The last time I went into a mix studio for film and they used Sonar was when? ...............
 
Never! 
 

The post by Chris Hubbard is simple trolling. 
 
Pro Tools has a professional user base that dwarfs anything else here in the USA.  Why? You have to go back a few years to a time prior to seriously powerful native computers.  Back then, PT required a AVID interface that consisted of parallel CPU's that could handle larger sessions. They built their entire brand around a non-native DAW that required a host of proprietary hardware. Some here do not remember when it would costs serious money to have the kind  of native processing power we currently take for granted.  Once you bought into the PT pathway, you had to continue in order to use the hardware you had purchased. This was, and remains, an expensive system. Entry level PT11 HDX system will set you back around $10k unless you are trading in an older HD system.  PT11 native is a hobbled system compared with PT11HDX.  Yes, it is PT. But is has limitations when you compare them.
 
The folks at AVID are not stupid. They knew how klutzy prior 32 bit versions of PT performed compared to 64 bit Sonar, Nuendo, Cubase, etc.  They had to abandon their RTAS format and do a complete rewrite of code to bring it inline with modern DAW programs. Thus AAX was born. So far, there has been a fairly rapid porting of third party plugs to AAX.  All of my Ozone, Melodyne, Breverb, Softube, Toontrack, and Waves plugs are already ported and work just fine. UAD showed their AAX at AES and Slate has promised to have it in 2013.
 
I am NOT a PT fanboy. I far prefer Sonar.  I use Sonar every single day and PT11 only when I have to for a particular project.  DAW software in all the various brands is simply a tool. I try, and continue to explore all of the tools available to me. I've experimented with Cubase as well as Reaper, FL, and Studio One. I got into PT because I needed to have this tool available. I always come back to Sonar because it is like putting on a pair of old shoes. It's comfortable and fits.
 
The strength of PT has always been in their hardware and the somewhat captive audience they have built. PT11 is really a homerun for them. They now have come into the 64 bit world and implemented many functions we as Sonar users have had for years. I do not believe their core demographic bears much resemblance to the Sonar demographic. As noted by a prior post, they have a virtual lock on the post world. We as a Sonar community can state the obvious... they are late to the party. However, it seems a bit silly to cite this as an argument over platform.
 
I think we should all just get back to exploring X3. I am anxiously awaiting X3C.

markyzno

John T
Turning down work based on file formats strikes me as a basic lack of a key competence. You can either get sorted out to deal with whatever comes your way or work with the client to figure out how to pass stuff back and forth. It's not rocket science.
 

Try telling that a Film Distribution company when you are going through deliverables.

Ah, no, I meant it the other around. If that's how they operate, then it's the audio engineer's job to fit into their system, is what I was saying.

markyzno
Beep, I am a high end pro and all that jazz, but I still choose Sonar (btw great post)
 
As I have said, Avid are a Necessary EVIL.
 
I cant see the power balance shifting anytime soon, especially as Cakewalk have gone Tascam, Avid have Euphonix....Cakewalk went the right way with Roland but obviously that relationship didnt work out (much to my tears)..
 
Anyway, Sonar rules IS a creative DAW over PT. Using PT makes you feel like you are on the naughty step, it dictates YOU. Sonar is far more user friendly. Always has been and always will.
 
 

If I had that kind of money to drop on a DAW I'd be back on Nuendo... and STILL have cash left over and more hardware/plug in freedom. If I lost clients... well that's their own loss. The type of people I'd prefer to deal with are more open minded than all that.
 
I used to work at a film company (as a lowly dreg) and all the editors HATED their Avid systems. HATED them.
 
Sonar to me seems to be at the cutting edge as a creative tool. If they just got their stability issues under control and combed through the entire program to fix all the broken crap throughout the program I feel they would be the standard everyone else strives for. They just don't have the resources though. Perhaps the Gibson acquisition will change that. Roland sure didn't take advantage of the opportunity... well not in a productive way anyway. I think they just pulled a semi vulture capitalist maneuver and made sure they saw losses for the right offs, scammed code and ideas while stealing staff. I bet we'll see a brand new DAW from Roland in the near future.
 
Mark it on the calendar. This is the day I called that Roland will release it's own audio software and it will likely look a LOT like Sonar.
 

stevee9c6
The post by Chris Hubbard is simple trolling. 
 
Pro Tools has a professional user base that dwarfs anything else here in the USA.  Why? You have to go back a few years to a time prior to seriously powerful native computers.  Back then, PT required a AVID interface that consisted of parallel CPU's that could handle larger sessions. They built their entire brand around a non-native DAW that required a host of proprietary hardware. Some here do not remember when it would costs serious money to have the kind  of native processing power we currently take for granted.  Once you bought into the PT pathway, you had to continue in order to use the hardware you had purchased. This was, and remains, an expensive system. Entry level PT11 HDX system will set you back around $10k unless you are trading in an older HD system.  PT11 native is a hobbled system compared with PT11HDX.  Yes, it is PT. But is has limitations when you compare them.
 
