Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!sonar vs cubase: final verdict..
Hi
I have been making music for 6 years now. I produce music from trance, new age to hiphop and I use midi and audio to create my music (vst, dx, soft samplers, soft synhts). As an average user i can give an honoust opinion about Sonar and Cubase sx. It is not my intention to crack down secuencer programs but that is my opinion. So this is it. Been using both for 4 weeks now and there are just some things that ar good and taht are not as good, but I have to say one thing. Removing funcionaloty from older secuencer can really push a user to the edge and left him with no choice than swifting from one program to another and let's be fair. It is much better to use 1 secuencer progam which you can really know and work with for a long time. PLus and minor points sonar: - easy of use - great basic midi funcionality (easy midi recording and editing functionality; just standard and straight forward) - fast in several ways: exporting/bounce audio files - standard lay-out (altough sometimes the lay-out could be better; maybe a a save template could be implemeted which lets you save your track views and let you choose which data you want to see on your main view) - audio view missing (which was to be found in earlier cakewalk software). this makes it more difficult becasue now you are obliged to zoom in and out and work on the main view. If you work with both midi and audio tracks, you need to hide some tracks in order to see everything in 1 view and work from there. It is better to put the audio editing somewhere else and seperate it from the midi editing. - hide tracks option. This improves functionality creates more space for you to edit audio and midi. - standard vst support (altough not as good as cubase sx which has vst 2 and better automation). This is something I miss personally in sonar. Something to write automation data instead of working with snapshoths. - general midi working flow is better than cubase sx. Faster and less detailed. - mute, solo and record functionalty is simpel and easy to use - mute all tracks with the push of a button - export to external audio editors (soundforge for example; a great way to improve your work flow) - easy secuencing of midi and audio data clips (moving around data and moving tracks), altough I miss the nudge tool you find in cubase sx, but nevertheless it is easy and fast. Cubase sx - great automation/vst 2 (record everyhting in midi data and do what you need to do. great! - midi editing is more detalied but confusing sometimes. too much doesnt mean it is better - good key-commands - solo/mute/record functionality is not logical /no unmute all tracks option - general main view is (the same as sonar) is could be better. you can save view templates but you cannot delete or uncheck track parameters or inspsector parameters and save that as a template). If you have 5 midi tracks and 8 audio tracks, it can become confusing and time time-confusing to edit your data in cubase's main view. - good recording (seeing the actual recording waveform real-time) - good track mixer - automatable EQ midi controlable parameters, but still I miss something. If you look at waves renessaince plug-ins, they have better functionality. the eq curves in general, especially and Low/high cutoff curves in cubase's EQ is strange. Very bumby and doesn't cut off frequency at a certain limit. The curve is too horizontal. - great generic remote device functionalty (so easy to connect your midi control surfaces...the big thing in the future) - no external audio editors menu, so if you got soundforge.....you won't use it as much as in sonar. a shame. Now they force you to use cubse sx editing functions which are not as detailed as soudnforge. - overlapp[ing audio parts on the same track can not be heard at the same track. In sonar you can, so in sonar you will need less tracks and thus increases your work flow. no scrolling and mousing around. - timestrechig tool is great - it can become a diffiuclt secuencer to use. But that depends on you, but sometimes if you use too many trakcs, cubse slows down and strange things happen. Sonar is less detailed thus a bit mroe faster. - on cubse sx you have to wait several milliseconds after clicking on the play button. TEsted on several pc's. - in inspector view (insert effects), you need to scroll 9 menus if you have lots of dx or vst effexts installed. Problem doesnbt occur when right button mouse clicking on the audio clip and choosing effect from there. Strange. ----- nevr used logic. Don't know. My final verdict is that if you want to get detailed (automation), use cubse sx. If you need good and standard midi functionaliy , use sonar which is capable of doing great stuff. with both you can create great stuff. I think I will go for sonar for midi editing and loop-based music (secuencing). When I got soemthing worked, I wille xport the audio tracks to wav and import them in cubse sx and sue cubase to mix and master the song. Now the problem is that the BPM used by both secuencers are slighty different, thus imposible to work with. That is why I am wating for better functionalty between both seceucners, making it posible to open and savesongs in sonar and openin them in cubse. Will come in the future. But it is not efficient. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|