| Author
|
Differences between Cubase SX 3 and Sonar 8?
|
Djones
IsraTrance Senior Member
Started Topics :
267
Posts :
1766
Posted : Jan 15, 2009 11:39:27
|
Would anyone know the main differences between these 2 sequencers?
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Jan 15, 2009 13:16
|
Sx3 is obsolete compared to sonar 8
Sonar 8 has by FAR the better Plugins included. FX and VSTi.
Sonar 8 finally has "instrument tracks" a combination of MIDI and Audio Track
You can compare Cubase 4 and Sonar 8, then it's a matter of taste and preferences, sonar has better VSTInstruments, when it comes to effects I find them even.
Cubase SX 3 simply is over compared to Sonar 8. Especially when it comes to EQ-Quality and included Plugins.
I'm cubase 4 user. Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
Nabla jpr
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
17
Posts :
130
Posted : Jan 15, 2009 17:53
|
I recently switched to Sonar 8 from Cubase sx 3.
Although I still have to learn Sonar I think that as subconsciousmind said Sonar 8 is much better than sx3 but I don't know about cubase 4.
I did it because of the fx, synth and workflow are much better imo.
plus I was finding myself using more and more the small step sequencer in sx and when I found the stepsequencer in sonar I was sooooooo happy!!this is great!!really
and I know that it's biased but to my ear it's sound better (i don't know whether I'm fooling myself or not)
now I'm going to stick to sonar...maybe I will check out cubase 5...so what i suggest is try sonar 8 and have a look at cubase 5
but sonar is definetely worth looking
..
nab |
|
|
|
Freeflow
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
60
Posts :
3709
Posted : Jan 19, 2009 10:24
|
Im pretty interested in Sonar 8 aswell..
gonna check it out!
im sure its better in many areas than cubase SX 3, though one quickly gets used to certain programs...
Any news on Samplitude btw? its also a nice program
|
|
|
|
frambonas
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
166
Posted : Jan 19, 2009 10:38
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-01-15 17:53, Nabla jpr wrote:
really
and I know that it's biased but to my ear it's sound better (i don't know whether I'm fooling myself or not) |
|
I don't think you can here much difference in sound quality between sequencers these day's.
Maybe 5 to 10 years ago that still was...but nowadays qualtity is made by the people who works in the sequencer, not by the sequencer self.
For me Nuendo 4 is the best...and that's the sequencer you should compaire with sonar 8.
The VST2 effects are great! |
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Jan 19, 2009 11:33
|
from the moment you touch the channel eqs cubase sx definitly sounds worse.
But when it comes to simply summing many blind tests revealed no difference.
Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
Nabla jpr
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
17
Posts :
130
Posted : Jan 19, 2009 12:17
|
my experience is that because I'm using a different daw with different eq, effects and such I did experience difference in sound quality(maybe the 64 bit engine?.. but this is not important for me at the moment as I'm more concerned about the workflow and other issues)
be careful that the version 8 is very buggy and it can become very annoying(at least in my setup)...so wait the update 8.3 that is coming out in february..this should address many annoying issues..
but I do like it...
|
|
|
|
psylevation
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
52
Posts :
841
Posted : Jan 28, 2009 23:07
|
In Cubase's defense, SX was 2 versions ago and was released in 2004 I think. Sonar 8 just came out so of course it's going to have a lot of things that are better about it.
Compare it to Cubase 5 when it comes out and then we have a fair fight 
I've given Sonar a good run and I felt like there were too many steps to do simple things. I'm sure a lot of that would improve with consistent use. It felt very clunky in terms of workflow for me.
This is why I've decided to stick with Cubase for the future as far as I can see (unless something major happens).
It's definitely up to the user which works best for them, for me it's Cubase, for you it could be Sonar. All of the major sequencers are more than capable now, so any of them are a good choice.
~Airyck~
~Unoccupied Mind ~
Psyowa! |
|
|
|
neuromantik
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
28
Posts :
593
Posted : Feb 2, 2009 07:41
|
The title should read: "What is the best cracked sequencer currently available"? 
Seriously, why even think to compare 2 pieces of software made 4 years apart hmmm...
I don't use ideas. Every time I have an idea it's too limiting, and usually turns out to be a disappointment. But I haven't run out of curiosity. -RR |
|
|
|
Nabla jpr
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
17
Posts :
130
Posted : Feb 3, 2009 16:12
|
just a small update on the subject as I have been working with sonar a bit more
--audio processing(cut, reverse, pitchshift..), much
faster and simple in cubase than sonar
In sonar you can do basickly the same things but it
takes more time
synthwise, z3ta, rapture can't be beat (also because they already in the box)
It would be great if someone who's working with cubase 4-5 joined the discussion..
|
|
|
|
labyrinth
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
275
Posted : Feb 12, 2009 00:43
|
im thinking about switching to sonar 8 as well. my only complaint has been that the automation process seems to take more time in sonar than in cubase sx and thats a very important part of your workflow. but i think if you put the time and effort in to learn the program well, you can use either of these to make great music. might end up making the switch to sonar though just based on the stability of sonar over cubase in my experience
Ovnimoon Records
http://soundcloud.com/labyr1nth
http://facebook.com/labyr1nth
http://labyr1nth.com |
|
|
|
Nabla jpr
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
17
Posts :
130
Posted : Feb 12, 2009 10:42
|
ok..after few months I'm going back to cubase 4..waiting for my copy next week.
the thing is sonar is a nice program but as said before the audio editing, automation, and organization of track view, midi and such are better in cubase imo
not to mention that at the moment I think Sonar is the buggiest program I have ever tried..something that should be sorted out soon hopefully
I will stil keep an eye on Sonar, it has great potential and in the future I might re-swicth again...but I'm looking forward to my cubase copy
cheers
Nab
|
|
|
|
Djones
IsraTrance Senior Member
Started Topics :
267
Posts :
1766
Posted : Feb 12, 2009 10:42
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-02-03 16:12, Nabla jpr wrote:
just a small update on the subject as I have been working with sonar a bit more
--audio processing(cut, reverse, pitchshift..), much
faster and simple in cubase than sonar
In sonar you can do basickly the same things but it
takes more time
synthwise, z3ta, rapture can't be beat (also because they already in the box)
It would be great if someone who's working with cubase 4-5 joined the discussion..
|
|
I was actually looking for a piece of sofwtware which actually speeds up workflow.
This doesn't really seem to be the deal then!? |
|
|
|
Nabla jpr
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
17
Posts :
130
Posted : Feb 12, 2009 12:37
|
well..for me not...but I can't tell you this is true for everyone..what I can say is try for yourself, I know it takes time to learn the basic funcions but the only person who can judge it's you.
give it a try for few months and see what happens
I would like to have a custom sequencer, a mix of few sequencer...it would be great, maybe it could be the future... customs modules that you can buy from different software houses and build your own...just dreaming...
|
|
|
|
cr1st0
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
80
Posts :
208
Posted : Feb 13, 2009 23:34
|
|
sonar 8 supports vst's ?
|
|
|
|
