msorrels
While I've only had Cubase Pro 9.5 now for about a week, I'm pretty sure MIDI VST's work, since I've got Kirnu Cream feeding MIDI to AAS Player without too much trouble.

Kirnu Cream appears to be a VSTi - not a true MIDI VST.  If it were a MIDI VST, I don't believe it would load properly into a Cubase Instrument Track.  But I could be wrong!

Resort Records
 
It supports the argument that newer applications will be leaner and more reliable (if perhaps lacking in legacy features), if only because the company is on its first generation of programmers and everyone knows what's what from the ground up.

I'll buy that argument.  I keep thinking of popular Sonar feature requests that Cakewalk was dragging their feet on implementing.  Probably too much legacy code that nobody today knows anything about, and the risk involved of breaking something with a change.
 
They killed Project5 for various reasons, but I believe one was that the the original programmer had left the company.  That should have been updated to multi-thread and released as 64-bit.

sharke

tenfoot
Thanks for the great summary David! 
 
One of my concerns with Cubase is that it may suffer the same legacy of decades of layered code, updates and convoluted behaviour that plagued Sonar. I was used to its quirks and they were never be enough to drive me away. Now that I have to change, I really want to strike that balance between deep features and young and snappy. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated!

This is a concern of mine as well as I select a new DAW. Sonar had a ton of really hard to pin down bugs and quirks that I'm convinced were caused by legacy code and new code not getting along.  Legacy code wasn't necessarily written to be future proof, and I can't imagine developers enjoy reverse engineering code that perhaps isn't documented sufficiently. Apart from anything it's a drain on resources. 
 
Many of Sonar's oddities were impossible to reproduce with a recipe, which meant that unless the Bakers had an "a-ha!" moment of enlightenment, the chances of them being fixed were small. I must have brought up dozens of issues on the beta forum that never ended up as bug reports because they could not be reproduced at will. Sometimes I would attach projects along with a bug report, in the hope that the project would demonstrate the behavior even if I couldn't come up with the steps. Oftentimes I would hear back "we're not seeing this at our end," which suggests that some bugs were peculiar to specific machines or installations - even harder to track down. A couple of times I heard "we're aware of this but we're not going to fix it because to do so would break another part of the program" (in discussions in the public forum no less) which again suggests a problem caused by legacy code that would have taken too long to get to the bottom of - the Bakers obviously had to manage their project resources frugally and taking the engine apart to find something that was more of an annoyance than a showstopper was probably deemed to be an inefficient use of their budget. So, many of the annoyances stayed across versions without any hope of a fix. 
 
An example of this is that 3 years ago I reported a problem with automation envelopes becoming misaligned when looping a section. A horrible problem which means that you cannot always rely on your automation playing accurately when a loop is enabled. The bug was never fixed, and looping in general has a ton of related problems in Sonar. I suspect that the looping code is an example of the core legacy code which made problems so hard to pin down. Some of the program probably needed a rewrite but they didn't have the budget to do this alongside the pressure to add new features and the like. 
 
So one of my main attractions with switching DAW's is to start with a fresh young program that has a modern, coherent code base. That's why I'm looking at Bitwig and S1. I know that Cubase is probably one of the most powerful, feature rich DAWs in comparison with Sonar, but when I think about it I didn't use half of Sonar's features. Do I really want a bunch of functionality that I'll rarely need, at the expense of potentially dealing with a set of hard to fix, hard-baked bugs in ancient code? 

I think it's unfair to compare Sonar to Cubase. Cubase had been completely re-written for SX1 in 2002. Then that code was mostly re-written when Cubase 4 was released in 2006. That cycle was completed in Cubase 7, in 2012. The original Cubase re-design allowed for modular updating of the code. That's why Nuendo and Cubase have the same audio core, but different external functionality. Some of the code in Sonar Platinum came all the way from the first version of Cakewalk. Having used both programs extensively, Cubase is completely stable, and has far less quirks than Sonar. Their development team has done a great job of squashing bugs in the last few versions. Even S1 is having a problem with automation that they haven't been able to solve in several updates. 

I started the 30 day demo of Cubase 9.5 (Don't even get me started on how stupid the e-licenser thing is. HATE IT!!!!!!!!!). I decided that if I do switch Cubase is the one I'll go to because I primarily build compositions in MIDI and then output audio tracks from my sound modules and VSTs. 
 
