Craig… Would you like to share your thoughts on which are the buggiest DAWs with us? Please  

sharke


I think this is one of these things where basically everyone wishes that all the different DAW companies would club together and make the DAW To End All DAWS which consists of all of the best features of each DAW rolled into one awesome bug-free holographic thought-controlled Star Trek audio workstation. 

I'm on board but how much would that thing cost and would I have to upgrade my MS DOS 3 286 machine?

John

sharke


I think this is one of these things where basically everyone wishes that all the different DAW companies would club together and make the DAW To End All DAWS which consists of all of the best features of each DAW rolled into one awesome bug-free holographic thought-controlled Star Trek audio workstation. 

I'm on board but how much would that thing cost and would I have to upgrade my MS DOS 3 286 machine?

It's only available for the Mac, although I hear an Atari 1040ST version is forthcoming.

Anderton

GlennP


Craig… Would you like to share your thoughts on which are the buggiest DAWs with us? Please  

Pretty much every DAW I've used has worn that crown at one point or another...usually right after a new version appears


I will say that the least buggy program I've used is Reason, and I suspect that is due in large part to it being a "closed" system. I also think (although in the immortal words of Herman Cain, "I don't have the facts to back me up") that one reason why I have such good luck with Sonar is I'm very careful in my usage (and choice) of 3rd party plug-ins.

I must say an extremely diplomatic response LOL Can’t blame a guy for trying 

Ah Yes… “Notator” “Edit Track Gold”, “Edit Track Platinum” I only have a “ST1040FM” Motorola 68000 CPU, but I’ve boosted it up to 4 meg of ram!

(in the immortal words of Mary Hopkin “those were the days my friend”) Klezmer/Reggae… Love it

"one reason why I have such good luck with Sonar is I'm very careful in my usage (and choice) of 3rd party plug-ins"

i do the same, which is easier since the last versions of Sonar, as they include a lot of plugs i needed (bus comp, 1176, PC2A, Concrete Lim, Breverb, etc)

and X2 seems to be perfectly solid on my system (dedicated laptop HP DV7, proc i7 720 QM, 4 Go Ram, Win 7 64)

except for 2 bugs ("ghost" numerical values display in the clip pane, and, as usual, colors import)

TS
Nice, France

Hi Craig,
 Thank you for taking the time to post such a detailed and thoughtful answer.

 Perhaps it is the fact that I agree with you on most, if not all that you have written that makes me think it is such a good post. It seems like an excellent synopsis of how to appreciate Sonar's strengths by putting the choices into perspective.


 I'd say that this statement:


"Sonar was the ONLY program at the time that could handle looping, hard disk recording, and MIDI equally well. Any limitations it had compared to Acid or Cubase were totally outweighed by my being able to do everything I needed to do in a single host program. As I've stuck with Sonar over the years, I've become really proficient at my "instrument," and that also counts for a lot." 




resonates strongly with my memory and my impression of SONAR and this idea is the very reason that I have become so attached to the application myself.


I think the only thing we seem to disagree on is that I do not draw the same conclusion as you seem to from the analysis you have shared. I hope that Cakewalk will someday transcend the current limitations of SONAR as I think that any single DAW can be made to offer a complete tool set to end users.



I'd rather ask, or rather pester, Cakewalk to sell me the other 15% of the functionality than to follow your advice and collect several thousand dollars of other DAW licenses and accumulate 100s of extra hours of learning other apps just to augment that %15 gap.

I actually have gone out and bought several other licenses... all in response to my disappointment at the SONAR Xgen stuff... so I guess I am actually taking your advice. SONAR/Cakewalk Pro Audio was my first full time DAW but I think you are correct so I've diversified even if I begrudge the idea.

I maintain that Cakewalk's primary competition is itself. I personally feel that Cakewalk would do well to analyze it's own product and ask itself "what can we do better" but I have the time worn impression that a lot of Cakewalk's current focus is on haphazardly copying ideas found in other DAWs in an vain effort to keep up with some other DAWs'  <85% capability.





Thanks again for sharing such thoughtful insights.


best regards,
mike

I'm afraid that if you can't track 24 tracks at once you've got far bigger problems than your choice of software.

Exactly...
And those core issues will follow *any* DAW.
Crackle and dropouts are the result of lack of performance.
The hardware can't keep up with the load... to maintain the data stream (thus pops/ticks/glitches/dropouts)

I think the only thing we seem to disagree on is that I do not draw the same conclusion as you seem to from the analysis you have shared. I hope that Cakewalk will someday transcend the current limitations of SONAR as I think that any single DAW can be made to offer a complete tool set to end users. I'd rather ask, or rather pester, Cakewalk to sell me the other 15% of the functionality than to follow your advice and collect several thousand dollars of other DAW licenses and accumulate 100s of extra hours of learning other apps just to augment that %15 gap. I actually have gone out and bought several other licenses... all in response to my disappointment at the SONAR Xgen stuff... so I guess I am actually taking your advice. SONAR/Cakewalk Pro Audio was my first full time DAW but I think you are correct so I've diversified even if I begrudge the idea.

Hi Mike,


Not to speak for Craig, but I think his attitude is, "If you can't beat em, join em."
IOW, The DAW software situation is what it is (at any one point in time).  An app may be imperfect or "feature incomplete" for a particular use/user... and rather than spending time/energy fighting it, he chooses to work with and around the limitations.  In this case, using what's available (other software) to "fill the gaps".

This is pretty much my attitude toward DAW applications.
X2 is my main DAW, but I have numerous other tools for specific purposes (Vegas Pro 12, Sound Forge, Reaper, Cubase, etc).

