I don't see anyone mentioning IL's FL Studio here, why is that ? They are currently working on a big 20 year anniversary edition which will be released sometime next year. Hopefully with some radical improvements. 
Just to mention, their life time free update policy have been good for 20 years.

denverdrummer
 
But the reality is, that anyone not named Pro Tools, Cubase or Logic, is potentially vulnerable.  Doesn't mean they are doomed, because nobody right now is going to unseat those three.  But it does mean staying profitable and staying competitive is a must.

That sounds about right!  Steinberg Cubase is owned by Yamaha.  Logic is owned by Apple.  And well, Avid Pro Tools is the industry standard, love it or hate it.

I don't believe the daw market is too crowded.
 
 
 
 

I think Sonar's decline shows it is sadly :(. I had wondered this myself given that you compare it to other creative type tools like video editors or the like and you find that there are WAAAAY more DAWs out there. This would either imply that creating and mixing audio is just far more popular than video, which Youtube would seem to be a counter indication of, or that there are just more than is demand.
 
Sadly, it looks like it is the second one since Sonar was not profitable. We may see more of them dwindle, in time.
 
That is why Studio One and Cubase are both good ones to look at, I think, because they exist not just as a product on their own, but a product to sell other products as well. Both are owned by hardware companies (Yamaha owns Steinberg for those that didn't know) and are tightly integrated with products those companies sell, making them a valuable product even if it isn't profitable in and of itself.

Sycraft
That is why Studio One and Cubase are both good ones to look at, I think, because they exist not just as a product on their own, but a product to sell other products as well. Both are owned by hardware companies (Yamaha owns Steinberg for those that didn't know) and are tightly integrated with products those companies sell, making them a valuable product even if it isn't profitable in and of itself.

It becomes a question of innovation versus stability. There are hobbyists who really enjoy an experimental environment.  There is nothing wrong with that, and a few of these marginal DAWs will continue to exist to serve that segment.  But they will come and go because they will be thinly capitalized.
People who depend on a DAW for a living, or at least as a tool to support serious music production (as opposed to hobby experimentation) will be best served by the products with more capital and market share behind them.
I wonder about StudioOne. Presonus is a good company, but I don't know that their business is strong and diverse enough to support StudioOne and Notion.  I wouldn't be surprised to see StudioOne continue to be a level below Cubase functionally even 5 years from now.
Both Presonus and Yamaha/Steinberg are investing in the convergence of various musical cultures.  This is something I long advocated for SONAR, but this did not resonate much with the SONAR user base.  That is ironic because the DAW itself is the product of convergence between sequencing and recording.  I believe the next convergence is the confluence of DAW and classical notation, which will draw in a potential market of missions of classically trained musicians.
(Please understand I am not saying it will draw in millions of customers.  But it will open the door to a segment that includes millions of people today.)
StudioOne / Notion has some rudimentary convergence today, which is a good first step.
Cubase / Dorico has no convergence today, other than the fact that significant parts of Cubase are embedded in Dorico's playback engine.
AFAIK, there is zero convergence today between Protools and Sibelius, and I doubt they will organize for that.
 
Ableton is built on a difference convergence, which is the DAW and live performance.  Most DAWs have some of the elements that can be useful in love performance, but Ableton is the leader here.  So if we want to look 5-10 years down the road, I expect the top tier products to support a 4-way convergence: sequencing, recording, classical notation and live performance.  That is a lot, and may be more than some musicians want to dig into.  But it makes the largest addressable market.  Anything short of this will be a niche player, which is OK.  I expect Reaper (and some others) can do well in their niches.

I am hobbyist and noob... in music production.
But for me, as programmer, it is almost irrelevant in which system and in which language to write programs. Sure, there is some learning curve on any switch. The first one, from Borland eco-system, was real pain. All that key combinations which no longer do what the should... almost automatic mouse clicks which hit not what I want... But I was quickly over that. I mean if someone can not write a program in text mode using vi or when asked "please write that in assembly for processor X" reply with "oh no... can I do this in Python?", sorry to say, such person is not a PROgrammer.
 
So I see an irony in all that discussions. On one side people write "that tiny DAW is just for kids" and then continue with "I have to carefully think what I am going to select for next 10 years...". If that is a music instrument for $10-20k, I agree such position make sense. But here discussion is about a PROGRAM, for under $1k (all together, less then the computer on which they can run, nothing compare to any serious music instrument)... For "pro" use cases...
 
