These days it's pretty much impossible to pick a "bad" DAW program. However you can pick the WRONG DAW program. Here is my 2 cents. Ableton is a different animal. If you do heavy ITB like loops, cut and paste and so forth to create tunes there is nothing like it. If you do a lot of audio, Protools is it especially if you work with other studios. If you do heavy VST, forget Protools it sucks (RTAS versions). Sonar's claim to fame is very good FX. If you are a composer and want to ad hoc tunes together it's tough to beat Studio One's drag and drop. It's so dammed intuitive but it's missing some of the power of the others. Some people, most people in fact, won't care. Others will.

That being said, I left Sonar for Studio One. I just can't stand the miniscule look of X1. And that's on twin 23" LCD's. I've also had too many things go wrong. Songs all of a sudden don't open, are corrupted and so forth. I've been a Sonar user since Cake came on a single 3.5 inch diskette. I moved on. Studio One doesn't get in the way, includes a decent set of FX and tools and just works. YMMV. As for Sonar, many people use it professionally and it's a fine system for some.

Bottom line: Pick your poison and learn it from top to bottom.

wormser


These days it's pretty much impossible to pick a "bad" DAW program. However you can pick the WRONG DAW program. Here is my 2 cents. Ableton is a different animal. If you do heavy ITB like loops, cut and paste and so forth to create tunes there is nothing like it. If you do a lot of audio, Protools is it especially if you work with other studios. If you do heavy VST, forget Protools it sucks (RTAS versions). Sonar's claim to fame is very good FX. If you are a composer and want to ad hoc tunes together it's tough to beat Studio One's drag and drop. It's so dammed intuitive but it's missing some of the power of the others. Some people, most people in fact, won't care. Others will.

That being said, I left Sonar for Studio One. I just can't stand the miniscule look of X1. And that's on twin 23" LCD's. I've also had too many things go wrong. Songs all of a sudden don't open, are corrupted and so forth. I've been a Sonar user since Cake came on a single 3.5 inch diskette. I moved on. Studio One doesn't get in the way, includes a decent set of FX and tools and just works. YMMV. As for Sonar, many people use it professionally and it's a fine system for some.

Bottom line: Pick your poison and learn it from top to bottom.

My solution?  Use them all :)

Seriously - I love using Sonar, Studio One, Live ...   just not at the same time lol.

You say Sonar's "miniscule" look bothers you - but I feel the fonts are TOO big and I can't get enough on the screen.  There can be a happy medium, I would assert.   No DAW has it, but Studio One is closer in this regard, for my eyes.

However, Studio one - as nice and smooth as it is -- is not as mature (feature-wise) as Sonar, and that's what keeps it's from being my "go-to" DAW.

Sonar still has that title for me, only because it has SO many features (due to its maturity).

But there are also things that drive me to drink with Sonar as well.  Lots of little things that just seem to escape the programmers at CW for some reason.

And, that leads me back to why I use more than ONE DAW anyway.

Plus, it helps keep me from being in my comfort zone TOO much.

arachnaut

ba_midi

My solution?  Use them all :) 

I agree with the sentiment, but life is too short. Just to keep up with the updates take enough time. Try them all, pick what you like (or two or three). But it takes a long time to really get to know some complex software, like Live or Sonar. And a lot of the skills are not portable. I'm not talking about mixing skills - but things like making a Live rack or writing a CAL script.


Any one of them can get the job done, it's just different types of sugar coatings and different calorie content.

While I agree it takes time to "dig in deep" to complex software such as DAWs, the fact is that they are all very similar in form and function.   Learning one does not gaurantee one can learn another one and know it as well, but it's not like they are totally different animals overall.

As I've said elsewhere, I like having the flexibility and using more than one DAW keeps me on my toes, so to speak.

But each person must find what works for him or her, of course.  We have a TON of options these days, fortunately.

Flywheel


I use plug ins alot so I will need to be able to use them within the specific application. I have no patients for vsti's not working within my DAW of choice.


