I'm surprised nobody has mentioned linux yet other than myself. Maybe I'm just a big geek.

I agree Sonar would make it big if they ported their software to MAC. Being in the software business myself, porting a a piece of software for another OS/system is not an easy task. Unless Roland/Cakewalk spend big money and time. Just imagine the billions of lines of code that need to be translated and reworked. 

I think Steinberg jumped on the MAC bandwagon a long time ago. Their products are still somewhat buggy in macs. but then again, dont quote me on that, I just heard...
 
As for Windows vs. Mac, yeah sure, Windows has always been the devil. I have a bittersweet relationship with windows. Fortunately though, I am proficient enough to make it work for me. I do anything (wether its registry hacks or performance tweaking) to make sure windows works for me.  I would love to own a mac, but PC's are more "affordable" and customizeable. I just built my PC a few weeks ago with equivalent, if not better, specifcations to the macs sold out there. I also make music for the videogame industry, I am an avid PC gamer and Windows just happens to be on the lead there in terms of PC gamming. Being a Sonar fan myself, I'm fine using Windows since Ive been used to the nonsense windows throws at me all the time :)
 
I believes macs are sweet machines if you have the cash for it. If you are proficient and good with computers and learn your ways to deal with hardware software issues, Windows should be fine. If you rae not very tech savvy, I recommend spending the cash on MAC.
 
The funny thing is, I never recommend anyone to go for windows. Like for example, my mother is BAD with technology. We got her  a windows PC and it was chaos. Calls everday, virus here, BSOD there, etc... so I was like "#($" ok, here a MAC, happy birthday. And yep, the calls stopped. hehee.

Pretty hot thread going here...and I won't try to put any wood on the fire, but here's my take for what it's worth. To end the debate once and for all, I would love to see 2 credible engineers mix the same project using both systems. Id be willing to bet that no one would be able to tell which was which.

Now, in my experience with MACS and PT, the older MACS didn't have loads of things running behind the scenes. This is where some users would bash Windows. The newer MAC OS' are adding more and more of the Windows type stuff. Now, if you configure a pc properly for audio, or do a custom install the RIGHT way instead of clicking "default" your Windows experience is going to be much different. It's always been a common folk consumer system with loads of bells and whistles....but what people fail to realize is, you can turn a lot of that stuff off or tweak it to your needs.

With PT, the cards that run it take a load off the MAC so it's going to run a bit smoother. Just think for a second how much you would have to spend on a MAC, PT and the cards that run it just to get a decent amount of tracks and power. If you have a properly set up pc running Sonar, the difference in my opinion is you can do anything the MAC can do minus the huge investment. When a MAC goes down and crashes, it usually goes down in flames. I'm not bashing them, it's a great system but I sincerely feel the mac vs pc, PT vs Sonar deals are just bogus. Seriously. Why pay for something if you sincerely don't need to when you can get the same results without shelling out massive amounts of money?

I had a discussion with some guy about cars a bit ago. I mentioned to him that I was ordering a Corvette ZR1 and he said "for 150k more, you should just get a Lambo dude". Why? For cooler interior and a different look? I still get from point A to point B in style...I have killer interior, a nice look, more hp than a Lambo at 638hp, a faster 1/4 mile time and it will go over 200mph for 100k. His reply was "it's still a Vette and not a Lambo dude".

This is the whole issue with PT. It's become more of a name than an actual better tool in all seriousness. I'm telling you right now, a good pc that is tuned correctly will hang right with a MAC running PT and do the same things. Sure, there are a few things each has that the other doesn't...but it comes down to 3 things.

1. Your ears
2. Your soundcard
3. Your converters

ANY of the DAWS available today will do a fantastic job. I'm running a Tascam DM-4800 console here now. It's not a D-Control, but it does the same stuff. I have NEVER had an issue with any of my pc's running audio since I began using them in 1999. Once I found out about custom installs and audio tweaks, it changes everything. Sure, I've had a few buggy Cakewalk versions as well as a few unstable Sonar versions in my time, but there was nothing I couldn't do in my business when I bumped up to Sonar 5. Now that 8.3 is really stable for me, the only limitations I have.......hmmm....haven't really found any for how I use this product. Needless to say I've had WAY more bad experiences with the competition....which is why I have stayed with Sonar. Again I say, let 2 great, credible engineers record/mix the same tune using both systems. There is no way we'd be able to tell what was done on what.

