|
cubase studio 4 vs sonar 8 choice help
|
View this Thread in Original format
| drewspuppet0 |
I am finally boning up and buying a DAW. Either Sonar 8 or Cubase Studio 4. I have used cubase and know it pretty much inside and out. Not worried about having to learn Sonar I'm sure I can figure out how things work there.
Anyone have any experience with comparing the two? |
|
|
| Khayat |
You will never get a clear answer on this..some will say Sonar other will say Cubase
They are similar in terms of specification u just have to pick whats better for u :)
Sonar has some extra bundled things than Cubase but i personally hate the interface so much |
|
|
| Subtle |
| Cubase is the choice, obviously because I use it myself :) |
|
|
| drewspuppet0 |
| yep I downloaded the Sonar 7 demo. Didn't like it I'm going with Cubase |
|
|
| cryophonik |
| I use both. I'm currently on Sonar 8 and Cubase Studio 4.1. I started with Cubase many years ago, switched to Sonar as my primary DAW at Sonar 5, but I've stayed current on the upgrades on both DAWs because I still use Cubase on occasion (e.g., for old projects, collabs, etc.). I prefer Sonar's workflow and GUI over Cubase, but that's obviously a subjective thing. The majority of trance producers go with Cubase over Sonar, so there's something to be said for that, but I find that Sonar's got a much better all-around feature set, MUCH better bundled plugins and synths (in the Producer edition, not the Studio edition), and has much better support for my external hardware (synths, interfaces). It's also got the step sequencer, BeatScape (in 8, not 7), Dimension Pro, Z3TA+, etc. But, I also produce a LOT more than just trance (house, chillout, pop/rock, film scores, ambient, solo piano, urban/folk, etc.), so keep my opinions in perspective. Also, Cakewalk actually listens to its users - the bigwigs at Cakewalk (i.e., Noel Barthwick, Brandon Ryan, Alex Westner, etc.) are active on their forums and have actually indicated numerous times that their primary focus when developing Sonar 8 was to address the issues and requests of its users, and they did...big time. Good luck trying to get that kind of customer support/recognition from Steinberg. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| if it wasnt for the clumsy MIDI editor id give Sonar a go, then again i dont approve any MIDI editor of any other DAW than Cubase. |
|
|
| djbruuen |
| i'm a cubase user, and after trying out sonar for awhile, i realized just how much i like cubase. For myself, it just seems so easy and neatly layed out, i think the abundance of colours makes it feel more user friendly than very cold as is sonar. I'm sure to long time users of sonar its great and its just preference, becuase you're used to the layout, but for a cubase owner, theres nothing thats enticing about the interface to make me switch. i also had issues with my presonus firebox and sonar 7 :conf: |
|
|
| cryophonik |
| quote: | Originally posted by djbruuen
...i think the abundance of colours makes it feel more user friendly than very cold as is sonar. |
Uhhh....Sonar gives you full control over the exact colors (using RGB/hex) of virtually element in its GUI. You can even save, export, and share your custom color configurations:
http://sonartemplates.googlepages.com/home
I even recall seeing one custom Sonar scheme that was based on Cubase's color scheme. Sonar also gives you a lot of flexibility in terms of how you lay out your GUI and menus, use multiple monitors, etc. It's MUCH more configurable than Cubase is.
| quote: | Originally posted by djbruuen
i also had issues with my presonus firebox and sonar 7 |
There are no inherent incompatibility issues with the Firebox and Sonar - a lot of people use that combination just fine. If you are having problems with any one of the major DAWs (Cubase and Sonar included), it's typically a driver issue/conflict and/or user error. If you take a look at the Steinberg forums, you'll see that a lot of people have problems with Cubase and virtually every soundcard on the market.
Don't get me wrong - my point isn't that Sonar is perfect and everyone should switch to it. If Cubase makes you happy, then go for it; it's a great app (developed by a terrible company). It's just that a lot people seem to find fault with Sonar where there really isn't one - they just don't look hard enough, or they want it to be Cubase. Case in point: the people who look at Sonar's color scheme and say "I don't like it" and disregard it without even looking far enough to see that they can change it to whatever they want it to be. Besides, if the color scheme is a person's primary factor when considering which tool to use for audio production (and it is for some people), then maybe audio production isn't for those people. It's not coincidental that you never hear pros whining about the color scheme of a Soundcraft mixing board because it doesn't look like Allen & Heath's color scheme. |
|
|
| pwnage1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
It's just that a lot people seem to find fault with Sonar where there really isn't one - they just don't look hard enough, or they want it to be Cubase. |
Yep, when i first got into producing i got demos off all the major sequencers Ableton, reason, sonar, cubase, Flstudio. I tried the demo of sonar and thought it was great, but so many people seemed to hate it and make up facts about how it was bad that i changed my mind on getting it(at the time of course i believed them).
I am happy that i decided to get fl studio out of all of them and later reason 4. But, basically i am just agreeing that people tend to make things up with sonar and, fl studio too that really aren't true. |
|
|
| echosystm |
| i believe, in terms of features and plugins, sonar is absolutely superior to cubase. however, i can't stand the gui and find the program far too difficult to use. this echoes the sentiments of most people i know who have tried it, so don't think i am alone. |
|
|
| djbruuen |
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
Uhhh....Sonar gives you full control over the exact colors (using RGB/hex) of virtually element in its GUI. You can even save, export, and share your custom color configurations:
http://sonartemplates.googlepages.com/home
I even recall seeing one custom Sonar scheme that was based on Cubase's color scheme. Sonar also gives you a lot of flexibility in terms of how you lay out your GUI and menus, use multiple monitors, etc. It's MUCH more configurable than Cubase is.
There are no inherent incompatibility issues with the Firebox and Sonar - a lot of people use that combination just fine. If you are having problems with any one of the major DAWs (Cubase and Sonar included), it's typically a driver issue/conflict and/or user error. If you take a look at the Steinberg forums, you'll see that a lot of people have problems with Cubase and virtually every soundcard on the market.
Don't get me wrong - my point isn't that Sonar is perfect and everyone should switch to it. If Cubase makes you happy, then go for it; it's a great app (developed by a terrible company). It's just that a lot people seem to find fault with Sonar where there really isn't one - they just don't look hard enough, or they want it to be Cubase. Case in point: the people who look at Sonar's color scheme and say "I don't like it" and disregard it without even looking far enough to see that they can change it to whatever they want it to be. Besides, if the color scheme is a person's primary factor when considering which tool to use for audio production (and it is for some people), then maybe audio production isn't for those people. It's not coincidental that you never hear pros whining about the color scheme of a Soundcraft mixing board because it doesn't look like Allen & Heath's color scheme. |
i apologize if my post came off dismissing sonar. I simply don't have the experience with it to make a critical assessment of its functionality. I simply like cubase becuase i'm used to it, and i'm sure sonar is great for those experienced on it. |
|
|
| cryophonik |
| No problem djbruuen! My post was more or less a bunch general observations of common misperceptions that I've noted over the years as a Sonar user, not so much a direct response to your post. Like I said, there's nothing wrong with Cubase (or Live, or Logic, or FLS, or ProTools, or...)if that's what works for you. |
|
|
|
|
