rmfegley
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 114
- Joined: 2014/12/24 14:57:07
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/10 15:09:45
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby abacab 2017/06/10 20:02:15
Combining a couple of items from the comments thusfar, I think that multiple tutorial paths that would each automatically load a specific simplified lens could really help a beginner get a handle on the functionality that is most useful to them, with subsequent more advanced tutorials (or other paths) bringing in more advanced functions and their corresponding GUI elements. The other thing that I've thought about in trying to help beginners or new users get a fundamental grasp of what a DAW is doing that will help them learn on their own more effectively (trying to teach to fish instead of giving them a fish) is the basic idea of signal flow. I think that a lot of older or more experienced users who learned about the basic concepts of audio recording and signal processing through hardware(even just plugging in a chain of guitar fx pedals) take for granted that they came to the world of DAW recording with a basic sense of a signal being sent around to different places and having things done to it, before eventually flowing out and turning into sound coming out of speakers. Hardware makes this idea explicit because there are literal physical wires with electrons flowing (or whatever it is electrons do inside a wire  ) from one physical processing unit to aanother. A DAW mirrors this idea virtually, but it's a high-level abstraction that is not quite so literally visible. It's implicit to someone who is familiar with hardware that this is what's happening, but I've seen many users with no hardware experience who are very hazy on this basic idea. To them there's just a rather amorphous box of sounds and somehow different things happen to different sounds, but how that arrangement is organized is unclear. Maybe you just set a reverb down next to a snare drum and the "mixer" stirs it up until the snare has some reverb mixed in it? That sounds goofy to an even somewhat experienced user, but seriously, without a basic grasp of signal flow as a fundamental concept, how would you know how that's accomplished? I think that tutorials or lessons that make that idea completely explicit from the most basic level is necessary for some users. A complicated diagram based on an electrical schematic diagram isn't going to be helpful for a lot of people. Just a tutorial about playing back a wave file and turning up the volume with the mixer fader to start with (with very basic diagrams). "In a tape machine, the tape with magnetic information passes over a playback head which reads it sends an electrical signal through a wire to a little amp with a fader to control the volume. In a DAW, the clip with a waveform visible is like a strip of tape. As the playback cursor passes over it, it sends the information to a virtual little amp with a GUI fader to control the volume. Load up the playback tutorial. Press the play button. As the cursor moves over the example waveform clip, raise and lower the fader for channel 1. The information in the waveform clip is being "sent" to channel 1 of the mixer, and the fader is "processing" that signal to change the volume of the signal." Then from there add a second clip on another track to demonstrate that the two signals are independent from each other (separate signal paths). Then show how they are combined into the master buss (the signals are merged or "mixed" into one signal path). Now what happens if we "insert" a reverb into the signal path? Or if we "send" part of the signal somewhere else in addition to the mixer fader? That level of simplicity may seem silly to a lot of users, but I really think that level of explanation is necessary for some users who have no familiarity with hardware at all, or with more complex things like an advanced mixer console. I've seen users who were greatly confused by all these myriad possibilities make headway once they grasp that, so that they can start to experiment and solve problems on their own by applying that very basic knowledge.
Sonar Platinum latest updateWindows 10 Homei7-4790 CPUASRock Z97 Pro4 MB16 GB RAMNvidia GTX 960Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 Alesis VI49 Keyboard/controllerNative Instruments Komplete Kontrol S49 keyboard/controller
Native Instruments Maschine Mk3Native Instruments Maschine JamNative Instruments Komplete 10Various other commercial and free plugins&
|
rmfegley
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 114
- Joined: 2014/12/24 14:57:07
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/10 15:17:47
(permalink)
I posted a long reply, and apparently because I edited it the spam filter decided to eat it. This is very frustrating, and this is not the first time this has happened with one of my treads or replies, really makes me not want to waste my time with this. EDIT: Restored now, thanks!
