Ditto to everything brian said. It really comes down to your needs and which platform (windows/mac) you want to go with. Personally i prefered the JSonar scripts as it relied on the fimiliar sonar interface i was already used to from using sonar with a screen magnifier before my sight got to the point where i had to switch to using jaws. Caketalking does bput its own interface layer over sonar and has its own complete set of shortcuts, where as JSonar relies on the default sonar interface and most of sonar's already extensive library of shortcuts, adding JSonar shortcuts where needed. On the flip side the mac comes with Voice over and you only have to buy Pro Tools and an interface.And to complicate things, there is also the option of reaper on the PC as well. - T.O.M
On Apr 26, 2012, at 5:06 PM, "Brian Casey" <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't think so really. > > It boils down to free versus paid, no tutorials vs extensive tutorials and > possibly less stable/less regularly updated/subject to lack of time for the > developer vs commercial insentive to release, talking of course about J sonar > and CakeTalking respectively. Though the development cycle for CakeTalking > scripts is quite slow, and from what I gather J Sonar is quite stable. > > There also seems to be more people using custom HSC sets etc to g ain access > to plugins with J Sonar, where as I'm not sure myself as a cakeTalking user > about latching on HSC sets to the scripts...I'd still like to hear from > someone in the know about HSC sets and Caketalking. > > Hope that helps, > > Brian. > > From: Jim Noseworthy > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 10:00 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? > > Hello: > > Is there a general consensus about which scripts work best for full access to > Sonar 8.5? > > Thanks all over the place. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Brian Casey > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 5:18 PM > Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? > > Hi Chris, > > I'm not trying to say your wrong, but I think we need to be careful in saying > which is more accessible, and its very dependent on someones needs/wants. > > If someone wants to do a lot of midi stuff and audio in equal amounts or > whatever, Sonar on a feature for feature basis would probably be technically > more accessible depending on the scripts being used. > Add to that the possibility of creating hot spot sets for jaws and it > presents very different accessability to ProTools. > > So I'm not saying your wrong but its not a simple black or white issue. > > Perhaps you didn't take to the way things were done in sonar, as you seem to > be taking to ProTools like a duck to water, but many make a living and > achieve success with sonar, so you know, lets try to give as full a picture > as possible to anyone trying to make a decision on what is a relatively big > investment/commitment. > > I'm glad you feel the way you do about PT though, I wasn't as posative, but I > didn't have a chance to throw myself into it fully and reading about your > quick learning on it and excitement about the platform gives me hope that > I'll at least learn PT as another skill in my bag of tricks some time in the > near future. > > > Brian. > > From: Christopher-Mark Gilland > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 8:03 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? > > In a lot of ways, I personally find it to be as accessible, if not more. > > Chris. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Pino Guarraci > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 11:41 AM > Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? > > Hello Chris, > > I agree with you but do you think that Protools is even accessible as > Sonar? > > Regards, > > Pino > www.studiocrescendo.be > www.proguide.eu > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Christopher-Mark Gilland > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 2:18 PM > Subject: Re: Pro tools or Sonar? > > For one thing, do realize that on the Windows side of things, ProTools is > going to be almost useless. > > If you get a mac, it works almost flawlessly. I would recommend PT by far > and away over Sonar! The effects are way better, the sound is way better, > and honestly, over all things I find at least, are just way easier to do in > PT in a whole. Plus, Sonar is not industry standard, where as ProTools is. > > Any good major recording studio is going to have most likely one, if not > more, ProTools systems that they can use. > > So ultimately, I'd suggest PT, but that is me. > > Chris. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: stuart young > To: '[email protected]' > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 7:51 AM > Subject: Pro tools or Sonar? > > Hi all. > I am going to be setting up a small recording studio with in the next 6 > months or so and I am currently doing some research in to which digital audio > work station to use. I have decided to use either Pro tools, or Sonar, but I > thought that I would first ask on this list if anyone has had experience in > using either product, and what were there thoughts on using each one. > Many thanks for your help on this, regards. > Stuart Young > Learning Support Unit > The West of England School and College > Countess Wear > Exeter > Devon > EX2 6HA > Tel: 01392 454223 > Website: http://www.westengland.ac.uk/ > Email: [email protected] > Charity Number: 1058937 > > The information in this email and any files transmitted with it may be of a > confidential nature and are intended solely for the addressees. If you are > not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying > to the email and then delete it without making copies or using it in any way. > The West of England School and College has taken reasonable precautions to > ensure that this message has been checked for viruses before transmission. > However, you are strongly advised to carry out your own virus scan before any > opening any attachments. The West of England School and College accept no > responsibility for loss or damage caused by software viruses. > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature > database 7089 (20120426) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com
