Jeff Evans
 V4 is coming with some seriously amazing features. 

Looking forward and I hope V4 includes OMF.
The studio I collaborate with prefers that for transfer.
 
Since the Studio One guys came from Cubase, I always found it a surprising omission...

could be the anti-spam thingy, always been a bit random

Starise
I had responded to some of these comments. My post went away and I'm not going to post it again. I want to believe it was a technical forum error. If not, can someone explain how a post just vanishes into thin air?

There is an AI that patrols these forums.  Something named Akismet...  https://akismet.com/
 
Bitflipper has commented on several threads about it.  You can PM a forum host to restore your post if it was deleted due to a false positive.
 
In my experience, it has usually been a post that I have just edited that disappears.  Or sometimes posting certain links.  Or sometimes just totally random ... 
 
If that is the only thing that gets abandoned when we get a new forum, I will say well done, Meng!

Genghis
Not flaming people on this, but can anyone really explain what they don't like?  Colors? Appearance? Or just set in your ways?

Yes.  All of the above.  I do think SONAR looks very professional and PS1 looks like a box of gummy bears.  And yes, I'm set in my ways (which I admit painfully). 
 
One thing I really liked about SONAR was the fx bin.  If you wanted to see your fx, even in track view, you enlarged the track and there you are.  In PS1 if you're in track view you have to switch to console view then double click on the track icon (or click the tiny arrow).  That's certainly not a catastrophe, but that process just seems cumbersome to me.  Is there an easier way?  Plus, in SONAR in track view you could manage both pan and volume, in PS1 you only have volume in the track view, to get both you have to go back to console view. 
 
I admit these are niggles and there is much I REALLY like about PS1, primarily the fact that it handles low-latency and an ton of tracks and plugins with ease. 

Thanks abacab for the heads up on why some of these posts are disappearing. 
 
To say " I don't miss Sonar" is probably a given no matter what you decide to do. If a person makes their mind up to use something else, they will no longer be concentrating on what they had before and they will use what they have.
You can't track in two daws at once, or at least most people don't for simplicity sake. Once determined to use it they will learn it as a new tool. I simply see this as a person who decided to use another capable product. If I buy a new Chevy and trade in my Ford I won't miss the Ford.
 
I don't understand the comment " how far daws have come" when comparing Studio One to Sonar. Sonar had monthly updates which were significant and is to this day well beyond  others in terms of functions offered.Probably second only to Cubase in midi functionality and capability, and I mean a close second not a distant second.The main function of most many daws, recording audio in any way you can imagine are in both daws. There's no such thing as a gapless audio engine. All digital audio is 1's and 0's with gaps in between. The engine in SO might be more efficient in terms of having the ability to play with it while it's running. I never do that anyways. Having said that, if Sonar couldn't run loops while you play with them we wouldn't have the matrix view.
 
"Work arounds" or finding alternative ways to do things exist in all daws. This is all highly subjective to what you do.If a work around is two mouse clicks I can handle that.
To hear people here talk you would think Studio One is invincible, but go  over to the Studio One forum and you will find that it also crashes at times. Users report issues with it too. Our forum is more open to these kinds of things while other forums restrict the way and the area you can report problems to. They don't want the appearance that problems happen but they happen.
 

Starise
To say " I don't miss Sonar" is probably a given no matter what you decide to do. If a person makes their mind up to use something else, they will no longer be concentrating on what they had before and they will use what they have.

Currently I run several instances of 4 different programming editors. And that is my usual working environment  
 

You can't track in two daws at once, or at least most people don't for simplicity sake. Once determined to use it they will learn it as a new tool. I simply see this as a person who decided to use another capable product. If I buy a new Chevy and trade in my Ford I won't miss the Ford.

After I have changed Ford Focus to VW Passat, there was no moments I have missed Ford. But in case I have to switch back, I do not think that is going to be the case...
 

I don't understand the comment " how far daws have come" when comparing Studio One to Sonar.

For that you have to try them...
 

Sonar had monthly updates which were significant and is to this day well beyond  others in terms of functions offered.

There is DAW with weekly updates, some are significant and there can be intermediate updates with fixes. Report real bug - get it fixed next day.
Sonar has some advantages in the work-flow and offered functions (f.e. see the comparison I have mentioned before). But the list of functions it does not have compare to other is also not empty.
 

Probably second only to Cubase in midi functionality and capability, and I mean a close second not a distant second.

In LEGACY midi support (RPNs) - may be. But Sonar does not directly support VST MIDI processing (and  "MIDI FX as a SoftSynth" has timing issues). MIDI routing - it does not really exist. Staff view - usable (not not more). Bugs... more then features. Not sure to what it is "close".
 

The main function of most many daws, recording audio in any way you can imagine are in both daws. There's no such thing as a gapless audio engine. All digital audio is 1's and 0's with gaps in between. The engine in SO might be more efficient in terms of having the ability to play with it while it's running. I never do that anyways. Having said that, if Sonar couldn't run loops while you play with them we wouldn't have the matrix view.

Try to start some "other" DAW on old computer and then again Sonar. The difference in performance will be obvious.
Also working with Sonar, I have learned never modify the project structure while transport is not stopped. In "other DAW" I can make new project, press "Play"/"Record" and build the whole project without completely stopping it(add tracks, FXes, Synthes, record parts, etc.). I will call that a "stress test" for gapless audio engine.
(do not try to enable "allow record arm with working transport" in Sonar, there was a thread about that... you can get your SSD filled quickly )
 

"Work arounds" or finding alternative ways to do things exist in all daws. This is all highly subjective to what you do.If a work around is two mouse clicks I can handle that.