Also I want to use vsti's on different platforms and not willing to work with this works with us only type projects.

forget Pro Tools if you want to run Plugins... only 32bit the rest are in 64bit today meaning you will get an error message in Pro Tools before you even start working saying that you used up all availble RAM in whopping 2,5 GB LOL?
 
Surround? What is that in Pro Tools world? works only in L R Stereo only.?
 

It's time to put a few myths to rest about Pro Tools. Recently I was made to do two Pro Tools courses as part of my teaching for this year. They were PT10 courses. And that in itself is interesting to have someone like Avid running around teaching this stuff is really very good. One of the best ways to learn a DAW I have ever encountered. The standard of teaching was excellent.

Freddie is completely wrong on this and it should be noted that he obviously knows nothing about Pro Tools. Their latest version 10 is the best version they have made by far so unless one is very familiar with this version they don't really know what they are talking about.

It is an incredibly deep and powerful program and I can see why it is an industry standard too. Audio quality is excellent, anyone who thinks it is inferior to anything else is just plain wrong. PT10 has 32 bit file support now. And double precision engine etc.. A full 64 bit version is on its way too with off line bouncing and freeze features. On a MAC you can take advantage of huge amounts of RAM still but run a 32 bit app.

The midi side is very deep and powerful too and I could say it has some of the best midi options out there. With the Plugin thing you just have to forget about VST, there is life without VST! Avid make millions of very very good plugins including a channel strip similar to the Pro Channel concept in PT10 based on a Euphonix console. Very good. All the other plugs are excellent and that includes a huge range of virtual instruments too. And most worthy instrument makers offer their finest instruments in a format that can be used in PT. Except that Avid is moving towards AAX so it will be interesting to see what develops there. They are about to drop RTAS and TDM in the next version.

PT10 can playback 768 tracks all at no latency (input monitoring that is) when running on a maxed out system. The latency performance is better than anything quoted here. On a 8 or 12 core Mac I have seen it playback a breathtaking amount of tracks all with plugs and instruments everywhere without a hitch. (32 sample buffers) Something most DAW's would have a very hard time doing. Before all the PC builders jump in here, I say go check out a maxed out HDX system running PT10 and come back and tell me what you saw!

The workflow is very good and very fast. Smart tools etc all very well done believe me. You have got serious problems if you cannot make great sounding music on PT. The audio features are quite amazing and very deep and complex. I can't even go into them here it would take 10 pages to describe them. It is gapless too and it can jump midi tracks while recording on the fly all without a hitch, something I thought Studio One was one of the few programs that could do.

Sure it is expensive and in order to get all that maximum performance you have to shell out a pretty hefty sum but then again you do get what you pay for too even in this instance. Top professionals (overall not individually) are not running Samplitude, Sonar, Cubase or anything else, they are using Pro Tools without a doubt. Now I understand why.

Even though they gave us a copy of the software and as teachers we get all the plugins too I don't have a computer fast enough to run it! I will have to go out and buy one which I cannot do right now. So to the PT bashers I say simply stop posting things based on what you think and go away and do some serious research about what it is your bashing before you post your waffle here! Other programs do offer great features and all at a much more competitive price. This is where programs like Sonar come in and they are doing it well.

Good point konradh. I agree if Cakewalk was running a similar course or Presonus for that matter I am sure I would come out of it feeling the same way. Which brings me to the point that if you really learn any program well and I mean deeply and know everything it can do then I am sure you would feel the same way about that software.

I am not plugging PT here just merely pointing out that many have no idea of what it can really do including people like Freddie and Ben as well. If both of those guys did the Avid courses they would come out of it feeling very differently I assure you. I have been teaching PT for the past 6 or 7 years at the TAFE and I thought I know a lot until I did that course!

I am not a PT user as such so I cannot relly comment on the support aspect of that product very well. But I do know that if you really learn how to use the program then you are probably not going to run into too many support issues unless it involves hardware etc.. And that is where the MAC comes in I suppose. If you buy the biggest and best MAC they make then PT is simply going to run on it and very well might I add and it all should without any fiddling around.

