WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD???

Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 2 of 6
Author
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3617
  • Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/21 19:58:38 (permalink)
j boy


Freddie, in a pro studio environment there's usually separate rigs for VSTi's, sometimes a dedicated composers room, etc.  They don't try and do everything on the main PT HD rig.  


  That's true! Or was true...actually

Today we have all CPU power we need in one computer so.. you can do all in one box.
Tracking stuff was usually based using ADAT for example.
Example: “Backstreet boys”-Album “Millennium” was all mixed down to ADAT for mixing in bigger US studio instead. Today you can use one computer, “the main studio”-computer only instead, no need of extra cluster machines, and FX teleport!

Isn't that great, I just love it, Intel QUAD and i7core and 64bit just rocks!
Viva SONAR 8, 64bit

Regards
Freddie


-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
#31
Jeff Evans
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5139
  • Joined: 2009/04/13 18:20:16
  • Location: Ballarat, Australia
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/21 20:09:55 (permalink)
Maybe the Industry Standard thing has something to do with operating systems and why professional studios are often running MACS with MAC based programs. Many of those people in those situations believe the MAC operating system is better and in some areas it may be. Especially with Internet security for example. The Windows operating system is quite bad in that respect. I know that I have had my share of things getting into my operating system and causing grief. But this again is another argument for keeping your main machine off the net.

So we have PT that started out on the MAC OS and now of course is running on windows as well. PT seems to be the Indusrty Standard in terms of audio recording and that leaves us with the rest of the programs such as Logic, DP, Sonar of course and others that feature midi as well as audio production.

What I see is clients are often starting out on many different software platforms and then the projects maybe coming together in one final 'Indusrty Standard' app like PT. So it does not really matter what apps are being used the end result is going to be the same.

I would be interested to hear from forum members that are running both platforms on a regular basis and can give us some insight to the advantages and disadvantages of both. For a professional studio I see the possibility of maybe running two machines and having both platforms and running several apps so when clients do bring in project from other app they can be opened, exported to Sonar and then worked on from there. I for one prefer doing it that way.

Logic 9 has been released now and has some interesting features. Check out the varispeed options and the tools for moving things around and stretching time etc. I would love Sonar to be able to incorporate some of those features such as varispeed for example which has been mentioned before on these forums. Other programs seem to be able to do it especially on the windows operating system so it must be able to be done.

I have had like many of us varied experiences with windows OS and at present I am XP. I see there seems to be some issues with Vista but only time will tell how Windows 7 is going to perform.
post edited by Jeff Evans - 2009/08/22 20:51:01

Specs i5-2500K 3.5 Ghz - 8 Gb RAM - Win 7 64 bit - ATI Radeon HD6900 Series - RME PCI HDSP9632 - Steinberg Midex 8 Midi interface - Faderport 8- Studio One V4 - iMac 2.5Ghz Core i5 - Sierra 10.12.6 - Focusrite Clarett thunderbolt interface 
 
Poor minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas -Eleanor Roosevelt
#32
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3617
  • Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/21 20:14:46 (permalink)
strikinglyhandsome1


I've never seen it as my job to make Sonar the industry standard.

I see my role as buying it, using it and looking fabulous as I do.
 
 
 
Says it all LOVE this!  
 
Hit the nail of the head!


-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
#33
John
Forum Host
  • Total Posts : 30467
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/21 20:50:16 (permalink)
Jeff Evans


I am going to say something controversial now. The biggest problem with Sonar is the Windows operating system by far. Not the program but the OS. I am convinced Windows is crap and they will never get it right. And to all of you that think Windows 7 is going to be your savior forget it. It will just be more crap.

The reason that many many of us are having problems with Sonar is the Windows OS. The MAC operating system is just excellent and way way way better. This is the main reason it is the industry standard. And the programs that run on the MAC OS are usually very stable and reliable. The best thing that Cakewalk can do is rewrite Sonar for the MAC OS then you will have a real winner there. But it is probably too late. They have partenered up with the wrong OS. Running Sonar under bootcamp is not the solution either because you are still running Windows.

