Sonar vs Reaper..one man's journey

[hotjams]

I’m learning Sonar and Reaper at the same time and……( I'm not here to say one is better than the other..I'm just sharing my experience as I try and learn how to use these two different DAWS.)It's been a few weeks now and I find myself liking Reaper more and more. It seems I get allot more done and things work like I would expect them to work. This is not to say Sonar isn't a good program but it seems to do things in a very counter intuitive way. While I find myself going, yeah, that’s cool, that’s a nice way to do it in Reaper, I'm saying to my self "what the f#Xk those people as Cakewalk thinking? I posted a few days back it would be nice to have a graphical interface that simply and clearly shows where all the inputs and outputs are routed, and what effects are in the “track line”. Now maybe Sonar has this but I have not found it. Reaper does have it, although I think they could do a better job of this as well.I think Sonar is a victim of it's own legacy and success. It's based on older ideas and concepts, where as Reaper is a much fresher approach.That said, I'm sure someday so new upstart will make Reaper look a bit clunky.I'm still going to try and stick with Sonar for a while longer, but I’m leaning more and more toward Reaper.

[crs7string]

Hotjams,Sonar's Console view is the graphical interface that shows the routing of tracks.I just visited Reaper's website and educated myself about it's features and looked at screen shots. I've been doing midi and audio recording on a computer for 20+ years.I know Reaper wants to be placed as the end all, be all solution to DAW users.Looking at the website, there is nothing new they are bring to the table that is not and has not been(from a midi perspective)in all the major packages.Visiting their forum, there are many, many complaints about the program crashing and malfunctions. (not unlike the Sonar, Logic, Cubase etc, etc, etc forums.)You state in your post that"I'm not saying one is better than the other" But you are clearly "bashing" Cakewalk and Sonar. Just because you are not finding Sonar to be as intuitive as Reaper does not necessarily make Reaper a superior piece of software.The comment that Sonar is based on older ideas and concepts, where as Reaper is a much fresher approach is a statement with absolutely no basis. Looking at the screen shots on Reaper's website shows page after page of the same screen shots I see everyday in Sonar.It is some what like picking up a Taylor acoustic guitar with heavy bronze wound strings and not being able to play it as easily as a Fender Strat with light strings and declaring that the Strat is a superior guitar. I think there would be a breakdown in the logic of that conclusion.I've stated before, that as a long time Sonar user, I find the approach you are taking on your journey to be insulting to me and the other Sonar users on this Forum.I have absolutely no problem with you singing the praises of Reaper. I just don't think you need to include the negative comments about Sonar. At this point they are only your opinions of Sonar as a user with apparently little or no working knowledge of the program.My friends on this Forum use Digital Performer, Logic, Cubase, Tracktion and Sonar. None of us ever make negative comments about the choice another has made in their DAW. If you listen to the music of Mazz, Matto, Steve Gilbert, Vikki (Hummingbird) or Dave Walton, it is impossible to tell who is using which program. In the end, the music you create with whatever tools you choose is important, not the tools.Chuck

[Mark Kaufman]

Sorry Chuck, but I honestly don't see any insult here...just a forum member comparing two DAWs and clearly making sure we know it's just his opinion. I sure don't get the sense he's insulting Sonar users. And as he compares, I sure wouldn't want to edit out what he found to be negatives. In fact, because he said what he did, you were able to point out to him how to find the graphical interface in Sonar...and that info was educational for me.The reason why I even say this is because, in my case, these posts been very helpful...as you know my Cubase SX3 is crashing and burning. I had only just learned the program and happened to like it, but in a time of need I have looked around for what to do next. Purchase an expensive new version of Cubase? Try one of the other big kids like Sonar, Logic, ProTools? And what of this new one that you can download for free and license when necessary? Based on my journey, hotjams' posts have been of interest to me, as well as opinions at Gearslutz and elsewhere. One thing I have learned is that in the general online community of reputable engineers and producers, Reaper is considered to be equal to the Big Players...it's not viewed as an inferior program, but as another option of good reputation. An important point that hasn't been made is this one: Reaper costs the least. I guess that's the one that's talkin' to me... Anyway, not trying to stir anything up here...just hoping to stir it down, I guess. -Mark

[crs7string]

