Sonar 3

MadStrum! · #1 10-09-2003

From reading these posts I've got the impression that it's quite buggy and not really worth the $$...
Still wondering whether to get it...

Pier.

rcktdg · #2 10-09-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by MadStrum!
From reading these posts I've got the impression that it's quite buggy and not really worth the $$...
Still wondering whether to get it...

Pier.

Exactly which bugs. I have been using it every day and night for the last week and I have had ZERO problems, hickups or burps and Sonar 3 is running great too

I find the plugins to be pretty good. I am enjoying the Ultrafunk compressor quite a bit. I had very compelling reasons to upgrade so the cost was a bargain for what I gained. Sonar is all grown up now, it transmits smpte. Whoo hooo!

Cheers, RD

Sklathill · #3 10-09-2003

I've had exactly one crash in Sonar after a week of continuous use, and it was actually a problem with Vsampler and importing one of my Akai CDs. Sonar 3 has shown impressive stability. Honestly, very refreshing to go home to Sonar 3 after working with DP3 on the Mac...

moskus · #4 10-09-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by Sklathill
Honestly, very refreshing to go home to Sonar 3 after working with DP3 on the Mac...

Wow! Can I quote you on that?

Qwerty · #5 10-09-2003

Hey if you are referring to anything that I have posted, don't worry - I really am splitting hairs. I find it much more stable and efficient than 2.2 XL.

All the other comments concerning the quality of the included plugins in the PE version are correct IMHO and I would not hesitate to recommend the upgrade to you if you are in a position to afford it.

Either way - it's supposed to be about the music. A great song will still sound great irregardless of which version it is recorded in.........

Q.

I just need all the help I can get

moskus · #6 10-09-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by Qwerty
Either way - it's supposed to be about the music. A great song will still sound great irregardless of which version it is recorded in

Very true!

BUT there's always that "How do you get there". Efficiency, you know.

Sklathill · #7 10-09-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by moskus
Wow! Can I quote you on that?

Yes you can. I've worked with DP3 for about 2.5 years continuously on both 9 and X, and as much as I like its interface, I can't STAND its instability.

moskus · #8 10-09-2003

Hmmm... I always thougth that DP was supposed to be extremely stable, it's a Mac program and all. Ha, I'm gonna mail this to a mac-friend of mine...

MadStrum! · #9 10-10-2003

I heard that DR008 , which i use for almost every song...doesn't work well/does not work at all in Sonar 3... can anyone confirm this?

Thanks for all the feedback.

Pier.

moskus · #10 10-10-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by MadStrum!
I heard that DR008 , which i use for almost every song...doesn't work well/does not work at all in Sonar 3...

Where do you hear these roumors?

DR-008 is a DXi and will certainly work in a DXi hosting app such as Sonar 3. The only thing is that it's not bundled with Sonar 3 as it's with Sonar 2 XL...

Bonkwell · #11 10-10-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by MadStrum!
From reading these posts I've got the impression that it's quite buggy and not really worth the $$...
Still wondering whether to get it...

Pier.

If you think Sonar 3 is Buggy look at all the complaints about SX2

http://forum.cubase.net/cgi-bin/cuba...=10&LastLogin=

MadStrum! · #12 10-10-2003

Hmmm... looks like i'll get it when my cash flow comes in!
There's a load of crap on the cakewalk website, can you guys tell me what r those new stuff that really matter, or r really cool?

Pier.

pronoise · #13 10-10-2003

Sonar3 has been great so far. Actually in my system it runs better than Sonar 2.2 ! I have no regrets that I have updated.

wfaraoni · #14 10-10-2003

I even loaded it on my old 300 mhz at work learning laptop with 64 meg ram XP and it has performed well. Even Better than 2.2 did. I have not found any bugs YET! But I have not spent much time using it either.

Peace
Bill

tcdave · #15 10-10-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by Qwerty
Hey if you are referring to anything that I have posted, don't worry - I really am splitting hairs. I find it much more stable and efficient than 2.2 XL.

All the other comments concerning the quality of the included plugins in the PE version are correct IMHO and I would not hesitate to recommend the upgrade to you if you are in a position to afford it. [/i]

Sonar 3 has a much improved/overhauled audio handling system. It is suppoed to be extremely efficient and stable due to this improved audio structure.

tcdave

moskus · #16 10-11-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by wfaraoni
I even loaded it on my old 300 mhz at work learning laptop with 64 meg ram XP and it has performed well. Even Better than 2.2 did. I have not found any bugs YET! But I have not spent much time using it either.

And that system is stable?

I have a 300 MHz laptop I don't know what to do with. Thanks for the tip! WinXP, here it comes...

wfaraoni · #17 10-11-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by moskus
And that system is stable?

I have a 300 MHz laptop I don't know what to do with. Thanks for the tip! WinXP, here it comes...

Its an amd k62 Pretty stable but you cant load some CPU intensive fx for real time. Also I must apply all fx to the tracks permanently but the up side is that when I find the time I do get to use the Full program and learn at work

I have an unusual laptop and the documentation says it runs faster with 64m ram than 128.???/

peace
Bill

MadStrum! · #18 10-12-2003

Ok... one more question...
DR-008 is gone right, if you didn't have 2.2xl....
what replaces it? There has to be a drum machine thing of some sort rite?

Pier.

johnhoe · #19 10-12-2003

Only really Vsampler DXi (Sonar 3 PE) which can play
AIF samples
AKAI (AKAI S1000/S3000 CD and AKAI S5000/S6000 .AKP)
Downloadable Sounds (.DLS)
Gigasampler (.GIG)
HALion (.FXB, .FXP)
LM4 Drumkits
SoundFonts (.SF2)
WAV samples

And is supplied with 2 CDs worth of samples.

moskus · #20 10-12-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by wfaraoni
I have an unusual laptop and the documentation says it runs faster with 64m ram than 128.???/

Okay, I'll install WinXP on my 300 MHz laptop now. I always thought that it would run best on Win98SE, so I didn't try it when I formated it this summer.

tombuur · #21 10-12-2003

Okay, if DR-008 is gone and I don't want to install it from the 2.0 disk, can I use Vsampler? All I want is to set up my own drum kit, and then tweek sound character and volume of the individual parts of the drum kit. If that can be done just as well in Vsampler, I will be fine.

moskus · #22 10-12-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by tombuur
If that can be done just as well in Vsampler, I will be fine.

Then relax, this should be possible with VSampler.

Dr_simon · #23 10-12-2003

I put Win 2K on a 300 mHz laptop and that nearly killed it.

I'd be intrested to see what happens with XP.

Best of luck !

moskus · #24 10-12-2003

Quote:

Originally posted by Dr_simon
I put Win 2K on a 300 mHz laptop and that nearly killed it.

Yeah, but I would never install Win2K on a 300 MHz. There's one of the differences between WIn2k and XP.

And do you think WinXP boots slow? Click here. My machine boots on 30 seconds, and that's from power off to it's ready for use!

Dr_simon · #25 10-12-2003

Cool man I wasn't tiring to be a smart ass or anything.

We never tried XP on the laptop so as far as I'm concerned it is still a mystery !

We also didn't have much in the way of Ram (about 32 Mb I think).

Anyway best of luck dude !

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)