Unless you are totally addicted to Vegas's UI and editing power (as I am), there doesn't seem to be any reason whatsoever to not try something else. My utter dependence on Vegas's editing ease and speed is the ONLY thing that keeps me from going elsewhere.
I've felt that way too, but now it seems the advantages will be gone. The new Sonar editing looks extremely easy and intuitive.
Myself I don't really care what tools I use, as long as the tool is easy to use, fast and reliable.
I started out with Soundscape, and still use it for recording and editing. I just use Vegas for mixing. But in the future I will probably go for one system for both.
What strikes me is, what a wonderful tool Vegas would have been today, if SonicFoundry and now SONY, could keep up the pace of developement as the people who have worked on Sonar. Not that it's bad, not at all, but it would have been THE DAW-tool, not just a budget "Video editing software with audio capabilities" that it's becoming.
I use Sonar 4 my midi stuff, but that is it. The integral part of the way that Sonar stores, loads and works with audio files is lame compared to Vegas.
Every time you load an audio file into a project it re-renders that file to live in a specific Sonar folder at whatever bit depth your template is set to.
Using Sonar for importing audio tracks requires doubled hard drive space for audio - I.E.: The folder that your audio started in and the folder that Sonar created just so it can be played in the Sonar template...
...Plus, why would you want to render a file for the sake of using it in an application's timeline? You are degrading your audio for the sake of mixing it...
When you touch Vegas once, the other method seems ignorant.
Mr Phil ", not just a budget "Video editing software with audio capabilities" that it's becoming"
"Budget video editing" ?!! Do you think Veags is somehow inexpensive or technically lesser than over video editing apps (if not superior in many ways) ? Do you think Vegas is somehow a lesser audio recording app than others ?
The only thing major missing is Rewire, and as Acid has this now, you don't need to be a brain-surgeon to figure that the next version of Vegas will too.
If you mean "keep up the pace of developement as the people who have worked on Sonar", is being happy with prematurely releasing software, I'd rather wait a little longer for new features. Not to say that Vegas has never had a release with the occaional bug (or more).
Do you think Vegas is somehow a lesser audio recording app than others ?
Uh, no, it's "so far" superior by virtue of it's GUI. Sonar is pushing right now.
Does it compare with the other DAWs? Not a chance. ALL the others support MIDI in a sophisticated way. Rewire is not even a band-aid. I sync Sonar to Vegas now via MIDI clock. How does the addition of Rewire put Vegas in the same league as the other DAWs?
Budget video editing" ?!! Do you think Veags is somehow inexpensive or technically lesser than over video editing apps (if not superior in many ways) ? Do you think Vegas is somehow a lesser audio recording app than others ?
The Vegas program costs 4500 SEK in Sweden, that's about £450, or $6-700. That is budget. Have no idea what Pinnacle or other systems cost, I'm not a video guy.
Compare that to a new Soundscape DAW, or likewise compared stuff. Costs more than ten times that, cause you get all the hardware too.
I'm not saying that the higher price, the better.
But it IS significant difference working with Soundscape and likewise.
We often read about problems with latency, and problems with monitoring and routing bla bla bla.....
"Latency? What latency? I never had any of those problems...?" I think to myself, but then I only mix in Vegas. I don't use it for recording. There is a reason for it.
Vegas IS a very good program, but it could have been SO much better. That's my point. Or do you say that it couldn't? Does it already have all that the users want? The only thing major missing is Rewire, and as Acid has this now, you don't need to be a brain-surgeon to figure that the next version of Vegas will too.
Eh... we've heard that for a long while now.... and midi implementation too. (Not that I personally wants midi in Vegas, I like things being separate)
But tell me, what was the major BIG difference between v4 and v5?
No, I fear that under SONY, Vegas will be even more specialized for video and DVD production.
>>But tell me, what was the major BIG difference between v4 and v5?<<
For me a huge stability and performance issue. Although V4 worked fine for a lot of folks, it was so incredibly sluggish on my system that I found it unusable and returned to V3 (I worked with Sony tech support and they could never solve the problem so V4 was a waste of money for me). I'm now using 5 which is light years beyond what 4 was on my system but its still not as snappy and stable as 3. So far, the automation and a few other features has been worth the tradeoff in overall performance but its still frustrating. I expect newer versions to perform better than older ones. So far V3c was the quickest and most stable of the Vegas releases. Lots of others on this forum have made the same comment so I know its not just my system.
For recording software, vegas is missing a major and fundamental thing that should have been in early on, by V3 at the latest: sensible input monitoring.
Weve got auto input now, but only for a VERY limited track count. We need hardware auto input on the recording front. Or we need an ultra efficient software input monitoring system that others have, but still that seems a poor solution. ASIO DM has been out an eternity in DAW terms.
The new Sonar looks pretty damn sweet. I'd be curious to see how stable and smooth it runs. I've had good experiences pre-Sonar in Cakewalk days but Sonar never took in my studio. I've seen it run great in other studios though. tmrpro's point about file storage would do it for me though. I absolutely HATED the way Cakewalk/Sonar stored media. Not portable at all if you ask me.