I find the interface absolutely inscrutable. For example, if took me forever to figure out how to get my audio interface to be an output (instead of the stupid generic ASIO driver thing). When you have to look up online help for something as simple as this, trouble is a'comin'. 
 
But.....I'm willing to give it a closer look. One question i had based on the original post is he said the legacy MID VST programs won't work with Cubase? Does that mean that all of this many VST plugins I have, from Dimension Pro to Lounge Lizard to Arturia Keyboard V, won't work in a MIDI situation with Cubase? That would be a total deal-killer. 
 
 

Cubase 9.5 has no support for 32bit plugins.  If you want to use any 32bit plugins you'll have to get jBridge or something else.
 
The MIDI VST thing is more complex.  Here's what I've been able to put together (and I'll admit I may be missing something here, people talk about things like plugin APIs but they clearly have no clue what they are saying, I write code for a living so I tend to be really picky about details):
1.  VSTi instruments that generate MIDI work just fine in Cubase 9.5.  They work/it works just like SONAR Platinum.
 
2.  Long, long ago Cakewalk came up with a MIDI plugin format, MFX.  This was pre-64 bit DAWs.  A number of MIDI plugins were made for it.  At that time Cubase wrote an adapter so you could use those 32-bit MFX plugins in Cubase SX.  But this was only 32-bit.  And was never officially supported.  With Cubase 9.5 not having ANY 32-bit support, it's dead.  And a 64-bit version of the MFX wrapper was never made.  So while there are 64-bit MFX plugins (which SONAR platinum uses -- it doesn't do 32-bit MFX any more either) none of those work in Cubase.  Here's the link to the adapter, but it's 32-bit only and doesn't work in Cubase 9.5
https://www.steinberg.net/en/support/knowledgebase_new/show_details/kb_show/using-mfx-plug-ins-in-cubase-nuendo-pc-windows/kb_back/2020.html
 
3.  Cubase has its own MIDI VST plugin format called, VST-MA.  There are actually commercial plugins written that use it.  Frank's MIDI plugins come in MFX and VST-MA format for example.  It's not a secret, it is documented.  But few/no other DAWs ever added support for it, so people seem to see it as something less.  Even though Cubase comes with a bunch of plugins that use it.  It is what is necessary for a plugin to show up in Cubase's MIDI insert menu.  No MIDI generating VSTi instruments will show up in the MIDI insert menu.
 
So what does this mean?  Saying Cubase doesn't support MIDI VST isn't true at all really (VST-MA is MIDI VST).  Cubase 9.5 works pretty much exactly like SONAR Platinum does as far as what most users would call MIDI plugin support.  Soft synths that generate and process MIDI work just fine, you can route their input and outputs all day and night, just like in SONAR. 
 
The "real" complaint seems to be that there is no way to insert a VSTi that generates/processes MIDI into the MIDI insert on tracks in Cubase.  Just like you couldn't insert a VSTi that generates/processes MIDI into the MIDI FX channel in SONAR.  Some people want this and keep talking about MIDI VST support like it was a real thing that somehow Cubase is missing.
 
While I can't use (for example) any of the tencrazy.com MFX plugins in Cubase, every single VSTi that generates and processes MIDI appear to work exactly like they did in SONAR.  And in theory I could develop my own VST-MA plugins and they would show up in the MIDI insert list in Cubase.  Frank's MIDI plugins do and they work fine.
 
So I think this is not a real thing.  Cubase does support MIDI VST plugins, just not some sort of bizarre hybrid that would let you use a VSTi (like say Kirnu Cream) without having to have extra tracks/etc.  I don't think any DAW does this treat a VSTi as a MIDI effect trick, though I don't think it's impossible.
 

raisindot
I decided that if I do switch Cubase is the one I'll go to because I primarily build compositions in MIDI and then output audio tracks from my sound modules and VSTs. 

 
Exactly my workflow too.
 
Tip:  The GUI MIDI Device Manager does not work for adding devices.  It's another known bug that's gone unrepaired for years.  If you have to add a MIDI sound module that isn't already among the Cubase defaults, you'll want to create a "patch script" (.txt file).  Look in C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Roaming\Steinberg\Cubase 9_64\Scripts\Patchnames\inactive (for example) and copy one of the supplied files and modify it to suit.  Check out the script documentation.txt file for help.  Restart Cubase and the device should appear in the appropriate list.  BTW, these files can also be found in C:\Program Files\Steinberg\Cubase 9\Scripts\Patchnames\inactive, but it appears to be a backup - changes made there won't appear in the program.
 

raisindot
I find the interface absolutely inscrutable. For example, if took me forever to figure out how to get my audio interface to be an output (instead of the stupid generic ASIO driver thing). When you have to look up online help for something as simple as this, trouble is a'comin'. 

