Sonar 7 performance experiences

[irrelevance]

Long time cubase user here currently running SX3 but I have recently been looking into Sonar 7. Seems that it handles midi very well with more features than most but I don't know how it's audio engine compares to cubase? Also how well do scope cards sit with this app? I have read that it's asio handling isn't that great with creamware cards and that it even mis labels the asio returns! Is this true?
I need an app that handles external midi instruments with ease ie one track for midi and audio (cubase 4 does this) that obviously has tight midi timing and flexible routing.
I'm going to give the trial version a run on the pc to see how it goes but 15 days evalution is not much when you consider everything that has to be unlearned and then learned again which I'm not looking forward to in fact this one thought has me torn between crossgrading or upgrading for the sake of simplicity.
I know you Sonar users are out there and your thoughts would be very much appreciated.

[garyb]

i prefer Cubase's workflow to Sonar's, but Sonar is a very capable app. in older versions, asio connections were labled stragely, but they worked with no problems, and i hear the latest version has addressed that.

[irrelevance]

Well I'm certainly used to Steinberg way of doing things though thats not to say it's the best way but it's one I'm used to. Also how well does Sonar handle audio editing. The cubase audio editor is very powerful and as such I have never felt I needed an external editor to get the job done.

[garyb]

Sonar has some cool tricks, but i prefer the arrange editor in Cubase to Sonar. both have powerful audio editing. both are full feature sequencers and both will do almost anything you need, it really comes down to workflow. there are others that are also quite good including Samplitude and Saw Studio(and Reaper). i think 15 days will tell you if you're really interested...

[bill3107]

I am using sequoia and samplitude and I can tell Cubase/nuendo were very "easy". I am now used to Sequoia and I do love many functions (and sound !) so I stick to this sequencer (I got sequoia for free as I was paid this way for a technical job ) but Cubase /Nuendo is, for me, a must-have for those looking for a simple software (I agree with you Gary)...

[siriusbliss]

Happy Samplitude user here.
Does everything well.

Greg

[pollux]

I used to be a cakewalk unconditional since the funny cake icon on windows 3.0, and dropped it after Sonar 3 because it became way too heavy, and doing simple stuff became tedious and complicated.. That might have evolved though, but I'm a happy Reaper user now.. Gives me everything I need, it's featherweight and yet simple to use.

[firubbi]

sonar7 should work with scope.

[Anderton]

I won't get into the Sonar vs. Cubase vs. Samplitude vs. Logic vs. thing because I use several DAWs, and they all have their strong points.

But I will say that I use Sonar heavily and it works fine with SCOPE. You can also label the drivers with "friendly names" so you can call the I/O anything you want. Before this feature, SCOPE names were long, confusing, and tended to be longer than would fit in the text field so all the input/output names look the same. This is no longer a problem.

BTW Sonar 7 did a major MIDI overhaul in the new version. Before Sonar 7 the MIDI was really quite dated, Cubase's MIDI was much better. Now they're pretty much equivalent, I think.

One thing I don't like about Sonar is the bundled "lite" playback version of Rapture isn't editable enough. It doesn't get across how great Rapture really is, you have to spend extra $$ for the full version. On the other hand Sonar is the only program other than Acid that lets you edit transient markers for Acidized files, which is a feature I use ALL the time both in terms of developing sound libraries, and fixing loops where the company got lazy and didn't edit them correctly.

A 15-day trial should tell you what you need to know. But in general, if you've really developed workflow with a particular sequencer, it will take you some time to duplicate that level of fluency with another sequencer. It's worth it, though, if the other sequencer has some feature you really need.

[Anderton]

Oh - one important thing I forgot to mention - I've never been able to get XTC mode working correctly with Sonar. But I must admit I never tried all that hard, so maybe it's something I'm not doing right.

[MD69]

Hi Craig,

Wellcome here!

You should read
http://www.planetz.com/forums/viewtopic ... 32&t=21703

and also, depending on context setting, some programs require to copy the riff.??? file available in scope_45/app/bin to the application directory.

Doing so I've been able to have XTC running with bidule, reaper, band in a box, ...

cheers

[Shayne White]

But I will say that I use Sonar heavily and it works fine with SCOPE.