post edited by rmfegley - 2017/06/10 15:50:43
Sonar Platinum latest updateWindows 10 Homei7-4790 CPUASRock Z97 Pro4 MB16 GB RAMNvidia GTX 960Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 Alesis VI49 Keyboard/controllerNative Instruments Komplete Kontrol S49 keyboard/controller
Native Instruments Maschine Mk3Native Instruments Maschine JamNative Instruments Komplete 10Various other commercial and free plugins&
|
abacab
Max Output Level: -30.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4464
- Joined: 2014/12/31 19:34:07
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/10 20:09:54
(permalink)
rmfegley
The other thing that I've thought about in trying to help beginners or new users get a fundamental grasp of what a DAW is doing that will help them learn on their own more effectively (trying to teach to fish instead of giving them a fish) is the basic idea of signal flow. I think that a lot of older or more experienced users who learned about the basic concepts of audio recording and signal processing through hardware(even just plugging in a chain of guitar fx pedals) take for granted that they came to the world of DAW recording with a basic sense of a signal being sent around to different places and having things done to it, before eventually flowing out and turning into sound coming out of speakers. Hardware makes this idea explicit because there are literal physical wires with electrons flowing (or whatever it is electrons do inside a wire ) from one physical processing unit to aanother. A DAW mirrors this idea virtually, but it's a high-level abstraction that is not quite so literally visible. It's implicit to someone who is familiar with hardware that this is what's happening, but I've seen many users with no hardware experience who are very hazy on this basic idea. To them there's just a rather amorphous box of sounds and somehow different things happen to different sounds, but how that arrangement is organized is unclear. Maybe you just set a reverb down next to a snare drum and the "mixer" stirs it up until the snare has some reverb mixed in it? That sounds goofy to an even somewhat experienced user, but seriously, without a basic grasp of signal flow as a fundamental concept, how would you know how that's accomplished?
I think that tutorials or lessons that make that idea completely explicit from the most basic level is necessary for some users. A complicated diagram based on an electrical schematic diagram isn't going to be helpful for a lot of people. Just a tutorial about playing back a wave file and turning up the volume with the mixer fader to start with (with very basic diagrams).
I think that is a very good observation. To a new user, the DAW PC is just a "black box" with sounds inside, and maybe an audio interface and some speakers, or headphones. I think in addition to what you have suggested, is to integrate a "Signal Flow Diagram" view to the DAW, that shows instantly where all inputs, outputs, instruments, effects, busses, sends, etc are routing to. I think even the expert users could appreciate a signal flow diagram. Then just add Bit's suggestion for a project database and you're really cookin!
DAW: CbB; Sonar Platinum, and others ...
|
Kev999
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3922
- Joined: 2007/05/01 14:22:54
- Location: Victoria, Australia
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/11 01:58:40
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby hockeyjx 2017/06/12 14:21:16
Some pre-requestites are assumed for anyone using DAW software: - Musical ability
- Computer skills
- Some basic understanding of audio hardware & signal routing
- Some basic theoretical knowledge about digital audio
The more the userbase keeps expanding, the higher the percentage of users not meeting all the criteria.
SonarPlatinum∞(22.11.0.111)|Mixbus32C(4.3.19)|DigitalPerformer(9.5.1)|Reaper(5.77)FractalDesign:DefineR5|i7-6850k@4.1GHz|16GB@2666MHz-DDR4|MSI:GamingProCarbonX99a|Matrox:M9148(x2)|UAD2solo(6.5.2)|W7Ult-x64-SP1
Audient:iD22+ASP800|KRK:VXT6|+various-outboard-gear|+guitars&basses, etc.
Having fun at work lately
|
Kev999
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3922
- Joined: 2007/05/01 14:22:54
- Location: Victoria, Australia
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/11 02:06:51
(permalink)
Familiarity with computers is one factor that many of us probably take for granted. Before I started using Sonar I already had experience using complex software applications (unrelated to music) and was adept at using a mouse for precision technical work. I had an IT coordinator role as part of my job. I had built 2 computers and had taken some IT courses. I had also done some voluntary work developing databases. But even with all this behind me I still found Sonar daunting the first time I launched it. It must be horrendously difficult for those without basic computer skills.
SonarPlatinum∞(22.11.0.111)|Mixbus32C(4.3.19)|DigitalPerformer(9.5.1)|Reaper(5.77)FractalDesign:DefineR5|i7-6850k@4.1GHz|16GB@2666MHz-DDR4|MSI:GamingProCarbonX99a|Matrox:M9148(x2)|UAD2solo(6.5.2)|W7Ult-x64-SP1
Audient:iD22+ASP800|KRK:VXT6|+various-outboard-gear|+guitars&basses, etc.
Having fun at work lately
|
abacab
Max Output Level: -30.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4464
- Joined: 2014/12/31 19:34:07
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/11 02:33:15
(permalink)
Kev999
Some pre-requestites are assumed for anyone using DAW software:
- Musical ability
- Computer skills
- Some basic understanding of audio hardware & signal routing
- Some basic theoretical knowledge about digital audio
The more the userbase keeps expanding, the higher the percentage of users not meeting all the criteria.
