Sonar 3 or Cubase SX 2.0 ?! [Archive]

Jared Hudson

12-08-2003, 09:19 PM

Ok,

I know I still have the keyboard thread going, but I thought this deserved its own topic. I had planned to get Sonar 3 Producer, but when I was talking to a guy at Guitar Center, he said he\'d just made a switch from Sonar 3 to Cubase SX, because of the main reason of being a cleaner working environment. The transport bar is supposedly a dream come true. Problem is, I\'m fairly comfortable with the Cakewalk esque setup, and I didn\'t like Cubase VST32, or does that program just totally suck? I\'ve never used SX, so I don\'t want to speak out of ignorance. Does SX use notation as well as piano roll? Does it perform better in areas over Sonar 3? I heard in Sonar 3, by the time you\'re done with a project, you have 80 windows open, simply because you have to close them to get to the ones you want. Cubase SX just hides them nicely. Anyways, what\'s your experience?

Jared

peter269

12-09-2003, 06:55 AM

Here are a few thoughts.

1. Yes, SX 2.0 has an excellent music notation screen that you can do full scores, even publish with. Notation has been a low priorit with Cakewalk.

2. The new transport is much more effective than previous versions giving you a lot of quick work opportunities.

3. New features include a quick set up for multiple time signatures, Time Warp which enables you to quick adjust a cue if the music needs to be stretched (or shortened).

4. For my work, I need to have a dual platform compatibility, which Cubase has.

5. The ASIO 2.0, VSTi features are native to Cubase and the plug-ins, including EW/QlSO, just work great. The use of System Link or FX Teleport makes for an ideal system with quick expansion and the end of spending extra bucks on multiple audio cards and MIDI interfaces. And now in Beta, GigaStudio works great within FX Teleport. So you have the best of all worlds with Cubase.

There\'s a good review of SX at www.audioMIDI.com (\"http://www.audioMIDI.com\") that you might want to read. I have nothing negative to say about Sonar, it\'s just that I\'ve been a Cubase user for a lot of years and really enjoy working with it.

sporter

12-09-2003, 07:01 AM

Originally posted by peter269:

5. The ASIO 2.0, VSTi features are native to Cubase and the plug-ins, including EW/QlSO, just work great. The use of System Link or FX Teleport makes for an ideal system with quick expansion and the end of spending extra bucks on multiple audio cards and MIDI interfaces. And now in Beta, GigaStudio works great within FX Teleport. So you have the best of all worlds with Cubase.

Peter, are you saying with FX Teleport, I can have SX on one machine, Giga on another, and play Giga tracks into SX and still maintain discrete tracks in SX?

Alan Lastufka

12-09-2003, 07:31 AM

CUBASE SX!

You WILL NOT regret it... I used to use Cakewalk, but got SX about 6 months ago and have never looked back.

I\'ve been hearing good things about Sonar, but Cubase makes everything SO easy...

Just my 3 cents images/icons/smile.gif

AL

Lazul

12-09-2003, 08:36 AM

CubaseSX/Nuendo 2 all the way!

Simon Ravn

12-09-2003, 08:44 AM

I have only seen very little of Sonar 3 so I can\'t really compare Sonar 3 and SX2. I CAN however compare Logic and SX2. And I must say I have yet to find a more frustrating piece of software than Cubase SX. It kills my inspiration, it crashes much more frequently than Logic, it is terribly slow at basic operations like solo\'ing a track and there are a lot of bugs that gets in the way of my workflow. I planned to jump from Logic to SX and bought SX - after having used it on a few projects, I am migrating back to Logic again. Yes I\'ll miss the offline bouncing and proper implementation of multitimbral VSTi\'s and FX Teleport doesn\'t go well with Logic either. However Logic is such a breeze to work in and very rarely crashes. SX2 has been quite a headache for me. Maybe some day when they get the bugs out of it (if ever) I\'ll reconsider, but for the time being it\'s Logic as much as possible. And then I\'ll check out Sonar 2.2 and 3.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-09-2003, 08:46 AM

Many of the features that Steinberg trumpets to the hills have been in SONAR for ages. Cakewalk consistently writes tighter, higher performance code. In SONAR 3, you get a far nicer set of DSP plugins and bundled content than you get in Cubase...among them, the Lexicon Pantheon reverb. It is sweet.