Mark,The point I was attempting to make is that the comparisons being made are not based on full knowledge of either program.If Craig Anderton (EQ magazine, Sound On Sound) or Paul White (Sound On Sound magazine) did an in depth, unbiased analysis and comparison of features of Sonar vs. Reaper I think their comments would resonate a little more.Reaper costs less because they do not include all of the same features as the leading DAWs. (software instruments, developed drum programming, etc.)If one wants the cheapest and possibly best value there are other options such as Power Tracks Pro from the folks that make Band in a Box.When you have posted about your issues with Cubase you have not been saying it's the program's reason why you are having issues. Hence, people are trying to help you.I have suggested, as have others , that Hotjams visit the Sonar forums to find the help necsessary to navigate his way thru the program. If he spent any time there he would find a very extensive and highly professional community of users. If he posted the same posts there he would be immediately labeled as a "troller" for Reaper.As you have already figured out, this is also a community of professionals willing to help.If I started my response to your EZ Drummer problems by talking about how superior Addictive Drums is as a drum program and that EZ Drummer is " a victim of it's own success", and "what the F#Xk those people at Toontrack thinking". I don't think I'd be creating an atmosphere that promoted the helpful attitude most people on this Forum enjoy.As I stated in my earlier post, I think the merits of Reaper can be discussed in a manner that does not have to include negative comments based on a limited knowledge of how to use Sonar ( or any other software)All software has it's strengths and weaknesses, including Sonar, Logic, Cubase, EZ Drummer, Stylus RMX and on and on and on. Until you can claim you are very familiar with any of the products, I don't feel you can offer any insightful comments on any of them.( at least without making some disclaimers)Chuck

[hotjams]

Chuck, I'm sorry if you find what I have written to be insulting. I'm just posting my "impressions" of these two DAWS as I try to complete the same tasks. I have no doubt Sonar is the more complete program. However, I think you really under estimate what Reaper can actually do.I'm aware and have used Sonar console view, I find it to be messy and confusing. I guess it works well for somebody who grew up using physical mixers. While Reaper has a console view as well, it also has a "I/O Matrix" where you can easily see where things are coming in, where they are going out and you can make edits right there. That said, they could do an even better job of this. Maybe the next release of Sonar will contain such a feature. In fact when I was looking at the Sonar "track manager" I thought I had found this. However, that was not the case. However, I think I will no longer make any posts comparing the two programs, obviously some people find it offensive and it was probably short sighted of me not to have foreseen this.

[ibanez468]

Hey hotjams!Not here ta' argue your point one way or another, but I've found that most DAWs have a degree of difficulty when learning them. What I've also found too, is that alot of folks tend ta' go on a bashing spree when a program or a piece of equipment doesn't work as easily as they would like it to (THIS STATEMENT IS NOT BEING DIRECTED AT YOU).The next thing that I tend ta' come across is, when I start working with that same said piece of equipment or program, after tinkering around with it, I begin to realize that it is probably more of a sophisticated program or piece of equipment than I anticipated. Which generally means that it's gonna' take some extra tinkering, reading & understanding in order for it ta' be useful for me.Give ya' an example. I was fortunate enough, several years ago, ta' purchase a Roland VP-9000 Variphrase Processor. While it is known for playing samples, I discovered that it is much more powerful than the fact that it can play samples. I was able to manipulate samples and do some really cool things. It's probably the equivalent of Recycle, a little before Recycle got so popular.Anyhow, I would go to the forum and read ALL of the complaints from people that had purchased this fine piece of equipment. What I found was that most of them had not taken the time to read, read, read, and experiement with the piece of equipment so they could understand that it was more than just a sample player. By not doing this, they simply got disgusted with the piece of equipment, and found every negative thing they could think of ta' say about it.Me, on the other hand, kept reading, and tryin' things out and made sure that it would do what I needed it ta' do, based on the manuals that were provided with the thing. After about 3 weeks of workin' with the thing (that was how long it took me to fully understand & conquer this sophisticated piece of equipment) I was rollin' BIG time. I was makin' my own samples, and manipulatin' things, and havin' a good ole' time, now that I knew what I was doin'. And then I was able ta implement that piece of equipment in my more serious works. Still use it to this day.My point is, most of those complainers on the VP forum were too lazy IMO, ta' take the time to read the manuals and absorb & comprehend what they were reading, and practice with the piece of equipment (ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS NOT DIRECTED AT YOU). They would have found that it was much more than just a sample player. Instead, they wanted ta' get spoon-feed every little thing that they could not understand. I understand there are times when one needs help when things ain't goin' right, but some of their complaints would've been solved if they had just taken the time ta' read and at least, test out the theories in the manual. I didn't ask for help from a forum or a designated Roland support group, or any of that stuff. I simply read & experimented, read & experimented, over & over until things started ta' CLICK. BTW, I joined the VP forum to see what new discoveries had been made by others (the ones that had a grasp on the thing and understood how ta' use it), and how they were using the VP in their own productions.I actually downloaded Reaper one day, just never loaded it up ta' try it out yet. I'm sure it's a great program. I'll eventually hafta' load it up and see what's to it. Simple is always a good thing, but unfortunately, not always found in every musical program or piece of equipment. Just remember, keep readin', keep experimenting, keep CONQUERING! That's my tried & true solution for gettin' positive results with these kinds of things. Each little VICTORY makes the next BATTLE, that much easier.I-468

[crs7string]

Hotjams,I would encourage you to continue to post your journey. I just think it can be accomplished in a more constuctive manner that is based on actually comparing a feature or benefit.For instance, the Sonar console view vs. Reaper's console view. Piano roll in Sonar vs. Piano roll view in Reaper.Creating a Groove clip in Sonar vs. Reaperetc.I think, if you take this approach, you will quickly find that both programs will accomplish your objectives. Then it is a matter of choosing which road you want to go down. The skill set required with any DAW is transferable to another DAW.We all tend to think differently and if Reaper is more intuitive for you, I can see why you are gravitating to that software. That doesn't make Sonar an inferior product.ChuckBTW I am trying to offer some constructive input to you in the spirit of helping all of us continuing to grow. If you do a search of my posts I think you will see this spirit of constuctive input.

