tecton
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 575
- Joined: 2005/03/07 07:34:07
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/25 18:38:16
(permalink)
I think some people here are referring to Pro Audio, it finished at 9 if I remember correctly.
Who knows such things? Cakewalk might not be caring to much about the 'pro standard hardware bundled partnership perception' because they know that someone can use Sonar on there fairly new Dell with a built in Realtech or some else can use an RME PCI card with light pipe and plug in some Apogees or what ever else that might tickle there fancy.
|
spheris
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 350
- Joined: 2004/02/17 09:09:00
- Location: Retired
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/25 19:13:41
(permalink)
Regarding interleave, I saw that in another post. Is dual mono in PT diffrent than two mono tracks armed and recording at the same time in SONAR? Sonar (no known version) can handle anything but stereo interleave (no switching to mono in the console does not create a mono channel) You'll see alot of past posts regarding it's unusual behaviour with mono summing, and pan oddities. Possibly the oddest part of it is that Sony also uses (apparent) interleaved stereo pairs - but does not display the same bizarre behaviour nor output problems as cakewalks audio engine. armed mono inputs may input to mono - but its immaterial once the audio engine within sonar gets its hands on it. it's not that at one point it wasn't suggested and pushed to be fixed. It just didn't happen for various reasons. PT (all versions) handles channels in mono mode only - meaning each stereo pair is channel independent Nuendo (3.2.1 version) appears to do the same Sadly just packed my HD system back to digidesign because of fatal flaws in digitranslator (sorry, can't justify 20+ grand for something that get's in the way of workflow - says retired, not suddenly stupid) and their HD rack has no better output than the ESI 192X Racks anyway - I'm truly shocked they still somehow hold on...but then again..people also buy scions, not because they have any quality to them...but they have great advertising.
post edited by spheris - 2007/01/25 20:03:41
"Genuine brilliance is a simplified formula - one part egoism, to two parts genius, add a bit of trial and suffering mixed with an optimism towards existentialism..the rest comes with time"
|
Here In Oregon
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 58
- Joined: 2007/01/04 15:58:39
- Location: Lake Oswego, Oregon
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/25 19:32:45
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: jmarkham
<snip>...but, when you get into the studio market, the cost differential between a high-end Sonar system vs. a PTHD system isn't as much as you would think. if you make a business plan for a studio, not using protools is a death sentence. i know this first hand. we will pay off our PT investment in about a year's time.
I respectfully disagree as of today. Times are changing and more power to you and the success in your local market. However, we have more pro studios in the red and going out of business today than ever before. Why? Mostly overhead and the advent of tools with many colors filling the void less costly. Major labels are not paying nearly what they once did and the bias that we must use PRO or Amateur Tools LE to make a good record is becoming well known.
But there are still some folks that think that what was necessary ten years ago is the same today. When most people are happy wth the sound of their MP3's and their IPODS; I find a Pro tools system not necessary in today's market if you have the talent on other systems. Major artists will still use top shelf studios and the finest SSL, Mics etc. but how many millions of other artists are relying on recording in a different medium and will become acclimated to that down the road. I have recorded on two hundred thousand dollar consoles with Pro tools but this isn't necessary anymore. It is the talent now man coupled with a good song and inspiration. My 2 cents.
post edited by Here In Oregon - 2007/01/25 20:08:12
|
D.Triny
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
- Total Posts : 870
- Joined: 2003/11/04 10:24:39
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/26 04:06:27
(permalink)
my experience is entirely the opposite ;-) :-) no surprise there... 
|
Spyda KB
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 293
- Joined: 2003/11/07 15:51:51
- Location: LA 2 JA
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/26 15:23:02
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: D.Triny
actually MIDI in PT 7.3.1. is not bad. Ture...as a matter of fact I am starting to ween myself away from Sonar 4PE as I am finding PT to do what I need. Of course the 3 big issues I miss from Sonar that PT LE does not have: PDC, Fast Bounce and better loop creation/ACID WAV implementation. The big thing I like: I tend to appreciate the less bloat that PT LE offers, but Sonar is still the better bang for buck option. For me I simply need simplicity and compatibility with other production houses and major studios I deal with. Digidesign appears to start opening up a few little things in PT LE that is making it a very capable sequencer. In any case to each his own. - KB
|
themidiroom
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1170
- Joined: 2004/01/21 11:41:56
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/26 16:03:48
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Spyda KB
Digidesign appears to start opening up a few little things in PT LE that is making it a very capable sequencer. In any case to each his own.
I had never used any of Pro Tools' MIDI until recently and I was shocked it worked well. I had a project with some drum tracks and I had to sequence keys to go with it. Normally I would do the sequence in Sonar and have it sync to Pro Tools, but it crashes a lot this way.
|
D.Triny
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
- Total Posts : 870
- Joined: 2003/11/04 10:24:39
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/26 22:23:19
(permalink)
or me I simply need simplicity and compatibility with other production houses and major studios I deal with yeah and this is where a "Save As PT 7.x session" feature would be a killa in SONAR.
|
sscannon
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 497
- Joined: 2006/11/05 00:16:58
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/27 04:44:14
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: D.Triny
or me I simply need simplicity and compatibility with other production houses and major studios I deal with
yeah and this is where a "Save As PT 7.x session" feature would be a killa in SONAR.