SONAR also gives you the ability to do almost anything with MIDI via envelopes, on multiple levels. For controlling something like GigaStudio, it\'s excellent. The so called \"native\" VSTi support in Cubase, vs the way it\'s handled in SONAR is a red herring. The first time you run SONAR, it puts \"wrappers\" around all your VSTi plugins (nothing more than telling them where and how to \"hook in\"), and it\'s a done deal. You will never have to intervene in the process, and it is processor and user transparent. However, with SONAR you get the advantages of handling native DXi as well, and that has its own merits. Certainly, sample-accurate timing all around has been a SONAR feature since day one. Sonar\'s Track View his very highly detailed, and offers control that NO application matches.

SONAR\'s mix engine allows UNLIMITED routing potential. There is no other mixer like this on the market, anywhere, at any price. Period. You can route buses, quite literally, in a tree structure, sending them wherever you like in whatever order or depth. There is no tie whatsoever to hardware mixers in structure...only Reaktor allows more flexible routing. Cubase\'s mixer, on the other hand, doesn\'t even offer the flexibility of hardware...it is a very preconceived structure.

If that interests you, it\'s a reason to have a serious look at SONAR. If you respect a high-achieving, independant development team, you should also get to know Cakewalk. These guys are brilliant, accessible, and personable. They work hard and play hard, have families, and have an intense devotion to their users. They are quality people, top to bottom. They rarely fall into the \"feature of the month\" rut, preferring to keep their code clean, on-track, and steadily progressing.

I cannot count the times I have tried to like Cubase. I have not gotten into SX, simply because I reached the end of my rope. For every \"golden\" version Steinberg releases, they manage to release five that are so buggy they boggle the imagination and confound the creative urge. Other times, I am simply baffled at Steinberg\'s development proirities. Multiple levels of undo took ages to achieve, and then they made it a bullet point in ads, like it was some stroke of genius!!

But those are my opinions on how the programs work for me...and whose efforts I choose to support.

What I think is that you should not take anyone\'s word for this. Download demos of both programs, find users of each and GO SEE their setups in action. That will inform you much more than hearing who likes what, in a forum like this. People are going to promote what they use, period. But their opinions and work flow will not be your own. There are very successful users of both SONAR and Cubase, so all else being equal, you need to insert YOUR priorities into that mix to determine what best suits your needs.

Alan Lastufka

12-09-2003, 08:49 AM

Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
I have only seen very little of Sonar 3... Logic is Mac only, Sonar is PC only, how would you switch between the two?

Cubase is both, and I have not encountered the problems you have, sorry to hear you got a bad copy...

I was looking into Logic after my dark days with Cakewalk but then it went Mac only and I only have a PC...

AL

Hasen

12-09-2003, 09:18 AM

On paper, Cubase SX 2 is the best sequencer there is - and in use its the most user-friendly. You can start using it straight away without so much as glancing at the manual. The problem is is that its about as stable as a pin balanced on the end of my finger. Every new release from Steinberg is full of bugs and you only have to check the forums to see this. They do get fixed though but basically Simon is right.

You should go with Logic really. images/icons/smile.gif

Jared Hudson

12-09-2003, 09:37 AM

You should go with Logic really. images/icons/smile.gif [/QB]But I don\'t have a MAC!

Simon Ravn

12-09-2003, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by Alan Lastufka:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
I have only seen very little of Sonar 3... Logic is Mac only, Sonar is PC only, how would you switch between the two?

Cubase is both, and I have not encountered the problems you have, sorry to hear you got a bad copy...

I was looking into Logic after my dark days with Cakewalk but then it went Mac only and I only have a PC...

AL <hr /></blockquote>Ehhh Logic is on PC too. Yes it is not being developed anymore, but that hasn\'t made my copy vaporize:)

Ray Lindsley

12-09-2003, 10:13 AM

I cannot comment on Sonar 3 but Cubase Sx is excellent. There were a number of problems with SX 1 but SX 2 works very well and is extremely stable as long as your computer is set up properly. While there are a few people that still complain about SX, the vasy majority of people on the forum (including former Steinberg critics) admit that SX 2 is great and works well. You also have to remember that these forums are support forums and that\'s why people go there- to seek help with problems. Most of the time the problem is caused by their system setup, and not the software. I recommend visiting the forum to judge for yourself.
I\'m not saying the software is perfect, or completely bug free, but it works very well for most people.
I have no particular axe to grind for Steinberg, and Sonar 3 looks very good, particularly when you consider the price and the plug-ins that are included. I just want you to decide based on accurate information.

mschiff

12-09-2003, 10:14 AM

I have never used Cubase, but Sonar has never disappointed me. The software is rock solid, and has never caused me a single problem in a session. It is very easy to use, but has tons of power \"under the hood\" if you need it. And the plugs that are included with the product are excellent.

