Sonar vs Pro Tools vs Cubase

phriq

phriq

Freon Productions
I've been using Adobe Audition for quite some time now. However, I have been getting fed up with some of its limited VST support and also am forced to use Pro Tools at school. I am thinking about switching from Audition to either Sonar, Cubase, or Pro Tools. I was leaning towards Sonar or Pro-Tools because I don't know a whole lot about Cubase. I tried it once and found it really awkward. What would you guys suggest? Is there any main advantages of Pro Tools 9 over Sonar, should I reconsider looking at Cubase?
 
I think PT, Sonar and Cubase are just about the same in function and quality. From there, it's just a matter of budget and feel of the User Interface. PT uses RTAS plugs and will cost twice the amount of VST's if you were to buy 3rd party plug-ins. But I also hear that PT's native plugs are very good, so you might not need to purchase additional ones. The stock plugs for Cubase and Sonar are decent also, though I prefer the UAD stuff.

I initially started with an old version of Cubase and switched to Sonar when I switched to Win7. I used it for a while, had some initial problems, figured them out, then had smaller issues which I couldn't get past. Stuff like the audio engine quitting at random times or the program locking up.

Eventually, I switched back to Cubase and upgraded to the latest version to take advantage of 64bit. I haven't had any problems yet. Other people use Sonar and I havent' heard of too many complaints.

I'm more comfortable with Cubase's layout and buttonology, but it's a personal preference.

just my thoughts.... your mileage may vary
 
Thanks Chili. I think I am going to give Sonar a try. We use ProTools for school so I may eventually end up switching to that out of familiarity, but we'll see. Thanks the input though!
 
Might wanna take a look at Reaper as well....I have heard of people customizing it's layout to mimic PT...if you are familiar with PT and keep going back and forth between programs....might be beneficial to you.....price point makes it a no brainer as well. Free uncrippled demo.
 
I rarely see (or maybe just don't notice) someone point out in threads like this, that ProTools has wide acceptance among professional users and studios, whereas the others are apparently used far less. Last film I saw, just last Tuesday, had a mention of the ProTools Techs in the credits. Never noticed any other, similar software or tech so credited.

I am not saying PT is BETTER, only that if you are going to make a profession out of this, (and yes, I know it's called HOMErecording.com) you might want to take that into consideration.
 
You rarely notice? Come on man, PT is the definition of industry standard. You don't need PT to get professional results.
 
I'm not getting your point, showstone. I agree, PT is the industry standard. And yes, you don't need PT to get pro results. I was only saying that, it being the standard, it lends it's self to things like another engineer who might mix in your studio (or you in his) is more likely to know PT and thus more likely to want to step in, also that you have a better chance of getting files sent to you in PT format. More interchangeability, all around.

So, your point, again?
 
Forget it. I have no point. Buy PT and all it's hardware. Make Avid fatcats richer. While you are at it, you need Nuemann mics, Neve pres, Manley eqs, and Teletronix comps.
 
I can actually see both points Stevie and Showstone, however, I think there is more validity in the argument that PT is the industry standard. That has always been something that has made me lean toward getting PT (plus it is what we use in school) but the cost has also held me back some (since I am still a poor college student). Although, maybe it would be worth it as then I could transfer files from home to school and vise versa and 9 just came out so hopefully I wouldn't need to upgrade anytime "too" soon. decisions....decisions....

I have heard that Sonar has better plugin support, is there any validity in this or is this just a cloud of hot air? I know PT comes with alot of built in plugins that I have heard a really quite good. Have either of you worked with either of them?

p.s. Showstone... I have messed around with the demo of Reaper and it was nice. I actually used it for using EZ Drummer (as Adobe Audition did not support it)...I liked it, but I think Sonar or PT is what I will be deciding between. I can get an Academic edition of PT for 300 I just found out :)
 
To each their own! I have a serious problem with Avid and their monopoly on video editting and music production. But that's cool. Makes sense if you A. Have the money to spend. B. Are already familiar with PT and feel more comfortable. C. Are expecting to need to swap PT files back and forth with colleagues.

