|
which is better cubase or sonar?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| crazedonee |
Hey guys i have an older version of cakewalk i was using but ,when i would do a mixdown everything would be saturated ,so a friend of mine said that sonar producer is good but i see a lot of people really love cubase and it seems more professional and also has lots of features .which one would you guys recommend me to but i think botht of them have support for sidechain too.
http://www.zzounds.com/item--CAKSONARPRO
or
http://www.steinberg.net/en/product...e5_product.html
they are both the same price about 500 just like to know which one is better.
thanks |
|
|
| cryophonik |
| I use both Sonar 8 Producer and Cubase 5 - I've been using Cubase since SX3 and Sonar since version 5. Neither one is better and neither one is "more professional" - they're both just DAWs and are only as good as the weakest link (i.e., the user). That said, if I had to choose the "more professional" DAW, it would probably be Sonar because it comes equipped with better plugins and because it has been ahead of Cubase for several versions now - Sonar implemented features like 64-bit, built-in, pitch-correction, audio quantize, etc. several versions ago and Cubase is just now playing catch-up. That aside, the two DAWs are pretty even now and they have more similarities than differences. Each one has its own strengths and weaknesses, but the biggest difference is in their workflow, and that's very much a personal preference. |
|
|
| Subtle |
I would recommend Cubase without doubt.
More users, bigger company and more support.
And it lacks absolutely nothing, it has everything you can dig really deep into the program to find features not seen in many other DAWs.
And the MIDI functions and delay compensations are absolutely state of the art, and it has the best piano roll of any sequencer i have tried.
It just has everything, you cant go wrong with it. |
|
|
| echosystm |
| Before Cubase 5 came out, Sonar was way ahead in terms of features. They are pretty much equal in that department now, but the user interface on Sonar is an absolute mind. It still has far better plugins. I would use Sonar, but I just can't ever get over how the interface is, so I use Cubase. |
|
|
| justjabbin |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
Before Cubase 5 came out, Sonar was way ahead in terms of features. They are pretty much equal in that department now, but the user interface on Sonar is an absolute mind. It still has far better plugins. I would use Sonar, but I just can't ever get over how the interface is, so I use Cubase. |
regardless of which DAW you choose there will be a learning curve. I have been using Sonar 7P and Sonar 8P for quite a while. The interface is fine once you get used to it. If you are used to working with a particular DAW and start using another you are always going to be a little confused and frustrated at first.
IMO I would reread cyro post as he has both and is such an experienced user that he really does understand the the differences between the two |
|
|
| Mel David |
Is it worth the $70 upgrade (special @ JRR) from X2 Producer to X3?
I was excited about Melodyne being integrated but it isn't polyphonic. There is an old track of mine which I lost the MIDI files for and wanted to convert the audio to MIDI but seems like the included Melodyne is only monophonic. |
|
|
| cryophonik |
X2 was a miserable experience for me - so bad that I turned to Pro Tools and Studio One as my primary DAWs. But, X3 has been rock-solid and definitely some major improvements, including the Melodyne ARA. I already had the full Melodyne Editor (polyphonic), so I don't use the included version of Melodyne, but the integration is f'ing awesome - it's implemented much better and more seamlessly in Sonar than it is in Studio One.
Comping is much improved in X3, the new track colors are really cool for organizing projects, the new Take Lanes are excellent, the new plugins (Addictive Drums, Lounge Lizard Session, Strum Session, Nomad Factory, Tone2 BiFilter2) are worth the upgrade price alone IMO, if you have a need for them, that is. It also supports VST3 now, and VST3s have much better organization in the Browser. If you use the ProChannel much (you should if you're not), the new QuadCurve EQ is really cool and the new Tape Emulation is also excellent. The cool thing about the Tape Emulator and other console fX built into the ProChannel is that, unlike plugins, you can easily instantiate and adjust them on all channels simultaneously - makes for a very efficient workflow.
So, yeah, $70 for the upgrade is a no-brainer IMO. |
|
|
| crazedonee |
| Just find a daw you like and use it for everything I used to be like the author of this post until i learned and mastered one Daw |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
I would recommend Cubase without doubt.
More users, bigger company and more support.
And it lacks absolutely nothing, it has everything you can dig really deep into the program to find features not seen in many other DAWs.
And the MIDI functions and delay compensations are absolutely state of the art, and it has the best piano roll of any sequencer i have tried.
It just has everything, you cant go wrong with it. |
LOL!!! Cubase fanboy! Cubase 7 sucks so hard ive moved on to Ableton permanently and im not looking back. |
|
|
| crazedonee |
I agree with Subtle you can do so much more with Ableton and Cubase is unstable and cheap.
I used to think Ableton was just for remixing but ,its not you can put down your thoughts in the session section then just move your ideas into arrange or just record right into arrange then go into arrange and edit if need be.
in Cubase you can only record one track at a time
in Ableton you can record your whole song at once thats just one great feature it has ,but like I said the other day just find one Daw you really like and just stay with it as this is an open ended question. |
|
|
| derail |
| quote: | Originally posted by crazedonee
in Cubase you can only record one track at a time
|
What? Have Steinberg removed multitrack recording? I'm still using Cubase 4 and that allows me to record plenty of external inputs at the same time. I'll have to check the Steinberg website, I can't imagine why they'd remove such a fundamental DAW feature. |
|
|
| derail |
From Steinberg's "Why Cubase" page...
http://www.steinberg.net/en/product...why_cubase.html
For bands
Whether you are in the studio or in the rehearsal room, Cubase is the DAW of choice for capturing your songs in the most professional way. The integrated mixing desk combines utmost flexibility with top-end channel strip modules for luxurious, pro-console sound. Thanks to the Control Room section you can provide each of your band members with an individual cue mix. And once the recording session is over, simply select the best parts and conjure the perfect take within seconds.
Why would the band members each receive their own headphone mix if only one of them is being recorded at a time? It sounds horribly inefficient.
Crazedonee, can you provide evidence for "Cubase can only record one track at a time"? Are you referring to the full version of the DAW, or a crippled trial version? |
|
|
|
|
