Cubase & Sonar

  • Thread starter Thread starter Reilley
  • Start date Start date
Thanks for these sensible answers, without a bunch of rah-rah stuff.

This is a very good forum.
 
altitude909 said:
Pro tools is the industry standard only because of its wonderful DSP via the Core cards . The software is not the selling point of PT
Click to expand...

Thats pretty much what I said, plug-ins=core cards. Its also the industry standard because it's the industry standard. :D A lot of marketing people know the words "Pro Tools", they wouldnt know the difference between PT and a Fisher Price casette but they hire studios because of the PT.
 
xstatic said:
My experience definately is the opposite of Bulls Hit's experience. Every time I open up Sonare it seems like a cluttered mess to me. Cubase however was a cinch for me to learn. I think it was so easy because it acts a lot like a traditional analog setup in a lot of ways. It just felt very easy to me. .
Click to expand...

This is the point. Modern sequencers have almost identical capability. Some have implemented features better than others, some come with nicer add-ons but ultimately it comes down to how comfortable you get with each product, so it's good to trial them both
 
That's very interesting. If they are THAT close, then Sonar has the edge on price, eh?

So PT has better plug-ins. Are Sonar and Cubase catching up on that score?
 
One more thing - Sonar doesn't play nice with all VST plug-ins. Even with Sonar 6's native "support" there are still issues. That is the main reason I moved to Cubase.

Sonar would not see all the banks on the M1 and Wavestation VST synths in the Korg Legacy Collection - Digital Edition softsynth package I bought this summer.
 
Reilley said:
That's very interesting. If they are THAT close, then Sonar has the edge on price, eh?

So PT has better plug-ins. Are Sonar and Cubase catching up on that score?
Click to expand...

My big beef with sonar is the external hardware support and advanced midi, cubase really shines in that department and sonar (and cakewalk before it) has always been lacking

I would not say that PT has better plugins, it's just that TDM is a great platform for plugins so you dont have to worry so much about their CPU overhead. DSP based plugins like TC, Creamware, and UAD definitely are on par with whats available for TDM IMHO
 
Reilley said:
That's very interesting. If they are THAT close, then Sonar has the edge on price, eh?

So PT has better plug-ins. Are Sonar and Cubase catching up on that score?
Click to expand...

Just so you're aware, it's very important to distinguish from ProTools LE and ProTools TDM. TDM has huge market share because the capability of its core cards (as was mentioned). LE has market share because of TDM. From what I've read (and this is just my impression - haven't used it), LE isn't nearly as good for the price as Cubase or Sonar. If you're wanting to train yourself to use ProTools, though, it's a good way to start.
 
brzilian said:
One more thing - Sonar doesn't play nice with all VST plug-ins. Even with Sonar 6's native "support" there are still issues. That is the main reason I moved to Cubase.

Sonar would not see all the banks on the M1 and Wavestation VST synths in the Korg Legacy Collection - Digital Edition softsynth package I bought this summer.
Click to expand...

This is true. Definitely a weakness of Sonar. For me, Sonar's biggest weakness is the tempo map. It doesnt "hold" the settings very well, especially if you make lots of tempo changes.
 
Reilley said:
I will test drive both.

In my neck of the woods, SONAR HOME STUDIO 4 XL and CUBASE SE 3 are the same price. Are they at the same level of features, so to speak?

Thanks again.
Click to expand...

I also own both.

Sonar will have more/better bundled softsynths. SE 3's bundled VSTi offering is pretty pathetic. I would recommend the Studio Case II package from Steinberg if you can find it. It is SE 3 with several more VSTi's.

Cubase SE 3 seems to be stronger in the MIDI editing arena and has input quantization. The way VSTi's are handled in SE 3 seems much cleaner than SHS's Synth Rack.

Finally, SE 3 is limited to 8 simultaneous physical inputs and 8 VSTi's. Sonar Home Studio has no limitations on # of inputs.
 
altitude909 said:
Cubase and Sonar are more sequencers than mixing/recording environments and are used accordingly. In the real world, if your signed and expected to deliver tracks you will end up in protools eventually for recording live stuff and mixdown. What you use is irrelevant up to that point. I dont know anyone who actually writes/sequences in protools but when it comes down to mixdown, I dont know anyone who uses anything but a HD/TDM Rig
Click to expand...

So where have you been then? There are lots of projects in lots of different studios for lots of major labels being done without or with minimal pro tools usage every day. It sounds to me like you only know one or two people in the industry if you haven't been exposed to anything else. There is absolutely no mandate to whether or not you HAVE to use Pro Tools.

I would also like to know how Cubase and Sonar and Logic etc... are sequencers and not mixing/recording environments? What makes Pro Tools any different in this respect? In fact, not just Pro Tools LE, but HD as well? How is it "more" of a recording/mixing environment? I know plenty of people who would actually like to do more work in Nuendo than in Pro Tools HD, but they are so used to PT and the other engineers and interns at the studios are as well, so they end up using PT out of convenience and not out of necessity.

David, I was never trying to insinuate that there were not professionals that are using Sonar, because there certainly are. It surprises me that they would go to Sonar though for there midi tasks since that is Cubases strong point. In fact, Cubase was really originally designed to be more of a midi program and never really made a full commitment to a more audio file based production environment until a few years ago when SX first hit the market.
 
xstatic said:
David, I was never trying to insinuate that there were not professionals that are using Sonar, because there certainly are. It surprises me that they would go to Sonar though for there midi tasks since that is Cubases strong point. In fact, Cubase was really originally designed to be more of a midi program and never really made a full commitment to a more audio file based production environment until a few years ago when SX first hit the market.
Click to expand...

Maybe familiarity. To be honest, I didnt even know about cubit, but Cakewalk was really popular in the early 90s, so maybe that has something to do with it. For me, I don't know if it would be worth it to switch platforms, I can do anything in Sonar midi-wise that I can think of.

It also could be sheer popularity, as Cakewalk is by far the most sold platform. It has various versions in places like Best Buy. I dont think it has anything to do with superiority, it definitely has some flaws especially tempo.
 
the newer versions of sonar are reaching editing speeds close to vegas, plus some handy tricks on their own

If you want one mouse tool speed, sonar will own verses cubase's need for several mouse keys

But integrating an assload of midi sound modules seems easier in cubase, and their drum map system is awesome
 
I don't think nor would I reccomend you switch David. Cubase works wonderfully for me, and I have never had a good experience with Sonar yet. However, I also realize that I am very familiar with Cubase and not nearly as familiar with Sonar and believe that has a lot to do with it.
 
Do these companies issue patches, fixes, updates etc., for their software, when necessary?
 
xstatic said:
I don't think nor would I reccomend you switch David. Cubase works wonderfully for me, and I have never had a good experience with Sonar yet. However, I also realize that I am very familiar with Cubase and not nearly as familiar with Sonar and believe that has a lot to do with it.
Click to expand...

Yup, that's the bottom line. Doesnt make much sense to re-learn something I have down cold.
 
Reilley said:
Do these companies issue patches, fixes, updates etc., for their software, when necessary?
Click to expand...

Some of the smaller companies do, the bigger ones are on kinda long , fixed schedules, so you will wait a LONG time for bugs to be fixed, even showstoppers

EXT is a sequencer type app with quick and responsive updates
 
Does one or the other have available better orchestral plug-ins and such? I want to
decorate jazz-blues [and other] songs with strings and some of the softer horns, ie. oboe, French horn, etc..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top