ok , have you seen a cpu hit with the hybrid (just trying to figure out waht could be the native futur load !)?

is that varispeed ?

http://www.youtube.com/wa...O8&feature=related

Everyone says midi editing in Sonar is superior to ProTools.  I don't own ProTools, but from what I've seen their midi tools seem more efficient than Sonar's.  It seems that you can do more with less key/mouse clicks.  This might change now with X1...  Of course since I don't own PT it is impossible for me objectively assess PT's midi shortcomings.

Can someone summarize the advantages of Sonar Midi editing over PT?

This is one of those things where repetition on message boards turns something into a factoid. The reality is that Pro Tools MIDI was pretty lame up until about five years ago, but has pretty much caught up since.

This is the great irony of DAW wars; they all got more or less neck and neck in about 2006 / 2007, and hardly anybody seems to have noticed.

guitartrek


Everyone says midi editing in Sonar is superior to ProTools.  I don't own ProTools, but from what I've seen their midi tools seem more efficient than Sonar's.  It seems that you can do more with less key/mouse clicks.  This might change now with X1...  Of course since I don't own PT it is impossible for me objectively assess PT's midi shortcomings.

Can someone summarize the advantages of Sonar Midi editing over PT?

Let's talk facts here... Some quick things off the top of my head:

Not in order of importance: Sonar has built-in arpeggiators in every midi track, an instrument rack, a variety of useful non-destructive MIDI plugins, CAL (which in theory allows you to do tons of wild and crazy things with MIDI, although it is not exactly user-friendly), a very decent step sequencer (perhaps one of the best, if not THE best in any DAW, if that matters to you)... and other important goodies for MIDI folks providing more flexibility and control over MIDI. It also has easy track freezing (which I guess isn't a MIDI feature but it does help in the MIDI workflow). On top of that, I guess you could consider ACT to be another aspect of MIDI workflow features, and if we go that direction, Sonar supports VSTi, and there are many more of those than RTAS plugins. Also, I guess it should be noted that since PT is not yet x64, PT cannot take advantage of larger memory footprint for sample libraries, unless you use VE Pro, for example. That's a dealbreaker for some composers right there.

I know I'm missing a bunch of things. :)

On the other hand, PT does have a good workflow inside the MIDI editor -- it's frankly a well-thought-out, fresh take -- a very clean/simple way to manage the data you work with from tracks/groups. DAW developers should take notice re: the ease of use of tracks inside the MIDI editor. It does have a Real-Time Properties editor where you can adjust quantize, transpose, etc... but that's frankly simplistic compared to what you can do with the more flexible Sonar MIDI plugins and other related tools. However, I far prefer the automation/lane tools in PT, although we don't know yet what improvements might be coming in Sonar X1.

All in all, the PT MIDI editor is actually very good, but in terms of depth and breadth it's a solid generation or two behind Sonar's. That said, for what PT's MIDI editor does, it does well, and it is very clean and open, very easy to navigate and use. But if you need to get a lot out of MIDI, you'll get more tools and flexibility out of something like Sonar by far, compared to PT. So for a composer, it's really a no-brainer, in my opinion. The sequencing roots of Cakewalk really pay off.

Again, I know I'm missing a ton of things. Will try to think of more later.

Perhaps MIDI editing can only be "better" based on a users own specific needs and work flow preferences regardless of features in host A or B 

cmusicmaker


Perhaps MIDI editing can only be "better" based on a users own specific needs and work flow preferences regardless of features in host A or B 

True, "better" is relative. I should have mentioned that. If you don't need some of the more advanced MIDI tools of Sonar (or Cubase for example), then the PT MIDI editor does indeed have good workflow for basic editing, there's no avoiding that reality. But a MIDI-heavy composer with large sample libraries, or just someone who wants to control/manipulate their MIDI with more power and depth who has ever needed the more advanced features of Sonar and Cubase, for example, will rapidly experience limitations with PT MIDI.

mike_mccue


Ok, ya'll are going to love this:

"Sonar has built-in arpeggiators in every midi track,"

Junk... besides it is so 3 decades ago.

"an instrument rack,"

handy


"an instrument t[sic?]rack,"

It is a cripple track... you need to open it up to the paired audio/MIDI tracks to get full functionality.

"a variety of useful non-destructive MIDI plugins,"

Not so much

"CAL (which in theory allows you to do tons of wild and crazy things with MIDI, although it is not exactly user-friendly),"

Not officially supported anymore??? Maybe I said it wrong?

"a very decent step sequencer (perhaps one of the best, if not THE best in any DAW, if that matters to you)..."

Junk... simply a crippled form of the already existing PRV step sequencer.

"and other important goodies for MIDI folks providing more flexibility and control over MIDI."

Why can't I average a list of tempos in the tempo view? That seems like a no brainer?


anyways...

all the best,
mike

Haha! You're brutal! :) I never said there was (or was not) any value to the list I made... It was not qualitative, but quantitative, and each person will have a different take on what matters most to them.

(P.S.: BTW, I never use the Cakewalk step sequencer, and never asked for it! ;) But some people really like it. )

When will people learn it is not all about feature sets? 

Its a game changer because PT is the standard in a large majority of studios and the price of entry just dropped 90%. And I can run it alongside Sonar on the same hardware. What's not to love?

If the price of a Rolls-Royce were suddenly the same as a Kia - it'd be a game changer in the same way.

Betamax was a "better" format than VHS and look how well that went. The road to success is littered with better ideas.