-- Martin

Owel

12-09-2003, 12:00 PM

>I\'ve used pre-Sonar Cakewalk and PC Logic Audio. I consider Cubase SX 2 to be superior.

Why, of course! Why don\'t you compare it with Sonar 3 and level the playing field.

You\'re like comparing Windows 3.1 and Mac OSX.

Owel

12-09-2003, 12:06 PM

Jared,

Don\'t be talked out of anything by anybody (esp. a sales person that may have his own agenda) without trying it out for yourself.

Demo versions are available. Download them and test drive them all, then make your OWN decision. It will be YOU using this software, not me, not him, not anybody. It\'s your money, so YOU better like what you\'re buying.

Nobody buys a car without test driving it, even if all the reviewers said good things about it.

Owel

Rich Pell

12-09-2003, 12:07 PM

I agree, i think you have to look at the WHOLE package. For me, with my setup and hardware SX2 is incredibly solid. I rarely get crashes and when I do it usually something stupid I`VE done.
Theres a good link on the Cubase.net site about what Logic users who have switched to SX still like about Logic and wished were in SX. The diff. in opinions are wild but funnily enough, most Logic cum SX users said they`d never go back to Logic!! Ive noticed that the FX in Sonar 3 are of a better quality that in SX though( i never use them anyway,except for The Chopper!!).
Different strokes for Different folks! Rich

David Abraham

12-09-2003, 12:10 PM

before SONAR 3 I split my projects about 50/50 between SONAR 2 and Cubase SX1

I found that for me SONAR was superior for Mixing and Cubase SX was superior for Tracking/Editing.

I still believe this is somewhat the case but SONAR3 has closed the gap significantly in the tracking area, and in some cases exceeded SX tracking workflow... and SONAR has no dongle, So I\'m pretty much back on SONAR3 most of the time these days.

haven\'t tried SX 2 yet, but the specs look great.

ProfessorOak

12-09-2003, 12:11 PM

Here\'s my take
I tried SX and was really impressed, but seemed to crash quite often. Granted, I was using a demo version- but still, it concerned me.
I was testing it out because I needed a bit more flexibility- I wanted a mixer closer to that of Samplitude, and the pics of SX seemed to show something that would be of my liking.

Now, at that time, Sonar 2 was my sequencer of choice. I\'ve been a cakewalk fan/user since the early days (we\'re talking floppy discs here) , but was seriously starting to feel constricted in Sonar 2. In my opinion, cakewalk was always perfect in the midi/arranging stages. There was nothing better or more full featured, but when it came to mixing audio- I liked it less and less as time went on.

So, like I said, I tried SX. I was thoroughly impressed with the mixer- it just seemed easier for me to make music. I was concerned about the locking up/freezing that I had when testing it, so I set some money aside and \'let it simmer\' a bit more.

And lo and behold, sonar 3 was announced. And all my prayers were answered. They kept the long-time famaliar cakewalk side I\'ve always loved, but overhauled the audio side into something alot like SX and samplitude.

After hearing the news, the decision was easy. I was already a registered user of 2.2, so it was just an upgrade for me. I absolutely love the mixer, could not live without the new routing, and the Ultrafunk plugs are worthy of all the praise you\'ve been hearing. I like the new lexicon reverb and all the other small upgrades make this the best sequencer I\'ve ever used. But on top of all of that, Sonar 3 is Rock Solid. I\'ve yet to have a problem, and I\'ve used it every day since Cakewalk shipped it to my front door.

Granted, I hear a lot of the problems have been resolved with sx2.0, and I\'m sure its that much more awesome, but for people like you and I- long time cakewalk users- Sonar 3 is the only way to go. You get everything you\'ve always loved PLUS everything you\'ve always wanted.

