I know I shouldn't but sometimes I just feel possessed to chime in on some of this:

i wanna make music WITHOUT ISSUE

ah...have you considered a TEAC 4 track ?

Bill -
CHO

I use to have to take my 4-track apart every so often to fix the play button. 

While the tone of the OP's diatribe is lacking, he has some points, which could have been make in a more acceptable manner:  
1)  It is noteworthy that some DAW software seems to be more forgiving of hardware configuration.
 
2)  Mixcraft is a great value for what it is... and it is not a "toy"
 
http://www.acoustica.com/mixcraft/pdf/Keyboard_Magazine_Review_Dec_2012.pdf
 
3)  The improvements from version 4 through 6 are quite remarkable
 
4)  They used a public beta program - smart move

I still have my cassette based Tascam 8-Track.

I can emphatically say, without a doubt, I have never lost a moments work in the 20 years I've owned it.

It's never once automatically rewound the tape, erased it, and left it blank.

;)

Bub


I still have my cassette based Tascam 8-Track.

I can emphatically say, without a doubt, I have never lost a moments work in the 20 years I've owned it.

It's never once automatically rewound the tape, erased it, and left it blank.

;)

You obviously were not using the cakewalk one.


Just kidding cakewalk. 


But hardware does have its advantages. But disadvantages also. We still use a tascam msr24. Maintenance is expensive and difficult when something breaks which has happened. 

CakeAlexS


I suspect less than 1% of people who use Sonar post here.
Anyway GodParticle clearly IS the self proclaimed expert of everything (God is all seeing), we clearly know nothing... Good luck to him in life, ...  and the afterlife. I'm sure his music will live on forever in peoples hearts..

I don't know why people need validation for the DAW choices they make. I couldn't care less about what DAW someone chooses to use. Really. Why someone feels the need to come on the forum of the DAW I personally choose to use to tell me all about why my choice is a poor one, and why I am a knucklehead for putting up with all of its flaws is beyond me.
The person who I have come to respect greatly in this respect is Rain - who is an unapologetic Logic user, who still frequents these forums, (not so much the SONAR one, but Techniques, Software, the Coffee Shop) but who doesn't see the need to try to earn a commission from Apple by trying to sway others to his point of view. He respects the fact that this is a SONAR community, and that there are bound to be a lot of people who are loyal to SONAR here. 
Before someone says that I am against any criticism (and obviously a fanboi), that's not it. SONAR works well here, and I like it for my needs. That doesn't mean it will be the case for everyone. 
The last thing I would do is go to a Reaper, or Presonus or Mixcraft forum to tell everyone there why they are dopes for using that particular DAW application. Just makes no sense - make your choice and move on.

WDI

Bub


I still have my cassette based Tascam 8-Track.

I can emphatically say, without a doubt, I have never lost a moments work in the 20 years I've owned it.

It's never once automatically rewound the tape, erased it, and left it blank.

;)

You obviously were not using the cakewalk one.


Just kidding cakewalk. 


But hardware does have its advantages. But disadvantages also. We still use a tascam msr24. Maintenance is expensive and difficult when something breaks which has happened. 

@WDI,
 
You sig indicates that you are using Sonar 7 PE on XP.  That's pretty remarkable.
 
Other than the new releases of Sonar not providing anything you needed or that your setup is uber stable, why have you stayed on 7 PE, and is there anything which continues to work better for you than on newer releases?

pbognar


While the tone of the OP's diatribe is lacking, he has some points, which could have been make in a more acceptable manner:  
1)  It is noteworthy that some DAW software seems to be more forgiving of hardware configuration.
 
2)  Mixcraft is a great value for what it is... and it is not a "toy"
 
http://www.acoustica.com/mixcraft/pdf/Keyboard_Magazine_Review_Dec_2012.pdf
 
3)  The improvements from version 4 through 6 are quite remarkable
 
4)  They used a public beta program - smart move

it all depends on what kind of producing your doing,myself i look at it as a toy.
how would you compare it against sonar x2 ?
 
do you feel the flow is the same ?
just curious.maybe im missing something or are we really comparing mixcraft against x2.
 
the sizes are very different,200 mb for mixcraft.
6 gb for x2 and that minus the added content,thats only the basic package of the daw and plug ins.

Truth is that you simply wouldn't be a dope for using Reaper or Studio One or Mixcraft, those DAW's don't fu_k with your mix every day and get in the way of putting out the goods. But using Sonar, well hey, enjoy the incessant bugs and anomalies that just keep popping up day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year, upgrade after upgrade, decade after decade. HULLOOOOO? Biff this sh_t until cakewalk stops taking you for a ride people, how long are you gonna let them keep yanking your chain. Clearly, going by Sonar's track-record for the last decade Cakewalk needs a new head-programmer and a proper team of coders who know what the hell they are doing. No DAW on the planet has the disgusting track-record that Sonar has, and continues to have. If i owned Cakewalk I would have sent the head-programmer out the door years ago, he's a total dud, and has amply proven that he's an amateur.  

I currently have a song running 19 individual softsynths each on their own track, plus 18 audio tracks, plus tonnes of realtime midi, and over 120 effects ALL RUNNING IN REALTIME STRAIGHT OFF THE CPU WITH NO CRACKS OR POPS AND AT ZERO LATENCY, and still my CPU IS ONLY AT 21%. NOW THAT'S WHAT I CALL A PROFESSIONAL DAW. Oh hang-on, i forgot, we are fu_kwits for not doing a 5 year diploma in Windows configuration and hardware research LOL, you guys and your 2 cent come-backs are just a sad lot. The facts show that Sonar is a lemon, plain and simple, it has been from the start, and just keeps getting worse, but Mixcraft has shown itself to be a reliable competent full-fledged Pro DAW, which only costs $149 i might add; I don't need to use a multi-fader console, i make dance music with high-end analog-emulation software plugins and a midi controller, and all's good here.

And obviously as you can see by the KeyBoard magazine review, i ain't talking sh_t. And just wait until Mixcraft 7 comes out, ho ho ho.

Looks like all the gainsayers and cockroaches have gone quiet and run for cover; where are you? Oh, you downloaded the Mixcraft demo did you. Well all i can say is...EAT THAT!

When cakewalk takes it's customers seriously and starts to cull most of the bloat, and also gets a new programming team and totally redesigns the user-interface plus strips all the legacy-code out to make a brand-new DAW that actually works without a hitch and runs beautifully on standard computer soundcards, then i'll take another look, but by then it will be too late, I'll be rewiring Mixcraft 7 into Studio One III and thus Sonar will be utterly irrelevant, along with all its sub-par bullsh_t and antics. Pro DAW my ass, you guys need to get a new sense of humour (<Yes, that's British spelling) HeHeHe

> "I currently have a song with 19 individual softsynths..." - awesome; good job. Wonderful. > "Looks like all the gainsayers (-?) and cockroaches have gone quiet and run for cover" I think we're actually waiting for you to post some songs, as requested multiple times above. That said I wish you well and have no beef with your Mixcraft joy. Best, Ed