ORIGINAL: ChristoherDuncan

...but had been analog tape till Cakewalk 5 which (I believe) was the first attempt to integrate audio recording.

Actually, Version 4 began the Pro Audio series.

By the way...welcome to the forum!

I switched from Mac to PC and chose Sonar because the only other reasonable alternative at the time was Cubase. I refuse to give any more money to Steinberg, having already been abused as a customer by them in the past. I have played around with SX3, and truthfully I like it a little better than Sonar in terms of workflow and GUI. Too bad Steinberg can never have more money from me, otherwise I might have purchased it. I have never seen Cubase4, but I suspect I would have similar feelings. That being said, cubase has a long standing well known problem for "some people" with midi timing jitter. That is the number#2 reason I chose Sonar over Cubase.

Sonar also has a few other neat features that cubase does not, like CAL programming and MFX capabilities. Of course, I have never actually had to use either those two features yet, but I really should try to take advantage of them, they were considered important to me in my buying decision. There are lots of other bells and whistles to Sonar that many people may consider important, but to me are more like add on perks. ACT, for example. The Acid-like capabilities. etc.. All the great plugins. Actually the plugins truly are nice, but I've already purchased third party plugins that I use more often than not anyway. For me the main reason for Sonar was for midi timing stability and the fact that it did everything I really needed essential in a DAW. I'm very happy with it, but I continually hope that Sonar will yet improve the GUI, the score editor, piano roll and drum editor to be as good as or better than SX3. I'm doubtful it will happen quite honestly, but even still, I prefer to use Sonar for the reasons already mentioned.

I have been useing Cakewalk Home Studio 2004 for the past few years. It took me a long time to understand it because I don't come from a recording background. In July I decided to buy a new computer with Vista and lots of memory and bells and whistles. I bought Sonar 6 and installed it. Honestly, its been a huge disappointment so far. It's like learning the whole interface from scratch. And whenever I try to record something I just get dropouts. I may just uninstall sonar 6 and go back to HS 2004. Is this progress?
BDJ

ORIGINAL: BigDaddyJoel
Honestly, its been a huge disappointment so far. It's like learning the whole interface from scratch. And whenever I try to record something I just get dropouts.

Depending on your audio interface, there are still issues with Vista. Typically (under Windows XP) dropouts are caused from incorrect buffer settings and other user controlled settings. Once you get that dialed in you should be fine. I'm still running Windows XP SP2 and will be for some time still. I have seen quite a few posts regarding DAW's and Vista if you want to do a forum search. SONAR seems to be ready for Vista, but I don't know that Vista is ready for audio.

ORIGINAL: Mike Fisher
By the way...welcome to the forum!

Thanks, man. Always been impressed by the vibe with Cakewalk folks. Version 4, was it? Your memory is clearly better than mine. It's been a number of years, and I've slept since then.

Looking forward to seeing how the Sonar 6 UI feels. Nuendo is doing a fine job for me, but it would sure be nice to have my MIDI and mixing all under one roof.

ORIGINAL: ChristoherDuncan

Your memory is clearly better than mine.

Nah, I just have all the discs and manuals since Cakewalk DOS 2.*. Otherwise, I probably wouldn't remember either!

Looking forward to seeing how the Sonar 6 UI feels. Nuendo is doing a fine job for me, but it would sure be nice to have my MIDI and mixing all under one roof.

I've got a friend who uses Nuendo, but doesn't have any MIDI needs. I've always used a good combination of MIDI and audio. Whatever works for you. There's a lot a great software available now. Back in the pre-audio Cakewalk Pro days, I used to sync Cakewalk and a 4-track cassette via SMPTE to record the audio. The key is doing the best you can with whatever tools you have available.

I started out recording with a tascam 4 track in the 80's. from there I worked in different analog studios. I decided to start recording again in the mid 90's. Started using pro tools but I did not like it. From there went to cubase. It came with a sound blaster card. There was a 16 track limit on it. I have tried other DAWs as well. Then I decided to take the plunge and purchased Sonar 2 SE. Sonar seem to fit well with the things I wanted to do with my music. So I upgraded to Sonar 3 PE. Then from there I upgraded to Sonar 5 PE. I was blown away When I opened a project I had recorded using Sonar 3 into Sonar 5. I could not get over just how much better it sounded without remixing or touching anything. So I spent some time importing old projects and playing around with them. I hope to upgrade to Sonar 7 when ever it it released. I have not used the midi functions all that much. for the most part I am a guitar player.