Lazul

12-09-2003, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
I have only seen very little of Sonar 3 so I can\'t really compare Sonar 3 and SX2. I CAN however compare Logic and SX2. And I must say I have yet to find a more frustrating piece of software than Cubase SX. It kills my inspiration, it crashes much more frequently than Logic, it is terribly slow at basic operations like solo\'ing a track and there are a lot of bugs that gets in the way of my workflow. I planned to jump from Logic to SX and bought SX - after having used it on a few projects, I am migrating back to Logic again. Yes I\'ll miss the offline bouncing and proper implementation of multitimbral VSTi\'s and FX Teleport doesn\'t go well with Logic either. However Logic is such a breeze to work in and very rarely crashes. SX2 has been quite a headache for me. Maybe some day when they get the bugs out of it (if ever) I\'ll reconsider, but for the time being it\'s Logic as much as possible. And then I\'ll check out Sonar 2.2 and 3. I still maintain you have something up with your OS/hardware configuration. I have been following your \"steinberg\" problems over the months and have never seen such issues you are having. Mine is rock solid even when running 2 uad cards and fxteleport.

Simon Ravn

12-09-2003, 06:19 PM

Thanks for your concern but I dont have any other problems with my system...

Lazul

12-09-2003, 06:20 PM

Also, you sure ya\'ll are using the legit dongled versions of SX/Nuendo? Supposedly the \"evaluation\" copies floating around exhibit such crashing and general slugishness. I would hate to think people are making critical judgement calls on a piece of software as such and spreading misinformation.

images/icons/wink.gif

Simon Ravn

12-09-2003, 06:23 PM

Yes I have that stupid dongle eating up one of my precious USB ports. I really believe their code is a big mess. And their testers can\'t be too sharp either.

kitekrazy

12-09-2003, 06:24 PM

Try the demos and make your own decision.

I\'ve stay away from Cubase for 1 reason-USB Dongle! I refuse to buy software with strange copy protection schemes. I\'ve read the Steinberg forums with this problem.

Sonar 3-simple installation, enter a serial number and that is it.

Lazul

12-09-2003, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
Yes I have that stupid dongle eating up one of my precious USB ports. I really believe their code is a big mess. And their testers can\'t be too sharp either. Sorry I didnt mean to accuse anybody of anything. Just wanted to make people aware that the kracks supposedly have issues that arent in the \"real\" thing. Of course there can always be system specific issues with the legit versions too.

Lazul

12-09-2003, 06:28 PM

Originally posted by kitekrazy:
Try the demos and make your own decision.

I\'ve stay away from Cubase for 1 reason-USB Dongle! I refuse to buy software with strange copy protection schemes. I\'ve read the Steinberg forums with this problem.

Sonar 3-simple installation, enter a serial number and that is it. There are no demos.

Simon Ravn

12-09-2003, 06:30 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
Yes I have that stupid dongle eating up one of my precious USB ports. I really believe their code is a big mess. And their testers can\'t be too sharp either. Sorry I didnt mean to accuse anybody of anything. Just wanted to make people aware that the kracks supposedly have issues that arent in the \"real\" thing. Of course there can always be system specific issues with the legit versions too. <hr /></blockquote>Funny thing is that all other programs work fine - Logic, yes even Steinbergs own WAVELAB (which is a GREAT program - can\'t have been coded by the same people:))

Lazul

12-09-2003, 06:32 PM

Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
Yes I have that stupid dongle eating up one of my precious USB ports. I really believe their code is a big mess. And their testers can\'t be too sharp either. Well I can say with assurance your problems are not normal. There are bugs in the software but none that detrimental as you describe..

Thomas_J

12-09-2003, 06:45 PM

For a person who values efficiency, I really recommend Cakewalk\'s products. If you\'re doing orchestral music the most important thing is the sequencing abilities. Some things are faster in Cubase, and some things are faster in Sonar, however in pure midi performance NOTHING comes even close to that of Cakewalk Pro Audio 9. It\'s simply unsurpassed. Never crashes. Lightning speed.

I doubt Simon is making up all the bugs. I think he\'s a more demanding user because of his big templates.

A piece of software can be amazing, but if it takes 1 second to solo a track in an arrangement it\'s useless to me. That\'s why I never felt comfortable in Cubase. Their interface is sloppy (and a couple of years ago it didn\'t even support the right mouse button)

I would go with Cakewalk.

Logic is great too. Who cares if they stopped developing it for PC, the latest version is still great and if you need the freeze function in version 6 you could just buy FX Freeze from Max.

Thomas

Simon Ravn

12-09-2003, 06:48 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
Yes I have that stupid dongle eating up one of my precious USB ports. I really believe their code is a big mess. And their testers can\'t be too sharp either. Well I can say with assurance your problems are not normal. There are bugs in the software but none that detrimental as you describe.. <hr /></blockquote>Of course instability is not confirmed as a bug. A lot of the other things I have problems with are however. And solo\'ing a track taking in excess of 1-2 seconds is just unacceptable.