I honestly don't think there's much in it either way.

mikespitzer


Since you guys are discussing the comparisons between SONAR and PRO TOOLS , I have a technical question .................

Since making the move from Analog studios to DAW years ago,  I have been a SONAR guy.

However, I only work with real musicians playing real drums, bass, guitars, etc...  

I never work with MIDI, Loops, Samples, drumming software, etc....

Thus I am always working with AUDIO TRACKS

I have seen it mentioned above that audio editing is one area where Pro Tools is better designed than Sonar.

Can you guys elaborate on what it is about Audio Editing that is superior in Pro Tools ????

For example, when I have to remove a small random noise on an audio track, I can Zoom in on the waveform, split the track and either mute or drop the volume at that small interval and it seems to work fine.

But I saw somebody mention that in Pro Tools you would use a "pencil" function to basically just "erase" out that small blip.

I have been a SONAR person for several years, but since I am only working with real AUDIO and the consensus seems to be that Pro Tools is the better DAW for handling Audio data (weaker in Midi) ........    I am wondering with the release of Pro Tools 9  it may be time for me to make the switch and be more "industry compliant" ----------- especially since I am  working with other musicians and studios around the world on projects and so far every single one of them is a Pro Tools user.
Except for this forum, I have never met another SONAR user out there ...... but, I know at least 30-40 Pro Tools users.

Your guy's serious advice and experience is appreciated.

I am not looking for an excuse to jump into another learning curve by getting into Pro Tools ------- but like I said above ,   if I ONLY work with AUDIO and never use Midi, loops, samples, sound modules, etc.......

Perhaps I am not using the best tool for the job ??

So is Pro Tools the superior tool for a studio only recording and editing Audio ??

Thanks

Not sure if there is a PT demo but that might provide the answers you need. Those more experienced users with PT might have some ideas on this thread to share. Not sure what a feature for feature difference might be...there might not be much in it. Depends on what you might want to achieve most likely.

rhythminmind

Example - being able to select a clip and just export the raw trimmed/edited audio without it being processed thru a bus, master, or track. Try to do that in one step with sonar.

Not to stir the pot since I do agree with you, but isn't this essentially the same as dragging a trimmed wave file out to the desktop?
What Sonar can't do is drag an already edited wave file without trimming/bouncing.  In that case, then you're right.
 
 

Jim Roseberry

To be precise, the fades are not destructive

 
You're splitting hairs...  

Not really. Destructive editing has a very specific meaning in the world of DAWs and audio editors. Pro Tools does not have destructive fades.

Jim, as a DAW builder people respect your opinion and will probably weigh it more than that of other posters. As such I think you have a slightly above average responsibility to be precise with your wording. I know it was a simple off the cuff comment but this is how rumours and audio myths are born. :)

(My guess is that this is also a throw back to TDM/DSP implementation)

My guess too.

UnderTow

Jim Roseberry


  Hi Rhythm,
 
If you're working on 3.5 minute tunes, the lack of offline bounce-down is less of an issue.
If you're working on longer projects (say live concert recording), if it's an hour show... it's going to take an hour to bounce down.  There are some situations (radio broadcast) where that's a royal PITA.  :)
Offline bounce-down might get you there in 10-15 minutes vs. waiting for an hour.

Not really. I have mixed quite a few live DVDs not to mention countless post jobs for TV and film averaging about 50 minutes each. I  have never felt I needed faster than real-time bouncing in Pro Tools. Hey I just mixed a 50 minute TV show today which is airing in a few hours. Even though it was a race against the clock, I didn't need or want faster bouncing and to put things in perspective, I couldn't have done it at all in Sonar. That would literally be days of work! (I know, I have tried doing post in Sonar. It is just not possible unless you want to drive yourself insane and literally have about ten times as much time to do it). It isn't about feature lists. Even things like quick bouncing. It is about how everything is implemented.

UnderTow

mikespitzer

For example, when I have to remove a small random noise on an audio track, I can Zoom in on the waveform, split the track and either mute or drop the volume at that small interval and it seems to work fine.

But I saw somebody mention that in Pro Tools you would use a "pencil" function to basically just "erase" out that small blip.

In Pro Tools you can redraw the waveform with the pen tool. Today I removed some electronic tick and buzz in the middle of a word. (Some glitch a wireless mic). You zoom in, select pencil tool, redraw the waveform so that it is smooth instead of jagged, click and buzz are gone. It is a very nice feature!

I have been a SONAR person for several years, but since I am only working with real AUDIO and the consensus seems to be that Pro Tools is the better DAW for handling Audio data (weaker in Midi) ........    I am wondering with the release of Pro Tools 9  it may be time for me to make the switch and be more "industry compliant" ----------- especially since I am  working with other musicians and studios around the world on projects and so far every single one of them is a Pro Tools user.
Except for this forum, I have never met another SONAR user out there ...... but, I know at least 30-40 Pro Tools users.

Your guy's serious advice and experience is appreciated.

I am not looking for an excuse to jump into another learning curve by getting into Pro Tools ------- but like I said above ,   if I ONLY work with AUDIO and never use Midi, loops, samples, sound modules, etc.......

Perhaps I am not using the best tool for the job ??

So is Pro Tools the superior tool for a studio only recording and editing Audio ??

It seems you should really try to demo Pro Tools. I don't know if there is a demo available from Avid but if not, maybe you can visit one of those people you collaborate with?

UnderTow