WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD???

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Chris S)

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:34:36 GMT

I know one reason Sonar is not standard: the notation is not good enough.
I was talking to the head of a music school in Portland and while he was familiar with Sonar he stressed that I needed experience with notation for formal music composition. If I take film composion later in the year, I will need to write with notation and I can not do that in Sonar 8 PE.

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (stevec)

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:27:54 GMT

When it comes to pure mixing I'd argue SONAR is at least as good as Nuendo.

Hi Brandon... I've actually spoken to Roberto (tazman) about this topic. It's certainly not the engine or FX structure coming into play, but mostly the way automation is handled; i.e., editing envelopes. He described the way Nuendo adds nodes and allows envelopes to be manipulated, and I think one of the more important points is that it seems to be very "solid" when it comes to selection. IOW, if you go to select a node, you get that node.   SONAR can be a bit "touchier" in that respect where attempting to select a node might get you that node, or the line next to it, or a bunch of nodes and lines, etc.    I've never had a case where I physically could not select the node at all, but not getting it on the first try certainly does happen.

This is one of my personal pet peeves with SONAR too. But fortunately I have very few of those.

But I have to say that the routing thing sounds cool too... the way he described it all routing in the project is displayed in a flowchart-like manner, making it easy to trace a signal from point A to point B.   Critical to running a DAW? Nah. But it would be a nice addition!

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (undereason)

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 02:12:15 GMT

Q & A with producer John Leckie (Gearslutz): Advice for Beginner Engineers
Q: Hi John i was wondering could you give any advice for a young engineer starting out, i have experience in recording and mixing for the last 2 years and was wondering if there are any specific areas you think a young engineer like myself should focus on learning

A: First thing is I'd aim at doing a session every day for next two years before you think of being an engineer. If you really want to engineer you got to get yourself sessions and offer to record anything and everything you can. You got to learn all areas..mics, outboard, patching, mixing, mastering, be **** hot at ProTools (no good saying 'I use Logic") know how to handle big sessions with ease (and small close ones) and most of all learn how to deal with all sorts of musicians and people who may have egos slightly larger than yours.
Try and find a band you can record and develop.
Hang around studios and let them know what a great bloke you are and hassle them for a job.
Make it an obsession and get to gigs and talk to bands, managers and record companies about possible sessions.
Learn how every piece of standard studio gear works and the best acoustic spaces in room you're working in.
Be disiplined in labeling and cable tidying.
Relax and get plenty of sleep
Hope this is of help..
Good Luck
Cheers
JL

It looks like for some people it's obvious that there is no option, just PT[...]

Sonar is cheap, so i think we can't expect it will be in some areas as good as more expensive soft.
Poor automation or Cd burning is annoying, but Sonar is not industry standard and won't be, it's just cheap alternative with some great addons (like virtual instruments).

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Seth Perlstein [Cakewalk])

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 00:12:03 GMT

ronboy

I think Sonar is used more for game composers and home musicians than Movie and TV composers! Until I hear that Sonar was used on major movie and TV projects, and I mean movies that I would pay to see in the movie theater or a TV show that millions watch every week I would be convinced that Sonar is a standard. The friend that Brandon Ryan mentioned in regards to TV and movie credits that uses Sonar is quite unknown to me. He's not known like the guy who writes the music to the X-files TV show! Now if that guy used Sonar for the music of the X-files TV show every week, 360 days out of the year then I think Sonar could be considered a standard!

Oops, I meant Quantum Quest ... all of the music was done in SONAR ... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0312305/

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (ronboy)

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 23:05:17 GMT

I think Sonar is used more for game composers and home musicians than Movie and TV composers! Until I hear that Sonar was used on major movie and TV projects, and I mean movies that I would pay to see in the movie theater or a TV show that millions watch every week I would be convinced that Sonar is a standard. The friend that Brandon Ryan mentioned in regards to TV and movie credits that uses Sonar is quite unknown to me. He's not known like the guy who writes the music to the X-files TV show! Now if that guy used Sonar for the music of the X-files TV show every week, 360 days out of the year then I think Sonar could be considered a standard!

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (rstollen)

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:54:28 GMT

Oops, I missed that. " />

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Brandon Ryan [Roland])

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:53:28 GMT

rstollen

Hey, what about Public Enemy? " />

" /> I was just pointing out some audio for video (games, tv, etc) people.

