Xabiton
Cupcake God
Im not arguing over semantics I have stated several hosts that can be rewired.
![[F_or_DEAF]](https://img.futureproducers.com/avatars/m/150/150788.jpg?1725613854){kind=avatar}
[F_or_DEAF]
New member
whatever man.
you make it sound like ALL D.A.W'z can be ReWired to one another.
the fact of the matter is that's NOT the case.
what are you still confused about?
my mistake...maybe YOU DON'T KNOW which ones CANNOT be ReWired to the others...
my mistake.
i apologize for thinking that you knew the facts.
you make it sound like ALL D.A.W'z can be ReWired to one another.
the fact of the matter is that's NOT the case.
what are you still confused about?
my mistake...maybe YOU DON'T KNOW which ones CANNOT be ReWired to the others...
my mistake.
i apologize for thinking that you knew the facts.
Last edited:
kb420
Old School Old Head
I don't really see a big deal either way. All of the programs mentioned can individually export tracks, and those exports can be opened in any other DAW.
So what's the difference?
So what's the difference?
[F_or_DEAF]
New member
Xabiton
Cupcake God
I never said ALL DAWS can be rewired. I simply stated some that can be. Im not sure if you forgot what you said or if you are just too stubborn to admit that you are wrong. You said
then I stated several daws that can be rewired. You changed the term to host. which is still a daw. I dont understand what part of some daws can be rewired don't you understand. You said no top daw can when in fact on a lot of top Daws can be rewired. If you don't understand that I don't know what else to tell u. You are arguing over the fact that you can't get your facts straight.
Xabiton
Cupcake God
rewire makes things easier if u want to edit things on the fly.
[F_or_DEAF]
New member
why are you saying the same thing that i am saying, but trying to make an argument over semantics?
Xabiton
Cupcake God
I am not trying to make an arguement over anything. You made a false statement and then are trying to make it sound like I said something crazy but I am not in the mood to argue with you. You are simply looking for something to argue about.
[F_or_DEAF]
New member
lol.
no point in arguing facts man...
like i said before...there are a few D.A.W.'z that are also known as "HOSTS" that you can't ReWire with each other.
all that I AM saying is that the fact stated above is the only limitation of certain software suites.
L
Live a Dream
Guest
lmao at you people arguing for the sake of arguing...
Are y'all like this in real life too?
Are y'all like this in real life too?
SongArtist
New member
Sonar is fairly loaded with good sounds, but it's funny people will still hunger for more.... (Spectrasonics, BDF, AddictiveDrums, Komplete, EastWest, IK, Synthogy Ivory, SampleLogic, SoniVox, Melodyne, Waves, SSL, T-Racks, OZone, the list goes on and on)
IMO in the end what's more important about any DAW setup is the 'Core Workflow', 'Stability and 'Efficiency', then I'll decide as I see fit what plugins I want to bloat it up with LOL!
IMO in the end what's more important about any DAW setup is the 'Core Workflow', 'Stability and 'Efficiency', then I'll decide as I see fit what plugins I want to bloat it up with LOL!
R
RobP
New member
I have Sonar 7 and Cubase 4.
IMO both are very good. Things to consider...
1. If you are starting out and don't have much money - it is a no brainer - choose Sonar. The number of instruments you get and their sheer quality, such as the Garritan Orchestra, Rapture, Dimension, Z3ta etc cannot be beaten for the price.
I don't currently own any third party instruments and as a result I tend to use Sonar more than Cubase, because to be honest the instruments supplied with Cubase are not even in the same league.
Even in terms of simple things like General Midi, the difference between Sonar's TTS-1 and Cubase's HalionOne are huge.
2. I personally find the workflow in Cubase both faster and neater.The UI in Cubase is much better, especially in terms of clarity - even down to seeing what the selected track is - in Sonar I have moved or deleted events/clips unintentionally many times because it can be difficult to see what is selected.
I find Midi and audio editing much faster to do in Cubase, however, Sonar does have some neat features in its midi editor, like the ability to pick a key and have the editor restrict your notes to that key.
3. Cubase supports project structuring. One can designate sections of music to particular parts, then non-destructively edit the ordering of the parts. Doing the same in Sonar is a right pain in the ass, especially if you have a lot of tracks.
4. Finding sounds is very easy in Cubase. When I add a virtual instrument to cubase I think in terms of what sound I want and let the software pick the appropriate instrument - thanks to its great filterable sounds browser. In Sonar one has to hunt for them.
5. If you are in to scoring, Cubase is way better than Sonar - period.
6. Sound routing is easier to do in Sonar, however I find the mixer in Cubase easier to use.
7. I get pops and crackles in Sonar especially when switching sound card or sometimes even when using the wrong combination of virtual synths - never had this problem in Cubase.
