robert_e_bone
Moderator
- Total Posts : 8968
- Joined: 2007/12/26 22:09:28
- Location: Palatine, IL
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/11 11:07:50
(permalink)
Mr godparticle, I had read through your initial posts last night (and the 5 pages of follow ups), and although surprised to see you had returned, I had decided that based on the demeanor of your initial posts that I would put together an attempt to post a response offering up whatever info I could to try to provide you my perspective on various software, principally Studio One, Cubase, and Sonar. I just had a knee replaced a week ago, and was in quite a bit of pain last night, so I put off responding until this morning. My perspective on the above-mentioned software is: Studio One: I have this, and like it, but it does not have the horsepower for my particular needs, particularly for mixing. It is installed, but I never really do anything with it any more. Cubase: It has been a while since I used this, but I did own it and had it installed for a while on a prior computer. I found the interface rather clunky and difficult to navigate. It did not feel 'smooth' to me to use, so I moved away from it. Sonar: I have owned and used Sonar for well over 20 years (from way back in the days of Twelve Tone and DOS), and while I did pick up both Studio One and Cubase in more recent years, I always have personally found Sonar to be my preferred DAW software. Sonar 8.5.3 was very powerful, but also very difficult to master - there was a huge learning curve to find and remember all of the little productivity 'tricks' - and that version is the one I most compare to Cubase. The Cakewalk decision to completely rewrite the user interface with X1, and further enhance with X2/X2a was HUGELY welcomed by me. X2 is wonderfully easy for me to use - easy to navigate, and easy to accomplish most things that I need it to do, and it has an incredible number of components that come with it, like the soft synths and effects, the Pro-Channel, and screen sets. For me, Sonar X2a is stable and my productivity has never been higher with any prior version of Sonar (even 8.5.3) or with any other software I have used (Cubase or Studio One). Bob Bone
Wisdom is a giant accumulation of "DOH!" Sonar: Platinum (x64), X3 (x64) Audio Interfaces: AudioBox 1818VSL, Steinberg UR-22 Computers: 1) i7-2600 k, 32 GB RAM, Windows 8.1 Pro x64 & 2) AMD A-10 7850 32 GB RAM Windows 10 Pro x64 Soft Synths: NI Komplete 8 Ultimate, Arturia V Collection, many others MIDI Controllers: M-Audio Axiom Pro 61, Keystation 88es Settings: 24-Bit, Sample Rate 48k, ASIO Buffer Size 128, Total Round Trip Latency 9.7 ms
|
Jeff Evans
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5139
- Joined: 2009/04/13 18:20:16
- Location: Ballarat, Australia
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/11 18:49:29
(permalink)
Asking which workflow is superior is sort of hard because an experienced Sonar user will be fast and fluent with the Sonar workflow hence will say yes it is good. They may find Studio One say a little awkward to use. An experienced Pro Tools user is also going to feel at home on PT and say it is good but they may find other DAW's a little uncomfortable. Me however, slick and fast on Studio One therefore I will tell you the workflow is also good. I find Sonar uncomfortable to use now when and if I have to go to it for any reason. Workflow will be good on many DAW's, basically it is related to how well you know your program. Simple as that. Studio One mixing is as good an any. Horsepower is related to the computer not the program. (UAD when engaged really takes mixing into serious territory too) The standard plugins will get you a fantastic mix, period. (Remember it the engineer that achieves that only) But as many of us have third party stuff, that is how you are expected to use it. Rather than give you a whole lot of Pro Channel type modules, they give you a solid frame to plug your own things in there. And I do, and they all work very well too in that situation. It is nice too send some great sounding tracks straight through to the stereo mix too without the slightest interference. Pro Channel and Console emulators totally unnecessary. It is great too that programs like Sonar offer so much as standard. Means you don't have to go out and buy the extra stuff and the standard is high with the Sonar built in stuff too. Just two different ways of approaching it. But if you are wanting to compare DAW's and find out, it is time as we have been saying to use them and see which one fits your vibe, feel and personality. No amount of discussion is going to get you to that point. Only listen to people who are on the latest version of Cubase (and any other DAW) as well. Sorry people but Cubase SX3 and around that time sort of does not cut it does it. Bit like comparing to the first version of Sonar. Do you want someone to base their impression on the first version of Sonar or the latest version. It is imperative that you examine all the very latest versions of all the programs of interest. Quite large improvements have been made in very recent updates to some programs out there. It is also important to realise that all DAW's have features that are well beyond those in their counterparts. It is silly to think that there is one that is so far out front and the others are way behind. It is not like that. It is a bit like a running race and the runners are all about a meter apart really, moving at the speed of light and taking it in turns to be the leader out front, it is usually only for a second or two!