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (rstollen)

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:50:57 GMT

Hey, what about Public Enemy? " />

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Brandon Ryan [Roland])

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:48:59 GMT

ronboy

Brandon,

can you list just some them? I'd like to know who some of these people are!

Well for game music you've got the guys who've done things like (off the top of my head) Warhammer, Command and Conquer, Call of Duty, The Punisher (Tim Wynn, Doyle Donehoo, Sean Murray, Chuck Carr, etc). And our good friend Shawn Clement has done countless film and TV projects.

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (ronboy)

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 17:31:59 GMT

Brandon,

can you list just some them? I'd like to know who some of these people are!

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Brandon Ryan [Roland])

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:07:31 GMT

ronboy

Never heard of anyone using Sonar for serious soundtrack work but I've heard of Logic and Nuendo being used! I think the sound track to Superman was done in Nuendo. The producer of EastWest/Soundsonline software instruments composes well known soundtrack trailers with Logic. There must be something learned from these facts. Professional composers, musicians and producers don't use Sonar because it is good but not good enough. Until more of these people use Sonar and beta test it it won't be a standard! When I look at the complaints, on this forum, and my own complaints I not surprised that Sonar wasn't used to compose the Superman soundtrack or used for any other know projects!

But professional composers and musicians DO use SONAR. Some are on this very forum. SONAR has been used in film, TV and major video game productions.

Please don't ask me to list them all...I'm a busy guy. " />

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Brandon Ryan [Roland])

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:05:30 GMT

tazman

I think you have two categories, the engineers and the musicians. I find that SONAR is great for musicians writing ideas, but once you get into mixing I find its work flow pretty bad. I recently purchased Nuendo for the mixing and mastering and couldn't be happier. I still use SONAR for some stuff, but the bulk of my work is now done in Nuendo. It's not that SONAR can't do it, it's just that the way it does certain things is cumbersome. Editing Automations is really bad, having a view that shows all the routings, I/O setup, etc.

No intention to knock Steiny here, but just responding.

When it comes to pure mixing I'd argue SONAR is at least as good as Nuendo. You couldn't even move plugins around until very recently and busses can't be reordered freely. SONAR can route freely and move and copy plugs with their settings even between projects. How is SONAR's workflow deficient? the export features are more robust, per clip effects, etc. I realize Nuendo has a slick new automation system as of last verison, but some poeple might consdier it overkill for anything other than perhaps a large post productioin project. And have you seen the cost of Nuendo compared to SONAR?

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (John)

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:05:11 GMT

Never heard of anyone using Sonar for serious soundtrack work but I've heard of Logic and Nuendo being used! I think the sound track to Superman was done in Nuendo. The producer of EastWest/Soundsonline software instruments composes well known soundtrack trailers with Logic. There must be something learned from these facts. Professional composers, musicians and producers don't use Sonar because it is good but not good enough. Until more of these people use Sonar and beta test it it won't be a standard! When I look at the complaints, on this forum, and my own complaints I not surprised that Sonar wasn't used to compose the Superman soundtrack or used for any other know projects!

The main reason is that Logic and Nuendo both have outstanding notation. This is needed by those do that sort of work.

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (ronboy)

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 15:54:09 GMT

Never heard of anyone using Sonar for serious soundtrack work but I've heard of Logic and Nuendo being used! I think the sound track to Superman was done in Nuendo. The producer of EastWest/Soundsonline software instruments composes well known soundtrack trailers with Logic. There must be something learned from these facts. Professional composers, musicians and producers don't use Sonar because it is good but not good enough. Until more of these people use Sonar and beta test it it won't be a standard! When I look at the complaints, on this forum, and my own complaints I not surprised that Sonar wasn't used to compose the Superman soundtrack or used for any other know projects!

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Nick P)

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:42:37 GMT

Sonar will never become the "Logic on the PC", because Logic has a vastly different culture and customer base. Just take a look at the Logic 9 videos on Apple.com. Not the crowd Cakewalk is after. A big part of that is the "Mac Elistism" which is a huge hurdle to jump. But who cares? It's about features and performance. Not a brand name or a piece of glowing fruit on the top of your laptop. The ball is currently in Cakewalk's court. But that ball only hangs around for a short time. I hope they handle it well. Maybe they'll start getting some additional respect from the pro community.