Welcome Mr. Anderton to PlanetZ! Thanks for joining us and answering questions and stuff!

I used to be a Sonar fanatic until version 6 when they introduced the flat 2D look. I thought it looked very poor and hard on the eyes and didn't feel I could use it comfortably. At the same time Apple did a major overhaul of Logic and made it much easier and -- dare I say -- logical. So I've switched to Logic, although I think it still has major design problems and Apple should continue revamping it. (Logic 7 and before was abysmal...v8 is vastly improved but still not "there.") I miss Sonar a lot, but I'm on the Mac now and still don't like the new Sonar...I just don't have a "favorite" DAW anymore.

If Cakewalk ever ports Sonar to the Mac and Mac-izes the interface, I'll probably switch back.

Shayne

[kyunghwee]

Using Sonar 7 here...working fine with 3 Creamware cards...although I feel I need to upgrade my computer to take full advantage of multi-core support and all those fancy plug-ins...that would be for another topic.
In terms of learning curve, it will probably take a little bit of getting used to if you switch from Cubase. However, I think developers at Cakewalk have thought of possible crossgraders and made it accessible to use same keyboard shortcuts for many common functions as other popular DAW software including Cubase.
I do enjoy using Sonar 7's new 'step sequencer' and 'MIDI magnifier' along with all the plug-ins bundled with the Producer Edition. But when it comes down to plug-ins, it seems to me Cubase has some very powerful ones up its sleeves also so that may not end up as a deciding factor.

Bottom line, I'd let 'the ease of work flow' be the guide.

[irrelevance]

Thanks for all the helpful replies so far.
I'm really not getting to grips with this app as quick as I'd like. Feel like a baby taking ity's first steps...again! Very frustrating experience actually. My maini motivation wether I'd like to admit it or not has to be the customer service aspect or lack off on Steinbergs part, and the seemingly open stance that Cakewalk seems to adopt. There are some enhancements in cubase 4 that would be very helpful although not absolutely necessary. My main gripe is like many others is with bugfixing/improvement policy. It's difficult to acertain for sure how Cakewalk will really score in this department as the company seems relatively new. But 'better the devil you know' isn't a sentiment that sits very well with me. My 15 days will expire soon and I'm still non the wiser. Ableton live is fantastic and a great addition to my traking and arranging suite of tools but I don't know if I will be able to lose cubase overnight. If I was on Mac for my main I would go logic without question and to hell with the learning curve!

[dawman]

I should give Sonar 7.0 a looksee and get familiar w/ it. Years ago I read about an Intel / Cakewalk demo in Washington where Intel was trying to prove to the world ( AMD back then ) that they were 64bit fluent since AMD was first out of the gate.

My favorite Hammond afficiando Joey D. was demo'ng Sonar 64 and Project 5, but Cakewalk is way ahead in the 64bit arena, and w/ new MIDI and Rapture, which is the best analog emulated VSTi I have heard so far, it's quite tempting.

Personally I think Bowen's Solaris 5.0.8 BETA is the synth to beat, as every aspect of analog performance features like seperate Oscillator glide values and Unison stacking w/ SSM & Moog Filters make it a fierce Monophonic beast, very complimentary to my analog synths which I route into my Scope projects. But Rapture is the only VSTi I am aware of that also has these " old school " features, and selectable waves to boot. If that synth can harness multiple cores in a 64bit O.S. it could be an incredible experience.

Until then I will continue using Cubase 4.1 just to do drum tracks or provide tempo variants to VDAT as that's my little easy workflow solution, and if any of these apps. can get a better sound quality than VDAT, I will jump in w/ both feet. But my ears do not lie.

That's my simple high fidelity solution. Until I hear a better sound engine, I will stay with my 10 year old 32bit Integer recorder and playback device. With XITE-1 @ 96k playback, and the new 4.1 update from Creamware for Cubase, I'll have a way to re record my MIDI drum tracks and add vocals @ 96k and 5.1. That's what I am looking forward to.