[hotjams]

Hey I-468! I have read a lot of your post and I really take to heart your "stick to it, don't give up" attitude. I'm not going to give up on Sonar. I think people fail to realize as I go through this, there will be things that I find Sonar is better at and I will post that as well. I'm in the early stages of getting all of this figured out. I know you can go read some "editor" or "sound mags" hired guy to give you "their" comparison. I thought maybe some people would appreciate a "laymans" journey, sort of a log of impressions. However, I got much better things to do than to share this information, particularly if it ends of offending people.

[davewalton]

Hi,I'll throw in a few comments (since I'm bored and had too much coffee this morning). One thing I think is that I've begun to recognize that the top programs (Cubase, Sonar, ProTools, Logic and maybe Reason) are the top programs because they're that good. Everyone here uses one of those mentioned as well as some others (like Tracktion) and I've heard GREAT music coming out of all of them. I don't know anyone who is using any of these to their maximum potential or is bumping up against the limits of the programs. I use Sonar. I picked Sonar because (a) I don't record live... virtual midi instruments only and I perceived that ProTools was geared toward "traditional" recording (live players, vocals, etc) and (b) Cubase was made by Steinberg and I didn't like some of the quirkiness of their "Virtual Guitar" (although I use it a lot). So I saw Sonar as a "happy medium"... equally versed at handling midi as well as any audio I might eventually deal with. Coming from Reason, I thought Sonar wasn't nearly as intuitive. Turns out it is... just that everything is presented in a different way. About a year ago, Mazz bought a vitrual bass from "Yellow Tools" but didn't get the dongle that was required to use it. Without really knowing what I was talking about, I posted a deal about how crappy Yellow Tools was because I saw their policy as "here's your virtual bass guitar. Oh, you want to use it? That will cost you an extra $49". While I was at it, I took the opportunity to expound on the evils of dongals (even though I don't own anything that uses a dongle). Matto took issue with my post (as well he should have), pointing out that maybe I should do a little more research before trashing a company or product on a public forum. I can't speak for Chuck, but I'm guessing that this might have been one of the comments you made that didn't sit well...Aug 3, 2008, 1:17am, hotjams wrote:I think Sonar is a victim of it's own legacy and success. It's based on older ideas and concepts, where as Reaper is a much fresher approach.Like my post about Yellow Tools and dongles, etc, this doesn't seem to be based on any unbiased personal research you've done. I bet I wouldn't have to look too far to find a very similar phrase in the marketing pieces from Reaper. So, don't pack up and go home or whatever. We all post all kinds of things that don't always sit right with others. Sometimes justified, sometimes not. Among many other things I've learned from this forum, is to try to temper my entheusiam for or against a certain thing and maybe just deal with how well something is working out as opposed to how crappy something is.What isn't working well for you is working "swimmingly" for some of the rest of us... and not because we can't tell the difference. DavePS - I don't remember if this was you or not but I mentioned on another thread about the Sonar forum. I've had GREAT success with getting questions answered, etc from the forum members there. One thing... try to find the issue in the manual and search the forum posts first. If the answer isn't there or is still fuzzy, post a question and most likely you'll get a reply in less than 15 minutes.

[mazz]

I don't think it's ultra useful to compare programs based on personal preferences alone. A more useful comparison for me would be something like: "I recorded a MIDI track and wanted to transpose it and the transpose function in program A was much easier to access than the same function in program B". Or, "I really need to edit in music notation display and A doesn't have it so it's a deal killer".It's kind of like the useless Mac vs. PC debate (that I engage in sometimes myself, I just can't keep my mouth shut! ). What that usually boils down to is "whatever you're used to using that helps you get the job done". We tend to get passionate about our tools but sometimes forget that at the end of the day they're just that, tools.In the end, no one can tell by listening what DAW you used. You might hear Stylus or Atmosphere but you can't tell what DAW they were plugged in to. So, whatever works is whatever works. Figure out a few tasks you want to do and see how each program is able to help you do it and try to envision expanding in the future and which platform will give you that. Then you can make a better informed comparison. Sonar may just not function the way your mind does and Reaper is more intuitive for you.Cheers!MazzPS: I had too much coffee this morning too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!