While pre-requisites may have applied at one time, that bird has flown as it applies to the general public ... Just look at the iPad apps for making music that are available now. Developers now are not marketing only towards the "experienced" group. I believe that there will always be a DAW market for professional studios and engineers, but that is likely to be a slimmer percentage of the overall creative music software sales.
DAW: CbB; Sonar Platinum, and others ...
|
Larry Jones
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 834
- Joined: 2007/10/11 02:45:33
- Location: Southern California
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/11 02:57:49
(permalink)
abacab
Kev999
Some pre-requestites are assumed for anyone using DAW software:
- Musical ability
- Computer skills
- Some basic understanding of audio hardware & signal routing
- Some basic theoretical knowledge about digital audio
The more the userbase keeps expanding, the higher the percentage of users not meeting all the criteria.
While pre-requisites may have applied at one time, that bird has flown as it applies to the general public ...
Just look at the iPad apps for making music that are available now. Developers now are not marketing only towards the "experienced" group. I believe that there will always be a DAW market for professional studios and engineers, but that is likely to be a slimmer percentage of the overall creative music software sales.
None of those are really "prerequisites." Processors continue to get more powerful, making it ever more possible for people to use tablets and even phones to record stuff, without any musical training or knowledge of signal processing. My first smartphone has more RAM and storage and processing power than my first PC. There are already successful recordings done entirely on laptops in bedrooms. If it hasn't already happened, I predict soon we will see hit music recorded and mixed entirely on a smartphone. It won't sound like what we're used to, but it will sell, and soon there will be producers and artists who have never used a computer-based DAW.
SONAR Platinum 2017.10 • CbB • Win10 • i7/2600 • 16GB RAM • Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 • NVIDIA GeForce 8400GS
|
interpolated
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 830
- Joined: 2015/03/26 17:34:58
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/11 07:31:02
(permalink)
It depends on your intention but system configuration is more important than it will do approach now. Not all off the shelf pc's or indeed Macs will make the grade.
Hence why serious users should consider buying a specialist system or getting one built if they can't themselves.
Ideally the workstation should suit the needs of the individual and then the software selected can take advantage of it.
|
Kev999
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3922
- Joined: 2007/05/01 14:22:54
- Location: Victoria, Australia
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/11 09:16:13
(permalink)
abacab
Kev999
Some pre-requestites are assumed for anyone using DAW software:
- Musical ability
- Computer skills
- Some basic understanding of audio hardware & signal routing
- Some basic theoretical knowledge about digital audio
The more the userbase keeps expanding, the higher the percentage of users not meeting all the criteria.
While pre-requisites may have applied at one time, that bird has flown as it applies to the general public ...
Just look at the iPad apps for making music that are available now. Developers now are not marketing only towards the "experienced" group. I believe that there will always be a DAW market for professional studios and engineers, but that is likely to be a slimmer percentage of the overall creative music software sales.
Sad but true. OK, so maybe my pre-requisites don't apply to all DAWs (past, present and future). But I believe that they are needed for anyone who want to do more than scratch the surface using Sonar or similar DAWs aimed at professionals and serious hobbyists.
post edited by Kev999 - 2017/06/12 00:21:15
SonarPlatinum∞(22.11.0.111)|Mixbus32C(4.3.19)|DigitalPerformer(9.5.1)|Reaper(5.77)FractalDesign:DefineR5|i7-6850k@4.1GHz|16GB@2666MHz-DDR4|MSI:GamingProCarbonX99a|Matrox:M9148(x2)|UAD2solo(6.5.2)|W7Ult-x64-SP1
Audient:iD22+ASP800|KRK:VXT6|+various-outboard-gear|+guitars&basses, etc.
Having fun at work lately
|
jpetersen
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1499
- Joined: 2015/07/11 20:22:53
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/11 20:38:49
(permalink)
DAWs consist of myriad features packed under menus scattered around the GUI and a manual describing each feature. Useless. We need "How do I...?" guides. Because users want to achieve specific goals. For newbies: How do I connect my interface? How do I record my voice and / or guitar / piano? How do I rap with loops? How do I construct a song with audio clips? My recording is done. How do I make a CD/MP3/etc. Each must be detailed, not timidly superficial, to get users up-to-speed in understanding SONAR's features. Introduce concepts like Musical Time, Snap To/By etc. Then there's How do I...? for the next level. How do I rearrange my song? How do I add drums/bass/strings? How can I make my song sound more like a professional recording? How do I set the tempo to my guitar strumming (scook has a great tip which I keep forgetting)//EDIT: it was from brundlefly How do I sync my live recording to a click (I keep forgetting this, too) - you can use audiosnap - you can use melodyne Then there's the experienced user's How do I...? Craig's tips are good examples (with descriptive titles rather than clever ones, if I may be so bold) and all the information on any number of videos and many often-lost forum postings.
post edited by jpetersen - 2017/06/15 14:33:02
|
MarioD
Max Output Level: -72 dBFS
- Total Posts : 901
- Joined: 2006/04/15 15:59:50
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/11 22:44:43
(permalink)
jpetersen
DAWs consist of myriad features packed under menus scattered around the GUI and a manual describing each feature.
