bitflipper
John
...If you have as I do a lot of MIDI hardware Cubase is more suitable...
Could you expand on that thought? Are we talking control surfaces, hardware sequencers, outboard modules?
All I need is MIDI IN and MIDI OUT.
That, and of course, a good multi-track MIDI editor. Samplitude's PRV seems as good as any I've seen so far, including SONAR's. Although I'm told Cubase has that nailed, too.
Dave I'm talking about hardware MIDI synths. Like an XV 5080. I also have an SC 8850 and a DR 770. Cubase has scripts for patch names as Sonar has instrument def. files. I think over all Cubase supports hardware better then any other DAW. If this is not a consideration other DAWs are darn good too. Heck even Reaper is good at this too. I just can't stand it. That is on me only. No one else should have that view just because I do.
My old Cubase SX 3 was very powerful yet Sonar had a better or easier way to route audio. Sonar still has a better audio routing then Cubase 9.5. However, it can emulate many Sonar abilities. None the less I miss the busing in Sonar.
Recording MIDI in Cubase is simple and easy. Recording audio is fair but nowhere as easy as in Sonar.
Though in Cubase inputs are able to print FX on incoming audio. At lease I think it can.
Personally I think there is no true replacement for Sonar. However as Dappa pointed out we can look at this as an opportunity to find new and perhaps better ways of working with MIDI and audio.
One point is Sonar was able to work well with any Windows audio driver. You will find that is not the case with many other DAWs. Cubase wants ASIO plain and simple.
I should add Cubase 9.5 has some good user control over the look and workspace. It a lot more customizable than it used to be. There are ways to have a much greater number of colors for tracks too.
Still, I am hoping that someone somewhere decides to keep Cakewalk going. I know that will not happen yet I still hope.