godparticle 
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 55
- Joined: 2012/08/11 06:41:47
- Status: offline
SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
I was banned after my first entry into the Cakewalk forums (for one month), so here i am again.
I await the outcome of Sonar X2B. I hope there will be a significant improvement in the bug situation. I still haven't committed to any of the major DAWs yet, but i know that none of them currently offer the equivalent of the Pro-console. That is the biggy for me, the option to have the sound of three different high-end consoles is hard to resist, but if there are significant complaints after the release of 2B, then i'm gone for good.
|
sharke
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13933
- Joined: 2012/08/03 00:13:00
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 00:37:41
(permalink)
JamesWindows 10, Sonar SPlat (64-bit), Intel i7-4930K, 32GB RAM, RME Babyface, AKAI MPK Mini, Roland A-800 Pro, Focusrite VRM Box, Komplete 10 Ultimate, 2012 American Telecaster!
|
Linear Phase
Max Output Level: -53 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2201
- Joined: 2012/04/15 02:21:15
- Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL USA
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 00:57:20
(permalink)
Cubase is a very difficult program to use. You have to know it, you can't learn it quick and easy like Sonar. The X Series of Sonar has been designed to specifically make it as easy as cake, for the newbie to get involved with Audio Production.
Cubase's workflow has had no such tweaks. If you do not know Cubase already, and or have no way of properly learning its intricate workflow that has stayed the same since its inception, than I suggest you do not go near it, as you will only waste your money.
Edit = I had the pleasure of learning on Cubase v3, some 8 years ago.. Its a brilliant program, but does not do so much more than Sonar, or Studio One, or Reaper, or anything really, to justify its extreme learning curve for the uninitiated.
too many lasers...  Sonar = audio editing ninja of a music software!
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 01:01:04
(permalink)
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
bandso
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 361
- Joined: 2007/04/15 23:48:13
- Location: Boston, MA
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 01:12:23
(permalink)
It does make me feel a little bad when I read these kinds of posts. When I jumped the sonar x1 band wagon I bought a spanking new 6 core amd and a supposed "military grade" motherboard. 8 megs of ram and Win764. Also new sata drives, video card, cd burner. All from Microcenter in Cambridge MA. I Built it all from scratch and set it up clean and tidy in a rack mount server ATX case.
For some unknown reason I have seemed to have hit the lottery when it comes to having sonar work right. All of the versions, all of the patches, and all of the quick fix just seem to work properly with my little studio computer.
When I am recording I take my time and press stop on the transport before I go dragging around plugins, as well as save my files every 5 min or so. I take each step one at a time and let the computer finish what it needs to do before I try to make it do something else. So far I can count the number of crashes I've had on 10 fingers over 2 years.
Please dont take this as bragging as I'm really not. I'm just trying to convey that if you can find yourself in a situation where you arent worried about the hardware then the true feeling of runnning a fantastic sounding DAW just melts into your head and brings such inner peace and creativity. I'm just really sad that you aren't able to experience this feeling that many of us here on the forum express and I hope you find the answer to your daw problems so you can move on to the art of making music.
Bandlab Platinum and every other toy I can get my hands on...and yes I'm way in debt over this obsession...
|
sharke
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13933
- Joined: 2012/08/03 00:13:00
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 01:12:53
(permalink)
chuckebaby
what is a "Pro-console".
I think it's when you put your arm around a hooker and tell her everything's going to be alright.
JamesWindows 10, Sonar SPlat (64-bit), Intel i7-4930K, 32GB RAM, RME Babyface, AKAI MPK Mini, Roland A-800 Pro, Focusrite VRM Box, Komplete 10 Ultimate, 2012 American Telecaster!
|
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
2013/03/07 01:14:35
(permalink)
No new program is difficult to learn. People have a total misconception on this. The human brain is rather amazing. It is as simple as stop using the program you have been using and start using the program you are going to use. You go the website and read all the stuff on what it does, you read all the SOS reviews, get a few Groove 3 videos and you are well under way. Remember most DAW's are doing exactly the same thing conceptually.
Other programs like Ableton or FL Studio might take a little getting used to but even so it is still easy. They say the program that has the hardest learning curve is Magix Samplitude. Cubase is not difficult to use at all.
I switched from Sonar to Studio One and had it down in days. Once familiar you will totally forget your old program. I cannot even use Sonar now. But if I was to go back I am sure I would have it down again in no time. Some DAW's do make it easier to switch though as they can be very intuitive. Others like Samplitude are not so intuitive.
