I started a thread over in my Sound, Studio, and Stage forum called Why Is Learning a DAW So Difficult? There were some really thoughtful responses, and it got me thinking this forum would be a good place to inquire about specifics on what could be done to make DAWs more approachable. Here's an excerpt from a comment from Nat Whilk I found interesting:
 
"There seems to be this floating expectation, out there drifting into brains all over the place, that, since computers are so "smart" that they should be able to make all tasks easy for us not-as-smart humans.

"The advertising that software makers employ has a lot to do with this. Plus the fact that, yes, some software has been getting better at being user-friendly, easier to pick up. Like phones, readers, browsers.

"But there are two paths to user-friendly. One path is to add features such as wizards, setup guides, step-by-step routines to give the user a solid intro and a base from which to then venture into more complex aspects. The other path is to just dumb the software down so that it does a whole lot less, offers the fewest choices possible, and claims it can get you where to need to go with no prior experience or education.

"The deal is that DAW users develop their own working methods and pretty much stick to those once they're up and running. Take 20 moderately competent DAW users and you have 20 different methodologies at work. So it would be hard to impose a grid of "do it this way" except at the very beginning of the process.

"Sound recording, mixing, and mastering is just complicated. Just do the work, I say - and no, software is not here to make everything easy for you. It's to give you tools to expand the effectiveness of your own skills. Not to make those skills unnecessary."
 
While I agree that recording quality music requires skill, I do think there must be ways to make it easier for people to get started. SONAR did the Add Track thing; I don't use it (I'm into Track Templates) so I don't know if it would be helpful to beginners...and they'd still have to know that "+" means "Add Track."
 
To get the ball rolling...I think one of the main difficulties is hooking up a DAW to an audio interface, particularly if the audio interface has a relatively sophisticated application of its own for routing and such. The only easy way I see to fix this is with companies that make both the software and the audio interface, but there are still issues the user would have to specify - like sample rate and bit resolution.
 
Or maybe when you boot up a DAW, there could be an optional screen with questions like "Do you play guitar and need a direct input?" "How many tracks do you need for mics?" and depending on your answer, what's needed would be created. Maybe there would be ways to enhance the Start screen to make it easier to get started.
 
Given that everyone here uses a DAW, and the skill level ranges from newb to expert, perhaps there are some good ideas just waiting to be implemented...but if this is a dumb idea for a thread, I'll just delete it :)

Gaming the learning helps.

Right now I'm thinking of how much I've learned from Syntorial.

Approaching it in bites helped me. I started only mixing with Sonar. I recorded on a different device. I still do sometimes.

For beginners, it would be better if they were shown the "why" along with the "how". Not just how to load up a compressor or parallel effects on a bus, but why you do it and the beginning and end results. Audio examples to go along with it so there's a basis for why you do things a certain way. I already know what I want to accomplish, so I can just watch the operational tutorials and be done with it. I feel sorry for anyone coming to the scene with little knowledge since there's a ton of good and bad information out there. One of the great things about learning to record in an actual studio, pre-internet, is that you quickly learn why you do it a certain way, and then you bend the rules at your discretion. Then again, these are tools, and all humans have a different basis for their perceptions and how they want them accomplished. Even a hammer is a simple tool that can be misused.

The only thing that pops into my mind I think would help any DAW software is the voice digital assistants that helps and guides you through complicated stuff, things like Alexa, etc... :)
You know sort of like Scotty from Star Trek, Hello, computer, Hello, Sonar :)

The "problem" with DAWs is that it is a control room in a box.
Many individuals may not have fared well had you thrown them a guitar and locked them into an analog 48 track control room and left. Given an information resource in that room, they would eventually find out what all this stuff is and why and where everything is connected and used. Think gain staging for one.
 
One big nasty that doesn't exist in an analog control room that plagues a DAW is that need to crank up the buffer count and that track count mounts, introducing more and more  latency. This is because the computer runs out of steam. This then requires some knowledge of the how and why and some ingenuity to find away around that problem like separate synth computers and direct mic monitoring.
 
There is no real way to level out the learning curve whether you have been tossed your very own into a control room or buy your very own virtual one to have at home. Either way, it helps to be an engineer. That's why they were called such.
 
I for one think the DAW or studio in a box is the best thing since sliced bread. Having come from the patch bay analog world of yore.
 

Sometimes there are things that seem intuitive to the user, but the programmers just seem to disregard it and expect the user to do it their way. Not being able to draw midi with the pencil tool comes to mind. Having a midi note sent from a drum pad being listed on the piano roll as zero length length in the piano roll is another example (A played note's length is never ever zero, because I heard play through my speakers). Little things like this that are missed make the software hard to use and "seem stupid" instead of it being a streamlined and professional product.

Great question! I'm not sure "easy" and "powerful" belong in the same sentence. So you could dumb DAW's down not to do so much. Or perhaps using words instead of icons, so the "+" sign would say "add track". Maybe having a screen set that includes less options than it needs to perform that task. I mean like having a screen only for recording so it's less to "see". I don't know... I love sonar. An anti-crash button! ;)

People like to learn in different ways, so my recommendation would be to have various resources available like books, videos, and courses which follow a progression that goes from beginner to proficient.
 
