Sonar 2.0 xl vs. Cakewalk 9

[MrStitch]

Is there any real major improvement in the software?
Does it handle audio better? Cleaner?
Poking around, I don't seem to find any real major differences. Anyone notice anything, besides the new layout? =)

[James Argo]

hhmmm... read here.

http://homerecording.com/bbs/showthr...threadid=77617


Jaymz

[dachay2tnr]

The "quality" of your recording won't be any different, since that's really dependant on your sound card.

However the Sonar interface is light years better than PA9 and the automatable FX are a nice feature. Also, Sonar has the ability to incorporate acidized loops (although I personally don't use them).

You might also like some of the midi drum features that Sonar 2 has.

And lastly, as is the slogan around here: ACKUS


all cool kids use Sonar

copyright 2002 acidrock

[moskus]

Not just interface improvements, but virtual instruments (DXi), use Rewire (f.ex. integrate Reason) and automatable effects!

[dachay2tnr]

I already covered the automatable effects

and the automatable FX are a nice feature

However, I did forget the DXi's. Good catch, moskus. The DXi's are another great improvement in Sonar over PA9.

[moskus]

Originally posted by dachay2tnr
I already covered the automatable effects

Doh!

[James Argo]

You know what... I've written alot of the differences between CWPA & SONAR. Hit reply. Page error Damn... Then I have nothin to say anymore but to post the link above...

Well, actually, you can't "feel" the differences, if you don't have the need for differences I mean many people just need regular multitracker for MIDI & audio, and they get used to CWPA9. They use onboard soundcard (only two input at a time). And do "regular" tasks... Then for "this kind of people", they won't notice the differences but the layout. But if you really dig it down to most of their features, they will realize the differences. I got a good example. Call me dumb stupid, but I really don't know the differences among Ms Word 97, Ms Word 2000, and Ms Word XP. For me, they all the same ol' word processor to write a letter . Okay, maybe a little differences, but who cares . What if I asked a "real" officer, who really works with documents & archieve thingee mostly everyday. They must know the differences alot among 'em... right ?


Jaymz

[moskus]

I don't know how you guys work, but for me new features means new ideas. The more toys the better (and not just software). To have the opportunity to use a certain feature, in case you suddenly could use it, I like that.

Just take last week. I have a friend who took his band and recorded a demo in a "more-pro-studio-than-mine" studio. Well, they started mixing and found that the tracks needed something. So I fired up Sonar at home, and with my Fender Strat and NI B4 I sended them some more "ambitient" tracks. And let me tell you this: The OMF support works beautifully! They could just import it into ProTools, mixed and ready! The engineer loved me (because he didn't have to mix it, hi didn't like the band at all. ).

You never know when you need the features. As the world moves on, you should to...

[dachay2tnr]

In responding to another thread, I recalled another powerful feature of Sonar that didn't exist in PA9. Slip-Editing.

Slip Editing is the ability to "cover up" portions of your tracks so they are not audible upon playback, but the parts are still available to "uncover" if you later decide you want them.

In PA9 you would have had to actually delete the part, and unless you made a backup of the track it would be gone forever.

Pretty neat tool.

[moskus]

There's also support for Control Surfaces in Sonar, which PA9 doesen't have.

And you can control MIDI CCs with envelopes in Sonar. And the volume envelopes are for the whole track, not just the clip (while you still can control the gain of the clip).

[DigiMusicDoc]

And in addition to everything else mentioned here, there's Groove Clips. Cakewalk put a lot of effort into trying to compete with the features of Sonic Foundry's Acid.

[moskus]

And the new and improved Console View is genious!


Anyway, we have forgotten about the most important part:
WDM and ASIO support! Meaning low low latency!

[BibleMan]

Originally posted by moskus
And the new and improved Console View is genious!

Although I agree with Moskus about the improved Console View, I think the best part of Sonar is that I don't have to use Console View. Everything a budding HomeRecc'er could ever want is right there in Track View.

And, as Dachay has said in the past, bad thing happen when you use Console View (i.e. growth stunting, staph infections, and you start putting down the toilet seat).

Once you get used to the new interface, everything you do goes much faster. It's all about time.



-BM

[Torpid-x]

Console view is still good for watching meters, and automation just looks sooo cool in it with sliders moving up and down...










































....and
Chicks dig console view more than track view!!!

[moskus]

Originally posted by Torpid-x
Chicks dig console view more than track view!!!

BINGO!

[Just A Glance]

There is a massive difference between these two that should be quite obvious. I was getting really pissed off with cakewalk 9 becase it kept taking all the memory and causing really awful errors in the audio that i couldnt deal with anymore. So i started using Sonar and this has NEVER happened. It handles so many more effects plugins and ive never experianced a dropout yet, even with my low power system. The whole Sonar package is just so much better in so many ways, go with the sonar.

[moskus]

Well, I've never had memory-problems with either PA9 or Sonar. And on my PII 350 PA9 had no problems, and Sonar wouldn't even start...