JonP

12-09-2003, 07:02 PM

Unfortunately, Simon certainly isn\'t making up the SX bugs. Its pretty aggravating to have to wait for the solo function to kick in but also its temperamental and sometimes unrepeatable crashes can be aggravating and draining. And my system runs other audio software such as (the far superior IMO) Nuendo 2 without anywhere near the same level of problems.

I do still get on well with the program as it is well set-out for speedy use but I wish Steinberg would fix problems at the fundamental level rather than jamming things on such a shakey base with each release simply to appease the casual user.

Sonar 3 definitely looks like the one to opt for until Cubase is sorted out properly.

sporter

12-09-2003, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by Thomas_J:

Logic is great too. Who cares if they stopped developing it for PC, .

Thomas About 75,000 people who used Logic on a PC, that\'s who cares. After marketing their product as a \"cross-platform\" application they decide they\'ll no longer support the PC platform. I\'d go back to reel to reel before I ever bought another Emagic product. I\'m usually pretty non-committal about software...you know, whatever does the job is cool. But Apple/Emagic can go copulate themselves as far as I\'m concerned. I\'d laugh my rear end off if they went out of business.

Thomas_J

12-09-2003, 07:06 PM

Yep, sporter, of course but it\'s not like you can\'t live without the new features in Logic on Mac. images/icons/smile.gif

Thomas

sporter

12-09-2003, 11:31 PM

I use and love SX, but Steinberg does some crazy stuff. In the latest version, which is feature rich by most any standards, window positions are not remembered when you use dual monitors. So everytime you open an edit window, you have to resize the window. Crap like that gets old. And there\'s problems with one of their own plugs-ins: Groove Agent.

But overall, SX 2.0 is a nice package. It\'s easy to get around in. The transport alone makes everything so easy...markers, jog wheel, cycle on/off, record mode...all in one place.

I am impressed with a lot of Sonar\'s new features, but after downloading the demo, I find it clunky compared to SX (subjective? absolutely!).

The new input buss routing in SX 2.0 is very elegant. Set up as many software inputs as your like for one physical input. You can monitor a signal with reverb, yet record it dry...so many possibilities.

In general, I have found SX to be very stable. AMF, it is the most stable audio software I have ever used. It is extremely reliable, at least for me.

Houston Haynes

12-09-2003, 11:36 PM

Read my review of Cubase SX 2 on AudioMIDI.com.

I\'ve used pre-Sonar Cakewalk and PC Logic Audio. I consider Cubase SX 2 to be superior.

cmrick

12-09-2003, 11:44 PM

Originally posted by Houston Haynes:
I\'ve used pre-Sonar Cakewalk and PC Logic Audio. I consider Cubase SX 2 to be superior. pre-Sonar Cakewalk? They\'ve made a few improvements since 1999. Not a real fair comparison.

Timo Heil

12-10-2003, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by Thomas_J:
For a person who values efficiency, I really recommend Cakewalk\'s products. If you\'re doing orchestral music the most important thing is the sequencing abilities.... Hello Thomas,

Could you please elaborate on this? As a former Logic user who crossgraded to SX1 I\'m considering getting SONAR 3 now - instead of the update to SX2.

What are the MIIDI features of SONAR that you really appreciate and what are the things you are missing, especially when it comes to orchestral scores?

Thanks
-timo-

RyanFormato

12-10-2003, 03:23 PM

I own Sonar 3.0 Producer and have to say it is beyond excellent. The plug-ins are excellent, the vsampler is getting better as you learn it images/icons/wink.gif and the VST adapter allows Sonar users to use both VST and DXI. The new interface is really excellent and the bussing is just plain insane. You can bus anything to anything else. I bought sonar because I had always had cakewalk pro audio 9 and then got sonar 2.2xl and then finally the 3.0 producer. You definitely won\'t go wrong with Sonar. I can\'t say much about the other because I never tried it.