PT is an expensive option for sure as you have to buy the card etc or 3 cards to be precise to make it all work at its best. So it is quite an expensive option in the end. At least you can run it with any interface now which is great. The Icon is amazing too as it opens up even more software features not found without it but again we are talking expensive options here. To say that PT is not professional is simply incorrect.

Ok here is my take for what it is worth:  I used Protools 8, at that time it was still a glorified digital mixing desk and or recorder.  Nothing wrong with that but as a composer, the tools was useless for me.

From what I am reading Protools 10 is trying to close that gap.  Just by the mere fact that finally they are opening up the software to different audio interfaces say's this.

Now this is where this converstion is going wrong, we need to define what each DAW does and what each DAW does what best.  At the moment not one DAW does everything.  This is why I gave up on these types of converstions long ago.

Ok so we need to define DAW's into different catagories eg: Sonar and Live can be classified as instruments, this is because they come with synth tools such as Arpegiator's built into each midi channel, it also has a step sequencer and a matrix editor, these are all tools found on early 80's synths, hence the reason they can be classifed as instruments, Live has a similar complement of tools but takes the concept a little further.

Cubase and Logic are more designed for "real" composition this is because in particular Cubase has installed the most comprehensive score editor within a DAW, I don't know where Logic is on this, Logic is fast becoming obsolete for me but that is just me.

As you can see now we have three different catagories of DAW's and each does a particular thing really well.

Here is the kicker, the problem with Tools and "industry standard" is it can in the wrong hands make everything sound the same and this is for a number of reasons, things such as same plugs, instruments and even workflow.

If you want to kick Tools, kick it for the right reason and that it is homogenisation of the music industry.

Finally here is another kicker, Sonar X1, after many months of bashing it, I have learnt to stop worrying and love the bomb (dr strangelove).  is it perfect, NO!! but they are heading in the right directon IMHO.

I like the concept of a modular DAW, I like the idea of being able to buy what I want and need.

Do Sonar need to fix some things??  Yes!! The staff veiw is fine if they can fix the way it exports XLM and they implement a program like Notion 3 and give it better intergration within Sonar.

I have had the privilege of using Notion over the last month and Sonar will never implement this level of notation functionality with Sonar.  That is another thread though.

I would love to see Sonar implement a VariSpeed button and I would love to see Sonar fix the gappless audio engine.

So to finish up no program does all, but Sonar is coming close if they can fix three things: The Score Veiw (and this can be done by way of a third party plug) a gapples audio engine and a Varispeed button.

Ok my two cents.

Ben 

Guz keep in mind that pro studios use PT HD :

First : the plugin calcuation are made by dsp : high end treatement and predictable results always ....the same results ...
use of dsp skeeps that wak ass osx latency ...

Second they never or rarely use itb summing but most of the time extrenal analog summing .....

Now protools going slowly native so they just made 10 to reach where we were 5 years from now ....until the native moves ...poor audio quality of engine and summing wasn't an issue

those are facts ....

PT HD was an industry standard but it was a part of a package , the soft alone would be a joke ....

PT 10 can be very deep in some areas and extremeily basic/limlted in some ....very surprising !!

it was and it is a big recorder and this how it was and is used ...but they want to change it ...simply to survive ...and it's a great move ...

why don't you use omf ?

Not to extend yet another "vs" thread, but I think there's something that tends to get lost in these "what professionals use" threads, and that's exactly which profession is being referred to.   There's more than one in our little world...  Musician?  Recording live events?  Mixer?  Producer?  Making "beats"?  Remixes?  Something else?
 

Well said frankand free. Many of the programs that Freddie has mentioned are based in Europe so it is quite probable that they would be popular there. But that is only there. For the rest of the world it is Pro Tools in the highest of professional situations. Especially in post areas for film etc. In music production there are a wider number of DAW's being used for sure. Hans Zimmer is sketching out ideas in Cubase but I can assure you when they are laying down the actual tracks for something like Inception they are doing it on Pro Tools and mixing it all there too. PT is good for a massive number of inputs as well as massive track counts. It is often used in those situations. More so than any other DAW I would inmagine.