I've had track counts into and over the 100's with a dual core 3.2 with 3 gig of RAM running XP in WDM mode along with midi and frozen synths and numerous plugs that were host plugs as well as 2 UAD cards. What would it cost me to buy a PT rig and a MAC to run the same amount and have DSP power? See my point? Price doesn't always make something better. At the end of the day, your abilities, ears, soundcards and converters make the music what it is. The DAW of your choice is what helps you track it and all of them work pretty well if you ask me.

To the OP with the friend that told you all that stuff....don't believe any of it. Trust me when I tell you man. Industry people can tell talent when they hear it. Granted, the more polished you are, the more of an impression you can make. But most of these guys know when something is good. If you deliver the goods, you could get a deal using a Fostex 8 track. Why spend 25k on a demo to be shopped when you only have to re-track the entire thing with a producer when you get a deal anyway? A major label will almost NEVER sign you and release the album you created in Joe Schmoe's studio that cost you 25k. As a matter of fact, you get about 15-30 seconds to impress an A&R guy.

When I was with Sony years ago, I can't tell you how many incredible CD's I took home with me. The A&R guys would sit there with a pen and paper. They'd listen to the cd for 15-30 seconds. If you made it to 30 seconds they would write down the number of that track. At the end of the listening session, whatever tunes they marked down would be the one's they listened to in full. If they liked what they heard in full, they'd go back and listen to the rest of the album. If you had the most incredible CD known to man and it was a slow starter that maybe wouldn't get interesting until 40 seconds into the song, chances are I have your CD here because they just gave them away. I came home with box loads of CD's that were soo awesome, all they needed was 10 more listening seconds to hook the A&R guy. But when you get 2800 unsolicited submissions per week and about 25 solicited get listened to, there's a lot of incredible music left behind that is thrown away or gets given out. It's really sad. So, don't believe what he said about agents...and I'll tell ya another thing about that agent thing.

Most agents are full of crap. They don't even know what a DAW is nor do they care what you used to create your music. An agent that just calls himself an agent is a nobody. An agent has to seriously know someone in the business to be credible. Just because a dude books your shows doesn't mean he has any power. A label wants to talk to an attorney. Not an agent, not a manager, not your brother in law who can do this that or this, or your hott lead singers wife who thinks she can walk up to Atlantic and strut her way in the door with product. Besides, and agent or a manager is not needed until you get a deal. Some *may* be credible and have contacts, most all are not and a huge waste of time and money. Trust me on that.

As for the mastering comment, if you're a good enough engineer, you can get away with an awesome sounding album without it....let's be honest. But having PT, Logic or any other DAW isn't the reason for that. It's in the ears of the engineer as well as the knowledge. I've got a mix of Perry Mason by Ozzy that Michael Wagener did....mastering would have improved it sure, but the thing was fantastic as it was. Do we NEED mastering? Most definitely for any release you want to sell. People paying money for your lil piece of plastic deserve the best quality you can give them and you should have the best representation of yourself and your music, possible. However, for a demo or something to give away....it's not something you need to pay for if you have a good sounding demo. See here's the deal in full...

A good engineer will mix your tune so good, the mastering engineer's job will be easy and when you get that mastered product back, it should NOT sound drastically different from what was sent. This means the engineer did his job and the mastering engineer removed some stuff that shouldn't have been there, added some stuff that should have been and wrapped it all up in a nice package that improved the fidelity. When Bob Katz did my last album, we sent him test mixes before we sent the product. He told us what he wanted and we did it. This made our album a pleasure for him to work with and one that allowed him to have creativity with because it had all the right stuff he was looking for coming out of the gate. He didn't have to polish a turd, he made a good recording even better and enjoyed it in the process.

