TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Why do so few electronica producers use Sonar?
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Why do so few electronica producers use Sonar?

Not looking for another boring DAW war here, but as a long-time Sonar and Cubase user (and Live novice), I find it pretty surprising that Sonar has such a small presence in the EDM/IDM arena and I'm always perplexed as to why. In my observations, there seems to be a lot of misinformation regarding Sonar's capabilities, features, workflow, etc. amongst electronica guys and it seems to be more of an afterthought compared to the competition (e.g., Cubase, Live, Logic, FLS, etc.). Also, the last few Sonar versions and, especially, the recent Sonar 8.5 upgrade included a bunch of new features and content that are squarely targeted at the EDM crowd, to the point of pissing off the non-EDM guys who dominate the Cakewalk forums, but I personally don't think Cakewalk is getting the message out because nobody on the EDM forums are talking about it.

Again, I hope this doesn't degenerate into a "which is the best DAW" or "DAW X sucks" thread, but I'd like to know what your experiences or impressions of Sonar are and, if you have tried it, why you decided not to go with it, or why you did if that's the case.

I have no doubt of Sonar's abilities, the GUI is just a huge turn off to me and im sure for others too.

I dunno, I am happy enough with Live + Reason that I don't feel I need to check out anything else. I have never used Cubase, Sonar, or FL.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles I dunno, I am happy enough with Live + Reason that I don't feel I need to check out anything else. I have never used Cubase, Sonar, or FL.

Along the same lines, Cubase suits me perfectly at the moment. I can quickly get in and get my ideas down. No current need to look at other sequencers.

Cryo, I notice you have both Cubase and Sonar in your list, what would your sales pitch be for an EDM producer currently using Cubase and mostly hardware? (though I have picked up a few more software synths recently due to group buys/special offers).

quote:

Originally posted by Nightshift ...the GUI is just a huge turn off to me and im sure for others too.

That point gets raised a lot, even by long-time Sonar devotees. Me, I like its GUI, but it's a frequent point of contention on the Sonar forums. Besides, a lot of non-Sonar users probably don't realize that its GUI is highly customizable - possibly the most customizable DAW on the market. Everything from custom color schemes to configurable menu layouts. But a lot of people don't like the look of the buttons, which, aside from color and placement, are hardwired.

Also, don't get me wrong here - my intent with this thread isn't to convince anybody that they should run out and switch to Sonar. I'm mostly interested in knowing why it's so under-represented in EDM compared to its overall standing among the overall DAW market, where it's usually in the top 3 in terms of sales.

Some of it may be due to Sonar being Windows only. A disproportionately large segment of the pro audio market uses Mac. Another may be due to Cakewalk having a poor reputation for a number of years this past decade. Thing have changed for the better but sometimes impressions can be hard to shake especially among established users.

quote:

Originally posted by derail Cryo, I notice you have both Cubase and Sonar in your list, what would your sales pitch be for an EDM producer currently using Cubase and mostly hardware? (though I have picked up a few more software synths recently due to group buys/special offers).

As I just typed while you were typing this (!), my intent isn't to try to sell anybody on Sonar, but I will clear up any confusion where I can and offer my own opinions. Cubase and Sonar are obviously both great DAWs in their own way, but it's funny that you ask this question because it's the biggest reason that I decided to move primarily to Sonar a few years ago. I really like the way that Sonar handles hardware, particularly with instrument definitions, which allow you to access all of your hardware synth's patches and parameters in a very easy and intuitive way. Sonar also led the way in latency compensation a few versions back, but Cubase has leveled the playing field since.

The Windows/Mac thing definitely makes sense, but I'm not sure that I agree with this:

quote:

Originally posted by Eric J Another may be due to Cakewalk having a poor reputation for a number of years this past decade. Thing have changed for the better but sometimes impressions can be hard to shake especially among established users.

If that was the case, you'd expect to see Sonar's sales drop across the board, but its market share has increased dramatically over the past decade, even amongst fierce new competition. It only seems to have suffered in the EDM world - maybe EDM producers are just sorta out of the loop (pun intended) for one reason or another?

i walked into guitar center 7 or 8 yrs ago and hadn't a clue what i needed to produce music. Cakewalk was running a special at that time and that's the ONLY reason i got it. I only had 1 other friend producing and he was in fruityloops. I don't regret my decision and lately i've been stem mixing in sonar, i've always liked it but they've never really reached out to the EDM circle... however didn't cakewalk just get bought out by roland?