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
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 01:22:21
(permalink)
bandso
It does make me feel a little bad when I read these kinds of posts. When I jumped the sonar x1 band wagon I bought a spanking new 6 core amd and a supposed "military grade" motherboard. 8 megs of ram and Win764. Also new sata drives, video card, cd burner. All from Microcenter in Cambridge MA. I Built it all from scratch and set it up clean and tidy in a rack mount server ATX case.
For some unknown reason I have seemed to have hit the lottery when it comes to having sonar work right. All of the versions, all of the patches, and all of the quick fix just seem to work properly with my little studio computer.
When I am recording I take my time and press stop on the transport before I go dragging around plugins, as well as save my files every 5 min or so. I take each step one at a time and let the computer finish what it needs to do before I try to make it do something else. So far I can count the number of crashes I've had on 10 fingers over 2 years.
Please dont take this as bragging as I'm really not. I'm just trying to convey that if you can find yourself in a situation where you arent worried about the hardware then the true feeling of runnning a fantastic sounding DAW just melts into your head and brings such inner peace and creativity. I'm just really sad that you aren't able to experience this feeling that many of us here on the forum express and I hope you find the answer to your daw problems so you can move on to the art of making music.
fellow bostonian !!!! i too built this model i use at microcenter..its an AMD phenom 2 black edition/6 core with 8 gb of ram and guess what...??? the lotery is amazing aint it? not a hick up except your everyday,what the heck is that? once in a while which the last one was over a month ago. i feel bad too for these guys spending 1000/1500 on I7's with 16gb ram and having issues. here i built this as a test computer for 450.00 bucks and it smokes lightining !! im a builder myself and microcenter is my outlet right there in cambridge. i build 3-4 computers a month(so im fairly small)but those computers i build half are daws.the other gaming systems,personal computers. great results. ive converted a few over to AMD. i cant say for pro tools or cubase as much as i can sonar,AMD and sonar play great together. nice post
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
|
bandso
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 361
- Joined: 2007/04/15 23:48:13
- Location: Boston, MA
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 01:42:59
(permalink)
Protools is normally the picky one when it comes to what DAW it will or will not run. Before X1, I had a digi002 and you had to use a computer built specifically for protools or you were sh** out of luck. (intel Q6600, intel motherboard)
Then x1 came along and I knew I was going to jump in head first. I had sonar 8.5 producer for awhile but it didn't play nice with the digi002 and hence didn't get much use. X1 was just simply killer though and I knew it was time to upgrade. So I got the new computer, a mackie blackbird interface, and have been in recording bliss ever since (although I did switch to two delta1010lt's when I rehooked up my analog recording board) Still no problems. I myself am a really happy camper!
Bandlab Platinum and every other toy I can get my hands on...and yes I'm way in debt over this obsession...
|
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
2013/03/07 02:00:39
(permalink)
godparticle
I was banned after my first entry into the Cakewalk forums (for one month), so here i am again.
I await the outcome of Sonar X2B. I hope there will be a significant improvement in the bug situation. I still haven't committed to any of the major DAWs yet, but i know that none of them currently offer the equivalent of the Pro-console. That is the biggy for me, the option to have the sound of three different high-end consoles is hard to resist, but if there are significant complaints after the release of 2B, then i'm gone for good.
I'm morbidly fascinated. If you haven't "Committed" to any of the DAWs yet how do know about the "bug" situation in any of them? If you are judging by internet forums on how good a DAW is good luck. You won't get a balanced view there from one side or the other, on any of them. There are unfortunately bugs in just about all software but there are none that should stop you working in Sonar and I doubt there'll be any that stop you working in any of the others either. I've suggested this before in some of your other posts. Try the demos, pick one that feels right for you and then learn it. I'll bet that all of the major DAWs will have far more features and be far more capable than you'll ever need.
|
TraceyStudios
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 603
- Joined: 2005/10/13 12:40:33
- Location: Chandler, AZ
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 02:09:50
(permalink)
I had some major issues with X2, X1 worked great for me. The folks here in the forum pointed out a few things, I took their advise and now X2 is working FANTASTICALY (is that even a word? if not then it should be!). There are still a couple of minor bugs that don't even bother me anymore, just work around them for now, they certainly don't stop me or even slow me down much. I also built this computer especially for sonar, perhaps I did not go the level of the guys from Boston, but it is working great! I admit I was a bit intimidated by X1 when I first opened it up. It appeared to be much differrent from Sonar 5 (which is what I used till X1). After a couple of hours I was moving right along at a fast pace. All of the functions are still there, plus several. I have a good bud who is a pro tools guy, he came over and was drewling over Sonar and how well it works and the fact that it is 64 bit. For the last 2 months I ask him hows it going, same answer, still tracking down problems with the computer and protools. I have also helped a few friends get started with recording, I suggest Sonar but they opted for Reaper. So I learned to use Reaper and I can't belive they chose that over Sonar. Had a free version of Cubase that came with an iterface I purchased a few years ago. I took a look at it and again, perhaps I am biased, but Cubase seemed complicated and hard to use, was not intuitive to me. Good Luck with it!