Wow, Sonar 4 Producer edition is $959. That's even more expensive than Vegas 5 + DVD Architect. For that price it better be damn good!
My old studio partner liked Sonar because of the midi features but I could never get use to it for audio editing and recording. Compared to Vegas it was counter-intuitive in that regard. That was Sonar 2 so it was a while ago. I wonder if they've changed their editing features much.
I would disagree with the notion that Vegas is budget software. There are plenty of budget choices for $50 or $100. It may lack a few things but Vegas still does compete on the pro level, especially in mixing and editing where it's hands down the best in my opinion, and that's really where I spend most of my time with the software anyway. The only reason to switch would be if you need midi (why Vegas doesn't have at least basic midi is the subject of a whole different thread) or are in dire need of better input monitoring. Does Sonar even have input monitoring?
The musicians and voice actors I've recorded have never once complained about the monitoring setup I have for recording and overdubbing with Vegas so even though Sonar 4 may look cool and be loaded with tons of new features, I'll stick with Vegas 5. And besides those often unused video features will again come in handy with the new client who wants to record a number of basic video interviews for streaming on the internet.
I would disagree with the notion that Vegas is budget software. There are plenty of budget choices for $50 or $100. It may lack a few things but Vegas still does compete on the pro level, especially in mixing and editing - - -
By budget I meant the pricing. I didn't mean that budget meant=bad.
It works very well for what you say: editing and mixing (that's what I use it for myself).
But it just can't compete with the real pro-level stuff like Soundscape and likewise when it comes to the whole chain going from recording to finished mix. It's not that full featured pro-tool that Sound Forge is. Not if you look at the product and see to what it is supposed to be: a multitrack recording/editing/mixing digital studio. The performance of Vegas (and likewise) is so dependant on your hardware. The level it reaches up to on its own is pro-sumer. It is not what a pro level studio would invest in as a first choice. Therefore why Vegas isn't as big on that market as it could have been. Cause there really is a good solid base to work from.
And I blame the video part. Huge misstake putting in too many different tools/features in one program.
If you mix an indy car with a monster truck you may have a vehicle that in some ways can do more than the indy car, but you just won't get a good indy car, or a good truck.
This has not so much to do with competing with Sonar I guess. The point with Sonar is the pace of developement. Shouldn't Vegas 5, soon to be 6, be so much better than Sonar4 that this discussion wouldn't even occur? Consider the fact that it's been quite a while since Vegas1 hit the market.
Again, the soul of Vegas is fuzzy. "Where should we put in the effort when investing money in developement? Audio, or Video?" is probably what both Sonic Foundry, and now SONY ask themeselves.
"Oh, hek, we just upgrade the number til we know what kind of tool we have, and where to go with it...."
I rarely reply to this kind of message, but for some reason I felt I wanted to this time, when I read the following from Mr. Phil.
'It is not what a pro level studio would invest in as a first choice'
I had 2 full fledged PorTools suites. I sold them both when I discovered Vegas. I've been using it since version 2.
I compose, produce and run one of the top studios in the city. Our rate starts at $ 200/hr. We have produced for BMG, Sony, EMI, to name a few majors not to mention many indies.
We also compose and produce music for TV, Film and advertising, including the music for the Canadian Broadcast of the Salt Lake City Olympics, Athens Olympics, national campaigns for Ford, Holiday Inn, AT&T, to name but very few. Our cliebts are in Canada, US, Japan, Europe and the Middle East.
We only use Vegas 5 for audio.
We billed over a million $ last year. We only use Vegas for audio.
We have three rooms including a 4000 sq.ft. recording room.
We only use Vegas 5 for audio.
what kind of sound card are you using that you have found issues with input monitoring? are you trying to record while using fx?
I have a delta 1010, and have only experienced issues with input monitoring when trying to record while fx processes are running, but if it is necessary, I switch to hardware monitoring, which usually resolves the issue for me.
Well, I didn't say NO pro studio would, but if you look across the market, Vegas is NOT the first choice. The choice of oneself is not always representative of the majority. I was talking about the majority, in general.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not the market leading system for big studios.
In Sweden where I reside, I have seen NO studio at any pro-level, that use Vegas as main MTR system. Several that use 2" tape still, a lot of a-dats, pro-tools of course, Soundscape (hallelujah!), Nuendo, even Cubase. But no Vegas. Maybe Vegas got a bigger market in the US/Canada?
>>Well, I didn't say NO pro studio would, but if you look across the market, Vegas is NOT the first choice.<<
Of course it isn't. Protools is – but Protools is a completely different animal altogether. It does not make any sense to compare Protools (not Protools LE, which is NOT really Protools at all) to Vegas (or any other native based app) in the context of questioning why Vegas isn't the "first choice." No disrespect, but to me, this is a tired old argument that suggests a lack of understanding of the market and its history, and especially Digidesign's role in this entire issue.