4GB's more and Vista 64bit could really change things, and having an XITE-1 w/ such a capable sequencer and host is very tempting. I'll wait and see how VDAT works, but one thing is certain, VDAT loses it magical sound once outside of the Scope project, that is it's Achilles Heel IMHO.


Strength & Honor,

[krizrox]

I won't get into the Sonar vs. Cubase vs. Samplitude vs. Logic vs. thing because I use several DAWs, and they all have their strong points.

But I will say that I use Sonar heavily and it works fine with SCOPE. You can also label the drivers with "friendly names" so you can call the I/O anything you want. Before this feature, SCOPE names were long, confusing, and tended to be longer than would fit in the text field so all the input/output names look the same. This is no longer a problem.

BTW Sonar 7 did a major MIDI overhaul in the new version. Before Sonar 7 the MIDI was really quite dated, Cubase's MIDI was much better. Now they're pretty much equivalent, I think.

One thing I don't like about Sonar is the bundled "lite" playback version of Rapture isn't editable enough. It doesn't get across how great Rapture really is, you have to spend extra $$ for the full version. On the other hand Sonar is the only program other than Acid that lets you edit transient markers for Acidized files, which is a feature I use ALL the time both in terms of developing sound libraries, and fixing loops where the company got lazy and didn't edit them correctly.

A 15-day trial should tell you what you need to know. But in general, if you've really developed workflow with a particular sequencer, it will take you some time to duplicate that level of fluency with another sequencer. It's worth it, though, if the other sequencer has some feature you really need.

I also user Sonar 7 with Scope and I have no complaints about it in reference to how well it works with Scope. In fact, I'd go so far as to say the two programs actually work quite well together. I have complaints about Sonar that have nothing to do with Scope though. But I have complaints about Samplitude Pro too. I've never used Cubase but I'll bet I could find something to complain about there too. Basically, you pick your poison and roll with it.

I seem to prefer Sonar for tracking and Sam for mastering chores. A hybrid approach is sometimes the best solution.

[siriusbliss]

All Samplitude here.
I'm tracking in V10.1, and mix out through Scope into a second instance of Samplitude - essentially OTB mixdown while being ITB within/through Scope.

Greg

[nprime]

Thanks for all the helpful replies so far.
I'm really not getting to grips with this app as quick as I'd like. Feel like a baby taking ity's first steps...again! Very frustrating experience actually. My maini motivation wether I'd like to admit it or not has to be the customer service aspect or lack off on Steinbergs part, and the seemingly open stance that Cakewalk seems to adopt. There are some enhancements in cubase 4 that would be very helpful although not absolutely necessary. My main gripe is like many others is with bugfixing/improvement policy. It's difficult to acertain for sure how Cakewalk will really score in this department as the company seems relatively new. But 'better the devil you know' isn't a sentiment that sits very well with me. My 15 days will expire soon and I'm still non the wiser. Ableton live is fantastic and a great addition to my traking and arranging suite of tools but I don't know if I will be able to lose cubase overnight. If I was on Mac for my main I would go logic without question and to hell with the learning curve!

Relatively new? I think they just celebrated their 20th anniversary.

I have been using Sonar and Scope (Pulsar) together for almost ten years, I have no major issues.

[Kymeia]

I've recently switched to Sonar and while it works fine on my dualcore laptop on my Scope system it seems to choke when playing back audio quite easily. Even the basic demo project ("Room for Clarity") chokes it and shuts down the audio engine - this is on a P4 3.6 ghz so it's no slouch. Should I be using different drivers perhaps (WDM maybe or a different ASIO module - at the moment my project uses the ASIO 2 24 bit drivers)

[nprime]

I've recently switched to Sonar and while it works fine on my dualcore laptop on my Scope system it seems to choke when playing back audio quite easily. Even the basic demo project ("Room for Clarity") chokes it and shuts down the audio engine - this is on a P4 3.6 ghz so it's no slouch. Should I be using different drivers perhaps (WDM maybe or a different ASIO module - at the moment my project uses the ASIO 2 24 bit drivers)

I'd ask that question over at the Cakewalk Sonar forum:

http://forum.cakewalk.com/tt.asp?forumid=5

They are a pretty good bunch and someone will know the answer to your question.