AMD FX-6100 six-core processor 3.3GHz 8 Gig RAM SONAR X3 Producer Tascam FW1884 Mackie Blackbird Presonus Digimax Avalon U5 BFD2 SL Trigger Alesis DM8 Pro drums KRK Rokit 8s KRK 10s ARC2 Folgers Dark Roast, a bit of crazy :) & lots of help from the forums! http://www.reverbnation.com/blakkmire
|
Glyn Barnes
Max Output Level: -0.3 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7564
- Joined: 2009/06/10 05:12:31
- Location: A Stone's Throw from the Line
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 02:32:33
(permalink)
bandso
For some unknown reason I have seemed to have hit the lottery when it comes to having sonar work right. All of the versions, all of the patches, and all of the quick fix just seem to work properly with my little studio computer.
.
Much the same here. X2 (with the hotfix but not with X2a patch) was running fine on my old Vista DAW (an "off the shelf" gaming PC from Mesh with the onboard sound disabled, initally an ESI Juli@ card, and later a Roland Quad Capture and a couple of extra disk drives), ok there were a few bugs and annoyances but nothing I could not work around with a minimal amount of effort, and no X2 crashes. On the old DAW the only serious crashes I experienced in 4 years were down to a failing hard drive. Prior to getting a Roland Quad Capture my ESI Juli@ drivers would crash occasionally for example if I left the stand-alone version of Kontakt open and launched Sonar. The new one is a custom build for DAW specialists Scan and so far the only real problem has been with IK Multimedia authorization manager, and no matter how hard you try you can't pin that one on Sonar. X2A will have bugs, but there has been nothing that stops me working so far. I am certainly not seeing stability problems. I think this is the experience of most users and I tend to think you have to be unlucky to get a unstable system, rather than luck to get a stable one.
|
Linear Phase
Max Output Level: -53 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2201
- Joined: 2012/04/15 02:21:15
- Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL USA
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 02:36:10
(permalink)
Jeff Evans
No new program is difficult to learn. People have a total misconception on this. The human brain is rather amazing. It is as simple as stop using the program you have been using and start using the program you are going to use. You go the website and read all the stuff on what it does, you read all the SOS reviews, get a few Groove 3 videos and you are well under way. Remember most DAW's are doing exactly the same thing conceptually.
Other programs like Ableton or FL Studio might take a little getting used to but even so it is still easy. They say the program that has the hardest learning curve is Magix Samplitude. Cubase is not difficult to use at all.
I switched from Sonar to Studio One and had it down in days. Once familiar you will totally forget your old program. I cannot even use Sonar now. But if I was to go back I am sure I would have it down again in no time. Some DAW's do make it easier to switch though as they can be very intuitive. Others like Samplitude are not so intuitive.
I find samplitude very easy and intuitive.. I dl'd the demo sometime last year, and I forget why I passed on it, but the setup looked great and I totally, "got it," in two seconds.
too many lasers... Sonar = audio editing ninja of a music software!
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 03:03:51
(permalink)
Linear Phase
Jeff Evans
No new program is difficult to learn. People have a total misconception on this. The human brain is rather amazing. It is as simple as stop using the program you have been using and start using the program you are going to use. You go the website and read all the stuff on what it does, you read all the SOS reviews, get a few Groove 3 videos and you are well under way. Remember most DAW's are doing exactly the same thing conceptually.
Other programs like Ableton or FL Studio might take a little getting used to but even so it is still easy. They say the program that has the hardest learning curve is Magix Samplitude. Cubase is not difficult to use at all.
I switched from Sonar to Studio One and had it down in days. Once familiar you will totally forget your old program. I cannot even use Sonar now. But if I was to go back I am sure I would have it down again in no time. Some DAW's do make it easier to switch though as they can be very intuitive. Others like Samplitude are not so intuitive.
I find samplitude very easy and intuitive.. I dl'd the demo sometime last year, and I forget why I passed on it, but the setup looked great and I totally, "got it," in two seconds.