There does not seem to be memory limit either. On a MAC it seems you can put 32 Gig of RAM in your machine. PT has got access to 29 gig of it. (even as a 32 bit app) It can do things like load an entire session into RAM and play it all from there. (Disc cache mode) That is a pretty special ability wouldn't you say. Ideal for multiple audio post edit suites operating off one large server. As often happens everywhere. What other DAW's can do that.

It does not matter who got what features first, it is 2012 and PT has got all the features now! Its also interesting that even when PT did not have all the features of other DAW's most professional studios were still running it. Every major studio here in Melbourne is on PT.  It is great because sessions can be moved around so easily. I think if you to research what the most common format is in terms of moving sessions around you will find it PT.

A maxed out HDX system can playback 768 tracks. PT has the highest sample rates too. It is all about to go to fully 64 bit as well. The AAX plugin idea is good in that all AAX plugs will be 64 bit and will operate perfectly. It eliminates the errors of using other plugins inside the host software. Stability plus. There is a massive range of existing PT plugins that can do everything almost every VST plugin can do now. The best virtual instrument makers will all offer AAX versions so you will still have access to third party stuff. Freezing and bouncing is coming in the next version.

And there is nothing on the level of the Icon controlling it all either. Let's face it who else builds such a powerful control surface and have it all integrate so well with a massive powerful program. I get the feeling that in terms of the actual music making process there are a variety of DAW's out there to choose from but in other areas there seems to be dominance by Pro Tools and for very good reasons.


 

Hey Jeff,

Samplitude is apparently very popular with Classical audio engineers and mastering engineers in Europe. It's not just Pro Tools you know. At least we don't have to keep hearing about Studio One I suppose...

Zo


Freddie you can label near audiosuite features : the ability to open several plugins gui at the same time ......lol !!!

i mean lloollllll 

Many people don't know:


Adding 1 to nonsense does not make one sense.




Not that it ain't sorta funny, I also had one or two laughs about it back then. But Freddie meant to judge the quality of ProTools 10 with that post, which doesn't work out really.


Joe: "I need online clip fades in my DAW, offline fades are so unfady"
Jack: "Then you can't choose PT10. It does have online clip fades, but v9 didn't"
Joe: "Bummer! I'm off to Sonar. It doesn't have some  of the other features I need, but at least it had online fades earlier."

BenMMusTech


 Logic is fast becoming obsolete for me but that is just me.

So to finish up no program does all, but Sonar is coming close if they can fix three things: The Score Veiw (and this can be done by way of a third party plug) a gapples audio engine and a Varispeed button.


Ben 

Don't know how Logic could be considered obsolete. An elegant and functional GUI that's been copied/adopted/adapted by Presonus and Cakewalk, the first to implement swipe comping, great transient detection/beat slicing tools, an incredible suite of plug-ins and synths, PLUS varispeed, score, gapless audio. And so much more. Even 2 years after its initial release, it's still at the forefront.


W/ the recent price drop (Logic Pro now sells for only $200), it's very easily the best bang for the buck on the Mac side. W/ more and more people getting fed up w/ Avid, I wouldn't be surprised if Logic became even more omnipresent. 


As for good old Freddie's remark - while Logic doesn't render to 32 bit, it processes everything in 32 and/or 64 bit FP. I'm not against the option of rendering in 32 bit, but honestly, it's the least of my concerns, and most of the people who are seem to be preoccupied w/ features and specs more than w/ music and sound. 


As for Logic X - once again, 9.1.6 (the latest in a series of free updates which have been issued since Logic came out 2 years ago) has just been released in December, and Logic X hasn't been announced, and as we say "those who know don't tell and those who tell don't know."

If you're on PC, Sonar probably is one of the best options.

Jeff Evans


Well said frankand free. Many of the programs that Freddie has mentioned are based in Europe so it is quite probable that they would be popular there. But that is only there. 

Hi Jeff, 

Need to correct you. Studio One is actually owned and ran by Presonus, a american based hardware company. The hardware EQ, fader, compression, etc. models are presonus, while the code was programmed from ex cubase employee's working for Presonus.


I always find this interview fascinating. 


http://studioone.presonus.com/testimonial/teddy-riley/