Well I've been a long time Sonar user and don't have the time - nor money - to explore other 'industry standards'. What been disapointing for me is my recent purchase of NI S88 keyboard...nice keyboard but with only 'advanced' functionality for Ableton Live 9.1.4, Cubase 7.5.1, Nuendo 6.0.7, Logic X 10.0.7, which irks me to no end. Such a big company, you'd think they'd go the 'extra mile' for a platform as popular as Sonar. But yes, popularity on how much it's being used. 
 
And, to get transport in Sonar, they state you need to use Mackie Control...NOPE! Thanks to Glyn for letting me know that you need to use V-100. Nice support from NI there! So whilst I don't care how Sonar stacks up against industry standards, I do care when developers develop their software biased towards popular usage. 

So it is just Reaper and Studio One cutting into sonar's share or is there something else going on? I've used sonar sinse 2xl and i have definitely noticed a drop in sonar related content in magazines,websites,etc. not being officially supported by some companies (instead of the "other daw" tag) or something simple like not having a project file for tutorials and instead having to import all individual stems. 
 

Snehankur
For Sonar : [of course only in my opinion]
Developers are fantastic, but marketing - I doubt.
 

You've got a point there - marketing....
 
Demos are not quite what you expect, Rapture Pro last I saw, and the CakeTV episode with Caketalk I saw trashtalking X3 - what are they thinking. One thing to have a playground for kids trying things out, but releasing it to the public is another matter. Try and ditch, try and ditch until you really get it right.
 
I get rather sad since Sonar as a daw is really good and devs are really skilled(and nice people too). More effort on looking professional all the way, maybe.
 
Ten years ago running Sonar 4 it was rather common with entering Sonar among Other, for the daw you run.
If Sonar is not listed today as separate it tells more about the plugin company than about Cakewalk, in my view.
Waves officially support Sonar - so if Waldorf does not, tough for them.
 

I was annoyed yesterday when I saw the OP, coming back to this I think Waldorf's email suffered for being written by someone who's first language is not English, because of this it came across off hand and dismissive which was probably not the intention. It would have been sufice to say it had not been tested in Sonar rather than saying Sonar is not "Industry Standard"
 
They do go on to say

 When you like, you can record am movie and show us step by step this
behaviour, so maybe we can look and fix it. Thank you !"

Which at least shows some willingness to fix the issue.
 
I had been toying with the idea of buying one of their synths in the recent NI sale, I didn't and I am not regretting that decision.

Morvejones
So it is just Reaper and Studio One cutting into sonar's share or is there something else going on? I've used sonar sinse 2xl and i have definitely noticed a drop in sonar related content in magazines,websites,etc.

 
The rolling updates model doesn't fit into the way magazines do reviews, and the page count for pretty much all magazines has dropped. Sound on Sound still runs my SONAR column every month and has no intention of stopping. Also, more media are going "pay for play" (not SOS or Harmony Central, by the way) meaning they favor coverage of products from manufacturers who advertise with them. This isn't quite as evil as it sounds; there's no way magazines can cover everything out there, so all things being equal, they'll cover products from the companies that support them.
 

not being officially supported by some companies (instead of the "other daw" tag)

 
It's important to remember in this discussion that "not supported" is not the same thing as "not tested with." Most companies test with a wide variety of DAWs, but if you call support, they target specific DAWs. To refrain what I said earlier, this is due to resources. Companies can't hire enough support people to be knowledgeable about all programs.
 
Universal Audio explains this very well (and note they mention SONAR):
 
UAD Powered Plug-Ins are compatible with VST, RTAS, AAX 64, and Audio Units host DAW applications, and are widely used with a variety of major DAW software — including Pro Tools, Logic Pro, Cubase, Nuendo, Live, Sonar, and more.
 
However, due to plug-in host differences between DAWs — and our own rigorous testing standards — Universal Audio only officially tests the latest UAD software with:
 

• Avid Pro Tools 10, Pro Tools 11, and Pro Tools 12
• Apple Logic Pro X
• Steinberg Cubase 8 and Cubase 8.5
• Steinberg Nuendo 7
• Ableton Live 9

Note: The most recent maintenance release of the DAW application is recommended
 
Q: Does this mean that my DAW is not supported?
A: Generally any VST, RTAS, AAX 64, or Audio Units-compliant host application will work with UAD plug-ins, and any ASIO or Core Audio-compliant application will work with Apollo audio interfaces. That said, if you are experiencing issues with your UAD or Apollo on a DAW that we don't list as compatible, you can still contact UA Tech Support and log the issue with us. We have great relationships with all the major DAW manufacturers, and will work with them to understand why an issue is occurring — whether we list the DAW as officially compatible or not.

In my opinion - this type of thinking limits the customer base of waldorfs clientele, hence, it is now their loss.  