Why not take the first one you see and just use it? If at some point you start to hate it, take the next one. You don't have to leave your chair to do that. Or you want repeat Sonar story, which "innovations" are more then 10 years old, half of the core features are obsolete/not supported and the rest is still good just because that was made good... long time ago.
 
For "converge". Do you remember "Audio Interface + Mixer + Control Surface (+ recorder)" in one box? How many have survived on the market?
 

azslow3For "converge". Do you remember "Audio Interface + Mixer + Control Surface (+ recorder)" in one box? How many have survived on the market?

Well by convergence what people mean isn't necessarily one device that is everything, but rather devices integrating in to a single, "converged" workflow. On the consumer side, this makes doing things easier and on the company side, it makes one product help drive the sales of other products.

azslow3
But here discussion is about a PROGRAM, for under $1k (all together, less then the computer on which they can run, nothing compare to any serious music instrument)

azslow3
... For "pro" use cases...
 
Why not take the first one you see and just use it? If at some point you start to hate it, take the next one.

I believe you are speaking as a hobbyist who derives pleasure from the exploration of new technology.  There's nothing wrong with that.  While I also appreciate the advanced technology, most of the time, the DAW and its plug-ins are a MEANS to the end, not the end in themselves.  I want to get to the best result with the minimum effort and hassle.  I have MUCH more than $1000 invested when you tally the hardware (computer, interface, headphones, microphones, monitors, etc), the software (SONAR, the plug-ins, and other tools like RX4 and MP3 converter), and my learning curve time.
 
I would value all of that at about $10,000, and I am sure others have a much bigger investment.  The question is how much of this is easily transported to another DAW platform.  Fortunately, most of it transfers, but I still expect this is a $2500 migration for me when I value my new learning curve time.I cannot look at the DAW as a disposable item.  I need one that will give me good service 10 years.  Beyond that I may not care much, or I may be long dead.

azslow3
For "converge". Do you remember "Audio Interface + Mixer + Control Surface (+ recorder)" in one box? How many have survived on the market?

The converged product doesn't have to come in one box.   StudioOne is purchased separately from Notion.  Not everybody needs both.  But a converged solution reaches the largest market.

Sycraft
by convergence what people mean isn't necessarily one device that is everything, but rather devices integrating in to a single, "converged" workflow. On the consumer side, this makes doing things easier and on the company side, it makes one product help drive the sales of other products.

Exactly.  For me, utopia would be a strong notation product that is seamless with the DAW, meaning that any MIDI changes I enter in the DAW automatically appear in the notation and vice versa.  And any additional tracks I have in the DAW that aren't linked with the score can still be heard (optionally) when working within the score.  Notion has the first little bit of this, but it isn't really useful yet.
And regarding the convergence with live performance, this gets into the area that was to be addressed by Momentum.  Capture ideas in the live world, and have them automatically make their way into the DAW.  Then the DAW can turn that into MIDI which is automatically seen in the score.
It is easy to describe and a huge undertaking to implement in software.  But I expect this is a big part of the future.  And I also believe the resistance to this from within Cakewalk and the long-term user community was a significant factor in the company's demise.

Fact- Other daw makers are still in business and if they weren't making money they wouldn't be in business.
Fact- As a percentage, the daws that went under in the last 10 are small compared to the total number.
Fact- There have been recent daw startups that are presently profitable.
 
Question- Given these facts, why do you think the daw market is over crowded?
 
I'm fairly certain that if you were a daw maker you probably wish there were less to choose from giving you more of the market. There is competition in all markets. If you have a good product at a good price point it will sell. The demise of Cakewalk is likely a relief to some, although I wouldn't stake my life on thinking it won't be repurposed.
 
Fact- Good products with bad marketing still don't sell well.
Fact- Bad product decisions turn off buyers.
Fact- Pricing a product above the competition is usually a very bad idea, unless an extra value can be proven to the customer.
Fact-If you spend more than you make you can't continue. 
 
If you're going under you do whatever it takes, discontinue the lifetime updates, stop production. Call a huddle. Regroup. Restructure. 
 
Just food for thought- Move out of Boston to some place you can afford the rent. Hire Indian programmers. Lay off the dead weight. Streamline yourself. Look at your options. Make good decisions from now on.
 
Might be way too late. Probably is.