The folks at AVID are not stupid. They knew how klutzy prior 32 bit versions of PT performed compared to 64 bit Sonar, Nuendo, Cubase, etc.  They had to abandon their RTAS format and do a complete rewrite of code to bring it inline with modern DAW programs. Thus AAX was born. So far, there has been a fairly rapid porting of third party plugs to AAX.  All of my Ozone, Melodyne, Breverb, Softube, Toontrack, and Waves plugs are already ported and work just fine. UAD showed their AAX at AES and Slate has promised to have it in 2013.
 
I am NOT a PT fanboy. I far prefer Sonar.  I use Sonar every single day and PT11 only when I have to for a particular project.  DAW software in all the various brands is simply a tool. I try, and continue to explore all of the tools available to me. I've experimented with Cubase as well as Reaper, FL, and Studio One. I got into PT because I needed to have this tool available. I always come back to Sonar because it is like putting on a pair of old shoes. It's comfortable and fits.
 
The strength of PT has always been in their hardware and the somewhat captive audience they have built. PT11 is really a homerun for them. They now have come into the 64 bit world and implemented many functions we as Sonar users have had for years. I do not believe their core demographic bears much resemblance to the Sonar demographic. As noted by a prior post, they have a virtual lock on the post world. We as a Sonar community can state the obvious... they are late to the party. However, it seems a bit silly to cite this as an argument over platform.
 
I think we should all just get back to exploring X3. I am anxiously awaiting X3C.

Nice post, Steve!  I'm also a PT user and, while it's not my go-to DAW nor do I consider myself a fanboy, I think that PT11 is a huge step in the right direction and, quite frankly, I enjoy using it (but prefer X3 much more, of course!).  BTW, not sure if you realize it, but NI has released AAX64 plugins for many of its instruments/effects this week - for some reason, it wasn't widely announced, but it looks like most of the major players are finally PT11-compatible.  Anyway, I'm not sure why these PT-vs-Sonar threads keep appearing here and I really wish that Sonar users would stop being so insecure and aggravated by Avid/PT.  They're both fine pieces of software with different core demographics, so there's no reason that the market can't accommodate both.
 
Now, where's that X3c update?!!! (not that I feel I'm missing anything in X3b).  Cakewalk really knocked it out of the park with this one.

Chrishubb2448
I think that the new Pro Tools 11 update could be worth all the trouble that is may cause. A LOT of the new features are great on 11. It finally has many features that all engineers have been waiting for. Pro Tools 11 redefines professional music and audio production for today’s workflows. From all-new audio and video engines and turbocharged 64-bit performance, to expanded metering and new HD video workflows. Pro Tools 11 also has 64-bit performance. This means much more accessible RAM to boost performance and you can creatively take your music and audio production to a whole new level, while handling bigger mixes with thousands of clips, take advantage of larger VI sampler sizes, and enjoy more system headroom. Pro Tools 11 is the dedicated low-latency input and playback buffers. This allows you to monitor record inputs on native systems with ultra-low latency — without sacrificing plug-in performance. To me, one of the best features of Pro Tools 11 is that you can now speed up delivery with offline bounce. With faster-than-real-time offline bounce, you can speed up your final mix or stem deliveries, up to 150x faster. Those little add-ons from Pro Tools 10 makes 11 better already. There are a ton more things that Avid has added and Im sure that you can read that on their website. One of my main things was the offline bounce, and I am finally happy that it is in 11. I have never used SONAR but I think that Pro Tools is still going to be the best recording software out there.  - Chris Hubbard 

Why would anyone respond to this?

Grum.

Maybe it will be called R-2 like starwars.

As someone who uses both, I'll drop my 2 cents. 
I prefer to track, record and mix in Sonar.  I like the included plug ins, track templates and effect chains.  Continuing on... the Midi functions/editor, unlimited track/bus count.  Sonar has several things over Pro Tools.
 
When it comes to any post production, audio editing and project/file sharing, Pro Tools is more advanced and the workflow is super fast.  Sonar doesn't have all the snapping options and navigation hot keys that Pro Tools does.  Also, the video engine in Sonar is light years behind Pro Tools.  ..just for some examples.
 
If you are just recording you or your band in a music situation, I think Sonar is a much better value
 
 

It's still hard to reply "Sonar" and have everyone look blank and say "Huh, never heard of it" when they ask what you are using.
Most seem to think Garageband, Cubase or Logic are the main alternatives to PT. I feel like the underdog.

M_Glenn_M
It's still hard to reply "Sonar" and have everyone look blank and say "Huh, never heard of it" when they ask what you are using.

I get that reaction quite a lot. It doesn't bother me, personally.