So to sum up - if you are rich
get Cubase with a selection of third party instruments, otherwise go for Sonar.
RobP
IMO both are very good. Things to consider...
1. If you are starting out and don't have much money - it is a no brainer - choose Sonar. The number of instruments you get and their sheer quality, such as the Garritan Orchestra, Rapture, Dimension, Z3ta etc cannot be beaten for the price.
I don't currently own any third party instruments and as a result I tend to use Sonar more than Cubase, because to be honest the instruments supplied with Cubase are not even in the same league.
Even in terms of simple things like General Midi, the difference between Sonar's TTS-1 and Cubase's HalionOne are huge.
2. I personally find the workflow in Cubase both faster and neater.The UI in Cubase is much better, especially in terms of clarity - even down to seeing what the selected track is - in Sonar I have moved or deleted events/clips unintentionally many times because it can be difficult to see what is selected.
I find Midi and audio editing much faster to do in Cubase, however, Sonar does have some neat features in its midi editor, like the ability to pick a key and have the editor restrict your notes to that key.
3. Cubase supports project structuring. One can designate sections of music to particular parts, then non-destructively edit the ordering of the parts. Doing the same in Sonar is a right pain in the ass, especially if you have a lot of tracks.
4. Finding sounds is very easy in Cubase. When I add a virtual instrument to cubase I think in terms of what sound I want and let the software pick the appropriate instrument - thanks to its great filterable sounds browser. In Sonar one has to hunt for them.
5. If you are in to scoring, Cubase is way better than Sonar - period.
6. Sound routing is easier to do in Sonar, however I find the mixer in Cubase easier to use.
7. I get pops and crackles in Sonar especially when switching sound card or sometimes even when using the wrong combination of virtual synths - never had this problem in Cubase.
So to sum up - if you are rich
get Cubase with a selection of third party instruments, otherwise go for Sonar.RobP
[F_or_DEAF]
New member
which one did you have first?
and why did you decide to add another DAW into your workflow?
R
RobP
New member
I had Sonar first. Started with Sonar 1 in 2001, then went to 3, 4 then 7.
What got me interested in Cubase 4 was their arrangement track option which provides the ability to section off parts of the project and rearrange them in time non-destructively.
The other big issue that spurred me to buy Cubase is that in many of my projects within Sonar I found that when copying/pasting/deleting clips/tracks I would sometimes unwittenly copy/paste/delete a selected clip/track that I didn't know was selected off screen - I found this aspect very frustrating. It could just be me but I have never got on with Sonar's way of selecting tracks and clips. It almost seems to randomly select things!
The other reason for trying Cubase is that I was curious what was happening on the other side of the fence
and the Cubase UI seems to look way more professional imo and is much easier on the eyes.I'm stuck in a situation where I want to use Cubase because it never pops or drops out on audio (at least on my system), when one records it plays everything that it should do - in Sonar it has a habit of missing the beginning of the first bar - so one has to manually insert a gap at the begining of the project to take this into account. Cubase also provides the arrangement track and the awesome media bay for recalling presets across all instruments.
However, Cubase's default instruments are but pale reflections of those provided with Sonar. I always hear that one should not take this into account, but just look at the work flow. However, without any external synth plugins nearly all my current projects are hosted in Sonar simply because of the rich sounds I can get out of it.
I didn't realise before I bought Cubase how poor their default synths are. Effects and processing are really good in Cubase - its just that they have skimped on the provided instruments. I guess Steinberg assume that most purchasers dump the default synths anyways and add their own, which is fine if you are a Pro, but not if you are a hobbiest.
RobP
[F_or_DEAF]
New member
yeah...it's crazy how each DAW has it's strengths and weakness...
them shyts is just like people in a way...
them shyts is just like people in a way...
xday32x
New member
Sigh..... That is a bummer to me because I am almost certain I will be going the Cubase route as it seems to be much more of what I want in terms of flexibility and keeping a good work flow. I sure would like some good instruments to add to my collection, but Sonar sounds like it is second best in comparison to Cubase in the areas I mentioned. It's beginning to look like it will be impossible to stick to one single DAW exclusively. I am sure there will be little habits I picked up using FL that I will not let go of and will end up using it in conjunction with the new DAW. Truth be told, if the audio recording/editing was worth a damn in FL I would probably just stick with it by itself. Also, I must say from screenshots alone, Cubase appears to have a gorgeous interface! Oh yeah, before I forget, how is Session Drummer in Cubase? I'm looking to see if I can create some songs that sound as if they have natural sounding live drums. Session Drummer any good?