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (tazman)

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 07:59:39 GMT

I think you have two categories, the engineers and the musicians. I find that SONAR is great for musicians writing ideas, but once you get into mixing I find its work flow pretty bad. I recently purchased Nuendo for the mixing and mastering and couldn't be happier. I still use SONAR for some stuff, but the bulk of my work is now done in Nuendo. It's not that SONAR can't do it, it's just that the way it does certain things is cumbersome. Editing Automations is really bad, having a view that shows all the routings, I/O setup, etc.

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (The Maillard Reaction)

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 07:34:32 GMT

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Freddie H)

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 05:01:27 GMT

Sonar is designed for Production emphasis (Songwriting, Recording, and Mixing).

I don't know how Sonar will become industry standard however, it probably needs to be Mac compatible as well.

No I don't think so, because Logic isn't comparability to WINDOWS. " />

I think the future plan of SONAR is that it will be the new LOGIC on Windows platform, but even better. As we all know, now days Cakewalk/Roland work and are partners with INTEL & MICROSOFT. So I think more people on Windows platform will sure crossgrade to SONAR instead especially after the major problems CUBASE 5, 64bit has with its instability and the bitbridge that are a joke. " />

Regards
Freddie

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (jlgrimes)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:44:39 GMT

I had a conversation with a friend of mine today who has a production team and they are using Logic and Protools. I was talking to him about finding and studio to Master a project for me. He stated if you mix correctly you don't need to Master. He asked me what I was using, I told him Sonar Producer 8 and he said man you have to get Logic or Protools on a Mac a PC cannot compare. He said a PC can't compete, he said the samples that Logic has it in will remove the need for any instrument. I told him I have been a Cakewalk person for years and I like it, he said the the Industry Standard is Protools and know other DAW can compare. He said if you take a project done in Sonar to an agent he is not going to even want to hear it because it is not Protools. Depsite feeling small because everything I came back with to defend Sonar was shot down by what is considered Industry Standard. How come we don't have more industry studios using Sonar? The bigger question is how can we change this, I have read several forums on the difference of Logic vs Sonar and there will always be a debate, but the fact of the matter is Protools and Logic is what the Industry is using unless I am wrong. How can we put Sonar on the Industry map?

1. What DAW you use matters little (in terms of sound quality). All DAWS (whether Pro Tools, Sonar, Logic, DP, Cubase, Nuendo, Reaper, Live, Fruityloops, Traction, Audition, Energy XT) are all capable of producing full professional grade mixes

2. Compatibility matters little as well. Every DAW can export its individual tracks to WAV or AIFF files to send to different studios. A lot of DAWS even support an OMF format to transfer projects made by different DAWS (Pro Tools charges a fee for this feature last time I checked).

3. All DAWs are capable of Recording studio quality tracks (24 bit 44.1 khz or better), with at least a 32bit floating point mixing bus. They all support VSTs, VSTis (or something very similar for plug-ins and instruments). All support some level of automation as well and busing system. Any DAW that doesn't do this probably isn't capable, Sonar does all of these tasks (Many of those tasks it goes far beyond the minimum requirements).

4. The main differences in DAWS are:

1. Application emphasis: (e.g. songwriting, midi composition, step sequencing, mixing, Video Surround support, Live performance, Mastering (Audio Editing), Hooking up to Large Control Surfaces, Dedicated Mixing processors).

2. Price level (market product is aimed for. Ferrari vs. Corolla (both get from point A to B, one maybe quicker but maybe the other one has other benefits lower insurance, better gas mileage) The same comparison holds for DAWS.

3. Compatibility (PC or Mac or both) (VSTs, DXI, Audio Units, RTAS, TDM etc) (ASIO WDM Core Audio Wave RT)

4. Feature sets (the feature sets will be based off of points 1 & 2).

5. Performance vs. Stability (This comes down to a lot of factors from the DAW software itself to your sound card, midi controllers, VST plug-ins, Computer itself, viruses, spyware, other programs on your computer, That weird weather outside).

Sonar is designed for Production emphasis (Songwriting, Recording, and Mixing).

I don't know how Sonar will become industry standard however, it probably needs to be Mac compatible as well.

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Nick P)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 19:56:11 GMT

Blocking.....5, 4, 3, 2, 1, Poof.

