Why Does Sonar Not Get The Respect Of Other DAWS?

ORIGINAL: space_cowboy
I don't really care if the mags and stuff don't fancy Sonar.

I dunno about the specialist press in general, but Sound on Sound - to me the most credible recording mag around - gives excellent coverage to Sonar, and treats it, Pro Tools and Cubase as being essentially all on the same level.

I agree on SOS. They are the best magazine on the market. They did a review of Sonar and Cubase in the same issue earlier this year and Sonar stood out better.

My bigger issue is not finding the right drivers. I have a Novation Remote SL and it doesnt work well in Sonar - at least not the Auto Map. It causes crashes and I have a stout system. The M-Audio - no driver specifically for Sonar.

One could suspect that the Roland relationship gets in the way, but Yamaha owns Steinberg and there is more potential for conflict there than with the Roland/Cake relationship.

Its funny, friends of mine with PT or Cubase come watch me work in Sonar and say "Wow that is easy! I have to ....." In every case, they had never even reviewed the capabilities of Sonar.

Sometimes I think that Cake's portfolio of stuff like Pyro and Kinetic gives the pro products an ametuerish tint - one that I do not think is deserved.

I dont think that Sonar lags behind technically. I think it lags as viewed by others in the DAW support industry. I think it is viewed as not being in the same category as some of the other competitors, but I also believe that is changing. I guess I wish it changed today.

The UAD1 had its issues with working with Sonar. The M-Audio keystation does not come with sonar drivers. The Auto-map. There are tons of instances.

Maybe the issue is more of the peripheral suppliers in the DAW market - the plugs guys - that are lagging and I am interpreting it wrong.

ORIGINAL: space_cowboy

I dont think that Sonar lags behind technically. I think it lags as viewed by others in the DAW support industry. I think it is viewed as not being in the same category as some of the other competitors, but I also believe that is changing. I guess I wish it changed today.

The UAD1 had its issues with working with Sonar. The M-Audio keystation does not come with sonar drivers. The Auto-map. There are tons of instances.

Maybe the issue is more of the peripheral suppliers in the DAW market - the plugs guys - that are lagging and I am interpreting it wrong.

Maybe the issue is more of the peripheral suppliers in the DAW market - the plugs guys - that are lagging and I am interpreting it wrong.

I have to agree, the peripheral makers hopefully will now spend more time with Cakewalk
stuff to make sure it has drivers.
The new CME UF keyboards are suppose to have U-ctrl which is a mackie control surface knock-off to have it work with DAW's.

Just think, if Sonar 7 has extensice MIDI improvement, we'll have more Cubase users switching over

Ed

Some say that Midi needs looking at and the Piano View Roll. But I fully understand why Audio was looked at first and for so long. It has captured the imagination and it has also opened DAWS (excuse the pun) to new customers.

I say it does. MIDI editing in the PRV is just plain out way, way harder than it has to be, almost like they made it a pain in the ass on purpose. But, I'm glad they put audio first, because that's mainly what I use it for, and for that it is top of the line. Maybe since the audio side is so high end now, they can get to work on a PRV that doesn't make you want to break your monitor everytime you see it. Perhaps that will help gain some respect.

I work in the Piano roll a lot and I'm not sure what you don't like about it. Maybe I'm not aware of what it could/should be. Prior to Sonar I worked with hardware sequencers--which is pretty much like just working with the Event list--so maybe I'm just naive.

Ognis- you seem to be one of the most knowledgable guys here. What would you like to see on the Piano View?

Well thats is it exactly. I would say well done for Pro tools and Cubase being well established.

For the most part I would not want to give up on a platform that has made itself to be very versatile just to not be supported by others in the profession that are very good at their trade. And a program that is a VIABLE option so that collaboration with others becomes a norm is what I would like without selling out my integrity.

hmm MAC Compatible. Do you think that Sonar have left that too late cross platforming.