My original un-mastered album does not sound drastically different than what Bob did. He made it more consistent, a bit louder, a bit more spacious, preserved consistency and dynamics and made it a bit more sonically acceptable. But it's nothing so drastic that would make someone say "wow, that doesn't even sound like the same mix!" Could I have released the album without having it mastered? Most definitely...but why not make it just that much better and master it as there IS a difference for the better? But at the end of the day, the software or computer used is not what allowed us a great album...the band performed well, the songs were delivered well, the engineer made sure the instrumentation was recorded properly, had good ears for the mix, Bob put the finishing touches on it and we got a good album because of ALL of the above. Put that engineer and my band in another studio with a mac and PT, some different gear, and it would have turned out the same with maybe a few slight differences. Thinking about it in a different light giving your friend the benefit of the doubt, maybe the guy was trying to say "I've had such good results, you could get away with a mix without mastering it" and he meant it more in the way of his good results over meaning to say "nah, I'm soo good and this gear works so well, you'll never need to master something again!" ;)

I find this to be quite an interesting, and intuitive debate.  I know some people have their emotional attachments to os's & software.

My situation is interesting.  I use Sonar, and I do some editing in Sound Forge, all on a desktop PC.  My bass player runs Logic on his Mac powerbook.  We exchange ideas via exporting via .omf & also by sending each other raw tracks.  He created an .ftp site for us to back all of our project material to, including raw tracks, POD Presets, SYSEX info from the synth, etc..., and it works great.  Best thing is, we're always on the same page at the same time.

Why the silly obsession with "Industry Standard" software?

If you can make good music with SONAR, do it!

Otherwise ... get another DAW and do it with that.

When you have made your music, save it in an "Industry Standard"
format for further mixing/production in whatever software the
studio you're in is using.

John


Danny you missed the whole point of the argument. Its not what you do that matters its how you do it that counts. If it ain't done on a PT system then it can't be any good, right???? Everyone knows that!!!!

Hi John,
   Me thinks you jest ;-) I use Protools everyday for both music tracking, mixing and post-production. Having used Sonar, 
it is my opinion that Cakewalk has decided that it will serve the home-recordist as its principle clientele. There are hints it's
trying to push up with the V700 hardware line. I don't know the demographics, but Cake has a long running and successful
series of products serving their principle base. And that's not a bad thing a all.
   But until, and unless, it pushes into Protools base ( Mac ) and makes a near seamless migration path, then it will not make
serious in-roads into Protools' space .. which is the meat of the pro music industry workflow.
   That does not mean that you cannot make wonderful, beautiful, wholly professional music using Sonar .. far from it.
   But, it does mean ... like being tooled for a particular car manufacturer, that you can't play in certain areas.

jeff

Freddie H

        
1. Pro Tools HD dropping users everyday, actually as we speak... that ship going under so if you not in neck & feet of water... leave the ship right now before it really going under!!
even the new Pro Tools 8HD are still in 32bit, all professional users screaming WHY 32bit? WE WANT 64bit!! period!!, didn't actually help.. what major flop that has been.
 
Pro Tools 8 HD is = the biggest Crash DAW from hell too. Even TDM crash. People has invest so much $$$$$ money in Pro Tools/Digidesign hardware so that's why many still holding back making the move. End of the day, best thing to do, jump in the rescue boats and its called SONAR and CUBASE. Drop WAVES crap too in the same run;) 

Freddie,

This is sooo not true.  Sounds like propaganda to me.  I get so tired of hearing people say silly things like this.  To really believe that everyone is jumping ship from Pro Tools to move to something else is just silly.  I don't believe it for a single moment.  No other daw is no where near the editing, grouping, mixing and automation that Pro Tools is.  Pro Tools is no where near Sonar on the MIDI/instrument side of things.  But when it comes to recording, editing and mixing audio, I wouldn't choose any other platform then Pro Tools HD.