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Mooch4056)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:38:46 GMT

thanks mike - looking it up now

Paul

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (The Maillard Reaction)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:33:09 GMT

the Shock of the New.

I read it when I was a young art/art history student. :-)

I have linked to the amazon page in a previous post.

There is a circa 1980 TV series on DVD that you may google... it is a great overview of art functioning as "new".

best,
mike

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Mooch4056)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:25:40 GMT

mike_mccue

Nick P

Did anyone ever refine the question to "industry standard what". Audio recorder. Audio editor. Midi recorder. Midi editor. Electronica production environment. The list goes on. It's insane. So naturally it gets 4 pages worth of replies. Welcome to the Sonar forums.

Oh, and BTW MM, although I realize it's boilerplate in your sig/profile, I would appreciate you removing the "best regards" when you respond directly to me, since obviously you have anything but best regards for me. Thanks in advance " />

Hi Nick,

Did you get to the end of the book yet? It's not so hard to learn that the musical arts are lagging approximately 50 years behind the visual arts in the pursuit of "New"... and this book illustrates the journey as experienced in the visual arts.

It may leave you to draw the conclusion that "New" music will end up in the same cesspool that post modern visual art has found itself wallowing in.

Luckily for all art the market and its use of culture functions as a meritocracy. That's why there was a craftsmanship revival in the visual arts starting in the early 80's... and why lately there has been a resurgence of interest in acoustic music performed on acoustic instruments (which even alienates me a bit because I'm an electric pop rocker type) where paying audiences that simply want to listen to music pay to listen to music.

It's a great book. I hope that you take the time to read it. The TV series is very well done as well.

best regards,
mike

hey Mike -- that sounds like an interesting book your describing -- whats the name of it ?

Paul

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Mooch4056)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:18:09 GMT

Nick P

I like Trev's response and as a working pro studio he knows of what he speaks I reckon. Really at this point it's meaningless. Like he says, most clients either don't know or don't care. They just want it to sound good. I look to what kids in bedroom studios are using. It's definitely not Pro Tools. They will be the next generation of music creators and producers and will be that much more technologically savvy than this generation. When you mention the big names in producing and engineering from the 70s, 80s, 90s, and 2000s, these kids could care less. They'll be doing it all and won't care what grandpa mixes on.

I remember when I was 16. I had a tascam pota studio 4 track cassette I got for Christmas. So did a few of my musician friends. It was just a neat tool to have to record on. Ultimately, the purpose of it was to "practice" laying down our tracks before we took out songs to a local "real" studio. Back then the controversy wasn't what kind or brand name equipment they had. It was how helpfully the engineer was and even more so ... HOW MANY TRACKS the studio was.

well i guess the "how many tracks" is pretty much a mute issue now a days. I know PT has a track limit on home version.... (shrugs)....others don't

I guess my point it I really think it's a silly argument. Pro-tools is the standard -- Don't much care why or how they got there. I like sonar and cakewalk so I decided to use them ....and I am happy with it -- and know there is other DAW software -- and sonar or pro-tools is not where it ends or starts in this world --

I remeber in 1986 when I was 16... we would make music on our 4 track cassettes and make it as professional sounding as we could. You had that skill or you didn't. And it never had a pro-mix sound -- but we had fun trying ..... and we we're creating music.... lots of music... some bad...some good.....

and that's what it's about ..... making music -- not what WE HAVE OR OWN --- who cares ... let me hear the music

which is why I think this is a silly argument -- that's my opinion

even if you don't like it .. i am allowed to have it

and I know for a fact -- I won't ever beable to stop this argument or debate -- it will go on

but I can have my opinion that I wish it would stop

right now it's the standard for cars to run on gasoline -- don't know why - don't care -- but it is ..... like it or not ---- perhaps not forever -- probably not forever --

(shrugs)

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (AM)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 09:41:54 GMT

As an old boy of music I remember the days of Protools, Emagic, Steinberg all on the Atari. I used to use Emagic until they were acquired by Apple then moved over to Cakewalk. People keep telling me Apple are better for timming then PC's although I'm sure 1000th of ms makes little difference to the human ear and they don't crash like windows machines (well, this may be true).

Never used Cubase and protools has always been there and classed as the pro studio's choice. I did think that with Roland's involvement with Cakewalk that sonar would have one killer VST - now a virtual fantom or v synth not just parts of one... that would be good.