You know what I think the problem is Linear? Not really learning the program...but learning the terminology the others use as well as WHERE they put things. That was my biggest beef with X1. Everything was so different and not where I was used to it being, THAT was really the learning curve for me. I found the same things in Reaper, Logic, Cubase, Nuendo and PT. They use different terms of the same things we know and they put them in different place. I soooo hate hunting around for things. I can't even tell you how sick it makes me. I shelved X1 for months because of it. I just hated that I was forced to learn a DAW that I had been using since Cake 4.0 on floppy disks. At the end of my learning curve...as Jeff has said, it wasn't really "learning" or "hard" at all. It was just that things were in different spots. It's been the same with the others in my experience. However....to me, Logic broke the mold. That one takes everyone some time to get used to. The earlier versions were even worse....but it's definitely the most difficult to get down in my opinion. -Danny
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
GIM Productions
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
- Total Posts : 860
- Joined: 2005/12/14 05:07:56
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 03:20:05
(permalink)
Hi all,i don't wanna enter in technics stuff but i can say one thing,Cubase 7 is really........ugly!!!
Best
Intel i7 3600,Asus Z170P,16 GIG Corsair ram,Focusrite Saffire Pro 26 i\o,Nektar Impact LX 49,Focusrite Liquid Mix,Monitors ADAM-K&H,Sonar Platinum Windows 10 SP1 Producer....more stuff in SStudio, Rome ,Italy.
|
ProjectM
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3941
- Joined: 2004/02/10 09:32:12
- Location: Norway
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 05:31:22
(permalink)
Well, I work a lot in Nuendo at work (not my choice of software) and got to play around with Cubase 7 a little while ago.
Besides a good number of bugs in it, it is a pretty cool upgrade. BUT, my problem with it is that it feels old! Just like Nuendo does to me. Ugly or pretty, I dunno. Clunky and strangely limited in areas. In other areas it blossoms.
I still prefer Sonar. But Cubase will be good for those who prefer that old school way of laying out things, once the bugs have been ironed out.
(Sonar Platinum - Win10 x64) - iMac and 13" MacBook - Logic Pro X ++ - UA Apollo Twin DUO - NI Maschine MKII - NI Komplete Kontrol S61 - Novation Nocturne - KRK Rokit 6 SoundcloudNegative Vibe Records
|
Bill51
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 216
- Joined: 2003/12/06 17:25:04
- Location: Gt Barrington, MA
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 08:22:08
(permalink)
There's a demo of C7 available now...
Bill Reed Finale 2012, Notion4, Sonar X2 Win8 x64, 64GB RAM M-Audio ProFire 2626 Kontakt, VSL VI Pro, VE Pro, EWQL Orch, Choirs and Pianos A closet full of cables, cords, adaptors, etc. Just let me know what you need
|
Chregg
Max Output Level: -51.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2382
- Joined: 2010/02/22 06:14:27
- Location: Perth, Scotland
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 08:40:14
(permalink)
godparticle back with a vengeance!! "Cubase is a very difficult program to use. You have to know it, you can't learn it quick and easy like Sonar." thats not true that, same learning curve mate, but thats only my opinion LP ;)
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 08:47:09
(permalink)
Haven't we been through this before? Deja Vu all over again!
|
ProjectM
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3941
- Joined: 2004/02/10 09:32:12
- Location: Norway
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 09:00:44
(permalink)
You never know John, things may have changed since the last time. I doubt it, but how can we know for sure without another debate 
(Sonar Platinum - Win10 x64) - iMac and 13" MacBook - Logic Pro X ++ - UA Apollo Twin DUO - NI Maschine MKII - NI Komplete Kontrol S61 - Novation Nocturne - KRK Rokit 6 SoundcloudNegative Vibe Records
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 09:03:31
(permalink)
No we know, its the same question. Besides shouldn't God know which DAW to use? Then does God even need a DAW?
Just asking.
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 09:35:08
(permalink)
im not sure how to take this thread,i thought he had moved on to mixcraft.
but then again i was also under the impression he owned sonar and thats why he was so upset.
im very confused,i can only hope he uses this forum to his advantage because there are a lot of good people here when your not yelling at them.
more importanty,there are a lot of smart people here,when you need an answer and need it fast,i dont know of any other forum on the net that produces answers faster than this forum.
its as important as the smart tool.
matter of fact,sonar should have a forum tool inside sonar,CNTR+SHIFT+F takes you right to the forum 8)
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
mmorgan
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
- Total Posts : 676
- Joined: 2013/02/19 23:39:05
- Location: Bellingham, WA
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 10:08:05
(permalink)
Recently I was asked to collaborate on a project using Cubase 7 so I purchased it and have learned enough about it to be mildly functional (or perhaps not totally dysfunctional). I didn't find it difficult at all, it just took some time to find out "where they put everything". I actually like the "look" of Q better than X2...but I like the integration of X2 better (the Multidock is the BOMB in my opinion).