Reaper is only $60 if you decide to keep it.....;)

No shit?!?!?!? Fargo? Crazy, and I thought I was the only one in the frozen wasteland of a state that was on HR.

How are ya? What ya got going on if Fargo? We can discuss further in PM if you wanna keep the thread clear....very interested in chatting with a fellow NDian.
 
I thought more recent versions of PT support VST. And the FX adapter lets PT versions at least as old as 6 use VSTs. PT9 doesn't require an AVID I/O anymore, either.

I just really thought the notorious PT incompatibility issues had mostly disappeared now. Is that not true?
 
This is one of those things where there is really no need for discussion...

You are learning Pro Tools, the industry standard professional software, in school.

Outside of sleeping, school, work, getting laid, whatever, you have X number of hours in a day.

You can spend all of those X hours learning more about the industry standard professional software and how better to use it.

Or...

You can spend some of those X hours learning how to use another DAW program.

Due apologies to those who like Reaper, Sonar, Cubase, or other DAWs, but they are NOT the industry standard professional software.

Like I said, there is not even a choice to be made here...
 
steve,


I've never used pro tools, and I'm sure its great. It is considered an Industry Standard much like Windows is the industry standard for desktop and laptop computing. I'm going by user percentages (80/20) split with the 20 percent being made up of Apple, Linux, etc. Even though I’m a Windows person that doesn’t mean serious work can’t be accomplished with other operating systems.
Back to Pro Tools and Cubase
Hans Zimmer is one of many composers who uses Cubase to score his films.
Here is a list of his films. (all scored in Cubase to my knowledge)
Hans Zimmer - IMDb
Harry Gregson-Williams is another film composer with dozens of Cubase (he uses the old Cubase SX version) scores under his belt.
Harry Gregson-Williams - IMDb
So clearly Cubase on a professional level, Cubase doesn’t seem to be a barrier to getting work to the screen. So if you toss the so called “Industry Standard” argument out the door, what other advantages over Cubase or Sonar does Pro Tools have?

Given this list of top rated films over the years, I think the term “Industry Standard” doesn’t mean as much as Avid would like you to think it does.
 
Last edited:
bdenton said:
Due apologies to those who like Reaper, Sonar, Cubase, or other DAWs, but they are NOT the industry standard professional software.

Like I said, there is not even a choice to be made here...
Click to expand...

BDenton,

That term doesn’t really seem to mean anything in 2011 does it? I would bet with more and more indie films, bolly-wood films etc, as well as major Hollywood films are scored with something other than pro-tools. (probably more than half) (note my post above for a small list of major Hollywood films scored with Cubase )
Perhaps you can make the argument that Pro Tools is used more than any other DAW for films, and by definition that means it’s the “industry standard professional software”. However that doesn’t mean it’s the only professional Industry DAW software, so yes there is a choice, many choices to be clear.
Cubase gives you quite a bit of bang for $500. Low budget films are much more likely to choose Cubase, Sonar, etc than Pro Tools, just as they are more likely to choose Adobe Production Studio for film chopping over the much more expensive “Industry standard” (whatever that is).
Nobody is going to demand a ticket refund at the box office after viewing the new $100 million dollar Sherlock Holmes sequel, when they read the end credits to discover Cubase was used and Pro Tools wasn’t.

My point is that one’s choice of Cubase vs. Pro Tools is not going to be the limiting factor in being successful at scoring a film, unless your DAW choice busts your production budget.
 
showstone said:
To each their own! I have a serious problem with Avid and their monopoly on video editting and music production. But that's cool. Makes sense if you A. Have the money to spend. B. Are already familiar with PT and feel more comfortable. C. Are expecting to need to swap PT files back and forth with colleagues.

Reaper is only $60 if you decide to keep it.....;)


No shit?!?!?!? Fargo? Crazy, and I thought I was the only one in the frozen wasteland of a state that was on HR.

