Poll: Sonar X1 Producer or Cubase 6
Poll Options
View poll results: Sonar X1 Producer or Cubase 6
Cubase 6
9 100%
Sonar X1 Producer
0 0%
Voters: 9.
#1
Getting fed up with Pro tools. I purchased Pt 9 crossgrade from pro tools m powered and ever since I've just had problems. DAE errors, runtime errors, pro tools crashing for no reason. Never used to do it but now I can't even finish song's, so heres the question, if I was to switch DAW's which one do you guys prefer? Sonar X1 or Cubase 6? I here they are both more stable then Pro Tools and rarely have all the lame errors. Let me know!
USA Jackson RR1, Carvin Custom 7 String, Peavey 6505+, Krank Krankenstein Cabinet, Carvin Power Conditioner, Line 6 G 90 Wireless, BBE Sonic Maximizer, Full tone OCD Overdrive, ISP Decimator, Boss TU 2 Tuner
#3
I'd go for Cubase, but it's said to be a little bug-ridden at the moment, so make sure you can get the updates.
#4
Quote by Unholy.Daemon
personally i use sony acid pro, but i found cubase by far easier to use than sonar.

brudda mon!!!!

yeah i use sony acid as well.

my first question is this :

how much extraneous stuff do you have on your protools pc?
the reason i ask is that a friend of mine had a protools rig and i remember him having to do a wipe and reinstall just the base OS, protools and all the little things he needed (vst's, loops, projects etc) and once he did that it "fixed" it. i think some drivers somewhere were conflicting.
#7
I have Cubase 5 and I love it.

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#8
Have you downloaded any recent updates? I used to have problems with PT8 crashing until I got the latest updates, now it runs perfectly.
#9
I had the same problems in 7.4, 8, and now 9. I switched to Reaper full time. I have tried Cubase 5 and it's great, but too slow for me in terms of editing. I find Reaper to be the fastest with editing out of anything I have tried.
I've bought, sold, and traded more gear than I care to admit.
#10
Your guy's PCs suck, PT runs smooth on mine
Derpy Derp Derp Herp Derp
#11
Quote by lockwolf
Your guy's PCs suck, PT runs smooth on mine


My PC outdoes most PC's out there. Even with a Saffire Pro 40 interface etc, and more than required specs on ALL components. I haven't had any DAE errors or anything with PT9, rather PT is just honestly a resource hog, and I max out the processor pretty quick, whereas with Reaper, I can run 60 plugs in a session on say like 26 tracks (UG Mix comp. track) and still only be at 50-60% usage in Reaper. It doesn't make a lick of sense dude, and I know for a fact I'm not the only one with that problem. Go read the DUC for more than 5 seconds and you will see that for yourself. No need to be pompous about this stuff dude, as you always are.
I've bought, sold, and traded more gear than I care to admit.
#12
Quote by Brendan.Clace
No need to be pompous about this stuff dude, as you always are.


Its how I roll

The reason it runs so smooth for me is because my system is designed from the ground up for recording. I'm running a Quad Core i5 Processor with 8gb of ram (soon to be 16gb) and a really well tuned Vista (Yes, VISTA). I've used Max on a 32 track fully loaded session about 5gb of Ram used and thats partly because I had a huge sampler running on 2 of the tracks which loaded 750mb into ram each. It wouldn't make much difference if I was running Reaper or not since its the Plugin (Thanks Kontakt) and not the DAW.

It all comes in how you tweak your settings. If you're getting errors like the DAE errors, you need to watch how much you load.
Derpy Derp Derp Herp Derp
#13
Quote by lockwolf
Its how I roll

The reason it runs so smooth for me is because my system is designed from the ground up for recording. I'm running a Quad Core i5 Processor with 8gb of ram (soon to be 16gb) and a really well tuned Vista (Yes, VISTA). I've used Max on a 32 track fully loaded session about 5gb of Ram used and thats partly because I had a huge sampler running on 2 of the tracks which loaded 750mb into ram each. It wouldn't make much difference if I was running Reaper or not since its the Plugin (Thanks Kontakt) and not the DAW.

It all comes in how you tweak your settings. If you're getting errors like the DAE errors, you need to watch how much you load.


Like I said, I'm not getting DAE errors at all. When you open PT it automatically takes up 700MB of RAM. BAM GONE. I open reaper and the RAM it uses is completely negligible. Like literally unnoticeable. I use Kontakt 4 (full) as well, and I can have 2 or 3 instances running with no problem at all (with similar sized libraries). Dude, I am a professional. My machine is also designed for recording. So is the new one I'm building in September. It's not the PC man. PT is known as being a hog for absolutely no reason.
I've bought, sold, and traded more gear than I care to admit.
Last edited by Brendan.Clace at Jun 17, 2011,
#14
Quote by lockwolf
Its how I roll

The reason it runs so smooth for me is because my system is designed from the ground up for recording. I'm running a Quad Core i5 Processor with 8gb of ram (soon to be 16gb) and a really well tuned Vista (Yes, VISTA). I've used Max on a 32 track fully loaded session about 5gb of Ram used and thats partly because I had a huge sampler running on 2 of the tracks which loaded 750mb into ram each. It wouldn't make much difference if I was running Reaper or not since its the Plugin (Thanks Kontakt) and not the DAW.

It all comes in how you tweak your settings. If you're getting errors like the DAE errors, you need to watch how much you load.

For me it only took hours of tweaking to make Vista usable. Go Microsoft! I'm going to get a student copy of Windows 7 when I get a chance.
For Frodo!
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
No because a world full of marbles silly man is just as real as a half empty glass of microwaved nesquik.