I spend a lot of time over at the DUC (Digidesign forums) in the Pro Tools HD Mac section and people rarely ever say anything about 64 bit.  Sure, many of us think that 64 bit is coming soon to Pro Tools (especially with Snow Leopard around the corner), but most of the HD users have a system that handles their projects very well and therefore they aren't anxiously waiting and frustrated by the lack of 64 bit processing (hence the reason that so many 3rd party plug-ins don't seem to care either).

Pro Tools 8 HD had its problems, but the recent updates have made Pro Tools 8 HD extremely solid for me.  Most crashes that Pro Tools 8 users have now days comes from them using unsupported plug-ins inside of Pro Tools.  To say that it crashes any more than other DAWS is not true.  All DAWS have their problems, crashes and bugs too.  

I am one of many very happy Pro Tools 8 HD users.  When being an engineer is your livelihood, Pro Tools HD is a very worthwhile investment.  If my Mac and Pro Tools HD system got struck by lightening tomorrow (knock on wood), I would do everything possible to get the same set-up back because I love my Pro Tools HD system.  Many users feel that strong about their HD systems.  

My overall point is that you can't believe all the propaganda that floats around out there that people are jumping ship from Pro Tools.  I believe that more people are still jumping onto the ship with Pro Tools then leaving.  

the only thing industry standard means is that this is what everyone else is using and you are expected to know how to use it too. it doesnt mean you have to use it on your own but its good to have for compatibility sake. I for one say use whatever you want.

Dizzi45Z

Freddie H

       
1. Pro Tools HD dropping users everyday, actually as we speak... that ship going under so if you not in neck & feet of water... leave the ship right now before it really going under!!
even the new Pro Tools 8HD are still in 32bit, all professional users screaming WHY 32bit? WE WANT 64bit!! period!!, didn't actually help.. what major flop that has been.

Pro Tools 8 HD is = the biggest Crash DAW from hell too. Even TDM crash. People has invest so much $$$$$ money in Pro Tools/Digidesign hardware so that's why many still holding back making the move. End of the day, best thing to do, jump in the rescue boats and its called SONAR and CUBASE. Drop WAVES crap too in the same run;) 

Freddie,

This is sooo not true.  Sounds like propaganda to me.  I get so tired of hearing people say silly things like this.  To really believe that everyone is jumping ship from Pro Tools to move to something else is just silly.  I don't believe it for a single moment.  No other daw is no where near the editing, grouping, mixing and automation that Pro Tools is.  Pro Tools is no where near Sonar on the MIDI/instrument side of things.  But when it comes to recording, editing and mixing audio, I wouldn't choose any other platform then Pro Tools HD.

I spend a lot of time over at the DUC (Digidesign forums) in the Pro Tools HD Mac section and people rarely ever say anything about 64 bit.  Sure, many of us think that 64 bit is coming soon to Pro Tools (especially with Snow Leopard around the corner), but most of the HD users have a system that handles their projects very well and therefore they aren't anxiously waiting and frustrated by the lack of 64 bit processing (hence the reason that so many 3rd party plug-ins don't seem to care either).

Pro Tools 8 HD had its problems, but the recent updates have made Pro Tools 8 HD extremely solid for me.  Most crashes that Pro Tools 8 users have now days comes from them using unsupported plug-ins inside of Pro Tools.  To say that it crashes any more than other DAWS is not true.  All DAWS have their problems, crashes and bugs too.  

I am one of many very happy Pro Tools 8 HD users.  When being an engineer is your livelihood, Pro Tools HD is a very worthwhile investment.  If my Mac and Pro Tools HD system got struck by lightening tomorrow (knock on wood), I would do everything possible to get the same set-up back because I love my Pro Tools HD system.  Many users feel that strong about their HD systems.  

My overall point is that you can't believe all the propaganda that floats around out there that people are jumping ship from Pro Tools.  I believe that more people are still jumping onto the ship with Pro Tools then leaving.  

 
 
 
 

Hi Dizzi!
I'm very sorry, and I hope you will not be offend what I'm saying. It's not my point at all.
Anyone can use what he or she like but let face it!