 
Yup.  And I'm sorry to say it doesn't get better 'til you've worked through every nuance of your routine, learning the Cubase way and optimizing settings to your workflow.  Then, it becomes apparent that Cubase can do pretty much anything you throw at it, so long as you have the time and patience to figure it (and the various workarounds) out.
 

raisindot
One question i had based on the original post is he said the legacy MID VST programs won't work with Cubase? Does that mean that all of this many VST plugins I have, from Dimension Pro to Lounge Lizard to Arturia Keyboard V, won't work in a MIDI situation with Cubase? That would be a total deal-killer. 

 
To repeat what Matt said, those are VSTis (VST Instruments) and should work just fine, so long as they're 64-bit.  DXi is not supported, so Sonar users should expect to see a handful of Sonar-bundled plugins disappear.  Others, like the Blue Tubes collection, appear to be earmarked for Sonar and also will not load into Cubase (or any other DAW).
 

msorrels
The MIDI VST thing is more complex.  Here's what I've been able to put together....

 
Excellent summary of the situation!  Thank you, Matt.
 

msorrels
The "real" complaint seems to be that there is no way to insert a VSTi that generates/processes MIDI into the MIDI insert on tracks in Cubase.  Just like you couldn't insert a VSTi that generates/processes MIDI into the MIDI FX channel in SONAR.  Some people want this and keep talking about MIDI VST support like it was a real thing that somehow Cubase is missing.

 
Personally, I just want to load the Piz MIDI plugin collection and other (presumably MFX?) MIDI VSTs into Cubase's MIDI Inserts.  If everything you've discovered re MFX vs. VST-MA is accurate, then I'm guilty of assuming MFX to be the 'open standard' while Steinberg's MIDI Inserts are more-or-less proprietary.  I guess that's wrong and we're just stuck with an unfortunate VHS vs. Betamax situation.  Yeah, we need an MFX-to-VST-MA wrapper.
 
BTW, one of the other workarounds I've seen discussed is MIDI port piping applications (e.g., MIDI Yoke) that allow for standalone applications (e.g., MIDI-Ox) to process MIDI data on the fly.  This gets pretty complicated and I'll confess I haven't had the guts to try it on my mission-critical workstation yet, but it's an option for anyone desperate to add CAL-style scripting to Cubase, for example.
 

I've spent a week now methodically reading the 1000+ page manual, trying out many things I read. Meanwhile I set up a few projects, imported some stuff from Sonar and generally tried to get a feel for the program. I think I plunged into Cakewalk head on, many years ago, and never fathomed the depth of the software. Now at least I want to see all the possibilities, whether I'll use them or not.
So far, I've been able to get what I want from Cubase and the learning curve isn't too bad. I think the problem is more to let all the procedures sink in and become second nature. And, admittedly, Cubase doesn't really help with some weird UI choices, although I'm not really sure whether they're weird or simply different from Sonar.
In a sense this turns out to be an opportunity. I've never studied Cakewalk in-depth, as I was still learning about audio and midi. Getting results had priority, no matter how roundabout the way. And those ways turned into common practice. Now I'm forced to study the DAW and as long as Sonar works, I've got time on my hands.

Resort Records
The Good:

• Strong MIDI support.  Cubase began as a MIDI sequencer in the 80s and, consequently, has thorough MIDI support. 

The Bad:

Audio takes.  By default, overlapping audio takes in a single Cubase track mask previous takes.  By contrast, Sonar will play overlapping takes.

Good information, thanks for sharing. Just two little points though, Sonar also started out as a MIDI only sequencer in the 80s, not important, just thought I'd mention it.
 
I always thought Sonar's handling of audio takes was the dumbest thing ever. The occurrences of me wanting clips piled on top of each other to play at the same time are vanishingly rare, and it always caused much time wasting when copy/pasting or dragging a clip to somewhere else, where I had to go in and remove the underlying pre-existing audio after. Add that to it's awful xfade editing, and it was a complete chore to edit audio. It didn't really matter what you set your drag and drop options to, there were always occasions when it did something you didn't want. Track lanes were just horribly broken.
 