Useless.
We need "How do I...?" guides. Because users want to achieve specific goals.
For newbies:
How do I connect my interface?
How do I record my voice and / or guitar / piano?
How do I rap with loops?
How do I construct a song with audio clips?
My recording is done. How do I make a CD/MP3/etc.
Each must be detailed, not timidly superficial, to get users up-to-speed in understanding SONAR's features. Introduce concepts like Musical Time, Snap To/By etc.
Then there's How do I...? for the next level.
How do I rearrange my song?
How do I add drums/bass/strings?
How can I make my song sound more like a professional recording?
How do I set the tempo to my guitar strumming (scook has a great tip which I keep forgetting)
How do I sync my live recording to a click (I keep forgetting this, too)
- you can use audiosnap
- you can use melodyne
Then there's the experienced user's How do I...?
Craig's tips are good examples (with descriptive titles rather than clever ones, if I may be so bold) and all the information on any number of videos and many often-lost forum postings.
I was thinking the same way. A Sonar for Dummies book along with a series of Sonar for dummies videos would be a tremendous. (For the record I hate the name dummies, they should be call for the inexperienced, but I called them dummies books as a reference to that series.) These would be for a beginner Sonar user. The biggest problem, IMHO, is that some consumers buy a DAW thinking they can just press record and things will work. We all know that ain't true! Also buying a DAW and thinking that it will make you a musician will not work anymore that buying a graphic problem and thinking it will make you an artist. You need the basics to use either program.
The reason people say the vinyl sounds better is because the music was better. Sonar Platinum, Intel i7 –2600 CPU @ 3.2 GHz, 16 GB ram, 2x2TB internal drives and 1 1TB internal drive, Radeon HD 5570 video card, HP 25" monitor,
Roland Octa Capture, MOTU Midi Express 128, Win 10 Pro
www.soundcloud.com/Mario_Guitar
|
konradh
Max Output Level: -42 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3325
- Joined: 2006/01/16 16:07:06
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/12 00:07:51
(permalink)
A background using multi-track tape and a traditional console helps a lot. I see people struggling with concepts like send/return, buses, EQ bands, pan pots, compression, volume automation, and other things that were day-to-day basics in a commercial analog studio. The question is how long we should keep up that metaphor. There is still a picture of a floppy disk for saving in most software, even though half the people using the software have never touched one. I am happy with the current metaphor, but someday everyone like me will be gone (although my fame will live on).
post edited by konradh - 2017/06/12 14:11:03
Konrad Current album and more: http://www.themightykonrad.com/ Sonar X1d Producer. V-Studio 700. PC: Intel i7 CPU 3.07GHz, 12 GB RAM. Win 7 64-bit. RealGuitar, RealStrat, RealLPC, Ivory II, Vienna Symphonic, Hollywood Strings, Electr6ity, Acoustic Legends, FabFour, Scarbee Rick/J-Bass/P-Bass, Kontakt 5. NI Session Guitar. Boldersounds, Noisefirm. EZ Drummer 2. EZ Mix. Melodyne Assist. Guitar Rig 4. Tyros 2, JV-1080, Kurzweil PC2R, TC Helicon VoiceWorks+. Rode NT2a, EV RE20. Presonus Eureka. Rokit 6s.
|
cparmerlee
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1153
- Joined: 2013/06/25 22:14:42
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/12 01:43:03
(permalink)
I think there are potential improvements all over the place. SONAR is a great product already. The improvements are relatively small things in the big picture, but when one is engaged in an artistic process, the nagging little things can really disrupt the artistic process.
I would look closely at StudioOne. In general I think Sonar is a more powerful product and I believe I can achieve better results on Sonar. But there are aspects of StudioOne that really do make me happy. The mastering mode is a pretty big deal, I think. It seems that StudioOne is more forgiving about doing the intuitive thing when one drags clips around or one tries to set up effects on multiple tracks simultaneously. I think some of the same things are possible in SONAR, but somehow StudioOne seems easier. I can't give an exact example, I am afraid. And that's the point. Most of the potential improvements are in things that are not in your main line of consciousness.