If just conservative “Pro Tools”-user opened there eyes for once and check out the other DAW:s on the market they will see how far back there old Pro Tools platform actually is. I would not say Pro Tools is a “standard”, more like a minimum “standard require” what you expect of DAW; “minimum” shall be able to perform in 2009.

There are many great features in Pro Tools too but they seem always finish last in race doing so.
Example: How many years did it take them implemented MIDI or virtual instruments, that are kind of a new feature in Pro Tools world?

 
 
So only facts then...

If I would say best editing of both batch control features, Automation and audio editing, score, and score to film I would say Cubase 5 is outstanding No 1. Better Audio functions you can't find! Run over Pro Tools anytime.. and back it up and run over it again!

If I would say best audio quality, smart functions tools, well organized, inspiring to work with, stability, FREE OPTIONS and always first and use of enhance new technology,64bit Technology, 64bitbridge, INTEL-technology,VISTA 64bit, Windows 7 64bit and no1. on doing so. I would say SONAR.


 
The No.1 new feature in Pro Tools 8 this year was:

the ability to Stretch Audio, Audio Loops. “Time-stretch”, “elastic audio”-function.
Many Pro Tools users felt that was amazing, and it is. Ability to stretch audio in Pro Tools was something new in Pro Tools.

Also ability to “Mark” Mixer view with a “color” to group them. 2009 and for the first time in use of color in Pro Tools. They add a new GUI of Pro Tools 8 too, that are looking really great too, I must say.
 
 
Comparing this “Biggest” new Pro Tools 8 feature “Stretch audio”, it obvious those function has been in use for years in other DAW.s like Cubase, SONAR and LOGIC.
I don't know how long..? How long will it take Pro Tools going Native 64bit? 10 more years?
Perhaps before Pro Tools and WAVES going 64bit, rest of us will probable use 128bit programs instead. LOL
 
 

CAR VS DAW!
Let face it! Pro Tools are years after the rest of the DAW:s on the market. If Pro Tools was a car it would be “Trabant”, with a overpriced $$$$$-tag on it. And its true “Trabant” was the “standard” of the east block before the cold war ended.  LOL
[link=http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&source=hp&q=Trabant&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=RxKRSu-qGceD-QbSwejyDQ&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4]http://images.google.com/...;ct=title&resnum=4[/link]


 

SONAR, Cubase and LOGIC is like more a BMW, VOLVO or Mercedes with all it class and functions. Think about it, and you will come to the same conclusions!

 
To rap it up, it doesn't matter what DAW you use. End of the day, use what ever you like. It's the songs that counts, not what DAW you used to make them!


Best Regards
Freddie
 

Freddie H

Hi Dizzi!
I'm very sorry, and I hope you will not be offend what I'm saying. It's not my point at all.
Anyone can use what he or she like but let face it!


If just conservative “Pro Tools”-user opened there eyes for once and check out the other DAW:s on the market they will see how far back there old Pro Tools platform actually is. I would not say Pro Tools is a “standard”, more like a minimum “standard require” what you expect of DAW; “minimum” shall be able to perform in 2009.

There are many great features in Pro Tools too but they seem always finish last in race doing so.
Example: How many years did it take them implemented MIDI or virtual instruments, that are kind of a new feature in Pro Tools world?

 
 
So only facts then...

If I would say best editing of both batch control features, Automation and audio editing, score, and score to film I would say Cubase 5 is outstanding No 1. Better Audio functions you can't find! Run over Pro Tools anytime.. and back it up and run over it again!

If I would say best audio quality, smart functions tools, well organized, inspiring to work with, stability, FREE OPTIONS and always first and use of enhance new technology,64bit Technology, 64bitbridge, INTEL-technology,VISTA 64bit, Windows 7 64bit and no1. on doing so. I would say SONAR.


 
The No.1 new feature in Pro Tools 8 this year was:

the ability to Stretch Audio, Audio Loops. “Time-stretch”, “elastic audio”-function.
Many Pro Tools users felt that was amazing, and it is. Ability to stretch audio in Pro Tools was something new in Pro Tools.

