I've been using take lanes some here lately. I don't let it get to crazy before I bounce to clip and usually only work with one track at a time. I think take lanes will be a big part of the X3 improvements. 

I certainly hope you're right, clintmartin. And I hope they do without doing something crazy like making them 3-dimensional.

shawn@trustmedia.tv
SONAR IS MY MAGICAL MUSICAL TOOLBOX...I LOVE IT!

I have been using SONAR as a serious user for about 8-10 weeks now.  I bought a copy of the entry-level SONAR 8 version but never invested the time to get up the learning curve.
 
I am doing a bunch of different things with it.  Most of that is experimental/learning -- i.e. I have no illusions about being able to produce a commercial grade result with my current skill set.   However, I do some semi-serious work.  I play in a bunch of community bands (concert bands, jazz big bands, orchestras, small ensembles).  I have done live recordings of many of these groups for several years, not to produce a commercial-grade recording, but to help the musicians improve their sound.  And a good recording is a form of pay for somebody in a volunteer position.
 
I have done most of the editing in recent years using Audacity.  That allowed me to produce a product that was OK, but I don't have to tell anyone here the huge gap between what you can do with Audacity and what you can do with X2 Producer.
 
Cutting to the chase, I have mixed the last 5 programs using SONAR, and people went out of their way to say how much they liked those recordings on 4 of those.  Magical toolbox, indeed. 
 
I have my work flow down to the point that I get the whole thing done in the same time it took with Audacity but the result is far, far better.  As far as SONAR's bugs and nuisances go, yeah, I look forward to improved releases.  But I honestly haven't crashed SONAR for over a month.  I guess I have just learned the path that gets things done and I stopped doing the things that crash the program.
 
I did a program last night mixing 7 channels after the fact.  I never would have taken on more than 4 tracks with Audacity.  With SONAR's user interface, the extra channels don't really add much to the total mix time.  Based on that experience, I would not mind capturing 12 or more channels if the venue and ensemble called for that.  It is very definitely manageable, even for my projects where I allow myself no more than 3 hours to mix a 60-minute concert.
 
Are there better DAWs out there?  Probably not, when you add everything together.  The grass always looks greener, but basically the DAWs are mostly a commodity.  The real differences are in the VSTs and the skills of the user.  I don't believe I would get better results from any other DAW.
 
Speaking of skills, I don't have experience with user groups for other DAWs, but I have used lots of sophisticated software over the years.  I can't think of a smarter, more helpful community than the folks that participate on this forum.  That is really a big part of what makes SONAR work for so many people.

It seems we get a mention downstairs in the CH, in a thread entitled "I have to say".  Go have a look.
 
Apparently we are "Friggin' jerks", and smug, and the OP adds " **** 'em and the snake they rode in on."
 
Charming.

brconflict
I certainly hope you're right, clintmartin. And I hope they do without doing something crazy like making them 3-dimensional.

EEK!!!! 
 
No 3d stuff here thankee....

cparmerlee
 
 
 
Are there better DAWs out there?  Probably not, when you add everything together.  The grass always looks greener, but basically the DAWs are mostly a commodity.  The real differences are in the VSTs and the skills of the user.  I don't believe I would get better results from any other DAW.
 

 
It's obvious you've never used any other DAWs if you can make a statement like this..

vintagevibe

cparmerlee
Are there better DAWs out there?  Probably not, when you add everything together.  The grass always looks greener, but basically the DAWs are mostly a commodity.  The real differences are in the VSTs and the skills of the user.  I don't believe I would get better results from any other DAW.
 

 
It's obvious you've never used any other DAWs if you can make a statement like this..

I have downloaded a couple of free trials.  None of them immediately jumped out as being clearly superior.  They all seem about the same to me.  They all support mostly the same VSTs.  They all do MIDI tracks.  They all do audio tracks. They all have some way to do punches. They all have mixing capabilities. They mostly have some decent MIDI editing capabilities. They all do loops.  They almost all have options to freeze tracks, etc.
 
There is a long learning curve with any of them before one reaches the power user level.  At that point, a person might prefer one work flow over another, or prefer one screen layout over another.  But these really look like classic mature-market commodities to me.  The real differentiation is in the VSTs.

Add me to the list of people happy with Sonar X2. This is my hobby and I'm using Sonar at least 2 hrs/day, sometimes all day, putting together new arrangements. Very easy to use (after reading the 2000 page user's manual and Scott's Power Book) and very rare to have a crash. (about the same as any other application on windoze)
 
Life is good!
 
Walt

cparmerlee

vintagevibe

cparmerlee
Are there better DAWs out there?  Probably not, when you add everything together.  The grass always looks greener, but basically the DAWs are mostly a commodity.  The real differences are in the VSTs and the skills of the user.  I don't believe I would get better results from any other DAW.
 

 
It's obvious you've never used any other DAWs if you can make a statement like this..

I have downloaded a couple of free trials.  None of them immediately jumped out as being clearly superior.  They all seem about the same to me.  They all support mostly the same VSTs.  They all do MIDI tracks.  They all do audio tracks. They all have some way to do punches. They all have mixing capabilities. They mostly have some decent MIDI editing capabilities. They all do loops.  They almost all have options to freeze tracks, etc.
 
There is a long learning curve with any of them before one reaches the power user level.  At that point, a person might prefer one work flow over another, or prefer one screen layout over another.  But these really look like classic mature-market commodities to me.  The real differentiation is in the VSTs.

I agree and I have owned just about all the DAWs that will run on a PC. Each has its strong point but all have weaknesses.  

John
 
I agree and I have owned just about all the DAWs that will run on a PC. Each has its strong point but all have weaknesses.  

 
Yes but they are not all the same.  The strong points and weaknesses make them functionally very different.  It all depends on your needs so it is IMO misguided to assume that they are pretty much all the same.  You need to dive deep and decide what your needs are to choose the best DAW.