I absolutely love how Izotope Neutron can analyze a clip and suggest some sensible effects settings based on that actual material. That is far more advanced than the simple presets. I think there is a lot of room for this kind of thing to capture the expert knowledge of the best engineers out there to at least put us on the right track.
And I am all for making the entire platform highly touch- and pen-responsive.
DAW: SONAR Platinum Audio I/F: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 gen2
OS: Windows 10 64-bit CPU: Haswell 4790 4.0 GHz, 4 core, 8 thread Memory: 16 GB Video: GTX-760Ti
Storage: Sandisk SSD 500GB for active projects. ReadyNAS 20 TB for long-term storagesonocrafters.com
|
KPerry
Max Output Level: -44 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3120
- Joined: 2011/04/26 15:13:15
- Location: London, UK
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/12 09:14:22
(permalink)
I would say just one thing: consistency, consistency, consistency. Yes, I repeated it, because I think it's important, but also because I think there are 3 string to it (at least)... So wat do I mean by "consistency"?
- Consistency of user experience - ie. use the platform's standards (eg. ctrl-C=copy) and don't re-invent the UI/UX wheel. SONAR does a pretty good job of this; other DAWs don't (in my experience, some of which is old, to be fair).
- Internal consistency - use the same look and feel, terminology and menu structures across your application. SONAR doesn't do brilliantly on this (in some cases, this is understandable as plug-ins, say, have been added or bought in at different times from different vendors, and plug-ins are probably less critical since there are always third party plug-ins that people will buy which will look and behave differently from packages ones), primarily due to "legacy" screens and menus, but not entirely - eg. the Ripple Editing options should behave like the meter selection options as they are both selectors, but they don't
- Industry consistency - use the same terminology and processes that already exist when adding a feature. Reaper is the worst at this (have you seen its naming conventions?!?!), but SONAR could be better - eg. when adding side-chaining functionality, most (all?) other DAWs are driven from the side-chaining plug-in (ie. open the plug-in and select the sc input from there); SONAR does the reverse (which I actually think is a more sensible approach, but it's not the industry standard way of doing this, which increases user confusion).
Windows 7 x64 SP1 SONAR x86/x64 Intel Q6600/8GB MOTU UltraliteMk3 (USB/ASIO) Edirol PCR300
|
Kev999
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3922
- Joined: 2007/05/01 14:22:54
- Location: Victoria, Australia
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/12 13:26:18
(permalink)
KPerry
...when adding side-chaining functionality, most (all?) other DAWs are driven from the side-chaining plug-in (ie. open the plug-in and select the sc input from there); SONAR does the reverse (which I actually think is a more sensible approach, but it's not the industry standard way of doing this, which increases user confusion).
It would be even better if Sonar did it both ways, allowing the user to choose.
SonarPlatinum∞(22.11.0.111)|Mixbus32C(4.3.19)|DigitalPerformer(9.5.1)|Reaper(5.77)FractalDesign:DefineR5|i7-6850k@4.1GHz|16GB@2666MHz-DDR4|MSI:GamingProCarbonX99a|Matrox:M9148(x2)|UAD2solo(6.5.2)|W7Ult-x64-SP1
Audient:iD22+ASP800|KRK:VXT6|+various-outboard-gear|+guitars&basses, etc.
Having fun at work lately
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/12 14:43:01
(permalink)
I have always thought that Sonar was a very easy DAW to learn. Now its become highly complicated with all the new features since Platinum first came out. However the basic stuff is still simple at least to me. One thing I'm not sure of is this question. At what point is a professional DAW going to assume a certain amount of knowledge of the user? To a certain extant I would find it annoying to be led by the hand on doing basic things.
There are simpler DAWs out there some from CW. Isn't Platinum aimed at those that have a desire to know more or at least have some basic DAW experience? I know that we get brand new users here on a regular basis. People that are starting from scratch. For them its a long road to proficient DAW usage. But those that have some years behind them may find any roadblock to "just getting on with it" tiresome.
I really don't know what the right answer is. I do think some work has to be done by the end user in order to know what to do and when to do it. One area that may be of help to all users is a way to configure ones computer to work best with DAW software. A configuration wizard perhaps?
|
rscain
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 784
- Joined: 2004/03/23 09:52:29
- Location: Kentucky
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/12 17:03:14
(permalink)
John
I have always thought that Sonar was a very easy DAW to learn. Now its become highly complicated with all the new features since Platinum first came out. However the basic stuff is still simple at least to me. One thing I'm not sure of is this question. At what point is a professional DAW going to assume a certain amount of knowledge of the user? To a certain extant I would find it annoying to be led by the hand on doing basic things.