post edited by Jeff Evans - 2013/03/11 18:58:12
Specs i5-2500K 3.5 Ghz - 8 Gb RAM - Win 7 64 bit - ATI Radeon HD6900 Series - RME PCI HDSP9632 - Steinberg Midex 8 Midi interface - Faderport 8- Studio One V4 - iMac 2.5Ghz Core i5 - Sierra 10.12.6 - Focusrite Clarett thunderbolt interface Poor minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas -Eleanor Roosevelt
|
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9871
- Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
- Location: Ohio
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/11 19:32:30
(permalink)
But if you are wanting to compare DAW's and find out, it is time as we have been saying to use them and see which one fits your vibe, feel and personality. No amount of discussion is going to get you to that point. Good advice, Jeff... Not much different than asking the same question about a particular instrument. ie: What's the best bass guitar? You'll get plenty of opinions if you ask various players... but you need to experience what's available to figure out which *you* prefer. Basic recording/editing/mixing is actually pretty similar in all the major DAW applications. There are differences in work-flow... but as Jeff said... it's mostly down to being familiar with each application. You can achieve great results with Sonar, Cubase, Studio One 2, Reaper, etc.
|
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 18001
- Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/11 19:44:03
(permalink)
I do all my digital recordings on an abacus.
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/11 20:31:34
(permalink)
Beepster I do all my digital recordings on an abacus. For the pre analog sound. Talk about retro!
|
trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6348
- Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
- Location: London ON
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/11 23:04:21
(permalink)
John Beepster I do all my digital recordings on an abacus. For the pre analog sound. Talk about retro! pppfffft. Not retro enough. I'm going back to knotted rope....
The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate. Bushpianos
|
robert_e_bone
Moderator
- Total Posts : 8968
- Joined: 2007/12/26 22:09:28
- Location: Palatine, IL
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/11 23:09:30
(permalink)
Well, MANY folks had already attempted to let godparticle know that he was best off downloading demos and determining his own choice, and he had ignored all of that. That's what I really wanted to type, but decided to go with what I ended up with after some internal struggles. I was only relaying my own experiences as my own experiences, and not meaning to say anything different. I could only speak to the versions I had - for horsepower I was really referring to things like the Pro Channel and all of that end of things that are so wonderful to have included with Sonar - I guess I could have explained that better, but I was torn the whole time I was posting that, because my brain kept telling me to ignore the whole thread. It was kind of like that scene in Animal House where Pinto has the angel and the devil trying to convince him which way to go with the underage girl. For me too, the angel side won, and I took the high road. I was kind of expecting him to still go off on me, like he had done with everyone else. Anyway - looks like it will remain a more quiet forum for a little bit. Bob Bone
Wisdom is a giant accumulation of "DOH!" Sonar: Platinum (x64), X3 (x64) Audio Interfaces: AudioBox 1818VSL, Steinberg UR-22 Computers: 1) i7-2600 k, 32 GB RAM, Windows 8.1 Pro x64 & 2) AMD A-10 7850 32 GB RAM Windows 10 Pro x64 Soft Synths: NI Komplete 8 Ultimate, Arturia V Collection, many others MIDI Controllers: M-Audio Axiom Pro 61, Keystation 88es Settings: 24-Bit, Sample Rate 48k, ASIO Buffer Size 128, Total Round Trip Latency 9.7 ms
|
FastBikerBoy
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 11326
- Joined: 2008/01/25 16:15:36
- Location: Watton, Norfolk, UK
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 03:22:46
(permalink)
A bit late but........
|
SteveStrummerUK
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31112
- Joined: 2006/10/28 10:53:48
- Location: Worcester, England.