How are ya? What ya got going on if Fargo? We can discuss further in PM if you wanna keep the thread clear....very interested in chatting with a fellow NDian.
Click to expand...

very well put. I believe we should support other software not just pro tools. are we going to start pulling quotes from paradise lost about how we should all conform or is it safe to assume that if the audio production industry is monopolized by pro tools or mac people like us aren't going to be able to continue our art within a reasonable budget or maybe even at all for that matter? Think about the awesome free plugins people have come up with that might not exist if it weren't for free software. Remember the story behind firewire and usb2. I'm not dissing the idea of having a universal mind on the subject but these companies are trying their hardest to keep their products exclusive and hard to get away from. It's like ford guys vs chevy guys once you get into the engine they're all the same but you get used to a certain engineering design of where this and that is and what size sockets you're going to need. You get comfortable. Artists are supossed to be poor thats the way it is and this is an art. At the end of the day I do support the low end stuff its the gateway to the professional stuff. I got into this when i was 14 I didn't have rich parents to send me to college where I can play with pro tools all day I had to start somwhere.
 
guitared2,

I think the industry trend is good news for us. I’m willing to concede that Pro Tools is the so called “Industry Standard” if they are willing to concede that the term really is meaningless in terms of being professionally successful.
In other words “Industry Standard” is a marketing gimmick in 2011, Designed to imply that if you don’t buy/use Pro-Tools, then you will never be allowed across the moat into the castle. Its quite a brilliant strategy by Avid that works against everyone’s basic fear that they won’t be taken seriously. Sort of the old “Charlie the Tuna” ploy. Sorry Charlie.
Every year there are more and more people scoring and chopping their VERY successful films including many major Hollywood films (see list above) with something other than Pro-Tools.
Pro-Tools is a fine software system, one of the best, but its not the only one, its one of many than gets the same job done.
I watched an old “Making of Open Water” shark film the other day. The director took his $100,000 and turned into $30 Million box office wonder. He edited and scored the entire film in his home’s walk in closet with his Macintosh 10 years ago. The technology since then has only gotten cheaper, and much better.
 
Last edited:
jokerone said:
guitared2,

I think the industry trend is good news for us. I’m willing to concede that Pro Tools is the so called “Industry Standard” if they are willing to concede that the term really is meaningless in terms of being professionally successful.
In other words “Industry Standard” is a marketing gimmick in 2011, Designed to imply that if you don’t buy/use Pro-Tools, then you will never be allowed across the moat into the castle. Its quite a brilliant strategy by Avid that works against everyone’s basic fear that they won’t be taken seriously. Sort of the old “Charlie the Tuna” ploy. Sorry Charlie.
Every year there are more and more people scoring and chopping their VERY successful films including many major Hollywood films (see list above) with something other than Pro-Tools.
Pro-Tools is a fine software system, one of the best, but its not the only one, its one of many than gets the same job done.
I watched an old “Making of Open Water” shark film the other day. The director took his $100,000 and turned into $30 Million box office wonder. He edited and scored the entire film in his home’s walk in closet with his Macintosh 10 years ago. The technology since then has only gotten cheaper, and much better.
Click to expand...

What you call a gimmick i call a scam. But hey don't listen to me I'm just a hard head rambling. I've found myself using ubuntu a little bit lately in conjunction with an apogee one. =O
 
guitarded2 said:
What you call a gimmick i call a scam. But hey don't listen to me I'm just a hard head rambling. I've found myself using ubuntu a little bit lately in conjunction with an apogee one. =O
Click to expand...

I have nothing against Pro Tools (other than the price). In fact, I’ve never used it so Its hard for me to compare it to anything.
However, I do know that when someone’s best and only argument for using Pro Tools is because it’s the “Professional Industry Standard”, then I know their best argument isn’t worth much because in 2011 many if not most (more than half) are using something else and using something else professionally and successfully in the industry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top