For example, if you look at Sonar University's Get Started section, it's just a mish-mash of different videos with no progression or structure. It's the same with Cakewalk's YouTube channel. There's a playlist called SONAR Platinum - Get Started, but it's just a mix of "Get Started" videos for various features -- again with no progression or structure.
 
I also like the idea of interactive, assistive technologies when they're done well.

I read through the thread on HC before you posted it here.  I find myself with the same attitude of Nat - I want the big challenges up front.  I could have started with a two input interface, a simple keyboard, and Sonar artist.  But I didn't - I went right for the Focusrite 18i20, a full fledged keyboard workstation, and SPLAT.  Why?  Because I don't want to miss out on anything, and I love the challenge.  I love learning things, and "figuring things out."  The software, no matter how complex, does not intimidate me. 
 
I'm only one year into this.  I'm an IT guy who deals with software every day.  Some of the the things that may trip up a beginner (installs, interfaces, cabling, routing, etc) I resolved in a decent amount of time (along with some great help from this forum - see Thank You To This Forum).   None of those issues were deal breakers to me.  
 
Now admittedly, I have spent very little time with Sonar (most of my work this past year has been learning about midi, getting things set up, etc.), but I have watched some Groove 3 videos and some Sonar University videos.  Sonar itself does not intimidate me - the terminology I can learn, and I can figure out where to "point and click."  But I am totally lost in the recording process - I have no background in that at all.    For example, it is easy to add a track, set the routing, etc. But what does it mean?  If I have the same synth, but with different sounds I want to use in different places, do I add two tracks?  Why or why not?  Why would you use a Midi track vs. a VST track?  Should I record my Moog as audio, or use a Midi track and route to it?  Why?  I know how to add a plugin to a track, but what does that mean?  What does "bouncing a track" mean?  What is "comping"?   All the Groove 3 videos, Sonar University videos, and documentation do not really answer these questions.  This is NOT the fault of Cakewalk or Sonar, I would have the same questions no matter what the DAW I would use.  
 
I don't ask those questions to get answers here in this thread, but more to demonstrate what I am personally dealing with.  I have actually searched for a book on DAW recording for beginners, but the closest thing I could find was Home Recording for Musicians for Dummies.  I dutifully purchased and read it, but it was more focused on types of microphones, how to record a guitar, etc.
 
Resonant Serpent makes the same point I am trying to, only more succinctly.  He knows what he is looking to do - he just needs to know how to do it.  I have no idea what I need to do.  I also understand I am an outlier with my extreme lack of knowledge;  because I cannot (as yet) use Sonar is no fault of Cakewalk.  
 
I believe someone on this forum once made a suggestion of a video series on "how to create your first song."  Something simple with some audio, midi, and VST tracks that shows how to record, bounce (whatever that means), and a simple mix and export.  That would be extremely helpful.
 
As always, I have forever grateful to this forum for all the help I have been given over the past year.
 
 

In one our conference rooms there is a simple 8x6 matrix mixer, so 8*6 buttons, one knob per channel (8+6). There was no single week last years when no-one has made the system unusable (pressing "random" buttons and turning "random" knobs). I am still the only person who can make it running again from any "broken" state... ~200 scientists (plus tons of students), most of them are building own complicated experiments with 1000s of  generators, amplifiers, filters, etc. Yet they see 48 buttons and immediately write "conference system is broken". So my point number
1) force users read at least some part of the documentation or force them to watch video before they can start to work with the program. Better some "interactive" curse (most computer games have "training level" which should be completed to proceed, another example is Amazon FireTV stick)
 
I have shortly tried Ableton and Reaper. Now seriously in Tracktion. I think the last one is out of concurrence in installation for beginners, so my point number
2.I) it is possible to make things "sequentially logical". Project (with what you work) -> Settings (how you work) -> Input (from where comes the signal for) -> Track (content) -> FX (how it is processed) -> Output (where it should go) -> Transport (when all previous is set, it make sense to press "Play" or "Record"). From left top to right bottom.  Most intuitive  for (left to right languages) humans.
2.II) if user make a mistake, show him where it is and how to solve it
 
"All rounder" DAW is already complex by definition, artificial overcomplications can boil even technical heads, so examples from Sonar which better to AVOID:
3) (a) FXbin + ProChannel: no difference in routing, in sound, in purpose, not even in the code! just in the User Interface, and only "where" it appears and with which "size" (b) audio tracks, MIDI tracks, Instrument tracks, AUX tracks, Buses : historical division, bits are just bits in computers (c) "I have no sound from my MIDI keyboard, it was there yesterday!" common... just check your device in "Edit"->"Preferences"->"MIDI devices"... still no luck? have you already focused the track in question and restored in the lower left corner the "Input"?
And sorry to say, new user will find "Insert" -> "Audio track" before he/she will understand that "+" near time counter is there to make adding tracks simpler