Logic 9 is spectacular and using it on a fast Mac just kills. Check out the varispeed options and the tools for moving things around and stretching time etc. Sonar really need to pull their finger out on this one and make this happen bigtime. Logic are the clear leader in this area. There are no issues. It all just works out of the box. The fact that Apple have aquired Emagic is good because they are making sure it all works. I love Sonar and I am going to stick to it because I am loyal too and I love the instruments and the sounds but it is a pity it has to run under Windows that is all I am saying.  And yes it runs OK for me and I have said that but you never know when it is going to do something stupid though. Strange behaviour, drivers doing weird things, things uninstalling etc. Most of this does not happen under the MAC OS. Once things are installed and setup they work forever.

I know quite a very professional people myself who have stuck to Windows as long as they can but in the end they gave up and bought a MAC. Wait till the i7 cores become standard in the MAC and see how that goes! I agree with the 64 bit thing though. That is important but the MAC OS will handle 64 bit and in time all the programs that run on it will be 64 bit as well.


Jeff if what you say is so true then I am not doing all the things I do on Vista that I do. I have zero issues with not only Sonar but everything else I run. I run a lot of different stuff too. Much more then the average DAW user. I do video and picture stuff as well as a lot of writing and graphics. Some of my stuff is presented nation wide. Some has been instrumental in obtaining grants for the people I do the work for.

Vista has just simply worked for in ways that no other OS has. I expect Windows 7 to be every bit as good as Vista and perhaps better. But, you make an allegation that is simply untrue.  My system can run against any Mac any day of the year and win.

I built it to be the best computer I could put my hands on and it shows. I don't know what others have or how well their system is doing but a lot of the problems people have is cheap internal gear put together by mass producers that don't care if it will really work with everything.  Much of the Vista fiasco was due to computer makers claiming Vista compatibility when their machines could barely run XP. 

Knowing what you are getting in a computer is primary in assuring problem free service. Most DAW users haven't a clue what is in the box. Then they complain that its not working. Well some research on what to get where to get it and how it all works together could stop all this mess.

If you want a good solid quality DAW machine get one from the custom builders that guarantee their work. Then tell me how bad PCs are. Scott and Jim here have a great reputation for building great machines that wont break your bank.  Me, I build my own. I have done so for years and wouldn't want any other kind. But for those that don't want to get one from Jim or Scott.
post edited by John - 2009/08/21 20:53:06

Best
John
#34
DaneStewart
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 717
  • Joined: 2008/02/18 13:48:58
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/21 20:55:26 (permalink)
I AM the Industry.
I have worked for years with PT....at other people's studios.
Right now I own SONAR, CUBASE 3SX, LOGIC 8, LIVE 8, REAPER, ACID PRO 7, and FL Studio 8.
(All just for compatibility with clients)

SONAR is the ONLY DAW I Choose for my own productions.

and I can choose.
#35
apd2
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 129
  • Joined: 2005/06/06 16:37:27
  • Location: Covina Ca.
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/21 21:16:37 (permalink)
IMHO Cakewalk really needs to decide whether they want to target the recording or the composing side of things, because otherwise they are trying to be all things to all people and this just tends to water down and bloat up the product eventually. Maybe it would be better to break up into separate packages aimed at the target market, and specific needs.

 
+1
#36
pianodano
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1160
  • Joined: 2004/01/11 18:54:38
  • Location: Va Beach Virginia
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/21 22:18:59 (permalink)
I have a slightly different take. Having used Sonar for years for both audio and extreme midi and soft syths, and fought it daily,  there was many a time I was more than ready to dump it and go to something else. Price wasn't the object either. I just wanted something that worked every time without fail and crazy bugs creeping about.  Iow, just when I really starting loading the app and my old computer down, everything would get  flakey.

Well, not any more. Since machines with the power of core i7's have come available, which I have gone to,  and now running many of my soft synths across a network via FxTeleport, latency is for all intents and purposes nonexistant and I have absolutely no idea how many tracks and plugs I can run all while recording with plugs inserted.  And I cannot find even  one single issue that causes problems any more.

I really don't know if there is some kind of prioritization going on in Sonar whenever a system is trying process or  do more that it can effectively do, but I will tell anybody that cares that Sonar, running on the latest generation of pc is awesome and a monster of a DAW.   

I believe that the only thing that has kept  Protools the standard for so long  is the fact that you had to use it with Digi hardware on machines they recommended and although track counts could be limited, they guaranteed it to run x # of tracks accordingly. But with the processing power available to anyone now, they no longer have that that advantage.