I think that there priorities are correct in that they have not slighted the pc man.

I am sure that there is already a focus on MACS especially with Sonars softsynths. Dimension Pro has already got the MAC heads purring.

I am sure they are those who would love Sonar to come/go across to the otherside. But the undercutting I guess would be an issue and is already starting to be an issue for the overpriced likes of Cubase. I have no intention of crossing over too MACS they are nice to look at but I must admit I am on my second pc and the first one is still running after 7yrs and I have had no technical problems with it at all. No software issues and the virus attacks are minimal. My telephone line has not suffered with overpriced billing. But now I am on to my second computer which is a Duo Core running under Vista and it is showing itself to be a lion.

IF However I wanted to show of and let people know that I was the Lion I probably would by a MAC. I know a few people with them and they let everyone know that they have a MAC and like to tell you what it can do. I am kind of reserved and have no need to let everyone know how well my little piece of plastic wonderment is doing. My music on the other hand is where my alter ego kicks in...

ORIGINAL: Dappa1

I know a few people with them and they let everyone know that they have a MAC and like to tell you what it can do...

Hey, I know those same people - they also like to tell you how much your PC sucks. It makes you wonder what this forum will be like if/when Sonar does go Mac-compatible.

I am not a pro user, but have been recording since the mid 70s. In fact, some of my recent stuff is sub ameteur - like Fight Night at the Roller Rink or Roswell - the musical. I consider myself old-school and just recently started buying soft-synths. Though a look at my hard drive might not convince anyone that this was a recent trend - only my bank account knows for sure. I can't imagine going back to tape. ADATs were a major step forward, but they were still hard for a single person to put something together. Syncing using the BRC was a compromise, but still not as easy as cut&paste-ing a frame of a song together then re-recording evreything bit by bit to give it the live feel.

I like tape compression and miss that. The plugs just don't get that right. I have most of the UA plugs, a 70% full PoCo and a bunch of 3rd party plugs. While I love what the UA does to my sounds, tape saturation was just so much nicer. I should hook my old 3340 up for getting that tape warmth.

PT - there are two flavors - the one that takes a minimum of $100 billion dollars and PT light - something that I think does not compare to Sonar, Cubase, Logic...

PT Midi Editing is awful but better than it used to be. I would guess that with the increasing performance of PCs, the market for DSP farms in stuff like PT Pro has to be declining somewhat, so PT lite is more of a way to bridge the gap and keep people addicted.

I don't know what Cubase offers in superior MIDI editing. I switched away from SX with the release of Sonar 3. At that time, there was not much difference.

I do not want Sonar going Mac. I want the guys in Beantown to dedicate all of their time to supporting this one platform. Anything else would be a compromise.

I just want hardware manufacturers and other plug in guys to recognize us as a viable community that deserves the level of support (if not more) than the Brand-X guys.

Hello,

The question presupposes facts that do not exist.

- Neither Sonar, Cubase, Logic or Digital Performer are considered professional tracking tools. You will find only ProTools in professional tracking studios. ProTools became the de facto replacement for Studer and MCI/Sony tape machines because ProTools was in the market years before anyone else (not because Digi threw their weight around). You could get an 8 track Pro-Tools rig back when a PC came with an 8-bit Ad-Lib/SoundBlaster card. The majority of working studios are not tracking studios, they are post-pro houses that create video content for industry and TV. Since most post-pro houses are Avid shops, it was a natural to add ProTools to the existing video editing equipment and that is why most post-pro houses are also ProTools shops. (Digi being part of Avid now).

- A survey of one's friends and acquaintances is not an accurate survey anymore than having a sports discussion in a pub. It is pure opinion with little fact.

- Don't trust what you read in the forums. Less than 5% of the total US retail sales are made on-line. Out of that 5% there is a minute number of customers who participate in user forums and I mean miniscule. Out of the miniscule number of forum users, forums are inhabited and controlled by a handful of users who contribute the majority of posts. On this forum I could name 10 users who total 20 to 30 thousand posts combined. Out of those posts maybe 10 or less should be sticky.

