Some Basic Sonar Needs

Plenty of other DAWs on the market for you to choose from. Sonar does what it does and does it well. There are certain things it does not do and it does require a stable system for the best performance. If you want it to do the few specific things it is not currently programmed to do or you can't be bothered to run it on an appropriate system with the appropriate support hardware then it just may not be the program for you. For me, as guitarist and composer X3 works fabulously and I look forward to eventually getting the new version.
 
I realize that with your one post and negative comments with no real question that you are likely here to just stir up the proverbial poop but there are many of us here who will take the time to correct your slander and misdirection so others looking for REAL opinions from REAL users can get accurate info.
 
To sum up for those folks...
 
No, Sonar does not allow channels to be routed to one another directly like other programs who use tracks as busses but there are plenty of ways to simulate this routing within the program. Also I, personally, much prefer the strict distinction between busses and tracks. I find it much easier to manage and keep track of as opposed to the wacky schemes the more traditional DAWs have. That said I kind of see Cake potentially moving toward adding these types of functions now that they have starting screwing around with the Sends and Inserts portion of the program and the fact there have been some requests here on the forum for such functionality.
 
Yes, Sonar tends to be a little more finicky than SOME of the other DAWs and you will want to have a solid system to run it with a good interface with good drivers (I recommend Focusrite for your interface). However the program has become MUCH more stable since the release of X3 and it looks like the new Sonar is going to really hammer out the last of those little oddities. That said I have been using X3 for over a year now and have not experienced anything significant in regards to stability issues like in the past so that repurtation seems to be a thing of the past. You just need a decent system, set things up properly and not be a total spazz with the program.
 
As far as all the bells and whistles... it truly is an all in one package and I personally LOVE that about Sonar. If I had gone with my original DAW of choice I would have had to spend three times as much buying supportive software (instruments, effects, etc) to be able to have a full creative set up and in fact the DAW itself cost almost 3 times as much. I took the gamble and it has paid of over and over and over again.
 
I am not a "fanbois". I would not say all this if I thought Sonar was crappy in any way (and I've made posts on this very forum abotu past grievances). It is a very powerful and useful tool for me personally and I've been trying out some alternatives recently. Those other tools have their percs but they do NOT even come close to Sonar for my personal needs and workflow. I can do pretty much everything I need to using Sonar and the included tools and honestly as an artist I enjoy the process more than in the other programs which I find kind of stale and boring.
 
So there's an honest review from a real user who does real work regularly with Sonar as opposed to a spam troll trying to flood the intertubes with the lame old stereotypes about the program (which I had heard repeatedly before becoming a user and STILL hear from folks who haven't even used the program for YEARS).
 
If you are starting out try out all the demos of all the DAWs, compare the feature sets and pricepoints, figure out what your computer and hardware can handle and most importantly what YOU need the DAW to do and make your decisions from there. If you just need to get your tracks into your computer... maybe the alternatives are better. If you want a full production suite with every instrument and effect you could ever need... then ya, Sonar is worth it and is very cost effective.
 
Cheers.