I would like to see an audio to midi converter. Something that would take my audio guitar track and convert it to midi. That way I could explore some of the midi functions of sonar that I have ignored. I am not a keyboard player. I have exported audio and converted it to midi and then reimported the midi into Sonar. The program was some cheap shareware program. I had a few peoblems with it, but it worked OK. I was going to buy the boost plug in but then I read it will be included in Sonar 7. So I will just wait for that.

Okay here it is in point form:

1988-1997: Atari 1040 ST running Steinberg 12, then Mastertracks Pro, then C-Lab Notator 3.1
1997-1999: Compaq Presario 486DX2 66 running Mastertracks Pro and Encore
1999-2000: P3 running
Steinberg Cubase VST32
2000-2002: Mastertracks Pro, Encore, then Magix Music Studio (Logic knock-off).
2002-2005: Dell P4 running Sonar 2 up to Sonar 5 (had problems with audio stream in 5)
2005-2007: Mac OS 9 to OSX running Logic Express 7, then MOTU Digital Performer 5, then Steinberg Cubase 4
Presently: AMD64 Athlon 3200 w. 3 gigs ram running Sonar 6.1...and loving it!

Honestly I have been through every single major DAW (except for Pro Tools) and I can hoenstly say that Sonar fits my compositional tendencies better than anything else. I like the ease of setting up markers, using the tabs to display notation and controller messages, mixdown and VI freezing.

Since Cubase Studio 4 is bi-platform, I do use it to contrast only because it does run a little more smoothly when I'm using Vienna SE and HALion Symphonic Orchestra. Not sure why that is but I much prefer the Sonar 6 environment since you can paint on loops or even change a MIDI event into a groove loop. Cubase is still a little a buggy.

After installing Sonar 6 (an upgrade from my Sonar 3 environment), I thought I'd follow up on my previous comments.

6 is nice, and has a few tweaks here & there that I suspect I'll like, such as the native support for VST. My previous VST tracks sound different played back in 6, and I suspect it's due to a better quality of control & flexibility from the native support. I'll have to tweak the tracks, but it should be worth it in terms of expressiveness.

In short, for anyting that comes within 100 miles of MIDI, Sonar is still the absolute best product on the market, even if it's clear that MIDI features come in a distant and winded second in your development effort. You haven't given any real thought to UI and usability enhancements in this area since the Cakewalk days (where most of this code obviously came from). E.g., I just spent an hour dealing with the drum map manager dialog - as elegant UI goes, you've just got to be kidding me. Clearly, the audio recording and mixing is where your focus is today. It would be nice if you continued to make enhancements to what makes Sonar unique, the best of breed MIDI features, but even with a UI that's becoming more primative by the year in terms of what's possible, the power of your MIDI is still worth the price of the software alone. Nonetheless, from a marketing perspective, you're still playing catch up on audio, and yet you neglect the one true competitive advantage you have. Curious.

That said, Nuendo will continue to be my DAW of choice for final mixdown, and most of that decision comes down to the fact that Sonar's UI is, well, clumsy. You folks seem to be fixated on competing with Cubase. My recommendation would be to set your sights higher and spend some time looking at the way grouping, routing, busses, and many other aspects of the mixing experience are handled in Nuendo. There's no reason why Sonar can't one day also be the ultimate in pro audio mixing, but you're not going to get there with a mindset of competing with second tier products.

Ultimately, I'd love to have one piece of software that offers quality without compromise for MIDI, audio and deep audio editing (see Cool Edit Pro / Adobe Audition) combined so that I wouldn't have to switch between apps, and you have no serious competition in the MIDI part of this equation (maybe if you did you'd take the UI a bit more seriously).

Perhaps after version 7 it's time to do what you did before. Retire Sonar as you did Cakewalk, take what you've learned from the experience, and start a new product from scratch that could truly give the high dollar studio tools such as Pro Tools and Nuendo a run for their money. With your background in MIDI, if you could get up to their level in the other areas I mentioned, you'd make serious inroads in the pro audio sector.

Until that day, I remain a dedicated Sonar user - for MIDI.

I hope the observations are taken in the constructive manner in which they're intended. Having spent two decades in the software business, I understand the battles you fight more than most, and I still think very highly of Cakewalk as a company. Here's to your continued success.

Christopher