Cubase vs. Sonar - Help me... please!

[babahi]

Still on my quest...

Went to the music store to find out about which program to use. Was told to stay away from Sonar because it's not as powerful as Cubase. Also, since Sonar is only version 1.0, the guy mentioned that it has had some pretty big stability issues. Next, the selction of plugins and extras available for Cubase are supposed to be huge in comparison to what's available for Sonar. This seems odd to me, since I thought Sonar was just teh next version of Cakewalk?

What are your opinions on these programs? Which is better? More flexible?

[Soup Kitchen Studios]

I've been using sonar for about 6 months. *It's on Version 1.3 now, and it's quite stable. *I have not had a single crash in the last 2 weeks since I switched to XP. *Before that I had ME so crashes were pretty frequent when running Sonar and Gigastudio at the same time. *I blame that on ME though.

Sonar is very simple to use and makes the most sense to me in layout. *I didn't read any manuals or anything, I just dove in and it all made sense. *That's important to me. *I spent time with Cubase and Logic before settling on Sonar and neither seemed as intelligently laid out. *Cubase and logic both seem like they were written for a computer nerd, and sonar takes much more consideration for the musician's mind. *

There are tons of plugins available for any platform these days. *Sonar can use any Direct X plugin. * It is essentially an update for Cakewalk Pro Audio 9.

[rlintz]

I agree with Dave. *I actually bought Cubase 5.0 but sold it and bought the competitive upgrade to Sonar once I saw the Sonar demo at my local Mars store. *Sonar makes use of the new Windows WDM drivers where Cubase uses the Steinberg ASIO standard. *One thing I've learned over the years is to never bet against Microsoft so there's a certain amount of confidence and comfort I get from knowing that Sonar utilizes Microsoft's preferred driver technology.

Sonar actually came with a big fat manual (vs. PDFs on a CD with Cubase) that was written by guys and girls in Boston instead of over in Germany. *The manual and it's tutorials are all excellently written and there's also a Sonar Power *book written by Scott R. Garrigus and also a new Getting started with Sonar mini-book written by Craig Anderton in the event you're not satisfied with the documentation.

Sonar has a very active newsgroup as detailed on Cakewalk's website and is also discussed very frequently at www.prorec.com.

Sonar is very easy to get to know and use and was built for the PC only.

I highly recommend it.

Randy

[jeffrey]

I can't really comment on Sonar since I've spent less then 20 hours with it. But I can say that I really like Cubase and totally prefer ASIO functionality over WDM; WDM is far slower imo and experience. At least with CuBase it is. I've pushed 20 tracks with no problem using plugins and EQ's using ASIO.

If you are interested in trying both I can help you find some versions of it, drop me a line.

[babahi]

Thanks jeffrey, I already have them both, as well as many other music programs (pro tools, and about 7 others). I saw bootleg versions in Hong Kong last month for a dollar each, so I figured I'd pick them all up to be able to choose later.

What does Sonar have that Cubase does not? And vice versa? I wonder what the differences can be, since both programs are to allow you to record music onto your hard drive, mix it, then spit it out onto cd. That's basically what I need, as well as MIDI capability, which thez both obviously have.

[rlintz]

Here's a great review of Sonar written by Rip Rowan from www.prorec.com.

Here's another from EQ magazine.

And finally, here's another written by Craig Anderton from www.musicplayer.com.

I hope these help - they provide a bunch of info on Sonar. *The bottom line from my perspective is that both packages are great at what they do. *I felt more comfortable and secure going with a company that developed a product for the PC only, that's built on Microsoft's own future driver technology, and that was based in the US (for the more clear documentation). *I also liked Sonar's ease of use and navigation. *I can perform nearly all input and output routing, effects selection and inserting, and rough mixing directly from the simple track view. *Virtual instruments wasn't a big consideration for me as about the only MIDI consideration I have is for drums. *They both come with the standard set of effects (EQ, dynamics, etc.).

In the end, pick the package that works best for you given your application.

[JFT]

Hi Babahi,

here's a good review that compare the 3 main DAW program:
http://www.tweakheadz.com/comparing_...logic_vst.html
The comparison is fair. There's annotation for Sonar as well.

I used to work with Cakewalk Pro Audio 9.0 and convert to Logic Platinum about 6 months ago. Dave's comment about Cakewalk/Sonar interface is funny since I felt exactly the opposite! Cakewalk and to a lesser (much lesser) extent Sonar was always "crippled" by an overly simplistic arrange window (you can almost recognize old win3.1 in the layout!). Given a screen resolution Logic provides me with WAY more "real estate". Now Sonar is very improved but I still feel it wastes a lot of space and the *information is "packed" in the arrange window which is the most important.

Of course it is all a mater of taste and of workflow. For me Cakewalk/Sonar always appears to me like a program not a musical instrument or tool. On the other hand Logic I see as a musical instrument. Cubase interface simply didn't click for me.

The software plugins "effects" in Logic shamed the Sonar equivalent the Platinum-Reverb in particular.

Dave's comment about complexity is partially true. On the midi side things CAN get complicated if you choose to do so but you don't have! Since my midi "environment" is setup I hardly touch it. The audio side is simpler to use and more intuitive than Sonar/Cakewalk.

Don't get me wrong the 3 programs are outstanding but each have their own strength. The channel editor in Sonar is very flexible and integrated with the arrange track. In Logic it is also integrated with the arrange but the curve are simpler.

Latency-wise I a much better performance with Logic than I got with Cakewalk. I can also play slightly more audio track.

The audio card you use should also be a factor in your decision some work better with some program than other. I'm using a Delta 44 and it worked fine with both.

If you can try them the best way is to chose the one you feel most at home with. Cakewalk always had the stigmata of being "less professional" than Cubase and Logic. I don't think, functionality-wise it is still true, except for the effects which are not yet up to par.

Good Luck

JFT