideas that apply to what we want to do.

eratu

 However, the real "feature" that Cake has to contend with, in my opinion, is not so much a feature race... it's the fact that PT will now have even deeper market penetration simply because it is perceived as the standard (whether or not it merits that designation). Simple session compatibility from laptop to highest-end studios is a compelling feature by itself. 

  
BUT the other thing, and perhaps far larger issue that some people seem to be missing here is WHY Avid did what they did with PT9. Yes, Avid is a business and they have to stay in business. But I mean, WHY did they change their modus operandi? You can answer that simplistically by saying, "they had to" or "they were up against a wall" etc., etc., etc.



During the press conference, the Avid guy who announced PT9 even admitted that Avid/Digi had been the "evil empire" before, in a little off-hand throw away joke. Now, whether or not they will be able to shake that perception will be debatable for years to come, but I think it's the real potential issue all DAW developers will have to contend with. An Avid that *says* they want to listen to their customers, an Avid that *says* they will be putting their customers first. 

PT9 is a strong statement, guys. It has the two biggest feature requests that people have been requesting for years. It de-couples the native software from the hardware and it has delay compensation. So what if those two features are laughable in and of themselves... Every serious DAW has had that for many years... so in one sense we can all kind of chuckle about that. But not so fast... the reason why they did that is worth watching, because it may mean that customer-centric approach they started with the new CEO may actually start to trickle-down to the real customers. 

I think that customer-oriented focus is going to be the real trend in the DAW universe for the next several years. And I think the survivors are the companies that will learn how to LISTEN the best. Fortunately for Cakewalk, they are not strangers to "listening" -- Sonar X1 appears to be a good example of listening to a lot of people and sets up a great foundation. 

Fun times ahead... and good luck to all the DAW developers out there. It's going to be fascinating to watch what happens. For some developers, I have a feeling it will be a rough ride. 

Zo

jackn2mpu

Zo


I don't see the goal of a such step ...i mean we all know that pt shine in the mixing stage but not on midi ....so i don't know why a guy will choose sonar for prod and pt for post pro (for example) while sonar can handle all the production stage well ....

i do understand when a logic, fruityloop or abelton live is doing so but for a cubase , sonar , reaper guy this is just adding some work ......unless you want a full integration in a pt equiped studio  (witch is also simple with sonar ..)

Sonar MAY be able to handle the whole deal but you'll never see Sonar in ANY major studio doing final album work. Sure, some groups/recording artists use Sonar for preliminary work, but the final is always in another program, whether it's PT or DP. Yeah - there's a bunch of stuff on major releases done in DP - the last Devo album for instance, and Danny Elfman does most of his work in DP.

And so ? you're not able to export you sonar sessions for PT use in big studios ?
Unless i need to record in great conditions my sound goes from my sonar to steirling mastering NYC ....and so for several planum releases ....

If a studio is working with PT , do i have to buy PT to work with them : you already know the answer ....also if you buy PT for being able to go on a studio , then you're just buying PT for nothin because you're ain't gonna use for what's it's graet but let somebody elese do it !!

Sure, some groups/recording artists use Sonar for preliminary work, but the final is always in another program, whether it's PT or DP.

bcrowe306


I think we all can agree that SONAR is a overall better, more flexible program.

Would making there software cross--platform be the answer they need? Me personally... I would love to see sonar running on a much more stable MAC.

 I think the company would get more respect in the professional industry if they did so.