Regards,

Danny
post edited by pianodano - 2009/08/21 22:23:03
#37
Positively Charged
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 744
  • Joined: 2008/03/11 20:13:35
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/21 22:36:27 (permalink)
It's Mac vs. PC all over again!  Vista 64 is solid and reliable.  That's all I care about right now.  I expect W7 to be just as reliable, but I will reserve my judgement and we shall see.

One little PT detail sometimes overlooked:
Digi hardware = huge expensive dongle.

Another little detail overlooked:
Mac's crash too.  I've seen it; funny as sh....t when it happens to a platform bigot.

Someday I might use a Mac.  But for the time being, I am a PC.  :D
#38
F@KKER
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 440
  • Joined: 2004/01/03 02:02:26
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/21 23:46:16 (permalink)
Mac is a religion.

I had a developer working on a multiplatform project that crashed and corrupted (he arrogantly did NO regular saves). He told me the reason "it corrupted" must be because it originated on a Windows platform.

We called tech support and when asked what activity was being performed when it crashed, he very strongly stated, "IT DID NOT CRASH, I AM ON A MAC!".

No wait, it's a cult.

F@KKER
/not intended to hijack the thread

Someone said:
I've had more time to play with this, and am withdrawing the bug remarks.
This appears to work as designed and is actually a pretty cool feature.
#39
dontletmedrown
Max Output Level: -58 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1722
  • Joined: 2006/09/09 13:52:26
  • Location: Camarillo, CA
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/21 23:52:41 (permalink)
I agree with Jeff and also with John.  Macs are generally really frickin stable without much work required from the user.  Like John says, building a computer and doing research can get you a stable system,  but that is what's different about Macs. Apple has done the research for you but you pay a steep price for that. 

With Macs there are very few different components being used, so things tend to be less bumpy driver-wise.  Know how you install a Firewire interface on a Mac?  Plug it in:  DONE.  No driver install, just fire up the DAW and it's ready.

I've been PC for over a decade.  Will be Mac someday, but I won't be ready for a while now that I've got my i7.
#40
PaPi
Max Output Level: -70 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1032
  • Joined: 2008/12/27 18:02:03
  • Location: SoCal
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 00:30:40 (permalink)
F@KKER


Mac is a religion.

I had a developer working on a multiplatform project that crashed and corrupted (he arrogantly did NO regular saves). He told me the reason "it corrupted" must be because it originated on a Windows platform.

We called tech support and when asked what activity was being performed when it crashed, he very strongly stated, "IT DID NOT CRASH, I AM ON A MAC!".

No wait, it's a cult.

F@KKER
/not intended to hijack the thread

I so totally agree with you.
No, it's not really my exploding iphone burning in my pants, it must be some kind of alien entity... I think Apple is like Scientology. Maybe the two will merge one day.
#41
simpleman
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 262
  • Joined: 2009/05/16 01:20:33
  • Location: Down to Earth
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 00:33:06 (permalink)
Sonar is not the Industry standard because the Music Industry itself is its own standard. It’s like saying make a Xerox of this document paper because for many years Xerox was the leading manufacturer of photo copying. There are too many competing platforms currently for any one DAW to stand out as the Standard. I guess in some sense Protools HD can be labeled a standard, said so because Protools emerged as the de facto platform as big studios moved from the magnetic realm to the digital.
So, rightfully, the Standard is DAW.
This question in itself should never be boring or be said “here we go again,” because of this reason. Its called market share value.
1.      Market=DAW
2.      Share=How many in use, sold.
3.      Value=What it has in it and the wellness of what is being produced by it.
Every cycle be it yearly or whatever this MSV has to be constantly measured for any DAW maker to remain competitive.
 
Then again won’t it be awesome if Sonar can blow all the competition away and really become the Industry Standard. But it should not happen, better if Sonar fights for a higher MSV as an edge.
#42
Jeff Evans
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5139
  • Joined: 2009/04/13 18:20:16
  • Location: Ballarat, Australia
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 00:46:16 (permalink)
Hey John I am very pleased to hear that you are getting great performance out of your computer and Windows OS.  It tells me that I can stay with Sonar and enjoy a good experience with Vista or Windows 7 as the case may be. I totally agree with you in that you need to build a special PC and using the right components will certainly  contribute to a trouble free experience.