Also ability to “Mark” Mixer view with a “color” to group them. 2009 and for the first time in use of color in Pro Tools. They add a new GUI of Pro Tools 8 too, that are looking really great too, I must say.
 
 
Comparing this “Biggest” new Pro Tools 8 feature “Stretch audio”, it obvious those function has been in use for years in other DAW.s like Cubase, SONAR and LOGIC.
I don't know how long..? How long will it take Pro Tools going Native 64bit? 10 more years?
Perhaps before Pro Tools and WAVES going 64bit, rest of us will probable use 128bit programs instead. LOL
 
 

CAR VS DAW!
Let face it! Pro Tools are years after the rest of the DAW:s on the market. If Pro Tools was a car it would be “Trabant”, with a overpriced $$$$$-tag on it. And its true “Trabant” was the “standard” of the east block before the cold war ended.  LOL
[link=http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&source=hp&q=Trabant&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=RxKRSu-qGceD-QbSwejyDQ&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4]http://images.google.com/...;ct=title&resnum=4[/link]


 

SONAR, Cubase and LOGIC is like more a BMW, VOLVO or Mercedes with all it class and functions. Think about it, and you will come to the same conclusions!

 
To rap it up, it doesn't matter what DAW you use. End of the day, use what ever you like. It's the songs that counts, not what DAW you used to make them!


Best Regards
Freddie
 

Freddie,

I am not offended at all by what you are saying.  I think I can understand where you are coming from because I felt the exact same way about Pro Tools.  I owned Pro Tools 6.9-7.0 M-Powered and I absolutely hated it at the time.  I used it maybe once or twice in a 2 year time period.  I thought it was out dated and featureless.  However, I was eventually forced to use a Pro Tools HD system because of the local studios and I have quickly fallen in love with it this time around.

Pro Tools has many, many, many features that I have yet to see in any other DAW.  Pro Tools may seem plain on the surface, but when you dig a little deeper, you realize that there is far more depth to the program than you may think.  Heck, the Pro Tools 7.3 manual is just under 900 pages of small print, two column text.  

You are completely wrong about Pro Tools 8 HD 2009 features.  Elastic Audio was introduced in version 7.4, (2007) and before that, Pro Tools had Beat Detective which was the only working audio quantize method in any of the major DAW's.  Beat Detective was introduced back in the Pro Tools 6.something days.  Audio Snap clearly took many of the ideas from Beat Detective. The Audio Snap Pallet is just like Beat Detectives.  However, Pro Tools Elastic Audio is way better than Sonar's Audio Snap.  Have you ever tried to quantize a 12 track drum part in Audio Snap.  It quantizes each track individually causing a phasing nightmare.  Elastic Audio works like a dream on multi -track drums and maintains the phase relationship.  It appears that Logic just barely implemented audio Quantize in version 9 (http://www.apple.com/logicstudio/whats-new/)

The other feature you mention, Color Coding was a Pro Tools 7.3 feature (2006).  Previous to that, you could color code the bottom strip of each channel since I believe version 7.0.  Last I checked, Sonar didn't even let you color code tracks separately. 

You should check out the new Pro Tools 8 features, because they are great!  Sibelius integration.  The notation is fantastic.  Do you know a DAW that can export Sibelius files for further editing?  Believe me, it is not the same thing as exporting midi and importing a midi file into Sibelius or Finale.  Their new instruments they added are fantastic and they added 20 AIR Plug-ins that have got to be some of the most innovative new plug-ins I have seen yet.  Ones such as FuzzWah, Talkbox, Dynamic Delay, Frequency Shifter and etc.  They really improved their midi production side of things.  

Up until now, it would be ridiculous for composers to use Pro Tools for composing because Pro Tools was not designed to be a midi based program.  Sonar is still ahead of Pro Tools in the midi realm, but Pro Tools has some really nice things that they have done with their midi improvements that aren't available in Sonar yet.  

