Opinions: Samplitude or Sonar (or something else!)...

[Piccoman2]

So I'm going to get digitalized here quite shortly. I have a PC that can handle the newest software. I just wanted to get opinions on what software you'd recommend specifically between Samplitude or Sonar (newer versions). I'm coming from the "I've never recorded digitally but I'm am fairly computer literate" (built my own computer ect...) category so I'd like it to resemble working with a tape machine and mixing with a consuel ect... Any advice / opinions would be greatly appreciated...

Scott

ps - w/ Windows, is XP home edition ok to be using? I have a 64 bit AMD chip so I was looking at XP64 but that seems a little "new" to be trying with bugs and other issues such as my lack of digital recording experience...

[strangefruit]

I use Cool Edit Pro a lot. It's a very organic system, compared to Cubase and Sonar. It doesn't have a big name but I truly believe that it's the best multi-track program.

[creature.of.habit]

sorry but, i dunno..cool edit doesnt sound that good...ive had it for years now..its not something i would advise if someone can get better.but im gald its working for you!

i started on cool edit 2.1., then had cubase, then got samplitude 8 but dont use it cause its not legit...im looking into sonar now..

with this said..if u dont have a budget, idd say look at samplitude, sonar and saw or something like that..

in my experience, software does have a sound to it, i noticed that right away from cool edit to cubase...samplitude sounds very good, but again i dont use it and even refuse to have it instaled cause i know i wont resist to start using it. it's good in my opinion, its very good. cubase is a natural progression from cool edit i believe...cool edit wont stand in the way of a good recording, but you can do A LOT better (sound and overal quality) for not much more money.

[matyas]

Haven't used Sonar much, but Samplitude is pretty amazing. I'm mostly a Mac guy, but I built a Windows box just to run Samplitude. (And that's all it runs.) The included plugins sound great (including the convolution reverb), the mix bus sounds awesome, and it has a very nice feel to it. The only reason I could see going with Sonar would be if you were doing a lot of midi work - Samplitude's strengths are in hard-core audio stuff, not midi production.

[Suntower]

I love Samplitude.

I still use Cubase sometimes, but only because it has better MIDI. If you're mainly going to do audio, Samp is -the- way to go, IMO. Sounds fantastic. Totally reliable. Logically laid out. Fantastic built-in FX. Great editing.

<HTH>

---JC

[asylumdigital]

I have been using Samplitude for a few years now. I love it. Very powerful for audio, however, MIDI is not its strong-point.


peace!
Scott

[tomhampton]

i had made up my mind that there weren't any samplitude fans in here when my samplitude question went largely ignored a week or so ago....

i've had some frustrations with making the leap from tape to hard drive, but they've been mostly learning curve...having to figure out how timecode works and the like...but i've gotta say, i can't imagine how much harder it would have been if i'd been learning on something else. samplitude is intuitive (for the most part), the layout makes sense, and it does sound good.

having said that, any of you guys know why my subsequent tracks slow down in comparison to the first one? sorry to do the broken record dance, but i still haven't figured this out....



T
_________________
http://www.tomhampton.com


guitar, lap and pedal steel, mandolin, dobro, banjo, other various oddities and harmony slut

[matyas]

Yeah, there are some Sam fans here. I'm only just getting into it, but I really dig it so far.
Sorry, Tom, the reason I didn't answer your question is that I don't know the answer and haven't been able to reproduce the problem. It might be some kind of wierd voodoo with your OS and drivers and hardware, or it could be something butt-simple that I'm just overlooking.

[Dingo]

www.sawstudio.com Check it out.

[hammertime]

I've been using Cubase, Pro Tools LE, and Sonar for a while. I've finally decided on Sonar. Personally, I prefer, just from an intuitive perspective, Nuendo/Cubase, but I despise the company, it's dongles, and arcane upgrade procedures. I think Pro Tools, from a software perspective is the least advanced (both Steinberg and Cakewalk have had acidized looping for around 3 years, plugin Latency delay compensation for about the same, windows-style drop-down menus for longer; my last version of pro tools that I got about a year ago doesn't have any of these). I just upgraded to Sonar 5 -- and although haven't installed it yet, it looks pretty cool when compared to the competition. With regard to the sound of different apps, I think most of this is overrated. I used to think Sonar and Cubase sounded different, and in some instances they do, but not the way I thought. Basically, I found that Sonar 2.2 ran a bit louder than Cubase 1.6, so that they appeared to sound different. This was a combination of 2 different things 1. the Fletcher Munson effect (which says that louder/softer sounds have a different timbre ("sound""), and 2. since I was getting around 0 dB vu on my mackie, when I switched to the louder app (sonar), I got to the limits of the mackie's headroom, and sonar appeared to sound "boomy." But once I adjusted the volume of Sonar and Cubase, the sound difference disappeared. As far as the summing debate, basically the way each program reproduces a .wav file is standardized more or less, and just simple math. Even summing different .wav files is a fairly standardized algorithm. Of course, different routing options may effect the sound, but as far as I'm concerned, Pro Tools Le, Cubase/Nuendo, and sonar (all of which I've used) have fairly minimal differences, assuming you're using the same hardware, in sound quality. Personally, I'd go with Sonar 5.

[hammertime]

But if you want the program to resemble a tape machine, you might like Cubase/nuendo more, because as much as I like Sonar, it feels kind of like a word processor or something (very utilitarian). When I first picked up cubase, I didn't feel I had to read the manual at all. I absolutely loved the drop-down menus (where you right click in a space and a list of options appears), and the way buttons and knobs mirrored their real world counterparts.

[jeff4h]

I cant imagine anything better ive been using for over a year, some people in nashville are replacing pro tools with it, the interface is easy and the routing is great, they all sound the same denpending on what kind of card you get the converters and you card and your mics and pres control the sound. There is also a lot of support, I think sapmlitude is great but you are going to be basically alone, Ive heard it is hard to use I have used it very little.ONe I thought looked good and they probably have the best after buy support was SAW