There are simpler DAWs out there some from CW. Isn't Platinum aimed at those that have a desire to know more or at least have some basic DAW experience? I know that we get brand new users here on a regular basis. People that are starting from scratch. For them its a long road to proficient DAW usage. But those that have some years behind them may find any roadblock to "just getting on with it" tiresome.
I really don't know what the right answer is. I do think some work has to be done by the end user in order to know what to do and when to do it. One area that may be of help to all users is a way to configure ones computer to work best with DAW software. A configuration wizard perhaps?
I pretty much agree with all of this. Except for the marketing and sales aspect I don't see why SONAR or any DAW that aspires to be "professional" should be dumbed down. OK, yes, I'm an old timer and got my start in an analogue 16 track studio. Back then you didn't get anywhere near the board until you'd spent a period of time learning about things like signal flow, which plug goes into which socket (the interface), how to isolate an instrument to prevent bleed, and where the coffee pot was :) Also, you hauled around a lot of gear! I actually started my digital recording with Cakewalk Guitar Tracks, which was a basic version of SONAR. It was relatively easy for me because, as mentioned in a previous post, it was set up like the old studio desks I was used to. It had a rudimentary track view but I never used it. There was no interface involved, you plugged your guitar and mic into your computers' mic jack with an adapter. It also had very basic midi but I never used that either. I used GT for a couple of years before I got into SONAR 3, and the transition was fairly easy. I understand the new user's wishes to jump right in with a full featured DAW, but honestly, to expect to be able to do that without some severe growing pains is completely unrealistic. I mean (and I realize the absurdity of this analogy) that's like saying "why can't they make it easier to be a brain surgeon?" I don't want any part of that! :)
My Tunes On SoundClick AMD FX9350 @4 gHz, 16 gb ram, 240 gb SSD, 2 1Tb SS/Hybrid HDs, 1 Tb Fantom External HD, Windows 10 64 bit, Sonar Platinum 64 bit, Studio One 4 Pro, Harrison Mixbus, Izotope Neutron 2 Advanced and Ozone 8 Advanced, ARC 2, NI Komplete 11 Ultimate, TC-Helicon VoiceLive 3, Focusrite Saffire Pro 24 DSP, Focusrite Octopre MkII, KRK Rokit 8 monitors, Sennheiser HD 280 pro headphones, MidiMan Oxygen 8, Behringer X-Touch, guitars and stuff
|
cparmerlee
Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1153
- Joined: 2013/06/25 22:14:42
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/12 19:34:56
(permalink)
rscain
Except for the marketing and sales aspect I don't see why SONAR or any DAW that aspires to be "professional" should be dumbed down.
I don't think anybody is in favor of anything being "dumbed down" if that means limiting capabilities for simplicity's sake. But there are many aspects of SONAR that just aren't very intuitive or that require some arcane secret handshake that only the old-timers all know about. The suggestion is that, while Cakewalk has done a marvelous job upgrading and modernizing a very mature code base to give it leading edge function and reliability, the "intuitiveness factor" is not so strong and the "clutter factor" is really burdensome. These should be targets of emphasis going forward. And if this means that some "legacy users" will have to change a little bit to accommodate an easier, more obvious way of getting the job done, I don't think that is too much to ask. I am absolutely dead set against an exponentially expanding set of options just so that legacy users are never asked to adjust a little as the product evolves. Clutter is the enemy.
DAW: SONAR Platinum Audio I/F: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 gen2
OS: Windows 10 64-bit CPU: Haswell 4790 4.0 GHz, 4 core, 8 thread Memory: 16 GB Video: GTX-760Ti
Storage: Sandisk SSD 500GB for active projects. ReadyNAS 20 TB for long-term storagesonocrafters.com
|
abacab
Max Output Level: -30.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4464
- Joined: 2014/12/31 19:34:07
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/12 19:52:13
(permalink)
John
I have always thought that Sonar was a very easy DAW to learn. Now its become highly complicated with all the new features since Platinum first came out. However the basic stuff is still simple at least to me. One thing I'm not sure of is this question. At what point is a professional DAW going to assume a certain amount of knowledge of the user? To a certain extant I would find it annoying to be led by the hand on doing basic things.
There are simpler DAWs out there some from CW. Isn't Platinum aimed at those that have a desire to know more or at least have some basic DAW experience? I know that we get brand new users here on a regular basis. People that are starting from scratch. For them its a long road to proficient DAW usage. But those that have some years behind them may find any roadblock to "just getting on with it" tiresome.
