Cakewalk Pro Audio 9 Vs Sonar vs Home studio?

  • Thread starter Thread starter flutemaker
  • Start date Start date
F

flutemaker

New member
so far i have made all the decisions and purchased all the parts.........but my stumbling point is the recording section........i have cakewalk pro audio 9...........its ok i guess.........but how does it compare to say Sonar........i am literaly a one man band........just me an my flutes.........never more than 8 tracks........how does home studio xl compare/stack up.........i do not intend to open a studio........just want to record my next commercial cd right here on the farm.........can that honestly be accomplished with n-tracks?(i kind of like it the best so far).........it feels more intuitive for a novice)........or should i stick with 9 o go with sonar????
i do not use alot of effects.........just need to be able to come up with something the factory can print clean.......
any thoughts?
thanks all for the many great tips and thoughts...........this bbs has influenced me in many ways.........and i will read and keep up with as much as i can.........
be well one and all
flutemaker
 
if you already have pro audio 9, why bother using n-track. pro audio is much more stable, and has plenty of features. if all you're going to do is record audio, you shouldn't bother upgrading to sonar. i did upgrade from pro audio 9 to sonar because i wanted to use dxi and vst instruments. if not for that, i wouldn't have upgraded.
 
Sounds like Homestudio2002 is more than enough for you (HS is basically a stripped down SONAR, only some things are limited...like the maximum number of insertable dx plugins). Beware though: it saves money but you'll never see any update for it...while on the other hand SONAR gets updates every three months. Asio support for homemusicians with Creative Audigy soundcards sounds pretty cool (which pro would buy a Creative card)? Forget it. You'll have to buy SONAR for that kinda stuff.

I'm using Homestudio2002 for about a year now, for my one man band, and I'm pretty happy with it (except for the lack of updates/support)
 
And I thought I wrote "..." alot! :D

I would either stick with PA9 (if I just recorded audio) or if you're experimental type, I'd go with Sonar (or maybe HomeStudio).
 
Still thinking about switching to SONAR...I like the idea of ASIO support & automatable DSP FX (standalone the effectspackage as much as a SONAR upgrade) :)
 
I would wait for Sonar 3 (I heard that it's supposed to be out somewhere between october - desember 2003).
 
I like the idea of 'support' too...or is this is an illusion for SONAR users also?
 
No, us Sonar users are apreciated, you see... :D
 
Is there a feature matrix somewhere that shows the differences between PA9 and Sonar/Sonar XL?

I'm a newb with an Aardvark Q10 currently in transit. The Q10 comes with a full featured version of PA9.

My intent is live performance recording onto 8 tracks. I'd like to learn how to do mixdown of these tracks. The end result will be given to the band as a high quality live recording of their performance.

My daughter wants to do solo recording and building multiple tracks. She will need to generate a drum track, as she does not play drums, nor do we own a kit.

Is there a good reason for me to upgrade the PA9 to Sonar or Sonar/XL?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top