Just a historic note on the unisex track function. Pros and cons that had to be resolved.
 
Fresh, new, unorthodox with definite advantages. Turned off many potential users because it did not follow established protocol.
 
One major advantage is the output controls on the mixer, specifically volume and pan, work for anything virtual. Pan is pan and volume is volume. You've seen how depending on the design of a synth, the volume control may or may not work in Sonar because the volume and pan may have been designed to respond to CC data, not a fader, so it is a mix and match as to what controls what.. Can still be done of course, but not in a single consistent way across virtual synths. Fault is not with Sonar or any of the other major contenders, but the lack of strictness in what constitutes a vsti.
 
Reaper leveled the field with everything no matter what controlled by a single mixer fader and pan.
 
This however created a big problem for those using ourboard hardware synths. Since Reaper was controling the unisex track with real output faders and pan, hardware synths were screwed. They needed CC commands to regulate gradients. That left folks like me with a considerable arsenal of vintage synths dead in the water. No control over anything external as far as volume or position in the stereo field.
 
Fortunately, the devs gave in to the whiners and set up a switch to convert the output sliders to CC data. Everything worked fine after this.  Happened somewhere mid stream in ver 4. But, to get this to happen, you have to actuate the command on the channel which then changes the channel to a midi chanel, not an audio channel, not a unisex channel anymore. Does give the best of both worlds.
 
All this said, if you have to look for one program that has set the bar for comprehensive routing and control of keyboards, it's Studio One ver 3 and onward. Wish Sonar and Reaper could come up to this level of control.
 
John
 
 

undoubtedly they will and some.
So too with Reapers mute options. Not sure if any other DAW can do the same
but to be able to toggle the mute or change the mute to mute all others except the muted
is very handy, likewise their solo tool.
It is a pain to have to solo one item then to compare, un solo it and solo another. very tedious.
 

BJN
undoubtedly they will and some.
So too with Reapers mute options. Not sure if any other DAW can do the same
but to be able to toggle the mute or change the mute to mute all others except the muted
is very handy, likewise their solo tool.
It is a pain to have to solo one item then to compare, un solo it and solo another. very tedious.
 

In Sonar try selective solo.

BJN
It is a pain to have to solo one item then to compare, un solo it and solo another. very tedious.

Don't want to be a smarta$$ but it's called "Exclusive Solo" in SONAR and does exactly what you want.

 

Reaper is cool!  I like to keep Reaper around as a "second opinion" test bench, for example to compare a virtual synth or FX routing setup that I can't quite figure out in Sonar.  Or to test a plugin in a secondary DAW to compare performance or compatibility with Sonar.  I like the way that the track routing works in Reaper, it is different, and provides for a good A/B comparison for how things could work. 
 
But I don't think I would ever migrate to Reaper as my go-to DAW.  It takes me 2-3 times as long to do anything there.  That's probably just the learning curve, but you still have to RTFM to do many basic tasks that are very intuitive to me in Sonar.

I think the MIDI transfer protocols are long established and pretty well ironed out after almost 30 yrs. It might be the resolution is not the same - or you should also make sure there are no midi effects inserted - and that the transpose or timing widgets on the track view are not doing any offsets or conversions. ( Sorry if I'm talking old school - I'm still on sonar 5 - not sure if X3 even has the track view widgets.)

Interesting discussion, but did anybody notice the original post was made over two years ago?

Wow, you're right.
 
Probably a current question though because so much has changed with both programs in the interim.
Notation ability still being ironed out and refined in Reaper, their video support, web support for worldwide jams and sharing.
 
I kinda lost step with the constant avalanche of updates with Reaper. My short coming only, due to inability to understand what the majority of any of it means. Just a primitive a guitar banger here. Only comprehend a cord going into the DAW, that's as deep as I can go in this life.
 
If you are a gifted geek programmer, there are fast pace developments that bring orgasms to the faithful. Hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of refinements to allow a greater depth of scripting and programming. Over the couple years since the OP, there have been maybe 2 or 3 things done that were critical to my workflow. The rest is over my head.
 
Excellent program. Excellent and dedicated forum members on the high end of the bell curve in their understanding of bits and bytes. Left me in the dust a long time ago.
 
John

reaper is indeed an excellent daw, very powerful, only held back by a lot of stuff being seemingly 'hidden' for a lot of folks, new comers etc, and can do a lot more than a lot of people think because of this, it's menu system, it's look (fixable with user made themes) seem daunting, or turn a lot of folks away. but it is a very capable daw for those who 'click' with it and hang in there to overcome there initial hesitation.

abacab
Interesting discussion, but did anybody notice the original post was made over two years ago?

I'm still using an apple ii + ST with c-lab ;-)
 
whats this vst's you folk are talking about ?!?!
 
next you'll be saying folk don't use reels any more.