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik The Windows/Mac thing definitely makes sense, but I'm not sure that I agree with this: If that was the case, you'd expect to see Sonar's sales drop across the board, but its market share has increased dramatically over the past decade, even amongst fierce new competition. It only seems to have suffered in the EDM world - maybe EDM producers are just sorta out of the loop (pun intended) for one reason or another?

That is what I was getting at. In the past decade (90's) before Sonar there was Cakewalk Professional and it was pretty much a joke compared to the other offerings of the time. In the current decade (2000's) Sonar is now a respctible product that can compete with similar offerings and therefore has increased market share. However I think that the reputation of the Cakewalk product of the (90's) still lingers in the minds of many.

quote:

Originally posted by Zombie0729 ... however didn't cakewalk just get bought out by roland?

Well, actually Roland is "just" a major shareholder (i.e., Cakewalk is not a division of Roland) as of almost 2 years ago (January 2008 IIRC); however, the new products are all marketed as "Cakewalk by Roland"

The UI is a total mindfuck. This is the reason no one uses it. I'd go as far as saying that Sonar is the most feature-packed DAW around, so it's not that.

It's not just the GUI that turns many people off. The piano roll editor is a PITA. On most other hosts, it's a breeze to quickly input notes with a mouse and edit them and what not. But on sonar, with their magnification and what not just complicates things to the next level. There doesn't seem to be a 'right-click' erase option. But I guess that can be personalized, even though I haven't figured out how to do that.

Another thing that really turned me off was the 'drop-outs'. I have a pretty good computer: Quad core, 4 GB ram, 2 HD (350 GB & 500 GB), (Echo Gina 3G interface), etc...but I still get these random audio drop-outs and they are annoying as hell.

Sonar is a good application. I have no doubts as to its capabilities. And the sound that comes out of it is very 'crisp & clear'. But unless they fix that horrid GUI, I would never consider it an option.

Too bad they stopped the development of Project 5. All it need was 'multicore support' and option to 'insert buses' so that one can side-chain if desired. It would've been my dream application. I love the GUI but... (sighs)...too bad they cancelled its development. It's a shame really.

quote:

Originally posted by echosystm The UI is a total mindfuck. This is the reason no one uses it.

But, the thing is, a LOT of people use it as evidenced by its high market share, just not many EDM producers. It's not like EDM producers have different UI requirements than the rest of the market.

@SGL - you raise many excellent points, although I'm not sure that you can attribute the audio dropouts to an inherent issue with Sonar; otherwise, everybody using a similar setup should experience them, but most people don't, including myself. OTOH, I have problems with audio dropouts (among many other more serious issues) in Cubase where other people running a similar setup don't. I definitely agree with your points regarding P5 - I wish they would've made it open source. Instead, they've ported/emulated some of its features (e.g., the MIDI channel arps, Groove Matrix) into Sonar 8.5.

I think the problem is that its a wannabe logic/cubase but came late to the party. Aside from which, I found it unstable, overly complicated, and impossible to set up.

I think ableton Live's got an amazing interface, because you can never find out how to do something unless you go looking, but theres nothing I've ever wanted to do that was impossible. It means it takes time to learn how to do the esoteric stuff, but also that the interface is uncluttered.

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips I think the problem is that its a wannabe logic/cubase but came late to the party.

The name Sonar may be relatively new (going on 10 years), but Cakewalk (previously Twelve Tone Systems, the original name of the company that developed the original Cakewalk sequencer, which subsequently became Cakewalk Pro Audio, then Sonar) has definitely been around longer than Cubase, and I believe longer than Logic as well, but I've never been a Mac guy, so I haven't really followed Logic. CW made its first sequencers back in the 80s and started working with audio before Cubase did. In the last few versions, Cubase has actually been playing catchup with Sonar and following its lead more than the other way I around, partially due to Sonar's annual upgrade cycle, which is more frequent than Cubase's, and allows them to release things like 64-bit compatibility (Cakewalk was the first DAW developer to do this, several versions before it was even on the radar of most developers), before Steinberg gets around to it. That's not to say that Sonar hasn't copied some of Cubase's features as well (all DAWs share a lot of common features nowadays, in case you haven't noticed), but to say that Sonar is a Cubase wannabe is quite short-sighted and uninformed. I don't pay much attention to Logic and what I gather from the Cakewalk guys is that they don't either due to its differing platform and target markets, so I doubt that Sonar is stealing any more ideas from them than any other DAW developer is else is stealing ideas from each other.