Last edited:
R
RobP
New member
Workflow is much better in Cubase and it has lots of 'little' features that just make you smile.
I don't use session drummer 2 at all, though I gave it a go in Cubase 4 and it worked flawlessly.
In terms of UI I find Cubase's more professional looking and much, much neater. As an example I have taken two screen shots of my current project. One in Cubase 4 and the other in Sonar 7. These can be seen in the images below:
Sonar 7:
View attachment 27637
Cubase 4:
View attachment 27638
(This forum won't let me point to the full size images)
Cubase looks far less cluttered and it is a lot easier to see the selected track (I have selected the same track in both). To make matters worse Sonar has another way of selecting tracks where their top left corners light up in florescent green. This is fine, until you realise that you might have a track selected in addition to these that is highlighted in the slightly lighter shade of grey.
Also, the version of Sonar I use (Version 7) doesn't support instrument tracks like Cubase 4. Hence the clutter around the midi/instrument tracks.
Of the two UI's I know which I prefer by a long way. As a result my latest project has been moved to Cubase 4 where it is a lot easier to work on.
RobP
Last edited:
[F_or_DEAF]
New member
yeah...too many good features out there to only be using one...
for example, i like Pro Tools but i HATE that when i ReWire Reason into Pro Tools, i gotta create TWO TRACKS in Pro Tools...an instrument track AND an audio track.
therefore, from a workflow standpoint, a different ReWire host is definitely needed...mainly to cut down on the OVERALL track count in Pro Tools.
Last edited:
SongArtist
New member
RobP,
So let me sum up your post;
$1,000 for two DAW's, primarily use Sonar ($500) for it's plugins such as Rapture and Dimension but mostly used inside of Cubase ($500) because you prefer Cubase's GUI over Sonar.
You know Sonar is fully customisable. And I have never had any issues of accidentally deleting tracks in Sonar, in fact the track selection is very clearly visible.
GUI, Workflow? Well it's a matter of opinion
I've heard others say they much prefer Sonar, or they much prefer Ableton Live, or ProTools.HD, or Logic, or Samplitude, or Studio One, or Record.
I know people who have been using Sonar for several years and are surprised to learn something new. The same can be said for all other DAW programs.
Important Note:
For anyone thinking of getting Sonar and Cubase?
Cubase.5 does not support DXi, some of the plugins that come with Sonar are Dxi.
------------------------------------
In Sonar for example; I can easily run 48+ tracks that includes multiple instances of third-party VSTi (instruments) and be able to edit midi either viewed single midi instrument events or multiple instruments events in the PRV, the midi tools and additional features available are excellent! At mixdown add multiple VST (effects) plugins (example: DensityMkII, Ozone, T-RackS) all running without any issues at all. No need to freeze or bounce midi events to audio, I simply export it all at once -- mixdown
End Results; it gets the job done! And that's all that matters to me.
I have saved literally hundreds of dollars on third-party plugins, discounts from IKmultimedia, XLN and iZotope. *Thanks* Great companies! Great sounds! I could not be happier.
Over the decades I have used many different software and hardware setups. Sonar, Cubase, Logic, ProTools, at the very 'core' they're all much the same more or less but basically the same. I've been recording since the 1970's of course I know enough to say that either of those apps will get the job done.
I have read many people having issues with their DAW? it could be due to a number of things, too many variables such as; registry issues, bad audio drivers, conflicts, hardware, user error, and whatever. But one thing I really hate are crackware users (piracy: anyone foolish enough to use cracked (illegal) software? I hope it renders their PC next to totally useless or at the very least full of bugs, piracy users won't get no technical help from me).
Logic (Mac Only) vs. Sonar vs. Pro-Tools.HD vs. Cubase. vs Live. vs FL. vs. Acid Pro. vs. Record. vs. Samplitude. vs Studio One. The main thing is whatever is best to whoever feels more suited and comfortable working with.
So let me sum up your post;
$1,000 for two DAW's, primarily use Sonar ($500) for it's plugins such as Rapture and Dimension but mostly used inside of Cubase ($500) because you prefer Cubase's GUI over Sonar.
You know Sonar is fully customisable. And I have never had any issues of accidentally deleting tracks in Sonar, in fact the track selection is very clearly visible.
GUI, Workflow? Well it's a matter of opinion
I've heard others say they much prefer Sonar, or they much prefer Ableton Live, or ProTools.HD, or Logic, or Samplitude, or Studio One, or Record.
I know people who have been using Sonar for several years and are surprised to learn something new. The same can be said for all other DAW programs.
Important Note:
For anyone thinking of getting Sonar and Cubase?
Cubase.5 does not support DXi, some of the plugins that come with Sonar are Dxi.