Snehankur
For Sonar : [of course only in my opinion]
Developers are fantastic, but marketing - I doubt.
 
Recently one of my friends circle (those who work in the industry) asked which DAW I use:
I said : CAKEWALK SONAR.
They asked : is it like a DAW ?
 
I brought them home and ...
 
Question is why do we have to bring them home and demonstrate?
 
Regards
Snehankur
 
 

If you friend works in the industry and doesn't know what Sonar Cakewalk is, they are either really young (early 20s) or they are not very knowledgeable about the market as it relates to creating music using a computer to record.
 
Cakewalk as a music production tool is 25+ years old and has been on the shelves of Guitar Center for decades.  Not to mention the other major retails.  
 
Of course if you are outside the US in a 3rd tier music market the experience might be different.  But here in the US which has by far the largest music market in the world, just about anyone in the music creation business should have at least heard of Cakewalk/Sonar.  
 

I have used Cakewalk recording software for many, many years and find my current version a very good all rounder. Before that I used reel to reel. (Yes, I'm giving away my age now :) ). I have a small home studio and record vocals and acoustic instruments as well as Midi keyboards. As well as the Sonar plugins which I use extensively, I also use Spectrasonics Omnisphere 2 and BFD 3.1 and I've had no issues with either of these superb pieces of software.
 
Last October 2015, I upgraded my computer. I had the last PC for over 8 years. I have always used PCs but wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something with Apple so decided to look them over as well as my PC options. Apple seem to be popular in the music industry, although I've never found out why. I went along to my local Apple store and spent around an hour with the Audio expert. I finally bought a PC because Apple couldn't supply a machine that is as versatile or capable as the PC that I finally chose. Mine is more powerful and much easier to expand and upgrade for around half the price. It has Thunderbolt and the new USB 3.1 Type C as well as the usual USB 3 and 2.
 
For me, PCs have this contest won hands down. As mentioned eldewhere, Apple may have some advantages but nothing that effects me.
 
I worked in the Oil industry for over 20 years for the biggest Oil companies and Service companies (and they buy the best), and never saw an Apple machine. Their IT managers usually know their stuff.
 
If it does the job ..............
 
Hope this helps,
JCB.

arachnaut
There may be a reason why the PCs had viruses and Apples didn't. Not many governments or big businesses hide their valuables behind Apple gear.

Most of the valuables in that situation are stored on servers which often run Linux or FreeBSD.

The lack of OS X viruses I think is down to a couple of things. The first is cost-effectiveness for the virus writers, the vast bulk of computers out there run some kind of Windows, and many of them run old versions that have long-known exploits. Many companies and governments don't even apply the MS urgent security fixes or even service packs because they want to extremely thoroughly test the update in case it causes a problem with their network or applications.

The second is that OS X is a *nix system based on FreeBSD and Gnu tools and has an inherent security model that's harder to insert running code into or install anything without the user noticing. Not impossible of course, but harder. So if you're a lazy virus writer why put the effort in when there are millions upon millions of security-comprisable PCs out there and lots of existing malware whose code you can recycle?

arachnaut
For me, though, I think the major reason I like PC's is because Microsoft tries very hard to keep older stuff working (drivers being an exception) while Apple seems to require all new software on major updates. At least that what seems to happen on the audio forums.

Doesn't happen very often, any more than it happens in Windows. I have several 32bit Windows applications that would run under modern 64bit Windows, but the 32bit application was suplied with a 16bit installation routine that won't run in a 64bit environment. Windows XPsp1 broke quite a lot of applications when it clamped down on user account security and blocked bad practices like applications which store documents in the same folder as the application. Something that was normal in the DOS/Win3 days but MS had been advising and warning against for years. Every so often every hardware/OS combination has an upgrade earthquake that changes lots of things, if it didn't we'd be using green-screen monitors, teletype terminals and storing stuff on punched paper tape and "minicomputers" the size of a couple of seriously big fridges. State of the art when I used it as a student in 1978/9 that was.
 

arachnaut
Those companies that make software products for PCs and Macs probably write everything under a universal layer of upper level software, like Qt or something like that. I like how Sonar just has to know Windows APIs.

Cakewalk's long-term Windows only approach is one of it's strengths, I agree. Windows and OS X do things in very different ways and Cakewalk have built a good, long-term relationship with MS and Intel. Having to only worry about bugs on one platform rather than two has to be a good thing as well. And Windows from Vista on has been getting steadily better at supporting DAWs and the peculiar requirements they have. The long lists of things that needed changing or tuning in Windows to get low latency audio working has got shorter and shorter over the last ten years.

In the end computers are like cars or guitars. You get and use what you hope will meet your personal needs, you find comfortable to use and costs no more than you are willing to spend. There's little point in arguments about which is "best" any more than in arguing whether a Telecaster is better than a Les Paul or a Selmer Maccaferri jazz acoustic from the 1930s.

