• SONAR
  • SONAR X2 versus Cubase 7 (p.16)
2013/03/11 11:07:50
robert_e_bone
Mr godparticle, 

I had read through your initial posts last night (and the 5 pages of follow ups), and although surprised to see you had returned, I had decided that based on the demeanor of your initial posts that I would put together an attempt to post a response offering up whatever info I could to try to provide you my perspective on various software, principally Studio One, Cubase, and Sonar.  I just had a knee replaced a week ago, and was in quite a bit of pain last night, so I put off responding until this morning.

My perspective on the above-mentioned software is:

Studio One:  I have this, and like it, but it does not have the horsepower for my particular needs, particularly for mixing.  It is installed, but I never really do anything with it any more.

Cubase: It has been a while since I used this, but I did own it and had it installed for a while on a prior computer.  I found the interface rather clunky and difficult to navigate.  It did not feel 'smooth' to me to use, so I moved away from it.

Sonar:  I have owned and used Sonar for well over 20 years (from way back in the days of Twelve Tone and DOS), and while I did pick up both Studio One and Cubase in more recent years, I always have personally found Sonar to be my preferred DAW software.  Sonar 8.5.3 was very powerful, but also very difficult to master - there was a huge learning curve to find and remember all of the little productivity 'tricks' - and that version is the one I most compare to Cubase.  The Cakewalk decision to completely rewrite the user interface with X1, and further enhance with X2/X2a was HUGELY welcomed by me.  X2 is wonderfully easy for me to use - easy to navigate, and easy to accomplish most things that I need it to do, and it has an incredible number of components that come with it, like the soft synths and effects, the Pro-Channel, and screen sets.  For me, Sonar X2a is stable and my productivity has never been higher with any prior version of Sonar (even 8.5.3) or with any other software I have used (Cubase or Studio One).

Bob Bone
2013/03/11 18:49:29
Jeff Evans
Asking which workflow is superior is sort of hard because an experienced Sonar user will be fast and fluent with the Sonar workflow hence will say yes it is good. They may find Studio One say a little awkward to use. An experienced Pro Tools user is also going to feel at home on PT and say it is good but they may find other DAW's a little uncomfortable.

Me however, slick and fast on Studio One therefore I will tell you the workflow is also good. I find Sonar uncomfortable to use now when and if I have to go to it for any reason. Workflow will be good on many DAW's, basically it is related to how well you know your program. Simple as that.

Studio One mixing is as good an any. Horsepower is related to the computer not the program. (UAD when engaged really takes mixing  into serious territory too) The standard plugins will get you a fantastic mix, period. (Remember it the engineer that achieves that only) But as many of us have third party stuff, that is how you are expected to use it. Rather than give you a whole lot of Pro Channel type modules, they give you a solid frame to plug your own things in there. And I do, and they all work very well too in that situation.

It is nice too send some great sounding tracks straight through to the stereo mix too without the slightest interference. Pro Channel and Console emulators totally unnecessary.

It is great too that programs like Sonar offer so much as standard. Means you don't have to go out and buy the extra stuff and the standard is high with the Sonar built in stuff too. Just two different ways of approaching it. 

But if you are wanting to compare DAW's and find out, it is time as we have been saying to use them and see which one fits your vibe, feel and personality. No amount of discussion is going to get you to that point. 

Only listen to people who are on the latest version of Cubase (and any other DAW) as well. Sorry people but Cubase SX3 and around that time sort of does not cut it does it. Bit like comparing to the first version of Sonar. Do you want someone to base their impression on the first version of Sonar or the latest version. It is imperative that you examine all the very latest versions of all the programs of interest. Quite large improvements have been made in very recent updates to some programs out there. 

It is also important to realise that all DAW's have features that are well beyond those in their counterparts. It is silly to think that there is one that is so far out front and the others are way behind. It is not like that. It is a bit like a running race and the runners are all about a meter apart really, moving at the speed of light and taking it in turns to be the leader out front, it is usually only for a second or two!
2013/03/11 19:32:30
Jim Roseberry
But if you are wanting to compare DAW's and find out, it is time as we have been saying to use them and see which one fits your vibe, feel and personality. No amount of discussion is going to get you to that point. 



Good advice, Jeff...
Not much different than asking the same question about a particular instrument.
ie:  What's the best bass guitar?
You'll get plenty of opinions if you ask various players... but you need to experience what's available to figure out which *you* prefer.


Basic recording/editing/mixing is actually pretty similar in all the major DAW applications.
There are differences in work-flow... but as Jeff said... it's mostly down to being familiar with each application.
You can achieve great results with Sonar, Cubase, Studio One 2, Reaper, etc.


2013/03/11 19:44:03
Beepster
I do all my digital recordings on an abacus.
2013/03/11 20:31:34
John
Beepster


I do all my digital recordings on an abacus.

For the pre analog sound. Talk about retro!
2013/03/11 23:04:21
trimph1
John


Beepster


I do all my digital recordings on an abacus.

For the pre analog sound. Talk about retro!
pppfffft.


Not retro enough. I'm going back to knotted rope....


2013/03/11 23:09:30
robert_e_bone
Well, MANY folks had already attempted to let godparticle know that he was best off downloading demos and determining his own choice, and he had ignored all of that.  That's what I really wanted to type, but decided to go with what I ended up with after some internal struggles.

I was only relaying my own experiences as my own experiences, and not meaning to say anything different.

I could only speak to the versions I had - for horsepower I was really referring to things like the Pro Channel and all of that end of things that are so wonderful to have included with Sonar - I guess I could have explained that better, but I was torn the whole time I was posting that, because my brain kept telling me to ignore the whole thread.  It was kind of like that scene in Animal House where Pinto has the angel and the devil trying to convince him which way to go with the underage girl.

For me too, the angel side won, and I took the high road.  I was kind of expecting him to still go off on me, like he had done with everyone else.

Anyway - looks like it will remain a more quiet forum for a little bit.

Bob Bone
2013/03/12 03:22:46
FastBikerBoy
A bit late but........


2013/03/12 09:58:39
SteveStrummerUK
FastBikerBoy


A bit late but........



 
No need mate, you get a free can of this stuff with every installation from Kitchens Worcester
 
 

 
 
 
2013/03/12 10:23:37
Bristol_Jonesey
I haven't seen a Kitchens Bristol yet.

Do you think they've forgotten us?
© 2026 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1

Use My Existing Forum Account

Use My Social Media Account