I started with pro audio 9 and then left for Samplitude. Mainly because the sound engine in samplitude was much better for one thing and also at the time samplitude was a better emulation of hardware mixing. I came back to Sonar 4 because of ease of use mainly, anyone who has used SAM can tell you its a very good program, but not real user friendly and as my needs grew I needed better midi capabilities and Sonar was better hands down. I doubt ill ever switch again because learning one program is time consuming enough as it is.

Audio recording has always been my hobby, not a profession - so I can't fund it the way I'd like to. I've grown from 4-track Fostex cassette recorders to the Pro Tool Digi001 which worked great, but their plug-in's or add-on's are too expensive for any hobbyist.

I switched to Sonar 6 Producer for two main reasons: 1) "most" everything you'll ever need comes with in the basic software package, and 2) the sales guy at the music store said he uses it and it is 'the bomb" for any recording project. A close personal friend of mine works at Digidesign and was absolutely "crushed" when I bought Sonar 6, but he had to admit it's an outstanding value once I showed him a demo... (and I'm still learning it !!!)

Hi there -what a nice Idea to Talk about that kind of decission!

I was Steinberg-Cubase User since Version 1.0! One Reason was, that my first apartment in Hamburg/Germany was very close to the Steinberg Development-Center. We had some Contacts about Bugs and improvements concerning the first Version and they send me some Updates for free B)
So - i was a real Steinberg-Fan...
Over the Years Steinberg introduce the audio-recording Stuff, an more functions. But also the usage of the hole software become more complicate...
After they introducing the "new" Cubase SX1 i was *very* frustrate about the bugs and workarounds - To make music become more and more a matter of "handling cubase in the right way". But I just want to play my instrument - I dont want to become an Expert in using a complicated Software!
Because of that i took a closer look to the competitors. Finaly I bought Sonar 4. The reason for this decision was very simple - The "Philosophie" of Cakewalk to build an easy-to-use-Recording-Software.

Thanks for reading - and sorry for my poor english

Tosch;)

I started out as an FL Studio user, though it wasn't long before the pattern-based workflow (kinda improved in v7) became a limitation for the kind of work I wanted to do, which involved longer, complicated melodies, often with multi-timbral multi-out plugins.

I'd been advised by many people to go with Cubase, as they claimed it had great MIDI editing (but no demo, so that was a complete non-starter). I used the Sonar 4 web demo for a while, and found myself pleasantly surprised at how robust and feature-rich the software was. It seemed that Home Studio 4 was going to inherit lots of these things, so I became a Home Studio user for a while. Then upgraded to Studio 5 and then Studio 6 (which was a real milestone for me. proper VST automation, which had been a bit glitchy before).

Sonar represents (for me), great value from a great company (clearly involved with its userbase) and one in which the improvements just keep on coming. It just does what it says on the tin.

ORIGINAL: Marketing [Cakewalk]

Hello,

Over the last few years we have seen a major surge in the number of customers switching to SONAR from other applications. We have our own ideas why this has been occuring, but we would prefer to hear it from you directly. So, please tell us.

What we are interested in knowing is:

1. What application you switched from and which version of SONAR you switched to.
2. Your specific reasons for switching to SONAR (specific features in SONAR, specific problems with other aps, customer service, etc.)

Thanks for your support of SONAR and thanks in advance for your help.

Best regards,

Carl Jacobson
Marketing Director
Cakewalk

I switched to Sonar 6 Producer Edition from Steinberg's Cubase 4.

I was a long time user of Cubase. I started with VST 3.7 and upgraded to VST 5, SX 1, SX 2, SX 3, and finally Cubase 4. With each new release came the hype that this was the Cubase that was going solidify the product followed by the reality that this was just another chapter in the saga of bitter disappointment. The straw that broke the camel's back was the back to back marketing blunders of (a) removing DX support and not telling anyone until after they had sold the product and (b) pulling the plug on the final SX3 patch after having promised it for more than a year. I felt I could no longer trust the company, and I called their integrity into question.

I had met Alex Westner through my work with FX-Max. Also, my work at FX-Max had introduced me to the Sonar product. To begin with, I knew just enough about it to support most of the Sonar / FX-Teleport questions. When the time came for me to switch over, Sonar was available to me, and I began to recognize that this was something special. As I began to work with it, I found myself dispelling many of the myths that abound about Sonar. I am sure you've all heard them, and if you've worked with the product you know it just hogwash. I crossgraded to Sonar, and I haven't looked back.

I also decided to invest in Samplitude as well to give me a dual approach.

My Steinberg experience taught me 2 things.

1. Never put all of your eggs in one basket.
2. Never put any of your eggs in Steinberg's basket because you never know when they will come along and cut the bottom out from beneath you.

rictheobscene

I'm totally with you on that! I switched from quitbase about 6 months ago to sonar 6 pe after wasting a year just trying to get past 1 track how pathetic is that.

I dont have to buy Extra Crap just to get basic tracks finished. (pro tools:( )

Also I can have as many tracks as my system can support.

Enough Said on that:)

Would still like Acid Style cutting if samples.

byebye
mrfantastical

I am in the process of switching. I am coming over from Cubase SX3, and some recent "issues" with my setup that only reared their head once I got into some intense projects (over 30+ tracks of audio).. and of course Steiny's legendary drop of support for SX/SL line of DAW's while still selling them via their online store or retail.

I have gone to using Sonar LE for now since my PE6 web demo has expired.. and the same projects imported over as wav files from the SX project have been rock solid.

I'm waiting for the upgrade annoucement for 6/7 before doing the official crossgrade.

Feature wise both are similar.. but Cakewalk's level of involvement and care for the end user is a refreshing drink of water in the hot desert of the DAW world =-)

ORIGINAL: studio343

I am in the process of switching. I am coming over from Cubase SX3, and some recent "issues" with my setup that only reared their head once I got into some intense projects (over 30+ tracks of audio).. and of course Steiny's legendary drop of support for SX/SL line of DAW's while still selling them via their online store or retail.

I have gone to using Sonar LE for now since my PE6 web demo has expired.. and the same projects imported over as wav files from the SX project have been rock solid.

I'm waiting for the upgrade annoucement for 6/7 before doing the official crossgrade.

Feature wise both are similar.. but Cakewalk's level of involvement and care for the end user is a refreshing drink of water in the hot desert of the DAW world =-)

Amen

I started recording by trying different softwares, to begin with.. cooledit, adobe audition,vegas,cubase, but one software that i was stuck and used to using is SONAR. I started out witho sonar 2 then eventually to its latest Sonar 6 PE. I have to admit that i havent figured out all the functions of the software and how i wish i could also maximize my learning for a better recording.

Thanks to cakewalk sonar that i have at least finished our album inspite of the lack of our equipments. the software was really helpful tool ong the growth of our music.