That aside, I agree with your points regarding Ableton Live, although I still think it has a hideous, but usable, GUI.

i thought about switching over to it. in the brief time i used it, it reminded me a lot of acid pro. i'd still use ableton for brainstorming, but i don't like arrangement in ableton. there is something about it that irks more and it seems to be bothering me more and more as times passes. to stay on topic the reason i don't use sonar is because i never really gave it a fair shot, but i might be daw hunting soon because ableton is really starting to rattle my bones. the audio warping engine is a sham that sometimes can't even keep loops in sync. im def. curious about sonar and more importantly it's audio editing capabilities.

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik The name Sonar may be relatively new (going on 10 years), but Cakewalk (previously Twelve Tone Systems, the original name of the company that developed the original Cakewalk sequencer, which subsequently became Cakewalk Pro Audio, then Sonar) has definitely been around longer than Cubase, and I believe longer than Logic as well, but I've never been a Mac guy, so I haven't really followed Logic. CW made its first sequencers back in the 80s and started working with audio before Cubase did. In the last few versions, Cubase has actually been playing catchup with Sonar and following its lead more than the other way I around, partially due to Sonar's annual upgrade cycle, which is more frequent than Cubase's, and allows them to release things like 64-bit compatibility (Cakewalk was the first DAW developer to do this, several versions before it was even on the radar of most developers), before Steinberg gets around to it. That's not to say that Sonar hasn't copied some of Cubase's features as well (all DAWs share a lot of common features nowadays, in case you haven't noticed), but to say that Sonar is a Cubase wannabe is quite short-sighted and uninformed. I don't pay much attention to Logic and what I gather from the Cakewalk guys is that they don't either due to its differing platform and target markets, so I doubt that Sonar is stealing any more ideas from them than any other DAW developer is else is stealing ideas from each other. That aside, I agree with your points regarding Ableton Live, although I still think it has a hideous, but usable, GUI.

I didn't mean to imply that it was stealing, only that it wanted Cubase's target market. I know that Sonar has features long before anyone else most of the time.

I get the impression Sonar is a DAW for nerds who are very focussed on getting the newest tech quickly (eg 64 bit) but aren't that interested in stability or useability.

Main reason I bought Sonar because of it's price/features ratio. Got the (8.0) studio version for 120 euros. Then upgraded it to 8.5 producer couple of months ago.

I must say I'm more than happy with it. I've had no major stability issues. Few crashes every now and then, but nothing continuous. And I have no issues with useability either.

I took a look at the demo before I plumped for Cubase but I found it clucnky and difficult to navigate. I bought Cubase blind and I was making tunes the first day but with Sonar I had no clue even with the tutorials.

The other factor is that it's almost completely NFR isn't it?

I know that the piano roll was a big turnoff for me when i have tried the program, that being said i havent spend more than 30 minutes with it in total, so its not enough to form a relevant opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by tehlord The other factor is that it's almost completely NFR isn't it?

That's true - the license can't be transferred on any Cakewalk products. That's the con side to not having a dongle.

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik That's true - the license can't be transferred on any Cakewalk products. That's the con side to not having a dongle.

Do people really resell sequencers though? I don't think I've ever heard of that happening and can't imagine the type of person that goes looking for used software (although that doesn't necessarily mean they don't exist).

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Do people really resell sequencers though? I don't think I've ever heard of that happening and can't imagine the type of person that goes looking for used software (although that doesn't necessarily mean they don't exist).

I've never sold a software sequencer, but I wanted to at one point. I bought FLS on a whim one evening and proceeded to not use it for two or three years. About the time I was wondering if I could sell it (turns out I can't), FLS 9 was released with Vocodex, so my purchase was justified.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Do people really resell sequencers though? I don't think I've ever heard of that happening and can't imagine the type of person that goes looking for used software (although that doesn't necessarily mean they don't exist).

I bought a used Edu version of Cubase Studio 4 for $125 this year.

It has virtually every capability the full version has and I can upgrade to 5 when I feel like it for peanuts.

Why not by it used? It's cheaper!

And I also have FL8 on my HDD that I never use. If I could sell it I would in a heartbeat.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.