I edit audio day-in day-out, and my chosen platform is an audio-only editor (I used Sonar for MIDI sequencing and occasional mixing, it had some REALLY neat features in the mixer, and when I sadly, really need to use audiosnap on dodgy musicians). I've yet to find any combined sequencer-based "DAW" that gets editing right, the first one I see that does will be where I put my money to move away from Sonar now that it's gone.
 
However, Sonar got it's MIDI editing pretty damned good. I always end up with a brain aneurysm when I have to work in Reason's sequencer, it's a complete and utter PITA since some refresh several versions ago. I believe Cubase used to work on a very similar workflow to Reason (didn't Steinberg interfere with Reason's design or something?), where you have to create clips first before putting anything in them, and all the weird copy/paste drag/drop, how fluid is its MIDI editing now?
 
Also, a BIG show-stopping issue for me...
How easy is it to export individual audio files from start to finish, for each track? Sonar does this magnificently, some other DAWs seem to believe they exist in their own little world where nobody using any other software will ever collaborate with its users. Project (or at least project data, including rendering softsyths) interchange is an absolute must for me.

bartveld
I've spent a week now methodically reading the 1000+ page manual, trying out many things I read. Meanwhile I set up a few projects,

I think that's a great method. The trouble is that the Cubase operation manual is long on description and short on procedures. To fill this gap, I've ordered The Complete Guide to Music Technology Using Cubase 9 from lulu.com.

As someone who skipped versions a few times in Sonar my experience of Cubase is similar; I keep having to read the manual.
 
Just seen their equivalent of StudioWare, anyone else here remember when we could create them? 
 
Only had it installed for a few days but have to say it looks good, just need to make some time to read the manual, watch videos and start using it properly.

That would work on the under swung (negative swing that is) down to about what cakewalk quantize swing would be set at 34%. It wouldn't help in the case of over-swinging. I have since come up with an ok workaround though. I can make a two bar clip of eighth or sixteenth notes (dependeing on which value I want swung) in sonar, then quantize multiple versions of those clips to varying degrees of swing (1%-100%), then import the different clips into Cubase and drag them into the quantize and use the clip(s) to make a groove quantize, which can then be saved into the quantize presets for later use.

Appreciate ya chiming in Sharke with a very good idea though! I will use that sometime for the negative swing! 👍😄

Cat Cave
Audio and midi setup was a walk in the park. Plug 'n' play sort of.

 
Huh.  I was a bit intimidated by the VST Connections panel (partly because I didn't understand what "VST" had to do with my sound card).  It made me uncomfortable to think I didn't know what was going on.  That said, like yourself, I got basic audio working without too much thought.  But, I didn't really understand the VST Connections panel until I went back a few weeks later and setup the Control Room.  Again, this was a little intimidating because it dove even deeper into the VST Connections panel and required that I permanently earmark hardware ports to various functions (and redo what I had initially setup).  It took some reading and YouTube videos, but it's working nicely now and I understand it.  As I said initially, the Control Room is one of my favorite features - great if you have multiple speaker configs, headphone outs, etc.
 

ooblecaboodle
I always thought Sonar's handling of audio takes was the dumbest thing ever. The occurrences of me wanting clips piled on top of each other to play at the same time are vanishingly rare, and it always caused much time wasting when copy/pasting or dragging a clip to somewhere else, where I had to go in and remove the underlying pre-existing audio after. Add that to it's awful xfade editing, and it was a complete chore to edit audio. It didn't really matter what you set your drag and drop options to, there were always occasions when it did something you didn't want. Track lanes were just horribly broken.

 
That's interesting.  I typically loop-record takes with a half measure before and after, so the clips can begin and end naturally and can be copy/pasted without worrying about crossfades (usually).  Sometimes, I'll have to add a fade-in or fade-out to a clip, but then it's done - no need to worry about crossfades when I replicate the clip throughout the song.  Cubase cripples this workflow.  Fortunately, Cubase allows users to store custom crossfades, so it's only a few extra clicks to apply my 'no crossfade' crossfade to clips.
 
Ideally, we could choose the behavior in Preferences.
 

ooblecaboodle
Also, a BIG show-stopping issue for me...
How easy is it to export individual audio files from start to finish, for each track? Sonar does this magnificently, some other DAWs seem to believe they exist in their own little world where nobody using any other software will ever collaborate with its users. Project (or at least project data, including rendering softsyths) interchange is an absolute must for me.