X2 definitely has room for improvement...
But if I had to weigh all variables... and choose another (single) DAW app to replace X2, that would be a tough choice.  I'd be making some concessions/compromises no matter which app I chose.

BTW, I agree with another previous post.  I love it when another DAW app comes up with a great "revolutionary" new feature.  That kind of innovation fuels/sparks development across all apps.

Crackle and dropouts can also (and mainly is with what I've seen with other peoples setups) be caused by lack of optimization and configuration. Intel speed step should be disabled for instance via BIOS or through reg hack. In my situation I had more crackle than rice crispies with it enabled. Using the right chip set drivers can also be important etc etc.

mike_mccue


I'd rather ask, or rather pester, Cakewalk to sell me the other 15% of the functionality than to follow your advice and collect several thousand dollars of other DAW licenses and accumulate 100s of extra hours of learning other apps just to augment that %15 gap.


best regards,
mike

My advice is not to collect several thousand dollars of other DAW licenses, just to fill in the really important gaps based on your needs. I just happen to have a lot of needs , and to expect any one program to cover all of them brings up my analogy of not hauling hay in a Miata. Going through the list again...
 
Ableton Live: It's a completely different philosophy compared to Sonar and for that matter, any other program; its paradigm is a musical instrument, not a multitrack studio. The fact that it can do DAW-like functions is sort of like lumping guitars and pianos together because they both have strings.

Traktor: Sonar will never be a DJ program. Like Live, the paradigm is completely different, starting with the need to be wedded to a controller.

Reason: Sonar will never include all the possible soft synths made by all the 3rd party companies in the world. If you want Reason's soft synths, or Arturias, or Ilios, or whatever, then you need to buy their products. Otherwise, you can pass on them.

Pro Tools: If you don't need to collaborate with people who use Pro Tools, you don't really need it. It doesn't have any significant features that Sonar can't replicate.
Cubase: Cubase has tools Sonar doesn't have...Sonar has tools Cubase doesn't have. Whether Sonar's tools are crucial enough to a Cubase user to also run Sonar or vice-versa is up to the user.

Studio One Pro: As I said, no matter which DAW I used, I'd have SOP installed for the mastering page to take advantage of features like DDP and disc image export. Given that no other DAW really has that kind of feature, I can't fault Sonar for not having it...although it would be cool if it had features like DDP export and such. But, with SOP, the mastering/multitrack page integration aspect (again, unique to Studio One) is in such a low level part of the way the program is constructed I don't see any program being able to add that particular functionality unless it's rewritten from scratch.

Sony Acid: Sonar can do pretty much anything Acid can do except load old Acid projects from over a decade ago .

Mixcraft Acoustica: Aside from the video capabilities, Mixcraft has many limitations compared to Sonar. It's fantastic in accomplishing what it sets out to do, but it doesn't have features that Sonar desperately needs to add.
MOTU Digital Performer: It's the king for hardcore audio for video. If you're scoring Steven Spielberg's latest movie, you can afford the license!

Reaper: Don't know it that well to comment as to whether it has mind-boggling features that Sonar needs to have.

Samplitude: As I said, if Sonar didn't exist, I'd probably use Samplitude or SOP. But that's because they've very similar in many ways, not because they're so different.

why is it these goodbye guys never have there specs in their signiture.

because they're probably using windows 98 or something.
and dont feel like telling anyone.
but have no problem complaining there are issues.

can i say i havent had one problem.
except a couples crashes because of olde plug ins.

chuckebaby


why is it these goodbye guys never have there specs in their signiture.

because they're probably using windows 98 or something.
and dont feel like telling anyone.
but have no problem complaining there are issues.

can i say i havent had one problem.
except a couples crashes because of olde plug ins.

  Well I'm running DOS  3 on my fully updated 286 system and I have no dropouts. But then I don't have any audio card for it. My Sound  Blaster needs Windows 3.1 to work. Can you help? 

I for one wouldnt go near a Yamaha proprietary data transfer system.  I bought into MLAN years ago and Yamaha suck at making drivers and updates.  Thing was buggy as an ant hill in a honey jar.  The line of ****ers and moaners (of which I was one) went on for miles.  Great idea, great hardware, Lousy drivers.

So if thats your motivation to go cubase I would wait 6 months and find out how the thing works.  Then I would wait 2 years and see if yamaha doesnt let the thing die on the vine.  Then I would buy new technology from whoever else has it 2 and a half years from now.

Ahh.. that explains things.    Having two Labradoodles, I know how much professional grooming can be, so I completely get it.
 
But you could always freelance, or maybe be one of those "editor at large" folks.  Or work on books in your spare time.    See?   I gots all kinds of good idears. 
 

dubdisciple


I'm not sure why people feel the need to be so dramatic when making their legitimate choice to go with one product over another. I bought a different brand of toilet paper this week and I have no inclination to go over to the Charmin forums and make a grand exit ( I seriously hope Charmin does not have a forum). I think it's safe to say that many members here have used other DAWS. We know some prefer other DAWS. We know that many wish some features of other DAWs were part of X2. I have no problem with anyone voicing these concerns. It just seems silly to me to make a conscious decision to drop a product and go through the attention whoring process of thumbing your nose on the way out. Just go. No hard feelings, yay for the free market!

This post serves a valuable purpose, as it defines the opposite of "drama queen." Perhaps Wikipedia will reference it.
 
On a different subject, sadly, I have to inform you that Charmin does not have a forum. However, they do have a reviews section! Here's the URL (registration is free):
 
http://www.charmin.com/#/toilet-paper-ratings-and-reviews.aspx
 
I was personally devastated that Charmin Basic only rates three stars.