I would not mix "work arounds" and alternative ways. The first is lengthy replacement for something not working. The second is different approach.
 

To hear people here talk you would think Studio One is invincible, but go  over to the Studio One forum and you will find that it also crashes at times. Users report issues with it too. Our forum is more open to these kinds of things while other forums restrict the way and the area you can report problems to. They don't want the appearance that problems happen but they happen.

Every DAW is not perfect. And each DAW community tries to defend own "home", sometimes even declaring bugs as features.
And Presonus has many declarative "care about users". Just some: (a) we have found a useless part in audio interfaces, hardware mixer/DSP, so we have removed it. You will fill better now! (b) we know you do not need anything with 32bit, all that is outdated and buggy. We protect you against that evil! (c) our hardware perfectly integrates with our software! It also work good with other software, but not so good (because we artificially hide some features from other software, to make them "exclusive" in our).
 
But sorry, this forum is not "unique in openes" and sometimes prided "developers feedback" was never top it its class. The community is mostly "self servicing".
 
I guess most people here still run Sonar for one or another reason. And I guess many people have good feeling doing that, from "feeling home" and "nostalgia" to "that is simpler/quicker to do in Sonar...". But I do not think that refusing the fact the program shows some "aging" effect is a good idea.
 
 
 

@abacab This was an important part of the equation for me as well, in buying Studio One for a really good upgrade price. I probably got the same deal you did.
My lifetime update cost for Sonar was about what one  might expect to pay for a yearly upgrade/update. 
 
I  believe the price of admission for Sonar was quite high for a new user. Yes Cubase is similar. The only way I could justify it is if I were using it to make $$$ in a studio every day.The price was posted at 499.00 retail to get in. Yes we were told that the retail price was seldom the charged amount, but the perception of that price tag probably turned lots of people away. 
 
Had I not been vested in the lifetime updates I would have probably rolled with the  monthly/yearly upgrade prices. Most likely in that case I would have decided on an every other year update to minimize my cost and maximize my updates. I wasn't really a fan of that business model. It had a few pluses. One of those was it would allow a person on a tight budget to pay monthly, but as I say I would have rather stayed with a yearly major improvement/features upgrade while getting minor bug fixes throughout the year. The plan demanded too much of the Cakewalk crew to deliver every month. Promising gargantuan updates every month made some unrealistic expectations I think. I'm glad that era is over. 
 
I'm doing some key conversions on paper right now. If Notion does that I might be interested in it. 
I know I know...lots of good reasons to get into Studio One. I'm not denying that. It's sad really that we didn't know about the sale sooner. I think Sonar would have retained more customers. As it stands, many made the change. I can't say I blame you really. I'm sure the bakers would rather hear a person left because they had to find a replacement and not make the constant comparisons. Not imply that SO is light years ahead of Sonar. It isn't.

Is there a way to get some like the X ray in S1 ? i want to punch myself each time i have to manage guy's on my laptop ....just discovered that even Logic does it (as well as PT) so anybody found a workaround ?

Jeff Evans
Time stretching is strong and quality is assured.

I know you was writing about MIDI... But if I have seen correctly, S1 use Elastique for audio stretching. And there Sonar with iZotope easily wins on some material (especially drums). I know Melodyne can do this good, but it is a bit "heavy" to use for that purpose.

Zo
Is there a way to get some like the X ray in S1 ? i want to punch myself each time i have to manage guy's on my laptop ....just discovered that even Logic does it (as well as PT) so anybody found a workaround ?

I do not have S1, so I do not know about build-in features (S1 owners here write whatever, except technical details...).
 
But there are general external tools, f.e. http://www.lukepaynesoftware.com/projects/peek-through/
I was surprised it still work for Win10 64bit (it is quite old 32bit program), but it does.
2 tips with it:
1) when installing, first extract the installer from the archive. It kind of "installs" directly, but not really.
2) when "Click throw" is enabled, I had difficulties to activate some windows after making them transparent. Try clickable top bar elements for that.

Starise
I like other daws. I use other daws on occasion. It's a tool like a vacuum cleaner. I try not to concentrate on the tools if I know how to use them already. If they work well for me I would rather get an idea and track it. In the end no one is going to care which daw you used. It's all about what you do with it.

+1

I am much more interested in using one DAW as well to get the whole job done. For me personally I would rather only use one.  I believe you can get that great piece of music realised with just one DAW.  As Hans Zimmer said, "the best DAW for you is the one you know".  For many Sonar users that means Sonar.  For many Studio One users it means Studio One.  And for other DAW's users it means that DAW.  Other DAW's certainly don't feature in your thinking, except the one that are using.
 
In professional terms too the client is certainly not interested in what your chosen tools are that is for sure.  They only hear the final product.  Many Sonar users have already come over to Presonus in fact.  As a moderator I know the figures and they are amazingly high.  And many of them are in fact stating how much they prefer using Studio One, already.  Because they have switched to it, have or learning it and using it.  We are quite busy over there helping Sonar users adapt. 
 
Sonar has not actually stopped working for anyone? Then the best thing Sonar users can do is nothing and just keep using their DAW.  And with recent developments only time will tell what could and may happen there.  Good things I hope.