On top of that, do you know any DAWS that:
1.  Allows you to automate trim automation (in Sonar it would be automating the offset mode), and then let you coalescence the trim automation to your regular automation?
2.  Have VCA's.  The ability to assign a VCA track that controls the volumes of all tracks assigned to it.  This is much different then using a bus and great to use alongside a bus. 
3.  Allow region grouping across multiple tracks.  
4.  Allow you to draw on the Waveforms.  This is critical for editing mouth noises on Voice Overs when the mouth noise is on top of a word.  
5.  Allow you to create tons of groups with complete control over the group.  For example, you could say: Group together Send A and B's volume, but don't group the mute, Group only Send C's Panning, Don't group the Tracks volume, but Group together the Record enable and the Mute.  These types of customized groups are easily suspended and enabled with a single click.  
6.  Allow you to suspend automation for any individual parameter per track.  
7.  Allow you to create markers that store more information than just where you are at.  But customizable to also store track heights, show and hide tracks, current selection, Zoom, Window configurations etc.  
8.  Allow you to roll back audio from your punch in point all the way back to where you had originally started playing the track before the punch-in.  
9.  A region list that allows you to easily drag clips back into your project and move to the original time stamp.  You can also clean out unwanted/unused audio from your audio folder from within your Regions list...and tons more.
10.  Can you record with what feels like zero latency through your DAW after you have recorded 60 audio tracks chuck full of plug-ins?  

These are all very important features that Pro Tools HD has that makes it very slick, modern and cool.  

My argument isn't that Pro Tools is better than all the others.  My argument is that Pro Tools is not a "Trabant."  It is full of many fully baked features that makes it a fantastic DAW to work in.  

Like we have all stated, it is about the DAW that has the features that you use.  In my opinion, I think all the latest DAW's are amazing in there own way.  But there is far too much Pro Tools bashing by people who just don't use/know Pro Tools.  

Paul Russell


If you hang around the Soundsonline forum, you'll see that most professional composers use either Cubase or Sonar. PT doesn't even get a look in.

Most professional composers use either Cubase or Logic, not Sonar. Next issue: Composers and engineers, while more and more becoming the same person, nevertheless are two separate classes of music industry professionals. Thus, the vast majority of engineers and pro studios use Pro Tools. The debate is not (or should not be) about Pro Tools as a platform for music creators, but rather about Sonar versus Pro Tools for music recordists.

All it will take is someone (hopefully one of us) getting a hit record, or records, using Sonar and everyone will start using it.

It really is that simple.

Sounds like the guy is a closed-minded snob. No matter what the product is or the field, to just say yours is the best and everyone else sucks tells me that is someone that is so closed to variety that I wouldn't want them working on my projects.

The good news is, I'm glad to hear you didn't punch him in the nose because he probably would have said that Mac, Logic and PT users never get violent. "You made be snort out blood because you use Sonar..." and then cried like a baby and chanted "mommy, I want my mommy" over and over. You see how these things can get out of hand?

SONAR IS NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD???
 
Why do I still use it then?
 
 
 
 
Ummmmm
 
 
 
 
Errmmmmmm
 
 
 
 
Uhhhhhhhhh
 
 
 
Oh yeah, cuz it does what I need it to.
 

Paul Russell


If you hang around the Soundsonline forum, you'll see that most professional composers use either Cubase or Sonar. PT doesn't even get a look in.

This is absolutely true. Engineers go nuts about PT but the vast majority of professional composers use Sonar or Cubase (or Logic, if they belong to the Mac cult...) Most often than not Sonar *AND* Cubase... And since CW will not fix the ridiculously unusable notation edit any soon, I guess we'll have to keep using both for a loooooooooong time...

I keep getting frustrated that Sonar doesn't do things that Pro Tools can and that Pro Tools can't do things Sonar can. Everyone is so right. Instead of Sonar trying to be everything, it really should focus on one area...and really develop that one area so that it is completely baked, 110%. Instead of trying to be everything for everyone. But then again, I think that is kind of Sonar's market goal. To be a tool that includes everything.

What sequencer doesn't include "everything"?