In fact with systems like the Sonar V Studio 700, Roland and Cakewalk have done a fantastic job of making it all work and I am just so glad that I am using that. It does all connect up without a hitch and works straight out of the box.  I believe that it is one of the best and most stable of environments to be using Sonar 8. I just wish more people could be using it in that context. It is not just about the control surface but about the way the interface works so well and the stability of the system as a whole.

There are still a lot of variables for people using so many combinations of hardware and variables within the Windows operating system and I wish there is a way of somehow making all that more uniform.  This would then mean less problems in terms of setting up Windows machines and getting them to work with Sonar 8 in a very stable and predictable way. In fact one of the great things is that Cakewalk have got a relationship with Microsoft and that at least is better than most other DAW apps. This means that at least Cakewalk have got a much better chance of making it all work out on Windows.

I am wrapped in the program and I still stand by the statement that it is a fantastic program and Cakewalk have done a great job in developing it this far and maybe with further updates we are going to see some improvements and maybe some of the sexy things that other programs can do. I think it is one of the nicest sounding programs especially with its instruments and plugins.  I have replaced a room of hardware with Sonar 8 and it has done a fine job in that respect. And despite my interest in other programs like Logic for example I have always been of the belief that their instruments tend to sound a little similar for my liking whereas in Sonar 8 there seems to be much more variation in terms of sonic qualities of instruments like Dimension and Rapture for example.

At the recent Integrate 09 show in Sydney what I did see were less programs dominating the scene as the ‘Industry Standard’ and more and more programs are coming into that arena.  There are a group of programs now that can take that title rather than a few and Sonar is definitely in that group.
 
post edited by Jeff Evans - 2009/08/22 01:15:12

Specs i5-2500K 3.5 Ghz - 8 Gb RAM - Win 7 64 bit - ATI Radeon HD6900 Series - RME PCI HDSP9632 - Steinberg Midex 8 Midi interface - Faderport 8- Studio One V4 - iMac 2.5Ghz Core i5 - Sierra 10.12.6 - Focusrite Clarett thunderbolt interface 
 
Poor minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas -Eleanor Roosevelt
#43
liberty
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 111
  • Joined: 2004/07/14 13:00:05
  • Location: Buenos Aires - Argentina
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 00:50:23 (permalink)
in my litle industry (my studio), sonar is the standard, and i dont need follow the direction of any "guru ofe the industry" for do my job, i am owner of my sound and use the tool what prefer.
My masters are in a wav file, this is my standard. If yhe client prefer aiff or any other file format i do the convertion and they give your money( the really standard), bye.

Sonar X2a Producer, IntelQ6600, 4GB ram, RME HDSP9652, and AMD Phenom X6 1100T, 16 GB Ram, Windows 7 64, 3x Behringer ADA8000, BCF-2000etc...
#44
rstollen
Max Output Level: -59.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1561
  • Joined: 2008/03/12 16:20:25
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 01:46:16 (permalink)
Windows bashing is too easy. Sorry, not buying that argument.

8.5.1 PE, i7 920, GA-EX58-UD4P, 6gb Corsair DDR3, 2 x Barracuda 500gb, HIS Radeon GS-4670 Fanless 1gb DDR3, XP Pro SP3, dual 24" monitors, Axiom 61, Korg Triton Pro, Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, VG-99, Yamaha MSP5, Fostex PM0.5
#45
digimidi
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 496
  • Joined: 2003/11/15 19:21:08
  • Location: Eastern part of the country
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 02:28:00 (permalink)
Message to Cakewalk:

Just keep on doing what you're doing and ignore all the rest.  You've done well so far and will continue to do so in the future.  There's a lot of food for thought in the previous posts, but the bottom line is that the audio world is a better place because of Cakewalk.  You've made the best decisions so far, so just keep on keeping on.

Regards

I started out with nothing and I still have most of it left... 
http://daveowenmusic.com/
http://fabulous52s.com/
https://soundcloud.com/daveowenmusic

Sonar Platinum Edition/Cakewalk by BandLab: Dell 8700 XPS i7 16GB RAM, Cyberpower laptop w/8GB RAM/i7/2GB NVidia card/Tascam US1641/Focusrite 18i6/Melodyne Studio 4/Waves Plugs (a lot)/Garritan/EWQL Symphony Silver & Fab 4 and a bunch of other stuff. Studio One 3/Magix Samplitude Pro X3 Suite/Mixcraft 8 Pro/Reaper/Acid Pro 8
#46
syntheticpop
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 688
  • Joined: 2006/07/25 21:39:56
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 02:40:41 (permalink)
i think Sonar is already a big part of the music industry, if not in the majority of professional studios than at least in project and home studios.  just keep telling all your friends how cool Sonar is and refer them to Twitter.  LOL.
#47
PH68
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 564
  • Joined: 2007/07/24 17:09:34
  • Location: England
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 04:30:12 (permalink)
I've never used ProTools.
I've had various incarnations of Sonar since v2, and once had a trial version of Cubase.
Sonar does what I need.


