Cakewalk Sonar X1?

AlanRatcliffe

Is anyone using Cakewalk Sonar X1? If so any opinions, problems? Especially if you migrated from earlier versions - how easy is it to adjust to the different workflow?

I've used almost every version of Cakewalk, since it was Twelve-Tone Systems Cakewalk for DOS (with the exception of Sonar 1, 6 and 8 IIRC), so I'm familiar with the usual Cakewalk stuff, but don't want to "upgrade" to a new system if they have turned it into the Edsel of the DAW world.

PJH

Sonar X1 has been a bit of a disaster from the stabilty side. Cakewalk have released a few patches though and the general feeling has been that it's pretty stable now. There are still complaints about it though and Cakewalk are about to release another patch in August which should address everything.

There are also a few new things that will be introduced as well in this new release. The August patch will be version X1c.

I'm still using Version 8.5.3 in the studio but I reckon I will upgrade when the new version is released. I've been using Cakewalk since Pro Audio 5 and have been happy with them overall. It does seem though that this new version is quite a radical step from an improved workflow point of view.

Cheers,

Peter.

AlanRatcliffe

Thanks Peter - exactly what I wanted to know! They went through the same brouhaha when Sonar came out (the reason I never owned V1). I think I'll also hang on a few months, then look at it again.

At least they have slowed down the releases - at one point, if you waited for the stable release, it would only be a few months before the next version came out. ☹

Renesongs

I stated with Voyetra and then Cakewalk in the early 90's became a complete fanboi. My interest started waning fast as soon as discovered Reaper.

Riaan-Combrink

Any suggestions regarding which version of Sonar is most user-friendly for live performance (ie playing midi backtracks)? Refering to resource hunger, ease of playback - stop - loading next track, etc.

I've been meaning for more than a year now to switch to Sonar (from Pro Audio 9 :-[) - after some excellent advice here on GFSA. I'm just about ready to order X1, but was hesitant as it seems very studio specific from reviews, videos, etc.

Any suggestions for best playback Sonar version? I'm already using Reaper for recording (and loving it) - so dual-use is not the biggest isue to me.

PS - using Vista at the moment. Anyone notice any issues between different Sonar versions and Vista, XP and W7?

AlanRatcliffe

I don't think any DAW is ideal for that kind of thing Riaan. Especially when it comes to loading songs, creating playlists, etc., none of them can be compared to something that is made expressly for that purpose - like Ableton Live. Even with something like Live though, it is best used with complex setups where you want to run a lot of software synths and audio processing for a big production with mostly live players. It's kind of overkill to use it to load a GM softsynth and a MIDI file for every song - and even then, it reloads the softsynth anew for every song, meaning longer load times (especially with a bigger, better sounding softsynth).

I think if I was doing the backtrack thing, I'd probably mix down to wav files at home and then use a simple file player with playlists set up. I'd still create them in Sonar at home, using it to it's full potential (the advantage of being able to record real instrument and vocal backing tracks and use huge sample banks and resource hungry synths and plugins is attractive), to get the best possible backing. But for live performance, it's a lot quicker and easier to load a single stereo wave file than a project file with multiple wavs, softsynths and plugins. It also means you can store thousands of songs on hard drive, meaning you can have a vast library of songs, ready to meet most common requests at the drop of a hat. True, you can do that with MIDI and use even less file space, but not with real instruments or high quality backing.

You do also get dedicated softsynth hosts designed for live use (Steinberg V-stack, Brainspawn Forte, SpinAudio Virtual Mixing Console) with built in MIDI file players - they let you load a couple of synths once and just run them like a rack of hardware synths, but with a file player built in (some even have audio processing too, letting you patch in vocals and even guitar).

As you can tell, it can get quite involved (and I didn't even get into hardware solutions like the Muse Receptor, which are far more rugged and gig-ready than a laptop), but the nice thing is there are solutions for every playing situation - you just have to do your research (and lots of it).

Riaan-Combrink

Alan Ratcliffe wrote I don't think any DAW is ideal for that kind of thing Riaan.
I think if I was doing the backtrack thing, I'd probably mix down to wav files at home and then use a simple file player with playlists set up. I'd still create them in Sonar at home
there are solutions for every playing situation - you just have to do your research (and lots of it).

Thanks, Alan - good advice. I'll look into those. I've been doing a hybrid thing anyway, playing some files in wav/mp3 via a fileplayer (Foobar - only one I could get to play back through ASIO) and midis through ProAudio 9. Of course its own set of problems - different dynamics, etc.

So the all-wav option certainly seems to be the way to go. Let me know how you find X1(or X1c) if you do decide to go that way. I may still get it for the purpose you suggested (long learning curve included!). Perhaps I should hone my skills first on Reaper, and then get something more expensive (like X1) later?

AlanRatcliffe

Y'know - I suspect that to someone who has learned their craft on a mixing desk and with MIDI sequencers, Sonar 8.5 would probably be a more comfortable and familiar working environment than X1. It's certainly more than capable for most peoples needs (actually far beyond most - I barely scratch the surface of even V7) and more than capable of producing an excellent finished product. A big advantage I suspect is you should be able to pick up the Producer version of V8.5 for far less than the standard edition of X1.

Reaper is a good package for learning the basics and has the added benefit of being relatively simple to operate. I find it frustrating, because it can't do a lot of the silly stuff I want on a regular basis (sidechains, etc.), but most people don't need that.

BMU

Reaper can sidechain. But you have to set it up using Reaper's insane track routing flexibility, it doesn't have a ready-made feature call 'sidechain'. I know this 'cos I bought a book that gets into some really complicated things with Reaper, sidechaining was just the start. (I promptly forgot all of it, of course. ? )

Renesongs

@ Riaan. I used Sonar 6 a few years ago on a laptop running XP in a live situation and it worked well without any problems. The only reason why I didn't mix down to wav or mp3 is because I was using Sonars lyric view to prompt me while on stage which was pretty neat.My laptop came with Vista pre installed which I ditched after one performance because it was highly unreliable. I'm now running Windows 7 on all my machines and I have noticed a some operational improvements and better performance than XP. (Personally I view Vista as more a virus than an OS.)

Although my experience proves that one can use Sonar in a live situation If I had to do it again I would rather learn my words and use wav or mp3.

Riaan-Combrink

Renesongs wrote @ Riaan. I used Sonar 6 a few years ago on a laptop running XP in a live situation and it worked well without any problems. The only reason why I didn't mix down to wav or mp3 is because I was using Sonars lyric view to prompt me while on stage which was pretty neat.My laptop came with Vista pre installed which I ditched after one performance because it was highly unreliable. I'm now running Windows 7 on all my machines and I have noticed a some operational improvements and better performance than XP. (Personally I view Vista as more a virus than an OS.)
Although my experience proves that one can use Sonar in a live situation If I had to do it again I would rather learn my words and use wav or mp3.

Thanks, Rene. My preference for ProAudio (and hence the Sonar upgrade) was also that I use the track view for certain live prompts - and also the ability to mute certain tracks if say a bassist or some other muso drops by.

My XP laptop had a hard-drive crash and I've had to resort to a pre-loaded Vista laptop for stage - what a disaster. I bear witness to your Vista-observation!!!!! I'm going to have to go W7 ASAP, and will probably mix down to wav/320kbs mp3 too.

AlanRatcliffe

I've found Vista to place a slightly heavier load on my machine than XP (both optimised as much as they can be), so if your machine is lower-spec (like an older single core Pentium CPU), rather go back to XP.

On the other hand, if you have a modern multi-core machine, I suspect that W7 will work better, taking fuller advantage of the newer hardware than XP is able.