Brian Walton

Snehankur
For Sonar : [of course only in my opinion]
Developers are fantastic, but marketing - I doubt.
 
Recently one of my friends circle (those who work in the industry) asked which DAW I use:
I said : CAKEWALK SONAR.
They asked : is it like a DAW ?
 
I brought them home and ...
 
Question is why do we have to bring them home and demonstrate?
 
Regards
Snehankur
 
 

If you friend works in the industry and doesn't know what Sonar Cakewalk is, they are either really young (early 20s) or they are not very knowledgeable about the market as it relates to creating music using a computer to record.
Reply #1
 
Cakewalk as a music production tool is 25+ years old and has been on the shelves of Guitar Center for decades.  Not to mention the other major retails.  
Reply #2
 
Of course if you are outside the US in a 3rd tier music market the experience might be different.  But here in the US which has by far the largest music market in the world, just about anyone in the music creation business should have at least heard of Cakewalk/Sonar.  
Reply #3 

Reply #1 : No they are not. They are in industry for more than 20 years. They uses Logic and PT HD.
Reply #2 : Even I used Cakewalk when it came from Twelve Tone and I used Sound Blaster card from Creative.
Reply #3 : I am from India. Music Industry is very large and as far as the listener base its much more than US. I will get the figurative details and charts. I am not sure about your concept of gradation of Tier of the music market here. Cakewalk is hardly in the scenario. And is why my question was how strong the Marketing Department of Cakewalk is, as they have can enough scope to make footprint. A bit planning is required.
 
My view was in the broader aspect not limited to the shelves in some US stores.
*English is not my language so bear with me and my explanation.
 
Regards
Snehankur

Snehankur

Brian Walton

Snehankur
For Sonar : [of course only in my opinion]
Developers are fantastic, but marketing - I doubt.
 
Recently one of my friends circle (those who work in the industry) asked which DAW I use:
I said : CAKEWALK SONAR.
They asked : is it like a DAW ?
 
I brought them home and ...
 
Question is why do we have to bring them home and demonstrate?
 
Regards
Snehankur
 
 

If you friend works in the industry and doesn't know what Sonar Cakewalk is, they are either really young (early 20s) or they are not very knowledgeable about the market as it relates to creating music using a computer to record.
Reply #1
 
Cakewalk as a music production tool is 25+ years old and has been on the shelves of Guitar Center for decades.  Not to mention the other major retails.  
Reply #2
 
Of course if you are outside the US in a 3rd tier music market the experience might be different.  But here in the US which has by far the largest music market in the world, just about anyone in the music creation business should have at least heard of Cakewalk/Sonar.  
Reply #3 

Reply #1 : No they are not. They are in industry for more than 20 years. They uses Logic and PT HD.
Reply #2 : Even I used Cakewalk when it came from Twelve Tone and I used Sound Blaster card from Creative.
Reply #3 : I am from India. Music Industry is very large and as far as the listener base its much more than US. I will get the figurative details and charts. I am not sure about your concept of gradation of Tier of the music market here. Cakewalk is hardly in the scenario. And is why my question was how strong the Marketing Department of Cakewalk is, as they have can enough scope to make footprint. A bit planning is required.
 
My view was in the broader aspect not limited to the shelves in some US stores.
*English is not my language so bear with me and my explanation.
 
Regards
Snehankur

 
I'd be happy to look at your figures.  But I think if you do a search on Recording Revenue you will find US sales absolutely dwarfs India's.  We are talking about recorded music here.
 
http://www.statista.com/statistics/297910/music-industry-revenue-india-sector/
 
http://www.statista.com/s...try-revenue-in-the-us/
 
As for marketing, any company is going to market where the actual biggest market is.  And honestly, sales figures would suggest that isn't India.  I mean zero offense by this, but they are not even a blip on the map.  Say 130 Million in revenue in India vs BILLIONS in the US.  

On the one hand, while annoying that SONAR isn't routinely taken as seriously as other DAWs, I'm okay with that because it's exactly what I need.  There was a time several months ago when PT had a significant edge over SONAR in some specific scenarios, but as the monthly updates rolled out, those features started being incorporated into SONAR and right now, I can't think of another DAW that offers the same functionality, flexibility, and content that SONAR has. So from that perspective, I couldn't care less what the masses think about SONAR or if it's widely considered to be "industry standard" or not. It does what I need it to do, it's a pleasure to use, and while there's always room for improvement, there's absolutely no reason for me to switch DAWs. 
 
On the other hand, general perception is important to certain degree, because if Cakewalk were to lose a significant foothold in the industry and didn't stay relevant, then they'd be out of business. Granted, were that to happen, we'd still have our current versions available to use, but eventually they'd most likely need to be replaced. Considering that Cakewalk's been in the game for decades and is still going strong, this seems to be a unlikely scenario. We can hope!