Update New Sonar Engine

[Jaime Ramírez]

Hi Bakers and people...

I am paying and trying the new Sonar Beta. I want to know if Sonar engine will be optimized for vst instruments performance. I am a cakewalk user since 1999. Since Gibson a buy it, 3 others daw, but my faith that the new Sonar performance will be upgraded is returning back and test again the software. Let us know... I am paying the bandlab subscription only for this reason, Having the others 3 daw updated. 

 

Thanks.

[Starship Krupa]

11 hours ago, Jaime Ramírez said:

I want to know if Sonar engine will be optimized for vst instruments performance.

Since you bought a BSP subscription just to test this, that's the best way to find out.

If you skipped past the past 6 years of Cakewalk by BandLab, the engine was given many optimizations during that time, so you should see a noticeable difference between SONAR and Sonar.

I've been using Cakewalk the whole time, and in my observations and testing, the engine is more stable and uses fewer resources than it did when Cakewalk by BandLab was first released.

It's more "it has already been" than "will be" optimized, but I'm sure that the developers will take whatever opportunities they can to improve it even more.

[Jaime Ramírez]

@Starship Krupa I work every week in the DAW. I never stop using. I install the last update that yesterday came out. I am a music producer (thats is my real job). I know. My only concern is the "crackles" when use vst instruments. In that scenario a don't see too much changes.(comparing with other Daws that is not happen). Since Gibson a live comparing and making tests. I think that the developers can work that part. 

[Starship Krupa]

4 hours ago, Jaime Ramírez said:

I never stop using

So you've been using Cakewalk by BandLab for the past 6 years and you have always had troubles when using virtual instruments?

And you're asking whether the developers have plans to improve the performance of Sonar in hosting virtual instruments.

I can only speak for myself, Cakewalk and Sonar seem to be not much different from other hosts for this use.

[Sergei Pilin]

For some reason the performance has been actually downgraded with Sonar taking significantly more CPU here compared to CW, in every project I've tried, from 10% up to 80% depending on the project.

[Starship Krupa]

On 4/27/2024 at 11:28 PM, Sergei Pilin said:

For some reason the performance has been actually downgraded with Sonar taking significantly more CPU here compared to CW, in every project I've tried, from 10% up to 80% depending on the project.

I haven't noticed this, but then again my system has 20 virtual cores, 32G of RAM and a 4GHz CPU to play with, so performance differences kinda get lost.

The current Sonar is supposedly still a preview and not a fully released product, so who knows.

As ever, if you've done anything to tune CbB like plug-in load balancing or thread scheduling model, make sure to apply those settings to Sonar.

[Sergei Pilin]

11 hours ago, Starship Krupa said:

I haven't noticed this, but then again my system has 20 virtual cores, 32G of RAM and a 4GHz CPU to play with, so performance differences kinda get lost.

The current Sonar is supposedly still a preview and not a fully released product, so who knows.

As ever, if you've done anything to tune CbB like plug-in load balancing or thread scheduling model, make sure to apply those settings to Sonar.

All settings are the same, but you're right, it maybe because there's lots of debugging code inside which will be later removed. My system is very similar to yours too, looks like.