charles

12-10-2003, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by RyanFormato:
I own Sonar 3.0 Producer and have to say it is beyond excellent. The plug-ins are excellent, the vsampler is getting better as you learn it images/icons/wink.gif and the VST adapter allows Sonar users to use both VST and DXI. The new interface is really excellent and the bussing is just plain insane. You can bus anything to anything else. I bought sonar because I had always had cakewalk pro audio 9 and then got sonar 2.2xl and then finally the 3.0 producer. You definitely won\'t go wrong with Sonar. I can\'t say much about the other because I never tried it. if you think the routing in Sonar is good you should try Samplitude it is far superior, with the object editor you can route the objects in a very unique way as well as the normal tracks
in the end the best sequencer is the one that works for you, everyone has different habits for example for me the real time step input i find frustrating in Sonar to some one else it will not matter at all

RyanFormato

12-10-2003, 03:47 PM

Yeah, I work for cakewalk. God some people have no idea what they are talking about. I never even mentioned SX in my post.

I just said you can\'t go wrong with sonar and mentioned the features that I felt were most important. I\'m only 19 so if I can work for cakewalk already, I\'d be thrilled images/icons/smile.gif

Hasen

12-10-2003, 05:30 PM

Lazul

12-10-2003, 08:46 PM

For every person having a problem with Cubase/Nuendo I guarentee you I can find a person having problems with Sonar. If I go to a Sonar forum right now I bet you there will be someone posting about crashing etc. It\'s always the vocal people who are having problems. When it\'s working they are making music.

Rich Pell

12-10-2003, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by Lazul:
For every person having a problem with Cubase/Nuendo I guarentee you I can find a person having problems with Sonar. If I go to a Sonar forum right now I bet you there will be someone posting about crashing etc. It\'s always the vocal people who are having problems. When it\'s working they are making music. Finally a voice of reason! Unfortunate, but true. Well said Lazul ,i second that motion.. images/icons/smile.gif Rich

peter269

12-11-2003, 01:36 AM

Originally posted by sporter:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by peter269:

5. The ASIO 2.0, VSTi features are native to Cubase and the plug-ins, including EW/QlSO, just work great. The use of System Link or FX Teleport makes for an ideal system with quick expansion and the end of spending extra bucks on multiple audio cards and MIDI interfaces. And now in Beta, GigaStudio works great within FX Teleport. So you have the best of all worlds with Cubase.

Peter, are you saying with FX Teleport, I can have SX on one machine, Giga on another, and play Giga tracks into SX and still maintain discrete tracks in SX? <hr /></blockquote>yup!

MikeGraybill

12-11-2003, 02:08 AM

Originally posted by sporter:
In the latest version, which is feature rich by most any standards, window positions are not remembered when you use dual monitors. So everytime you open an edit window, you have to resize the window.I\'m using SX 2.0.1 on a dual monitor setup and do not have this problem. The only reason I can think that this might happen would be if you don\'t maximize (across both screens) SX2 before opening the project. I do wish it would automatically open across both if that was how it was closed, but sadly, not the case. Everything is remembered within the project assuming that the project is being opened in the same enviornment that it was last closed in, otherwise it will resize to fit the new circumstance.

Once open, you can minimize, resize or whatever, and it won\'t compress your stuff to just one monitor when you restore the main window.

I used Cakewalk 9 not too many years ago and really did love it. I used VST32 at school and finally got a student version for home use, but never did feel as comfortable with it as CWPA9. With the coming of SX, I was really impressed and tempted, but what I saw of my friends\' setups kept me away from it. Just too uniformly buggy - though I\'ve heard tales of folks that never had a single problem. SX2 on the other hand... well, I\'ve found MY home now. I\'ve not had a single crash, bug, error, nothing (really knocking on wood atm...) So far, it actually has a clean slate on my setup, and that is saying ALOT! Best cash I ever spent. Period.

But that\'s just me. images/icons/wink.gif Of all the reasons to test demos out on your machine, I believe one of the most important is to check your hardware compatibility (especially if you\'re on any kind of budget, and cannot afford to replace your physical gear to conform perfectly to the software you wish to run.) I\'m not talking about soundcards and the like - I mean the impossible to know stuff, like will your motherboard be odd in a way that affects the brand of memory you use only when a particular operation is performed by a particular application (be it Sonar, SX, Logic, etc). It\'s all still very much voodoo if ya ask me, but it seems I\'ve been lucky enough this go \'round to get a solid combination.

Just because one prog is stable for your neighbor on his machine, it is not even remotely indicative of the kind of performance you will get on your own. So try some demos if ya can and really experiment with them, for that reason as well as the obvious, aforementioned ones.