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (The Maillard Reaction)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 09:23:17 GMT

Nick P

Did anyone ever refine the question to "industry standard what". Audio recorder. Audio editor. Midi recorder. Midi editor. Electronica production environment. The list goes on. It's insane. So naturally it gets 4 pages worth of replies. Welcome to the Sonar forums.

Oh, and BTW MM, although I realize it's boilerplate in your sig/profile, I would appreciate you removing the "best regards" when you respond directly to me, since obviously you have anything but best regards for me. Thanks in advance " />

Hi Nick,

Did you get to the end of the book yet? It's not so hard to learn that the musical arts are lagging approximately 50 years behind the visual arts in the pursuit of "New"... and this book illustrates the journey as experienced in the visual arts.

It may leave you to draw the conclusion that "New" music will end up in the same cesspool that post modern visual art has found itself wallowing in.

Luckily for all art the market and its use of culture functions as a meritocracy. That's why there was a craftsmanship revival in the visual arts starting in the early 80's... and why lately there has been a resurgence of interest in acoustic music performed on acoustic instruments (which even alienates me a bit because I'm an electric pop rocker type) where paying audiences that simply want to listen to music pay to listen to music.

It's a great book. I hope that you take the time to read it. The TV series is very well done as well.

best regards,
mike

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Jim Roseberry)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 09:07:57 GMT

Interesting, thanks Trev. Sounds like working with wavs / aiffs is pretty common and happily accepted, so this would make Cakewalk's job easier in enticing other studios to migrate.

Trev's posts here are excellent.
I've got numerous higher profile clients... and accepting/passing Wav files is exactly how they handle moving projects from one stage to the next.
Works flawless every time...

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Nick P)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 07:44:05 GMT

My prediction is that Propellerheads' Record will become the "container" for transferring audio projects among music producers. It's cross-platform, high-quality, and of course will be rock-solid on even less than super-powered systems. People will create in whatever and then dump to Record. Everyone will have a copy next to their preferred DAW. If I had an important client I'd buy it for them. Makes perfect sense. Big studios/production houses will have personnel who will quickly be able to transfer from Record to Pro Tools or whatever.

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (noiseboy)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 06:17:59 GMT

Interesting, thanks Trev. Sounds like working with wavs / aiffs is pretty common and happily accepted, so this would make Cakewalk's job easier in enticing other studios to migrate.

Re:WHY IS SONAR NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD??? (Trev Wilkins)

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 06:11:14 GMT

@noiseboy

most of our work is all done in-house but sometimes we are part of a wider picture. As a 'for-instance' using the aforementioned Mr Lee... Their last album was started in the North East of England during some down-time while touring, the studio there was based around some hard-disc system. Plans were made to continue recording at my studio sometime later so I needed the tracks in a format that I could use. They were transferred to a Pro Tools system then the PT files were sent to me. I simply opened them in SONAR and then when the band came we did our sessions and saved as standard SONAR projects. At this time it wasn't decided where the next sessions would be due to touring commitments so we did some editing. I also did quite a bit of pre-production before these sessions so that the band's time would be spent doing what they do best, playing.

Later it was decided to continue the work in London (I'm in the Midlands) as the band would all be close to there when they had free time so I sent all of the existing tracks as audio files (maybe Aiff as it was going to a Logic system next). Extra tracks were also added from various studios both in the UK and USA by various artists and engineers. I haven't a clue what systems they used.

I also recently mixed the audio for their live DVD which I recorded in Rome when touring there a couple of years ago. This was recorded straight to hard disc and then I did the whole mix in SONAR including all of the editing, fixing and mixing. If you've ever done a live album then you'll know how demanding this can be!
Two of the guys from the band worked with me (Gerry Hogan, pedal steel and Brian Hodgson, bass) so that we had 3 independent views of the mix. When finished it was synced back up to the video (which we didn't shoot but edited, that's another story!) and all put together before pressing.

Not sure if it's for sale in the USA yet but I have a copy to send to Cakewalk (when I get round to it) and have credited them as they deserve.

I use SONAR because I know it and it does everything I want it to do. I'm not certain if we are 'Industry Standard' as we've always been a bit maverick in our approach but it works for us.

Another one we recently did was for a BBC series where the production company recorded kids from around Britain talking about their dreams. Of the 10 chosen 6 were from our studio, recorded in SONAR.

And then there's...