Cubase 5 vs Sonar 8

[Nuk3m]

It's just that your post looks more like the rambling of a retarded kid than someone who is providing real arguments... And just because you're slow on cubase, doesn't mean Shane is... And just because you're fast on PT doesn't mean your sound is good...

Well i firstly never said my sound was good. Just because your fast on anything doesn't mean your sound is good, musical instruments included. And i never said Shane wasnt good or fast. It never entered the argument. I claimed that him with no memory or settings was not fast. Secondly i use nuendo more then PT currently so im not slow on the alternatives. Thirdly i like to make things interesting. No need to call people retarded children.

 

[xconnyx]

Cubase 5 is awesome, and is my DAW of choice. Haven't used Sonar much, since I'm a Mac user and Sonar is Windows only. I'd say that the simple fact that Cubase has full feature parity and compatibility on Mac and Windows is a major edge over Sonar in and of itself, especially if you ever plan to do any work in big studios.

That being said, Sonar looks nice and I'm sure it can do some cool things, but my overall impression of Sonar using it at a couple of friends' houses was that it was trying really hard to be like Cubase, mostly successfully, and had little identity of its own. A solid app, but I'm unaware of it having any particular advantages over any other DAW.

which version of c5 are you using right now? the maintenance update v5.0.1? because i'm using it and it is barley working.... but maybe it that fucking 8pre again. i stick to cubase 4.5.2 atm, works great for me, but i would like to use 5 but it's crashing to often right now.

 

[ahjteam]

Also, the elastic tool, while Cubase doesn't have it, to my knowledge

False. Its called Warp and its been there for good five years now.

 

[Stillborn]

Well, it's not technically the same, but yeah, I see your point... I stand corrected.

 

[Nebulous]

Seriously guys, WTF? Opinions...arse holes....what's the saying again?

I asked for opinions and that's what I got, no need to get all defensive or offensive about it. While I am also of the opinion that PT has editing options better suited to my workflow also, I am comfortable in sacrificing that for the sake of not giving in to Digi's ass crack interfaces and respect other peoples difference in that opinion.

I really don't see what the point of all the crap was when in my initial question I didn't even mention PT. Again, I do appreciate opnions, but heated arguing isn't changing anyones option.

I'll be going with Cubase 5 FWIW.

 

[Kazrog]

Ermz - there's no direct equivalent to Beat Detective in Cubase, but simply by group editing tracks and using auto crossfades, time stretching, etc. you can quickly get similar results. Steinberg is working on some sort of solution to this according to some posts on their forum, but it's not going to be out for a while. If you absolutely need Beat Detective, then you need Pro Tools.

Also, the behavior of the standard pointer tool in Cubase is nearly identical to the smart pointer in Pro Tools, it's just not called a "smart pointer." This is similar to Windows people asking where the "Start Menu" is on a Mac.

I'm running Cubase 5.01, which solved some minor display glitches I was having in 5.0, but other than that 5.0 was rock solid for me (Mac OS X 10.5.2 on my studio rig, with PreSonus FP10.)

 

[darthjujuu]

guize, guize...still no mention of audiosnap?? one run through of this clip had me thinking it might be time to switch from cubase to sonar. that and, (at the time atleast) sonar was the first usable DAW to utilize a 64 bit environment. stupid question, has steinberg made it there yet? i might be a tad behind on current events

here's that fancy audiosnap vid if anyones curious:

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=D8C1A732CFD41C88&search_query=audiosnap

has anyone done a substantial amount of drum editing with this?