However, I work in school, and when talking to the music department all they know is Cubase or ProTools. Some newly qualified music teachers even ask "what is Sonar?" when I mention that's what I use.

During the school year I am involved in helping young bands, and we tend to get pro-recording engineers from local studios in to record the live efforts of the pupils.
In the past five years I've seen five different engineers.
They all bought a mac.
They all had Cubase or Protools.
Hence, these young kids in the bands think that's what they'll need.
My mention of Sonar is lost on them.

Shame.
But, as I said. Sonar does what I need.

~ Cakewalk ~ Arturia ~ Waves ~ Overloud ~ Windows ~
#48
KidBomba
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 20
  • Joined: 2009/08/22 04:12:39
  • Location: Vancouver
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 04:45:00 (permalink)
I just wish that one day Cakewalk would create their own DAW linux based!
#49
Nick P
Max Output Level: -44 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3112
  • Joined: 2006/09/01 18:08:09
  • Location: Area code 392 - Arlington Hts, IL
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 05:50:10 (permalink)
The only way you will be able to answer this question for yourself is to switch to one of the "industry standard" products, and get a feel for the culture surrounding that product. It's a whole 'nother world.

Cakewalk Forums - A Great Learning Resource For All Things Cakewalk!
#50
pjl
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 796
  • Joined: 2006/02/28 00:36:53
  • Location: the land of Oz
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 07:51:51 (permalink)
BMOG



He stated if you mix correctly you don't need to Master.
This statement alone convinces me that you were talking to an amateur.

Celebrate reason, sleep in on Sundays
#51
djjhart@aol.com
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2189
  • Joined: 2008/10/24 08:45:46
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 08:23:01 (permalink)

Your friend dosnt know what he's talking about plain and simple. If its mixed right you dont need to master the track .. LMFAO.
maybe for recording audio protools is standard, thats it.. Logic's sound engine has changed since ver 7 and many have been complaining so not mastering in logic or protoool seems like you'll never have a red book mix. for that fact radio play. 
 yeah the only thing about sonar is yes there on a pc..and there release of 8.0 was just a system killer but since 8.31 its rocking.. yeah professional studio use protools no dout, for hip hop R&B, country, pop, and yes its studio standard in most big studios.. but your buddy is hearing hear say.if he said no mastering is needed with a good mix down. why sonar isnt studio standard its on a pc. and for me I would say because 7 resources were bad , you needed a super computer to run it , 8 was great but 8.0 was a crash box .. so working in a studio with a client and your system freezes clicks pops, ect.. well for me I had an artist come in around feb of this year well the artist walked out cuz my system frooze up like 6 times during the recording, we were actully recording vocal takes and one of our best take frooze up right while she was singing, I was so pissed , she left I went right back on the fourms and went nuts on CW. 

BMOG


I had a conversation with a friend of mine today who has a production team and they are using Logic and Protools.  I was talking to him about finding and studio to Master a project for me.  He stated if you mix correctly you don't need to Master.  He asked me what I was using, I told him Sonar Producer 8 and he said man you have to get Logic or Protools on a Mac a PC cannot compare.  He said a PC can't compete, he said the samples that Logic has it in will remove the need for any instrument.  I told him I have been a Cakewalk person for years and I like it, he said the the Industry Standard is Protools and know other DAW can compare.  He said if you take a project done in Sonar to an agent he is not going to even want to hear it because it is not Protools. Depsite feeling small because everything I came back with to defend Sonar was shot down by what is considered Industry Standard.

How come we don't have more industry studios using Sonar?  The bigger question is how can we change this, I have read several forums on the difference of Logic vs Sonar and there will always be a debate, but the fact of the matter is Protools and Logic is what the Industry is using unless I am wrong.

How can we put Sonar on the Industry map?