One thing the Q doesn't have is this forum...and this forum seems to be unique in that there is a thriving community of users trying to honestly help one another (for the most part). I don't really get that feeling when I check into the other forums.
OP: I'd go with what you know and love: MixCraft.
Regards,
Mike Win8(64), Sonar X3e(64) w/ RME Fireface UFX.
|
redbarchetta
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 534
- Joined: 2013/02/16 21:01:12
- Location: Portland Oregon
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 10:12:52
(permalink)
TraceyStudios
So I learned to use Reaper and I can't belive they chose that over Sonar.
Actually Reaper I think is a great DAW. I think the biggest drawback to Reaper is that it just looks dated. I've heard that it's MIDI support is lacking compared to other DAWs but I never attempted to do anything MIDI in Reaper so I honestly have nothing to base that on other than hearsay. I was using Reaper before coming to Sonar, the only reason I purchased Sonar was because ( and this is superficial ) I really liked the user interface. It looked modern, sharp, it just looked cool and exiting in comparison. Now mind you, I am NO professional. I'm a single guitarist who wants to record his music. In fact, Sonar may be overkill for "me" personally.
Rick - Sofware Engineer by trade, Rock Star God wannabe Sonar X3 Producer
Roland Octa-Capture
M-Audio Fast Track Ultra
Boss DR-880
Boss GT100
Line 6 Pod X3
Yamaha HS 50M
Focusrite VRM Box
Audio-Technica ATH M-50
Various guitars and amps
|
redbarchetta
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 534
- Joined: 2013/02/16 21:01:12
- Location: Portland Oregon
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 10:15:10
(permalink)
GIM Productions
Hi all,i don't wanna enter in technics stuff but i can say one thing,Cubase 7 is really........ugly!!!
Best
It looked strange to me which was why I didn't go there and chose Sonar.
Rick - Sofware Engineer by trade, Rock Star God wannabe Sonar X3 Producer
Roland Octa-Capture
M-Audio Fast Track Ultra
Boss DR-880
Boss GT100
Line 6 Pod X3
Yamaha HS 50M
Focusrite VRM Box
Audio-Technica ATH M-50
Various guitars and amps
|
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
2013/03/07 10:39:50
(permalink)
redbarchetta : " It looked modern, sharp, it just looked cool and exiting in comparison."
Just yesterday I was hit by just how beautiful X2 looks. The clarity, the detail, the real-machine reality, I love it.
The only part I'm not thrilled about is the tracks/lanes being more or less awful shades of grey, but the rest is awesome.
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 10:46:10
(permalink)
Paul P
redbarchetta : " It looked modern, sharp, it just looked cool and exiting in comparison."
Just yesterday I was hit by just how beautiful X2 looks. The clarity, the detail, the real-machine reality, I love it.
The only part I'm not thrilled about is the tracks/lanes being more or less awful shades of grey, but the rest is awesome.
agreed +100 im still in awe over the gui in x2,if you open x1 then open x2,you just go wow. the improvements are nice. but i too would like control over colorizing, my only fear is i will spen less time creating artwork with sonar then i will music..lol its bad enough im side tracked constantly by this forum :)
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 10:46:25
(permalink)
Paul P
redbarchetta : " It looked modern, sharp, it just looked cool and exiting in comparison."
Just yesterday I was hit by just how beautiful X2 looks. The clarity, the detail, the real-machine reality, I love it.
The only part I'm not thrilled about is the tracks/lanes being more or less awful shades of grey, but the rest is awesome.
I have to agree with you Paul. It grows on you. The points you make are true. At this time I have no desire to change the looks of X2. I know that is sacrilege but I like it just the way it is.
|
TraceyStudios
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 603
- Joined: 2005/10/13 12:40:33
- Location: Chandler, AZ
- Status: offline
Re:SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7
2013/03/07 10:56:56
(permalink)
@RedBarchetta - Ok, so if you had to choose Reaper or Sonar, which one would it be? :) just sayin.......
AMD FX-6100 six-core processor 3.3GHz 8 Gig RAM SONAR X3 Producer Tascam FW1884 Mackie Blackbird Presonus Digimax Avalon U5 BFD2 SL Trigger Alesis DM8 Pro drums KRK Rokit 8s KRK 10s ARC2 Folgers Dark Roast, a bit of crazy :) & lots of help from the forums! http://www.reverbnation.com/blakkmire
|