Sonar v.s ProTools

  • Thread starter Thread starter paulbeteivaz
  • Start date Start date
Good point.

With the recent transition of Apple to "Intel under the hood", that is true ... and it serves to further illustrate the point I made earlier.

Apple attempted to hold to proprietary equipment and software, and charged a premium for it -- for many years ... since its inception.

Your point shows what the market eventually made Apple capitulate to. It was a direction market forces forced upon Apple to make them "pay to stay in the game." It became "do (change) or die".

Given enough time, inevitable technological environmental shift, and market pressure (say people simply turn away from PT due to an unwillingness to fork over a premium for the proprietary system versus comparable, more flexible alternatives), Digidesign may also be forced into parallel decisions.

Best,

Kev-
 
Last edited:
K-dub said:
As a side note: Sonar does allow import/export of OMF files, so files created on it can be utilized (to a degree) w/ PT.
Click to expand...

If the PT owner sprung the extra $ for Digitranslator
 
Okay,I guess I'm just gonna hafta do this again....

TOP TEN REASONS SONAR IS BETTER THAN PRO TOOLS

10.The cats and chicks on this forum are way cooler than those Pro tools dorks.
9.You'll get whiter whites and brighter brights.
8.In a scientific study 9 out of 10 people prefered the smell of the sonar cd to the Pro tools cd.
7.Sonar just sounds cooler than pro tools...c'mon say it, s-o-n-a-r!!
6.Pro tools is made by underage workers in sweatshops somewhere in N. Korea.
5.10% of all proceeds from sonar go toward finding a cure for techno.
4.If you don't buy sonar something bad will happen to someone somewhere,now you don't want that to happen....do you?
3.Music made with sonar goes great with beer!
2.It's 100% fat free!
And the number one reason to get sonar(drumroll please)....





Chicks dig guys with Sonar!
 
SteveE9C6 said:
Hey there... this is in the Cakewalk subforum. You expect a bunch of love for PT? Silly me. :rolleyes: Why do I need to feel better? I feel fine. I don't dislike PT. I just believe it is overpriced. And yes, Digidesign is a massive marketing platform for an essentially closed system. People keep pouring money into their coffers because generally speaking, PT has the reputation and people are lemmings.

A serious pro tools installation costs near $100k. You can obtain the same end result using Sonar... or virtually any recording software.
Click to expand...

i love everything about pro tools except the price. I dont even want the pro series. Hell, 16 tracks would do it for me
 
PS
I love sonar too though!!

Their surround sound editing in 4.0 PE is a must when im making the sound for my brothers 3d animations.
 
Anyone get the e-mail about purchasing Sonar 5 now and you'll get Sonar 6 for free? I'm still on Sonar 4 PE, anyone know anything about Sonar 6?
 
RAK said:
Anyone get the e-mail about purchasing Sonar 5 now and you'll get Sonar 6 for free? I'm still on Sonar 4 PE, anyone know anything about Sonar 6?
Click to expand...
No

I'm still on 3 and I'm very happy with it.I may upgrade to 6 strictly for the purpose of not getting too far behind.
 
acidrock said:
No

I'm still on 3 and I'm very happy with it.I may upgrade to 6 strictly for the purpose of not getting too far behind.
Click to expand...
Still on 3 also, and having the same idea.

However, when push comes to shove, I will probably pass on 6 as well. :)

I still haven't really found anything I want to do that I can't do in 3. Now if they made 6 more CPU efficient, that could be of interest - but, if anything, the newer versions seem to be bigger resource hogs than the previous versions.
 
Hmm... I've got 3 and 5PE. I really like 5. Perfect Space is worth the upgrade by itself. I also believe that the 64 bit computations yields a more accurate final result. I didn't say I can hear it... just that I believe it. :rolleyes:
 
I started with 3 PE, and upgraded to 4 PE. I have to admit that I did find significant user interface improvements from 3 to 4. I didn't go to 5 because I'm not really doing as much home stuff as I use to, so I'm not really sure I need to go to 6 (although there is something to be said for not falling behind and having the newest thing)

To be honest if I ever update my home studio, it will probably be to get an intel-mac and digital performer. (I have the MOTU 828mkII with audio desk on an iMAC, and I last version of DP I used was DP3, and really like the program) I've still never used Cubase or Logic.
 
