sharke

Beepster
IIRC Pro Tools is still 32 bit limited so it would be a good selling point considering they are a major competitor. 

I still find it incredible that Pro Tools seems no closer to a 64-bit version, given that it's the *cough* "Industry Standard" *cough*. 


From what I've heard, it's going to require a complete rewrite of their audio engine, so God knows how long that's going to take them. I remember when speculation was rife that Pro Tools 10 would be 64 bit, and yet it wasn't. 


One thing's for sure. If they're going to be releasing a 64-bit version of Pro Tools that's essentially a rewrite from the ground up, I wouldn't like to be an early adopter. 

Actually, I spoke to the European marketing executive - or whatever his position was - earlier this year and 64-bit pro tools is on its way. Apparently it's even more or less finished and being tested. The problem is it will require new hardware and updating and reorganizing plugins etc etc and they were worried that their pro clientel would have massive problems with that, both in terms of down time and cost. New hardware has arrived and they've made a new plugin standard. My guess is that the outrageous upgrade price to PT10 is because of this.
 
It sucks being the "industry standard" when you have to consider all that stuff too 

Beepster


@ProjectM... hmm, and that's the extent of it? My first DAW was a hand me down Nuendo system. Dude was purely audio based. Weird. I really liked it even though I didn't know what the heck I was doing back then and intended on going back to Nuendo (well using it in conjunction with Sonar) if I ever started making decent money again. However if it's just a really souped up for video version of Cubase I'll have to rethink that. I did however notice the current version of Cubase (6.5) is limited to 32 bit whereas Nuendo is 64. That's a deal breaker.

BTW... I tossed that song I was talking about up in the Songs forum if you wanted to check it out. Still needs some tweaks but I got other stuff going on right now. Cheers.

Well, Nuendo is actually quite a different beast. Nuendo now have only very basic MIDI unless you purchase the "Composers Pack" or whatever it's called, which pretty much puts Cubase into Nuendo. It's a $2K purchase for the whole package - or something like that - but then you have what probably is the most powerfull Media composing package that works on any system. I have recorded a lot of music with Nuendo - and millions of hours of ADR - and it is really good as far as DAWs go. But it crashes a whole lot too. However, the networking abillities is absolutely amazing. Unless you dabble with stuff like that then it's money out the window IMO.
 
A DAW for a specific need. In the end they all record audio
 
Will check out your new track! Man, I'm looking forward to that one!

 
It sucks being the "industry standard" when you have to consider all that stuff too 

Protool's issues have more to do with the new plug-in format and their new hardware than anything to do with being 64-bit. Mainly, 24-bit fixed-point DSP is getting stale, and host plug-ins are giving DSP a good run for the money. Floating point DSP is where they need to go..which is precisely what they are doing. 




As you indicate, they have a huge installed base...Being proprietary is a two-edged sword: you get the client lock in, but the client base also locks *you* in technology-wise. So Protools steps carefully....

Anderton


If I was called in to pilot a session on any DAW, and I mean ANY DAW, I could do it. I've used all of them and am quite familiar with how they work.

They all have different strengths and weaknesses. The object is to choose the DAW whose strengths match your needs, and whose weaknesses don't impact what you need to do.

In terms of crashes and bad behavior, in my experience much of that is due to variables in the Windows environment, coupled with how someone uses a program. And frankly, I think a lot of it is just plain dumb luck. Program A might not be happy with build 6.003.455.1 to a particular graphics card while Program B might not care at all. But when build 6.004.556 comes out, Program B might crash while Program A works fine. And if you don't use that particular graphics card, then everything might work. Or nothing might work

My biggest problems with reliability have related to graphics cards and drivers, with the second biggest being defective RAM chips (not defective enough to fail, but enough for a few missing bits here and there). I think the latter problem is more common than people realize.

I've had very stable operation with X2, but also with Ableton Live 8, Pro Tools 10, Cubase 6, Acoustica Mixcraft 6, Sony Acid, Traktor Pro 2.5, Samplitude Pro X...you name it. I attribute that to the choice and testing of the hardware (it's a PC Audio Labs computer) rather than to the software. I've had very good luck with ADK and Rain computers as well, and given those experiences, I'll stick with computers that are integrated by people who are a lot smarter than me

If there was only one DAW left in the world, I would use that and make music with it. I wouldn't care if it was Mac or Windows, either. Fortunately, we are not in that position.

Hi Craig,


 Would it be possible for you to articulate what SONAR's strengths are compared to the others you have mentioned?

Here are some of my impressions:

- Live tracking multiple musicians: Pro Tools, Studio One.