Happy hunting,
mike

Houston Haynes

12-11-2003, 08:36 AM

Originally posted by Timo Heil:
As a former Logic user who crossgraded to SX1 I\'m considering getting SONAR 3 now - instead of the update to SX2.With a cheap upgrade path, you should go ahead and get SX 2 - you won\'t be sorry.

No offense intended, but I\'m suspicious of anyone who parrots the old line on how Cubase SX is buggy and crashes so often compared to Nuendo - when SX 2 and Nuendo 2 are on the same exact code base. IMNSHO, anyone with that old song should just pony up the $150 and get SX 2 - unless of course if they\'re using an unlicensed old version in which the opinion here shouldn\'t count for anything anyway. images/icons/wink.gif Not that anyone here would use stolen software, of course...

JonP

12-11-2003, 09:02 AM

In my experience so far, it is true that Nuendo has been more effective and less buggy than cubase (not to say it hasn\'t thrown up its own little problems now and then). I can\'t claim to have pulled apart and analysed every little problem I\'ve encountered in lab conditions with SX but, although they\'re shot from the same barrel, so to speak, one does appear to be better than the other.

Still, this is just purely experience that is only very mildly sour. I\'m not rampantly anti-steinberg or anything and wouldn\'t trade in Nuendo or Wavelab for anything - I love them both!.

Kenn159

12-11-2003, 09:26 AM

Quote
The ASIO 2.0, VSTi features are native to Cubase and the plug-ins, including EW/QlSO, just work great. The use of System Link or FX Teleport makes for an ideal system with quick expansion and the end of spending extra bucks on multiple audio cards and MIDI interfaces. And now in Beta, GigaStudio works great within FX Teleport. So you have the best of all worlds with Cubase.
Response
Are you saying Gigastudio 3.0 is in the Beta stage now?

David Abraham

12-11-2003, 09:52 AM

Originally posted by Lazul:
There are no demos. actually a SONAR3 demo was recently posted...

http://www.cakewalk.com/download/download.asp?Action=DL&PID=300%20 (\"http://www.cakewalk.com/download/download.asp?Action=DL&PID=300%20\")

Kenn159

12-11-2003, 09:54 AM

Quote
The diff. in opinions are wild but funnily enough, most Logic cum SX users said they`d never go back to Logic!!

Response
I guess we know what web sites you were visiting before northernsounds images/icons/grin.gif

Daedalus

12-11-2003, 10:15 AM

quote:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Thomas_J:

Logic is great too. Who cares if they stopped developing it for PC, .

Thomas
About 75,000 people who used Logic on a PC, that\'s who cares. After marketing their product as a \"cross-platform\" application they decide they\'ll no longer support the PC platform.<hr /></blockquote>The problem with your statistics is that probably 90% of these users were unlicensed users using cracked copies of Logic. This is the of the problems for developerswith the Windows platform . I\'m pretty sure Emagic isn\'t worried about losing the business of their unlicensed users.

Yes, they probably lost some legit users as well but seeing as how they are owned by Apple, it doesn\'t make much sense for them to develop PC products anymore.

On a bit of a tangent, since we\'re comparing sequencers...

Is there a function in Cubase SX 2 that allows me to view midi automation data like the Hyperedit window in Logic? I like seeing my automation curves in parallel rather than having to switch from mod to vol for example. In this window, I can view Vol, Mod, CC#11, pan, velocity, etc. all beside each other.

In my use of the Cubase SX demo, I didn\'t find anything like this. Does anyone know of something like this?

Rich Pell

12-11-2003, 10:22 AM

Hey Daelus, I mean hello from T.O. Yea, of course u can do the same think in SX2. In the midi key editor, on the left of the controller lanes there an + to add more lanes and a - to collapes them. You can even resize all your controller lanes and do custom setups. Rich

kbaccki

12-11-2003, 10:22 AM

Originally posted by MichaelAngelo450:
Of all the reasons to test demos out on your machine, I believe one of the most important is to check your hardware compatibility Yes, and that\'s why I\'m floored at not having a SX2 demo available! How could you come out with a major release of a relatively expensive product (for the home user), and not be able to assess compatibility and performance?

It\'s all still very much voodoo if ya ask me, but it seems I\'ve been lucky enough this go \'round to get a solid combination.\"Voodoo,\" well that\'s one way to look at it. \"Dropping $500 to find out whether or not it works well enough to use on my system\" is the other way.

Is it me?