The producer edition is a great deal if your just starting,but if you've already got third party effects/synths that you're happy with,the upgrades aren't deal makers.
 
I'm interested in seeing what new fangled trick CW is going to perform to incite people who purchased 5PE to upgrade. My version works killer now (wasn't always this way), and for the first time, I'm skeptical about what they're going to offer that's going to get me to subscribe.

Mind you, I've bought into every single upgrade since Pro Audio 8, and I've never had any regrets ...

Yet, it's gotten SO good, one must wonder how they're going to up the ante and make it worth forking over the dough.

If they simply roll out MORE SURROUND -- they can plan on a lukewarm reception.

Stereo is still king.

Kev-
 
Maybe they'll increase the audio for video capabalities. I'm still on 4 PE, so I don't know what they did with that on 5.
Maybe some amazing new plug-ins and/or software synths to be bundled with.

And how about including the MP3 encoder free of charge this time?
Offering/including an AC-3 encoder would be nice too. I think Steinberg bundles one with their software (or at least you can buy it), but it's not as expensive as buying a stand alone encoder, darn dolby liscensing rights!!
APAK (which comes with Apple DVD Studio Pro) is very nice, but I know i'm mixing my metaphors...back to Cakwalk.

I think you're right though, ultimately just rolling out more surround sound capability isn't going to be enough.
 
when I opened my studio I just wanted a DAW to be able to recall mixes. I had a guy with a friend that had lots of experience with both. He recomended Sonar. I am very glad he did. I think it is as good of not better sounding than PT, especially 64 bit. It is a lot quieter than Mbox, is cheaper, more plugins, I can run 24 tracks at a time with my Motu 2408 MKiii. for about 1300 bucks for Sonar and motu. PLUS, I hate jumping on anyones band wagon. I agree, if a client HAS to have PT, stay away from him/her. I figure, if they have to have PT because they know that much more than me, why are they coming to me? I have had my share (as all of us have) with people that have a little knowlage and are dangerous with it.
 
paulbeteivaz said:
I need somebody to help me decide which of the following recording softwares is more suitable for me and more user frindly.

Sonar Power Studio 250 / 660 OR
ProTools MBox 2

Thanks,
Paul
Click to expand...

The MBox 2 is for shit, don't digi anything unless you can at minimum get the 002 rack, I love Sonar but I don't really trust combo packs in this price range. Your best bet is to customize your own set up, maybe a Mackie onyx Satellite and Sonar?
 
Ronnievoice said:
...I don't really trust combo packs in this price range...
Click to expand...

There's no reason not to trust the sonar combo pack. cakewalk bought roland (or vice versa?) and the hardware supplied in the combo pack is the top rated edirol fa-25 or whatever it's called. I own a Fa-66 (the 4in/4out + 2digitalin/out) version which is identical in every other way, excellent hardware, good pres, great converters, nice extra features (soft control and esp. limiter and switchable di input, also the variable zero-latency monitor mixing is nice, standard now days, but not when these boxes were released under the edirol name over a year ago).

There's nothing wrong with the sonar combo packs - best software you can get, great hardware for the price. I just am selling my fa-66 finally after getting a firepod, but just an fyi - I'm also picking up a used m-audio audiophile 2496 pci card so that I can run the m-powered pro tools demo and see what it's like. I've used pro tools for years in pro studios, it's pretty good, but really it's the hardware and entire system that makes it so good, the interface WAS good but now is really lacking in features compared to sonar and cubase. I don't use mac apps (logic 7, dig. performer) but have heard great things about those as well compared to pro tools.

I'm just curious which is why I'm trying it out - if I like it I'll pick up a used copy of pro tools m-powered for two reasons - so I'm compatible with big businesses and other studios using a popular standard, and so if somebody says "do you have protools in your studio?" I can answer honestly "yes". If they ask if the daw is protools based, I can say "depends what's needed, but I only use protools if I have to be compatible with a different studio that's using pro tools, otherwise I use more powerful software such as Sonar."

That'll be my sales pitch - I'm running a business here, I'm not arrogant enough to turn down a gig because someone says I have to use pro tools. It's great software, no problem using it, just not AS great as sonar or the like. If it gets me a gig, I can deal with inferior midi features, far fewer native third party plugins, fewer options, and a kludgier interface. It still is great and gets the job done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top