------------------------------------
In Sonar for example; I can easily run 48+ tracks that includes multiple instances of third-party VSTi (instruments) and be able to edit midi either viewed single midi instrument events or multiple instruments events in the PRV, the midi tools and additional features available are excellent! At mixdown add multiple VST (effects) plugins (example: DensityMkII, Ozone, T-RackS) all running without any issues at all. No need to freeze or bounce midi events to audio, I simply export it all at once -- mixdown
End Results; it gets the job done! And that's all that matters to me.
I have saved literally hundreds of dollars on third-party plugins, discounts from IKmultimedia, XLN and iZotope. *Thanks*
Great companies! Great sounds! I could not be happier.Over the decades I have used many different software and hardware setups. Sonar, Cubase, Logic, ProTools, at the very 'core' they're all much the same more or less but basically the same. I've been recording since the 1970's of course I know enough to say that either of those apps will get the job done.
I have read many people having issues with their DAW? it could be due to a number of things, too many variables such as; registry issues, bad audio drivers, conflicts, hardware, user error, and whatever. But one thing I really hate are crackware users (piracy: anyone foolish enough to use cracked (illegal) software? I hope it renders their PC next to totally useless or at the very least full of bugs, piracy users won't get no technical help from me).
Logic (Mac Only) vs. Sonar vs. Pro-Tools.HD vs. Cubase. vs Live. vs FL. vs. Acid Pro. vs. Record. vs. Samplitude. vs Studio One. The main thing is whatever is best to whoever feels more suited and comfortable working with.
R
RobP
New member
RobP,
So let me sum up your post;
$1,000 for two DAW's, primarily use Sonar ($500) for it's plugins such as Rapture and Dimension but mostly used inside of Cubase ($500) because you prefer Cubase's GUI over Sonar.
You know Sonar is fully customisable. And I have never had any issues of accidentally deleting tracks in Sonar, in fact the track selection is very clearly visible.
GUI, Workflow? Well it's a matter of opinion
I've heard others say they much prefer Sonar, or they much prefer Ableton Live, or ProTools.HD, or Logic, or Samplitude, or Studio One, or Record.
Important Note:
For anyone thinking of getting Sonar and Cubase?
Cubase.5 does not support DXi, some of the plugins that come with Sonar are Dxi.
------------------------------------
In Sonar for example; I can easily run 48+ tracks that includes multiple instances of third-party VSTi (instruments) and be able to edit midi either viewed single midi instrument events or multiple instruments events in the PRV, the midi tools and additional features available are excellent! At mixdown add multiple VST (effects) plugins (example: DensityMkII, Ozone, T-RackS) all running without any issues at all. No need to freeze or bounce midi events to audio, I simply export it all at once -- mixdown
The main thing is whatever is best to whoever feels more suited and comfortable working with.
Price wise I paid around £350 for Sonar back at version 1 and for Cubase 4 I got a good cross-grade discount - though I was suprised to find that I ended up with the 'full' version of Cubase.
Money wise I find DAWs incredibly good value for money - especially Sonar. Prior to 2000 I was using an old Tascam 4 track recorder. Going from that to Sonar 1 was a complete eye opener!
I couldn't beleive how flexible Sonar was in comparison to the 4 track. The concept of having as many tracks as I would ever need and having midi instruments to use and even having effects that would have cost me around £80-£100 per effect in hardware was incredible! I felt really empowered when I made the switch.
Workflow wise, for me right now, Cubase is the one. There is also the rather odd thing of 'look/feel'. It's quite weird. For me Sonar's look/feel peaked at Sonar 3 but has since become diluted and unfocused. For some reason (and I don't know why!) I find Cubase's environment conducive to getting the creativity going. Whereas in Sonar I feel it looks flat and dull - it just doesn't feel like home. It could be that Cubase is still quite new to me and it is this newness that helps with the creativity - however, I'm not too sure.
You are right about DXi's. In fact as far as I'm aware Cubase 4 doesn't support DXi's either....
In terms of loading - at least on my system (a Mac Pro) Cubase seems to work better and I never get dropouts of pops and clicks like in Sonar. That said, my largest projects only amount to around 20 tracks tops, so maybe I'm not really pushing either of the systems.
In terms of selection of clips and tracks in Sonar, I have mentioned this in the Cakewalk forums before. I'm definitely in the minority here, but it does catch me out often enough to be disconcerting. Cubase makes track and clip selection 'less accidental' - at least for me
I guess your last statement says it all. Ideally one should work with whatever they are most comfortable with, hence my move to Cubase.
If one was starting out from scratch I would still recomend Sonar over Cubase - simply because the base package has a lot more potential stored in it in terms of the provided instruments.
RobP