Great idea!
|
davidchristopher
Max Output Level: -63 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1360
- Joined: 2004/06/18 15:51:14
- Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/27 09:01:54
(permalink)
EDIT: Same thought posted by another user. Never mind :)
post edited by davidchristopher - 2007/01/27 09:24:22
|
Guest
Max Output Level: -25.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4951
- Joined: 2009/08/03 10:50:51
- Status: online
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/27 09:37:46
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: themidiroom
ORIGINAL: Spyda KB
Digidesign appears to start opening up a few little things in PT LE that is making it a very capable sequencer. In any case to each his own.
I had never used any of Pro Tools' MIDI until recently and I was shocked it worked well. I had a project with some drum tracks and I had to sequence keys to go with it. Normally I would do the sequence in Sonar and have it sync to Pro Tools, but it crashes a lot this way.
i think the step sequencer is pretty good .. i really like the midi realtime parameters you can put on the midi regions. once they get the Sibelius integration bi-directional, i'll be very happy. saving out from PT can be interesting .. if you choose one track .. it combines all the events into one track .. and if you choose multi, very few applications can read the midi ;-) it's a midi version that was prevalent when Jesus was a teenager. jeff
|
david_h72
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 18
- Joined: 2004/05/10 02:05:19
- Location: Boston MA
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/27 09:47:56
(permalink)
There's also the track limit on PTLE, not much of a problem if you're doing typical sized arrangements, but for composers it just doesn't cut it - I can use over 48 tracks easy, and in PTLE you have to pay extra to get UP TO the limit of 48.
Didn't know that Sonar sounded better too. Better is good.
|
F@KKER
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 440
- Joined: 2004/01/03 02:02:26
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/27 11:11:25
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: BruceEnnis
CW knows what its business model is and I think they are laughing all the way to the bank at your embarrassment.
Actually if you get a chance you may want to look over at "The Other Place" interesting topic relating to this yesterday.
...not sure what "other place" you are referring to, but check this "other place": http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=65451 So, don't complain about slow updates, at least they do come ;) Steiny just poked a stick in thier own eye. F@KKER
|
missword
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 202
- Joined: 2005/06/04 02:37:41
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/28 19:09:01
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: themidiroom
Yes Howard, it's true. They call it disc allocation. There's a way to "trick" Sonar to do that as well if you have a lot of tracks and one drive can't keep up.
What is this trick to recored audio to multiple hard drives?
|
BruceEnnis
Max Output Level: -58.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1665
- Joined: 2003/11/05 16:48:01
- Location: Maryland
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/28 19:47:15
(permalink)
So, don't complain about slow updates, at least they do come ;)
Steiny just poked a stick in thier own eye. What are you talking about I've never complained about updates from Cakewalk ever and don't care about anything Steinberg does. My audio software of choice is Sonar and Protools TDM. Also anyone who has been here for many years knows the URL of "The Other Place". I was replying to John about a topic on another forum on the current financial state of Cakewalk.
|
lavoll
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 447
- Joined: 2004/10/28 13:42:50
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/29 03:37:51
(permalink)
|
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9871
- Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
- Location: Ohio
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/29 13:43:15
(permalink)
DigiDesign Users Conference
|
Spyda KB
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 293
- Joined: 2003/11/07 15:51:51
- Location: LA 2 JA
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/29 15:24:24
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: D.Triny
or me I simply need simplicity and compatibility with other production houses and major studios I deal with
yeah and this is where a "Save As PT 7.x session" feature would be a killa in SONAR.
That will happen when the day Digidesign opens PT LE to any audio interface of choice......I can dare to dream!!! - KB
|
themidiroom
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1170
- Joined: 2004/01/21 11:41:56
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/29 16:00:40
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: missword
What is this trick to recored audio to multiple hard drives?
Basically, you move some of the audio files to different drive. When you open the Sonar project, it will notify you some audio is missing. Browse to the new drive location where you moved the files and tell Sonar to reference from current location. That project will now always read those files from the other drive.
|
BruceEnnis
Max Output Level: -58.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1665
- Joined: 2003/11/05 16:48:01
- Location: Maryland
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/29 18:53:15
(permalink)
|
Jose7822
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10031
- Joined: 2005/11/07 18:59:54
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/29 19:03:55
(permalink)
Probably his monitor is the one needing calibration and not Sonar. 
post edited by Jose7822 - 2007/01/29 19:24:40
|
yummay
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 396
- Joined: 2003/11/06 09:01:58
- Location: Canada, Quebec
- Status: offline
RE: Sonar vs. Pro Tools
2007/01/29 19:18:59
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: themidiroom
ORIGINAL: missword
What is this trick to recored audio to multiple hard drives?
Basically, you move some of the audio files to different drive. When you open the Sonar project, it will notify you some audio is missing. Browse to the new drive location where you moved the files and tell Sonar to reference from current location. That project will now always read those files from the other drive.
Duuuhhhhh!!!!!!!!!  Brilliant Idea and I feel just plain stupid not to have thought of this before. I just love this disc allocation feature on my PT7 LE rig and was hoping SONAR would come up with a feature like this someday! So, you are telling us that, by doing so, SONAR will read the "moved on another HD" audio files AND still record new tracks on the projects' original HD?? I'll check it out! Many thanks again! 
Yummay, Amuses-gueules sonores Bite-sized sounds and harmonic entrées Dell Studio 1747 (I7), Tascam US20x20, Yamaha 01v96V2 / Behringer ADA 8000, Godin LGXT+ Roland GR-09, Behringer Motor 49. Windows 10 (64), Sonar Platinum, Komplete 10, Sound Forge 10, Vegas pro 9, Waves Gold.
|