why cubase sx is better than sonar...

  • Thread starter Thread starter roostmusic
  • Start date Start date
cominginsecond said:
I don't know how close Cubase SX is to Cubase VST/32, but I downloaded a demo of VST/32, and it took me forever to wrap my head around it. With Sonar I was recording and mixing in minutes.
Click to expand...

Gee...I never tried Sonar I must say, But if VST32 is complicated, then there must not be a user friendly software on this planet;)
 
Can Cubase SX do groove looping?

No? Pah, humbug.

Sonar for President!

Moskus, I have been called some names in my time but never "Yummy". I'll take that as a compliment. Dachay, see what you've started now:rolleyes: Lol
 
Gee...I never tried Sonar I must say, But if VST32 is complicated, then there must not be a user friendly software on this planet
Click to expand...
Different strokes for different folks. I found it much harder to work with than Sonar.
 
SONAR is better all the way...












Why should I tell that anyway...? :confused:
 
I would actually like to see more of the type of comparison made in the original post. Nothing wrong with periodically reevaluating which software you use.
Dave
 
i can't see myself getting rid of sonar because i know it so well...everything down to all the keyboard commands...i just hope that they incorporate some of those features that i mentioned originally in future releases. sorry to cause a stir...i just second guess stuff alot :)
 
i agree with Dave S. a healthy discussion of the pros and cons of various software is a good thing.

1) automation can be quantized and can snap to an event or grid. This is a huge feature for creating gates n such.
Click to expand...

This isn't really a big deal to me because Sonar's envelopes (automation) can be copied and pasted. You set up your automation on the beat, and just copy and paste it where you want it.

2) you can organize your tracks into folders...you can have a folder track named drums and have all your midi drum tracks in there. (much better than show/hide track)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't use it, but that's a good feature if you wanted to mute, archive or hide a certain set of midi tracks all at once.

3) in one midi track, you can have separate panes or tracks for different automation types. This makes it very easy to keep track of all your controller automation.
Click to expand...

Either Cakewalk 8 or 9 use to do this. It had an automation track. I hated that. I want the automation for each track in that track that way i can copy/paste that automation if needed.

4) in the track (main) view, you can view the controller automation separately from the note data by clicking on a little plus sign. This would make editing controller data on a large scale very easy. Beats the heck out of creating separate midi tracks for your controller automation.
Click to expand...

In sonar, for MIDI you can view the controller automation separately form the notes. In the track view press the MUSICAL NOTE, that will clear the notes from the view and leave you with just the controller and wheel data.

How long have you been using Sonar? Maybe the problem isn't the software, maybe you just need to dig a little deeper.

Thanks for the info, keep it coming. I want to know how the software I'm using compares to the others. I've been using Cakewalk since it was in DOS.
 
I've heard good music from all kinds of hard/software.
I've heard crap from all kinds of hard/software.

I think it's a personal choice what a person uses.
I think the final outcome depends more on the editing and mixing by the person using the hard/software than the hard/software.

A while back some guy posted some songs that were recorded on a two track recorder back in the 1970s. They sounded really good.

On the other hand,

I have a song done in Sonar. There is a lot of room for improvement.
It's not sonar nor the two track recorder that made the songs good or bad, it's the person pushing the sliders around.

Difficult software is easy to use once you get use to it.
It's a personal choice.
I started out on Pro Audio 9 and moved up to Sonar. I've no intention of getting any other recording software. A lot of great songs have been recorded using Sonar.
I'm a bit embaressted that one of them isn't mine. :eek:
 
One very good reason why Sonar is better than Cubase

Sonar is made by Cakewalk, who are (in my experience) an honest, down to Earth company that make good software and sell and support it straightforwardly, in the American tradition of excellent customer service (I'm not American, by the way).

Cubase is made by Steinberg, who are lying dishonest thieves that make ultra-buggy products, sell them on the back of their old first-mover advantage and huge installed base, rely on their customers as paying beta-testers and promise fixes that never come.

Anyone seen the stuff going on with the Houston? You gotta be kidding putting gear in that state on the market!

I switched from Cubase VST to Sonar, and vowed I would never touch Steinberg again. I can't deny I've been tempted by SX, but I can resist. Sonar rocks, and more importantly, works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top