Recording stems (wet) is pretty easy to do and is part of my routine archival strategy too.  Here's the steps:

1. Cubase > File > Export > Audio Mixdown…
2. Enable Channel Batch Export (checkbox)
3. Select all audio channels, group channels, fx channels, and any active output channels you want to render
4. Press the Naming Scheme... button to automate naming of your rendered files.  Naming Schemes can be saved and recalled.

Cubase's export options are a bit more robust than Sonar's.  In addition to all the file formatting options, you can downmix and split channels.  If you haven't recorded all of your outboard MIDI instruments to audio tracks yet, you can enable Real-Time Export and get the equivalent result.
 
I seem to recall Sonar offering the option to export tracks dry.  Unfortunately, I don't see this option in Cubase.
 
Another thing that might help you exchange projects with other studios is Cubase's Track Archives.  I forget the standard these are based on, but these XML files come close to a universal DAW import/export file format.  How many DAWs read them?  I don't know.  There's a chart somewhere.  The files contain pretty much everything you would expect from a proprietary channel import/export format - fader settings, EQ settings, plugins, sends, colors, etc.  Might be better than stems.
 

bartveld
I've spent a week now methodically reading the 1000+ page manual, trying out many things I read. Meanwhile I set up a few projects....

Kudos to you!  Perhaps if I had tried this approach, my initiation would've been easier.  Well, "easier."
 

Mitch_I
I've ordered The Complete Guide to Music Technology Using Cubase 9 from lulu.com.

 
Wait, what?  There's a Cubase 9 book?!
 
Thank you!

Resort Records

ooblecaboodle
I always thought Sonar's handling of audio takes was the dumbest thing ever. The occurrences of me wanting clips piled on top of each other to play at the same time are vanishingly rare, and it always caused much time wasting when copy/pasting or dragging a clip to somewhere else, where I had to go in and remove the underlying pre-existing audio after. Add that to it's awful xfade editing, and it was a complete chore to edit audio...

 
That's interesting.  I typically loop-record takes with a half measure before and after, so the clips can begin and end naturally and can be copy/pasted without worrying about crossfades (usually).  Sometimes, I'll have to add a fade-in or fade-out to a clip, but then it's done - no need to worry about crossfades when I replicate the clip throughout the song.  Cubase cripples this workflow.  Fortunately, Cubase allows users to store custom crossfades, so it's only a few extra clicks to apply my 'no crossfade' crossfade to clips.

I take issue with the audio editing in Sonar, and your solution is (as I understand it) to not bother. It's worth bearing in mind that it's highly unlikely that any clip will begin at a zero crossing, so some kind of pop or click is inevitable, unless your DAW is doing "something" that you didn't tell it to do, to your audio clips.
As for recording half a bar in/out, what about the little fret noises, breathing, people clearing their throat and so on that happen before a take? You can't just leave it there, it needs to be edited, to be cleaned up.
 

Also, a BIG show-stopping issue for me...
How easy is it to export individual audio files from start to finish, for each track? Sonar does this magnificently, some other DAWs seem to believe they exist in their own little world where nobody using any other software will ever collaborate with its users. Project (or at least project data, including rendering softsyths) interchange is an absolute must for me.

I seem to recall Sonar offering the option to export tracks dry.  Unfortunately, I don't see this option in Cubase.
 

Then that's a big no-no. I need to be able to give out raw multitracks, and expect to receive raw multitracks. Extra steps such as removing all plugins and so forth just isn't tolerable. I'm not wasting my client's time, or mine, with unecessary extra steps.
 
So, Cubase isn't an option. Nevermind, still plenty to go.

"Then that's a big no-no. I need to be able to give out raw multitracks, and expect to receive raw multitracks."

 
Remarks please, Steinberg is not like Cakewalk, there you can found more different specialised Software Modules.
 
If you work longer with Cubase, then you can handle alone within your Homestudio, or then with very good Companions like WaveLab (  .raw files with different PCM supported https://steinberg.help/wa...ed_file_formats_c.html ).  Both Software works together ease (see this youtube demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15rmxGg9rxo&list=PLKgGKF-FSsJ_H-HEYgHJLnbovOoU226mz
 
You can also found for Gaming or Orchestral Surround Design etc. compatible big Brother of Cubase named Nuendo. 
 
you can found interesting DAW comparison Tables (Dec. 2016) there on wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_digital_audio_editors