Tired of feeling like I have to make excuses for being a Sonar user...

Can understand your point immediatly.
I remember many times people asking me with which 
DAW I managed  a good sounding mix.
And when I mention Sonar Plat , the  reaction is:
 
Sonar ? But Sonar is buggy 
Don´t want to go and continue these conversations anymore cause most the discussions
are leading in the direction that I should apologize for working with Sonar.
Strange.
 
 

Hi there, I am sure that you are most proud of what you have accomplished and you certainly should be! I went and watched your video and it does sound great. I wonder why the song is so long? I am sure you have your reasons, which are good enough.
Anyway, I don't have all the Sonar knowledge that a lot of these guys do, but I do know what you are referring to with your comment. Whenever someone does ask me, I tell them and they pretty much always reply with, "You should use Pro Tools." I have asked repeatedly what they think is so great about Pro Tools, and they usually just say, "Its just better."
 
Here is my answer to your question though: Sonar does not invest in its image. They also do not seem to be overly concerned with the user. I don't know if this differs from the other DAW makers, but it certainly seems that this is true. I know, many of the hardcore supporters will want evidence, but they know, as I do, that it is generally true. Basically, it seems to me, Sonar is primarily interested in users constantly upgrading-spending-and not that concerned about their reputation in the world of users. I think that it is possible that this reputation that I speak of, has gotten around far more than they wish to admit. Because of this, they "hit" the existing users more and more rather than reach outwardly towards new customers. Therefore, they spend little in image. Maybe they don't need to spend more on image. George Lucas never spent much money on adverts for Star Wars-not because he couldn't afford to, but because he believed that he didn't need to in order to sell the tickets. He was right!
 
I don't know if that helps in any way but there is at least one possible answer for you, I am sure you will get plenty more!
 
Well done on your success!
 
bob

That's is exactly what Most professionals in the industry feel! Weather Logic, Protools etc. most feel Sonar is for the "Non-Professional" hobbyists? Personally I love Sonar, I also came from Protools HD, used it for years.

I'll say that Sonar doesn't look slick a lot of the time. Its interface, even with Skylight, is way more cluttered than most DAWs. I don't mind, I like all the options, but consider for instance the track headers and control bar, or even channel strips, and compare them to ProTools or Logic, let alone something minimalistic like Live.

A cracking tune by the way!

A lot of different styles blended together in that song.
Your lead guitar chops are great. very versatile piece.
 
Now about Sonar, Ignore the noise. I think Sonar X1 was released too early. the first drop almost made me leave Sonar. Autosnap was broken and there was a few other things that were off kilter.
With that being said, sonar released an X1 A patch very shortly after its initial release of Sonar X1 to fix a lot of these issues. However I believe the damage was done by this point. It established a bad reputation and especially true amongst the haters.
 
Myself, I use sonar exclusively in my studio and couldn't be happier.
It does have its quirks at times. This can lead to head scratching but all in all, it is rock solid here.
I should note im using a brand new system (Well less than a year old) Intel I7 4790K - 1150LGA - SSD drive with 16GB of ram - using onboard graphics.
 
I have had only 1 crash in the past year (last Easter / April) and it was because I did something stupid (thought I was cloning 1 track and instead had all tracks selected, so it cloned all 42 tracks at once. When I hit undo, it went unpoo).
 

What a great sounding production (Distant Horizon)of you, Peter.
Kudos!

Kudos to you, Peter.  A great song with a lot of moxie riffs.  
 
I am an old fart and just let the odd comments about Sonar roll off my shoulder.
 
I have used Cakewalk since the DOS days,  Sonar is still my DAW of choice.

PJH
 
Since having the review go out I've received quite a number of emails from readers and the overwhelming question is:
"How did you manage to achieve this using SONAR???"
 

Make excuses???  NEVER!
 
The next time someone asks you that question, answer "Because I'm that f'ing good."  Sonar is a just a tool, it's how you use it that makes great music.
Given what previous generations achieved with tape technology (and earlier), focusing on your achievement attained with a DAW is idiotic.

Frankly I don't give a damn what people say.  I like Sonar.  Besides you can't tell what DAW was used by just listening to a CD or MP3.

First, let me tell you this...I am a HUGE Alan Parson's fan, and my goodness, you nailed his sound in that piece!  This is FANTASTIC.  Here's the thing...I am NOT at all surprised that you recorded this in Sonar. (OK, maybe I'm biased).  I, myself have come up with some amazing sounding productions using Sonar.  I've looked at ProTools, Cubase and some of the other "industry standards" and have decided the following:  ProTools costs too much and is too proprietary with it's plug in format...and the plug ins you can get for it are also very costly, and Cubase just...didn't do it for me.  
Before Sonar, I was an avid Adobe Audition user (See what I sort of did there, lol...), and used Acid Pro for the MIDI portion of my music. I used to wish there was a single DAW that could do everything Adobe did that also included a really good MIDI support system. That's when I really started looking into other options.  I had used Cakewalk before the Sonar days and to be honest, I didn't like it.  It was a lot more complex than it needed to be, and frankly, it just was ugly and confusing looking.  Then X3 came out, and I downloaded the demo and loved it.  I then bought it and have been with Sonar since.  I'm now a Lifetime member of Platinum and couldn't be happier with it as my DAW of choice.  The ONLY thing I use Adobe for now is converting my WAV files to MP3 files and then for CD architecting.  

Again, I love your music.  I'm now listing to "The Long Road Home".  You are stellar. 

When you strip all DAWs of all included plugins they're pretty close to equal anyway. There are really only a few specialty functions for each one and they're not usually stuff that you need every day. If you do this for a living you probably have a bunch of plugins from Waves, FabFilter, SoundToys, you name it. Plus things like Melodyne, Drumagog, etc.

In other words, if you knew multiple DAWs equally well you'd be able to get identical mixes on each of them.

Rob[atSound-Rehab]
 
I consider Sonar the VW, Toyota, Kia (you name it) reliable middle class workhorse that you can afford to buy and afford to maintain ... and most of all gets the "job" done. Of course, if I had a huge ProTools HD desk / Porsche I would show it all around and make snotty comments. 

This attitude is just perpetuating the myth that sonar isn't for pros. Oh its good, but its not what I'd use if I could afford something else. Hogwash. I can afford any DAW I want. I use Sonar because its what I prefer to use. Anyone who wants me to switch to pro-tools had better be prepared to start with a discussion of how much they're going to pay me.

SONAR users think for themselves.
 
But I think Telecharge has a point: "Maybe they just want to learn your techniques." A lot of people have asked me what I use in SONAR to get the sounds in my projects.