#52
djjhart@aol.com
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2189
  • Joined: 2008/10/24 08:45:46
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 08:26:59 (permalink)

LOL thats why windows 7 is being released LOL

Vista 64 is solid and reliable
#53
Nick P
Max Output Level: -44 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3112
  • Joined: 2006/09/01 18:08:09
  • Location: Area code 392 - Arlington Hts, IL
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 08:27:10 (permalink)
yorolpal


What industry?


I know the olpal has me blocked, but to answer this - from my perspective there's a huge industry (i.e. commercial money-making music enterprises) out there. It's just moved way away from the late 60s/early 70s where so many forum members live (in their heads). Funny part is, it's moving more and more towards the live performance end of the spectrum. Almost like pre-recording days. Why? Because as recordings become harder and harder to restrict access to, they become less and less worthy of being exchanged for currency. Simple economics. So if the op (olpal - not original poster) is talking about the recording industry exclusively, I'll have to agree with him. BTW, it has been predicted by a multi-grammy winning producer that at some point in the future recordings, however delivered, will be nothing more than free promotional material, and all revenues from music will be earned on live performance. Pretty cool predicition I always thought.

Cakewalk Forums - A Great Learning Resource For All Things Cakewalk!
#54
jackn2mpu
Max Output Level: -47.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2765
  • Joined: 2003/11/08 17:38:43
  • Location: Soprano State
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 09:15:50 (permalink)
Jeff Evans


I am going to say something controversial now. The biggest problem with Sonar is the Windows operating system by far. Not the program but the OS. I am convinced Windows is crap and they will never get it right. And to all of you that think Windows 7 is going to be your savior forget it. It will just be more crap.

The reason that many many of us are having problems with Sonar is the Windows OS. The MAC operating system is just excellent and way way way better. This is the main reason it is the industry standard. And the programs that run on the MAC OS are usually very stable and reliable. The best thing that Cakewalk can do is rewrite Sonar for the MAC OS then you will have a real winner there. But it is probably too late. They have partenered up with the wrong OS. Running Sonar under bootcamp is not the solution either because you are still running Windows.

Logic 9 is spectacular and using it on a fast Mac just kills. Check out the varispeed options and the tools for moving things around and stretching time etc. Sonar really need to pull their finger out on this one and make this happen bigtime. Logic are the clear leader in this area. There are no issues. It all just works out of the box. The fact that Apple have aquired Emagic is good because they are making sure it all works. I love Sonar and I am going to stick to it because I am loyal too and I love the instruments and the sounds but it is a pity it has to run under Windows that is all I am saying.  And yes it runs OK for me and I have said that but you never know when it is going to do something stupid though. Strange behaviour, drivers doing weird things, things uninstalling etc. Most of this does not happen under the MAC OS. Once things are installed and setup they work forever.

I know quite a very professional people myself who have stuck to Windows as long as they can but in the end they gave up and bought a MAC. Wait till the i7 cores become standard in the MAC and see how that goes! I agree with the 64 bit thing though. That is important but the MAC OS will handle 64 bit and in time all the programs that run on it will be 64 bit as well.
Finally - a Cake connected person (not on the payroll as I understand it) that tells it like it is about porting Sonar to the Mac os as a native app. I'm dual-platform here - pc running S8 and Mac running DP6 (and Photoshop). I've run Photoshop on both platforms and it runs a LOT better on the Mac than the pc. Everything runs more stable on the Mac, and for whatever reason even dongles run no problem on a Mac.

Jack
Qapla!
#55
studio24
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 446
  • Joined: 2007/03/16 21:59:37
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 10:21:53 (permalink)
Jeff Evans


I am going to say something controversial now. The biggest problem with Sonar is the Windows operating system by far. Not the program but the OS. I am convinced Windows is crap and they will never get it right. And to all of you that think Windows 7 is going to be your savior forget it. It will just be more crap.

The reason that many many of us are having problems with Sonar is the Windows OS. The MAC operating system is just excellent and way way way better. This is the main reason it is the industry standard. And the programs that run on the MAC OS are usually very stable and reliable. The best thing that Cakewalk can do is rewrite Sonar for the MAC OS then you will have a real winner there. But it is probably too late. They have partenered up with the wrong OS. Running Sonar under bootcamp is not the solution either because you are still running Windows.