- Likewise, don't trust what you read in the industry mags. They have one true goal - self-perpetuation. That is to publish a new issue each month containing advertising. The "articles" are just space between the adverts. At professional studios you will find these magazines where they belong - in the bog.

- When it comes to creative tools everyone (pros, semi-pros and amateurs alike) have their favorite. Sonar is one of those creative tools. I don't know Logic, but I have experience with Digital Performer and Cubase SX. I'd say the similarities between the DAW hosts far outnumber the differences. Which is to say, if I was to collaborate with someone using something other than Sonar, it wouldn't trouble me in the least.

- Purchase a software tool does not automatically make one a member of anything. It just makes one an owner of software.

- You will be judged by the final result, not the tools or processes that got you there. The end user cares not about what tools were used. (I certainly don't care what brand of tools the plumber is using as long as he stops the leak!)

- Final advice: get on one horse and ride it. Spend more time creating and less time worrying about whether you bought the right thing (which is what the original post is really about).

GK

I have also seen a change in tone when I chat with people about my DAW choice. Used to be they didn't know it at all because they either:

+ used ProTools and everything else was amateur
+ used Cubase and considered it to be the best MIDI/Audio DAW out there
+ used Live (or ACID), and considered DAWs to be archaic

However, recently more and more people I chat with say "Oh I've heard of that, how is it?" So, in time there's a growing awareness. I think the last couple of years have been very good to SONAR's standing, increasing as each new release and write-up comes out.

Respect of whom? I think from a technical perspective, Sonar is very
well respected at shows like AES.

From a pro music perspective, I think people have heard about Sonar,
but it is dwarfed by the dominance of Protools. In this space, I would
say the hierarchy of respect is something like:

Protools
Logic
Nuendo
Sonar
(DP, Vegas, other)

In Europe, Nuendo and Cubase are used a lot more.

Sonar not being on the Mac hurts adoption. I think if it were on the Mac, it would
instantly replace Logic as the easier to use music composition and midi editing
alternative to Protools.

Lastly, Cakewalks marketing is "so small".

Perhaps Sonar is destined to be the Rodney Dangerfield of DAW software, but that
doesn't mean it doesn't deserve respect.

ORIGINAL: studio24

Respect of whom? I think from a technical perspective, Sonar is very
well respected at shows like AES.

From a pro music perspective, I think people have heard about Sonar,
but it is dwarfed by the dominance of Protools. In this space, I would
say the hierarchy of respect is something like:

Protools
Logic
Nuendo
Sonar
(DP, Vegas, other)

In Europe, Nuendo and Cubase are used a lot more.

Sonar not being on the Mac hurts adoption. I think if it were on the Mac, it would
instantly replace Logic as the easier to use music composition and midi editing
alternative to Protools.

Lastly, Cakewalks marketing is "so small".

Perhaps Sonar is destined to be the Rodney Dangerfield of DAW software, but that
doesn't mean it doesn't deserve respect.

I think Sonar is a relatively good match for it's audience. It took Pro Tools many years before the mainstream engineering community would use it and Digidesign was really trying. I think if Cakewalk could somehow develop a turnkey platform, more pro facilities would seriously look at it. I'm not sure if Cakewalk is even interested in that market however.

ORIGINAL: themidiroom
I think Sonar is a relatively good match for it's audience. It took Pro Tools many years before the mainstream engineering community would use it and Digidesign was really trying. I think if Cakewalk could somehow develop a turnkey platform, more pro facilities would seriously look at it. I'm not sure if Cakewalk is even interested in that market however.

I'm convinced they're not. They would be behaving differently if they wanted to. I don't know
their sales stats / demographic .. but maybe it would just cost too much to push up into the
pro market compared to the ROI.