I really don't know what the right answer is. I do think some work has to be done by the end user in order to know what to do and when to do it. One area that may be of help to all users is a way to configure ones computer to work best with DAW software. A configuration wizard perhaps?
The title of this thread seems to be getting a bit lost 3 pages deep in the comments ... "What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?"
DAW: CbB; Sonar Platinum, and others ...
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/12 20:20:53
(permalink)
abacab
John
I have always thought that Sonar was a very easy DAW to learn. Now its become highly complicated with all the new features since Platinum first came out. However the basic stuff is still simple at least to me. One thing I'm not sure of is this question. At what point is a professional DAW going to assume a certain amount of knowledge of the user? To a certain extant I would find it annoying to be led by the hand on doing basic things.
There are simpler DAWs out there some from CW. Isn't Platinum aimed at those that have a desire to know more or at least have some basic DAW experience? I know that we get brand new users here on a regular basis. People that are starting from scratch. For them its a long road to proficient DAW usage. But those that have some years behind them may find any roadblock to "just getting on with it" tiresome.
I really don't know what the right answer is. I do think some work has to be done by the end user in order to know what to do and when to do it. One area that may be of help to all users is a way to configure ones computer to work best with DAW software. A configuration wizard perhaps?
The title of this thread seems to be getting a bit lost 3 pages deep in the comments ...
"What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?"
I was trying to answer that question. I don't think it can be done in a way that would be useful to all. How much ease is enough? We get users that have no idea what a wav file is much less MIDI. If its not an MP3 they're lost.
|
timidi
Max Output Level: -21 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5449
- Joined: 2006/04/11 12:55:15
- Location: SE Florida
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/12 21:57:32
(permalink)
Everyone should win a trophy for participating.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/13 04:20:54
(permalink)
This thread is loaded with intelligent and thought-provoking observations. I'm really glad I asked the question.
|
LJB
Max Output Level: -60 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1502
- Joined: 2009/07/29 10:31:31
- Location: South Africa
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/13 06:53:54
(permalink)
Something that I have asked for for years now is a reliable backup system:
1) a menu where one can set dedicated paths for backing up (incl external HDDs and networks), even a scheduler.
2) a system that checks what has been changed and what not, and only updates the changed files and folders (to save time)
3) A process whereby once you have clicked "Backup" you know it's all been done correctly.
If that sounds far-fetched, I already am using a stand-alone program a friend wrote to do all of this, but I'd like to see it integrated into Sonar. Or Cakewalk can contact me and I'll give them the script to implement :O)
Furthermore, for the "commercial" producer there is always a need to export final mixes in all sorts of configs, whether for backtracks or stems or just archiving. The problem is the stems and even mixed separates have to be bounced through the master bus to get the correct sound, thus:
I would like to see an automated process similar to EXPORT whereby SPLAT will solo each folder (drums, guitars, bass) or each allocated group (or some such selection), mute all other tracks and bounce the entire selection THROUGH main stereo bus, mute that selection and process the next one, and the next etc...
Thus giving you a drum sub mix that is "broadcast ready", vocal, guitars etc..
Not sure if anyone else agrees?
Ludwig Bouwer, One Big Room Studios.
--------------------
Cakewalk with all the trimmings / Win 10Pro 64 / Intel i7-7700 / Asus Prime Z270k / 16GB DDR4 / RME HDSP9652 / RME UFX / Black Lion Audio ADA8000 / ART MPA & ART Pro Channel / Focusrite Voicemaster Pro / Aphex 107
Check out my work at www.onebigroom.co.za
|
dubdisciple
Max Output Level: -17 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5849
- Joined: 2008/01/29 00:31:46
- Location: Seattle, Wa
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/13 07:28:58
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Mystic38 2017/06/17 15:41:25
Maybe easier said than done, but modern DAWs should automatically map to every controller and control surface made by a major manufacturer. A noob should be able to select from an extensive list of control surfaces and it should work immediately.
|
dubdisciple
Max Output Level: -17 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5849
- Joined: 2008/01/29 00:31:46
- Location: Seattle, Wa
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/13 07:31:36
(permalink)
Another feature who's time has come is smart detection of moving sound samples or instrument banks.
|
rscain
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 784
- Joined: 2004/03/23 09:52:29
- Location: Kentucky
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/13 11:45:40
(permalink)
cparmerlee
rscain
Except for the marketing and sales aspect I don't see why SONAR or any DAW that aspires to be "professional" should be dumbed down.