Logic 9 is spectacular and using it on a fast Mac just kills. Check out the varispeed options and the tools for moving things around and stretching time etc. Sonar really need to pull their finger out on this one and make this happen bigtime. Logic are the clear leader in this area. There are no issues. It all just works out of the box. The fact that Apple have aquired Emagic is good because they are making sure it all works. I love Sonar and I am going to stick to it because I am loyal too and I love the instruments and the sounds but it is a pity it has to run under Windows that is all I am saying.  And yes it runs OK for me and I have said that but you never know when it is going to do something stupid though. Strange behaviour, drivers doing weird things, things uninstalling etc. Most of this does not happen under the MAC OS. Once things are installed and setup they work forever.

I know quite a very professional people myself who have stuck to Windows as long as they can but in the end they gave up and bought a MAC. Wait till the i7 cores become standard in the MAC and see how that goes! I agree with the 64 bit thing though. That is important but the MAC OS will handle 64 bit and in time all the programs that run on it will be 64 bit as well.

I think you've hit the nail on the head Mr. Evans. If Sonar (in its current form) were available for the Mac and could read and
write Protools PTF format session files .. it would be very popular. 

Seeing what's going on with Avid (and it's mishandling of Digi), many of us are looking around for where to go if Digi
collapses (and they've had some significant folks leave that I deeply respect ). If Sonar were available on the Mac and provided
an easy migration path for PT sessions, it would garner serious consideration. 

jeff

#56
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31918
  • Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 10:34:28 (permalink)
Nick P


yorolpal


What industry?


I know the olpal has me blocked, but to answer this - from my perspective there's a huge industry (i.e. commercial money-making music enterprises) out there. It's just moved way away from the late 60s/early 70s where so many forum members live (in their heads). Funny part is, it's moving more and more towards the live performance end of the spectrum. Almost like pre-recording days. Why? Because as recordings become harder and harder to restrict access to, they become less and less worthy of being exchanged for currency. Simple economics. So if the op (olpal - not original poster) is talking about the recording industry exclusively, I'll have to agree with him. BTW, it has been predicted by a multi-grammy winning producer that at some point in the future recordings, however delivered, will be nothing more than free promotional material, and all revenues from music will be earned on live performance. Pretty cool predicition I always thought.


Nick,
 I'm assuming you know that yorolpal owns a bona fide studio. A studio that supports several employees whom earn there living while producing content that actually gets paid for AND distributed.

 Or maybe you don't know that.

 On the other hand, I have a friend who just the other day was sort of optimistically telling me about having 5 *paying* gigs scheduled in October... $150 a night. He's a real hard worker, fully passionate about his craft... so I don't have the heart to share the truth with him... that ain't the "industry".

 Have you checked out XGames 3d yet? It's in a theater near you!!!

best regards,
mike


#57
fitzj
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1487
  • Joined: 2005/10/13 11:56:37
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 10:35:40 (permalink)
Its not the tools it the person using them that creates the master piece. My brother in law with a chainsaw can create beautiful work on timber that other's couldn't do with all the fancy tools in the hardware store.

#58
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
  • Total Posts : 26036
  • Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
  • Location: Everett, WA USA
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 11:20:40 (permalink)
and write Protools PTF format session files ..

Any DAW that could do that would be a hit. Unfortunately, they would also be sued out of existence by Digi, as the PT project file format is proprietary. Heck, Digi's trying to prevent Mackie from advertising a control surface as being PT-compatible because they only want people to use Digi's own hardware.

If you get RECORDING magazine, check out this month's article relating an experience trying to export a Cubase project to ProTools. They only managed it with the help of a Steinberg employee.


All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. 

My Stuff
#59
studio24
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 446
  • Joined: 2007/03/16 21:59:37
  • Status: offline
Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? 2009/08/22 11:30:08 (permalink)
bitflipper



and write Protools PTF format session files ..

Any DAW that could do that would be a hit. Unfortunately, they would also be sued out of existence by Digi, as the PT project file format is proprietary. Heck, Digi's trying to prevent Mackie from advertising a control surface as being PT-compatible because they only want people to use Digi's own hardware.

If you get RECORDING magazine, check out this month's article relating an experience trying to export a Cubase project to ProTools. They only managed it with the help of a Steinberg employee.

Other tools can read the PT session file format and have done so for years. As long as it were done in a "clean room" fashion, there
would be no issue. This has also been done with Microsoft Word format, Excel format , etc.

jeff

#60
Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 2 of 6
Jump to:
© 2026 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1