- Latest soft synth and efx technologies: Cubase


- Drag and drop gap less DJ composition: Abelton, FL Studio


- Film Sound: Pro Tools, Nuendo


- Pitch correction: Studio One.


- Notation: ?

- Complex routing: Reaper



15 years ago I didn't mind that SONAR wasn't the best at these things because I thought it would eventually evolve towards something better and I liked the overall design of Cakewalk Pro.

Now I find myself thinking that Roland is more effective at making agreements for bundling free stuff than figuring out why, for example, V-Vocal doesn't cut it, Audio Snap doesn't snap accurately, and the Pro Channel hasn't been as reliable as plain old VST. Heck, I'll be impressed when Cakewalk figures out how to make a friendly name friendly.




It seems like SONAR's legacy as a MIDI sequencer places it in a position to be a darn good MIDI sequencer.



What else has it become really, really, really good at?


It seems to me that if I were to follow your advice and become a owner operator of all these other DAWs that I will eventually wonder what SONAR is the best at... so I figure I might as well ask before I spend all that money and time elsewhere.


When, where, and why do you choose SONAR in preference to all the other DAWs you have installed and have expertise with?





best regards,
mike




BTW I agree with your sentiment about one DAW... I think I could be very happy using Studio One 2 free... it's amazing to me to see what can be taken for granted as basic functionality.

@sharke... I don't really like to cheer for reasonably well meaning companies going under but Avid really seem to have rested on their laurels. That kind of sloth and arrogance doesn't fly in the current business climate. I also always hated the fact they forced you to buy their proprietary hardware for far more than other brands. Just not cool. Cheers.

@FBB... lol, yes. You and I both were actually trying to get a forum member to zoom in more because he wasn't able to trigger the hotspots. To me it's not a bug but a bit of a design flaw. It works as intended but I just find it awkward constantly having to zoom in and out while editing. Zooming horizontally is to be expected because you want to get at the Zero Crossings and now in X2 it's super easy with the new ruler zooming option but to have to zoom vertically just to get at the hotspots is just awkward and tedious. It very much slows me down. Just something maybe the Bakers should take a look at. Maybe like a sub HUD specifically for slip editing. Cheers.

@Project M... Thanks for all that info. I was not aware of most of that. Weird thing is I don't recall Nuendo ever crashing or freezing up on me but it was a very early version and I wasn't doing anything to crazy with it. I like the idea of video capabilities but not enough to warrant the expense... at least not until people start offering me money to do it. The networking is pretty much completely unnecessary as I am totally by myself on one main system (might fire up my old DAW in the new place just for fun but if I ever move anything around I'll just use my thumb drive as I have been). As far as that new tune I realized it had gotten buried in the songs forum so here a link to the thread. It's nothing too special but every element was written and physically performed by me (including the "drums"). Cheers.


http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.aspx?m=2710421

Is this what you call resting on laurels?











Digi design is still growing and emerging as a live sound management standard in some markets.


It turns out musicians liked it in the studio and now they want it on the road.

Beepster


No dice, but I promise not to grind too much.

So have we successfully derailed this thread yet?

I think yes.

;-p

I remember you had issues with those of us complaining about not receiving emails from cakewalk for over 6 years on another thread. :-)

@FBB... To me it's not a bug but a bit of a design flaw. It works as intended but I just find it awkward constantly having to zoom in and out while editing. Zooming horizontally is to be expected because you want to get at the Zero Crossings and now in X2 it's super easy with the new ruler zooming option but to have to zoom vertically just to get at the hotspots is just awkward and tedious. It very much slows me down. Just something maybe the Bakers should take a look at. Maybe like a sub HUD specifically for slip editing. Cheers.

Hi Beepster... you've mis-understood me. What I'm saying is you shouldn't have to zoom in on either plane to be able to access the hotspots. I don't have to. I can hit a hotspot from a view that's so zoomed out there's barely anything left of the clip, yet I can still hit hotspots easily.

That's why I referred to it as a bug, some users are obviously not able to do that which suggests some are seeing a bug rather than design problem.

@FBB... Yeah... I guess I could see. I mean they are still usually there (but not all the time) but I find it very hard to hit the spot I want and it ends up messing with fades or editing the wrong way. Auto Zoom helps somewhat but I actually turn that off particularly when editing so I can see the other waveforms better. IDK... I just need to spend more time with it all to get my workflow happening a little more smoothly but at the moment it's slowing me down. I'm not upset about it or anything. Just something I think could be improved. Just like some tweaks on the take lanes and whatnot. Cheers.

@raboch... But I wanted talk about our FREEE STUUUUFFFF!!!! ;-p