Rich Pell

12-11-2003, 10:32 AM

Originally posted by Kenn159:
Quote
The diff. in opinions are wild but funnily enough, most Logic cum SX users said they`d never go back to Logic!!

Response
I guess we know what web sites you were visiting before northernsounds images/icons/grin.gif Hey Kenn, Not sure if that was a friendly joke of a bit of sarcasm or what,but no problem either way images/icons/smile.gif . The thread i was referring to was on set up by Badge(or Bas) on the XP cubase.net Forum called \"Logic users unite\" Dec. 5th. I thought it was a good thread were u could request features that u miss in logic and wish that were in SX. Go check it out, its kinda interesting. Best, Rich images/icons/wink.gif

Rich Pell

12-11-2003, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by Kenn159:
Hi Rich
I was referring to the word you used that is freqently used in porno.
No Offence intended, Just trying to lighted up the forum a bit with a joke.
Peace, Ken Holy ****..ha.ha,I had no idea! Oops,totally miss that! Ohh well, Ron Jeremy(the hedgehog) would be proud.(insert bad 70`s wa-wa guitar and a bit of congas)...Dirk Pell

Kenn159

12-11-2003, 11:40 PM

Hi Rich
I was referring to the word you used that is freqently used in porno.
No Offence intended, Just trying to lighted up the forum a bit with a joke.
Peace, Ken

Daedalus

12-11-2003, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by Rich Pell

Hey Daelus, I mean hello from T.O. Yea, of course u can do the same think in SX2. In the midi key editor, on the left of the controller lanes there an + to add more lanes and a - to collapes them. You can even resize all your controller lanes and do custom setups. Rich Wow thanks Rich. I\'ll have to check this out. Nice to see some other folks from the T-Dot images/icons/grin.gif

zquarles

12-12-2003, 08:13 AM

(in caveman voice)
Zack like Sonar.

I actually just upgraded from version 1.3x to 3 and can\'t WAIT for the FedEx truck to show up...unfortunately, it\'ll have to plow through a mountain of snow that is my front yard.

Stupid Wisconsin...

robgb

12-12-2003, 08:51 AM

Re: Nuendo 2 vs. SX vs. Sonar

I\'ve never used SX, but I\'m currently a Sonar user (version 2.2) and a couple of days ago I received an NFR of Nuendo 2.

I don\'t know how much of an improvement over 2.2 Sonar 3 is, but Nuendo 2 is light years ahead of Sonar 2.2.

What a WONDERFUL application. I\'ve been playing with it almost non-stop and still feel like I haven\'t tapped its potential.

dnortana

12-12-2003, 10:01 AM

Rob,

I\'m curious about Nuendo. How is it for Midi editing, and orchestral work? I\'m currently using DP on a Mac, but need to find a PC app to take with me on the road (business laptop is a powerful PC), and I\'m starting to look around. I\'ve tried Logic, but so far its object approach doesn\'t cut it for me with orchestral writing....

Trond

Rich Pell

12-12-2003, 12:54 PM

I used to use Nuendo 1.6 and i wrote my 1st documentary on it. I was a WW1 doc.~all orchestral. With 1.6 is seemed that the midi side of it was almost an afterthought. The midi abilities in N2 are greatly improved and very similar to SX2. Check out the Steinberg site ,i think thers a comparison chart betweeen the 2 somewhere. Best Rich

David Abraham

12-12-2003, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by robgb:

I don\'t know how much of an improvement over 2.2 Sonar 3 is, SONAR 3 is at least 1 light year ahead of SONAR 2.2 images/icons/smile.gif

RyanFormato

12-12-2003, 01:21 PM

Go here

http://www.studio-central.com/review_of_Sonar_3.htm (\"http://www.studio-central.com/review_of_Sonar_3.htm\")

They have reviews on the others too but it compares Sonar 3 to the other sequencers. Tweakhead will also answer questions that you may ask.

filmtvbiz

12-12-2003, 01:52 PM

Originally posted by peter269:
Here are a few thoughts.

1. Yes, SX 2.0 has an excellent music notation screen that you can do full scores, even publish with. Notation has been a low priorit with Cakewalk.
I don\'t believe SX (or Sonar for that matter) will play any of the correct notation symbols (at least to my knowledge). It will place, for example, a trill symbol, but it will not play it. For professional music notation, I still think Sibelius (or Finale) is the order of the day. Of course, this is just with respect to music notation, for sequencer uses, SX is a very good program.