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 09:58:39
(permalink)
|
Bristol_Jonesey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 16775
- Joined: 2007/10/08 15:41:17
- Location: Bristol, UK
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 10:23:37
(permalink)
I haven't seen a Kitchens Bristol yet. Do you think they've forgotten us?
CbB, Platinum, 64 bit throughoutCustom built i7 3930, 32Gb RAM, 2 x 1Tb Internal HDD, 1 x 1TB system SSD (Win 7), 1 x 500Gb system SSD (Win 10), 2 x 1Tb External HDD's, Dual boot Win 7 & Win 10 64 Bit, Saffire Pro 26, ISA One, Adam P11A,
|
jb101
Max Output Level: -46 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2946
- Joined: 2011/12/04 05:26:10
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 10:27:07
(permalink)
Or kitchens in Lincolnshire. Perhaps they think we don't have kitchens here yet. God appears to have been excommunicated..
|
FastBikerBoy
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 11326
- Joined: 2008/01/25 16:15:36
- Location: Watton, Norfolk, UK
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 10:35:30
(permalink)
jb101 Or kitchens in Lincolnshire. Perhaps they think we don't have kitchens here yet. God appears to have been excommunicated.. You don't need kitchens, you have Cadwell Park. I've spent many a pleasant day roaring round there at a not so fast pace. Looking forward to doing it again this year if it ever stops snowing.........
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 10:52:45
(permalink)
My goodness still snowing? I'll bet you are ready for Spring. I sure am.
|
jb101
Max Output Level: -46 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2946
- Joined: 2011/12/04 05:26:10
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 11:34:46
(permalink)
At my son's pre-school they are doing a project on Spring. Teacher asked hem to look around and say what you see in spring. "Snow", came the chorus of replies..
|
SteveStrummerUK
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31112
- Joined: 2006/10/28 10:53:48
- Location: Worcester, England.
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 11:41:40
(permalink)
Bristol_Jonesey I haven't seen a Kitchens Bristol yet. Do you think they've forgotten us? No mate. It's because your home town is well known as a cockney rhyming slang euphemism. Or I'm talking complete bollocks... As usual What a tit.
|
Paul P
Max Output Level: -48.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2685
- Joined: 2012/12/08 17:15:47
- Location: Montreal
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 11:44:13
(permalink)
Anybody else find it odd that this thread is still here ?
Every time I've tried to report an abusive post someone's already beaten me to it, so it's not as if the moderators aren't aware.
Other threads have been quickly moved which were nothing compared to this one.
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 12:05:54
(permalink)
what's the big deal? somebody doesn't like a product... they move on. everyone else who is being productive with it, carry's on. what's the big deal? are there folks here, who just cannot ignore certain folks? if so, why?
|
Paul P
Max Output Level: -48.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2685
- Joined: 2012/12/08 17:15:47
- Location: Montreal
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 12:18:24
(permalink)
There is no big deal. The thread has been quite entertaining :-) But it also contains material that goes quite a bit beyond what is reasonable politeness and I thought that Cakewalk liked to maintain a certain level of it. I really don't have a problem with most kinds of posts, but I'd like know then why some very innocuous threads get moved ?
|
Seth Kellogg [Cakewalk]
Administrator
- Total Posts : 814
- Joined: 2009/02/06 15:25:40
- Location: Boston, MA
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/12 12:45:59
(permalink)
Alright, this thread deserves to fall into the abyss.
|