I don't think anybody is in favor of anything being "dumbed down" if that means limiting capabilities for simplicity's sake. But there are many aspects of SONAR that just aren't very intuitive or that require some arcane secret handshake that only the old-timers all know about. The suggestion is that, while Cakewalk has done a marvelous job upgrading and modernizing a very mature code base to give it leading edge function and reliability, the "intuitiveness factor" is not so strong and the "clutter factor" is really burdensome. These should be targets of emphasis going forward.
And if this means that some "legacy users" will have to change a little bit to accommodate an easier, more obvious way of getting the job done, I don't think that is too much to ask. I am absolutely dead set against an exponentially expanding set of options just so that legacy users are never asked to adjust a little as the product evolves. Clutter is the enemy.
I agree, for the most part, with what you are saying. There are a lot of things in SONAR that are tough to find or figure out at first blush. And if they can figure out a way to make these things more obvious or intuitive I'm all for that. I'm not enough of a design or code person to figure that out, but that's why the Bakers get the big money, right As far as the "legacy users" having to change, well, I'm not adverse to that if it truly does make things easier but it would seem to me that until this "magic" UI comes along that product evolution (or new features) will continue to up the learning curve a bit until folks figure the new stuff out. I don't want to sacrifice the opportunity to have new tools at my disposal simply because I might have to learn something new. And the "legacy users" have had to change before. I don't know if you were around but the change in SONAR from the "numeric" days (5,6,7, 8.5 etc.) to X1 and beyond was huge. A lot of people, and I mean a LOT, raised hell about the changes in the UI, methodology, even the naming change. So it's happened before and will likely happen again.
My Tunes On SoundClick AMD FX9350 @4 gHz, 16 gb ram, 240 gb SSD, 2 1Tb SS/Hybrid HDs, 1 Tb Fantom External HD, Windows 10 64 bit, Sonar Platinum 64 bit, Studio One 4 Pro, Harrison Mixbus, Izotope Neutron 2 Advanced and Ozone 8 Advanced, ARC 2, NI Komplete 11 Ultimate, TC-Helicon VoiceLive 3, Focusrite Saffire Pro 24 DSP, Focusrite Octopre MkII, KRK Rokit 8 monitors, Sennheiser HD 280 pro headphones, MidiMan Oxygen 8, Behringer X-Touch, guitars and stuff
|
RJN
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 178
- Joined: 2003/11/16 11:59:16
- Location: Michigan
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/13 14:54:49
(permalink)
I agree with the "bits are just bits" idea. I think a lot of the problems with DAWS are they try to emulate studio gear and processes which many users are not familiar (or certainly not experts) with. Ex.: calling something a "tape delay" in a DAW is just misleading.
Way back -- I used a sequencer program on my Amiga called "Bars and Pipes". It didn't pretend to be a big multi-track tape machine or really anything from a real studio. It had "bars" for data and "pipes" for routing, with gadget boxes/connectors for effects and processing that you could put at the start of bars or at the end of bars. You mostly put MIDI data in the bars, but alternatively, you could draw any function in the bar and "pipe" it to a gadget on anther bar. Does the same thing as pretending to be a "track" but a lot easier to understand. Within the scheme of the program you could try all kinds of weird things and it might not be what you expected but it would not error out on you either.
Rob -------- Core i7, 3.4 GHz, 16Gb RAM, Win 10 Pro (64-bit), 2 Tb HD, SONAR Platinum Producer , Roland Quad Capture, Alesis QS8 rjnorwich.worpress.com
|
konradh
Max Output Level: -42 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3325
- Joined: 2006/01/16 16:07:06
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/13 14:58:49
(permalink)
The current Sound on Sound magazine has an article with the top unanswered user requests for Pro Tools. I was amazed to see some very basic things Sonar has had for a long time missing from Pro Tools.
This is not to start another debate about which is better. I was just surprised by some of the omissions in such a mature product. (I'm sure some will say this about Sonar, but I haven't yet needed to do something I couldn't. Some things are just not as easy as they could be and a few things seem to be intermittently quirky.)
Konrad Current album and more: http://www.themightykonrad.com/ Sonar X1d Producer. V-Studio 700. PC: Intel i7 CPU 3.07GHz, 12 GB RAM. Win 7 64-bit. RealGuitar, RealStrat, RealLPC, Ivory II, Vienna Symphonic, Hollywood Strings, Electr6ity, Acoustic Legends, FabFour, Scarbee Rick/J-Bass/P-Bass, Kontakt 5. NI Session Guitar. Boldersounds, Noisefirm. EZ Drummer 2. EZ Mix. Melodyne Assist. Guitar Rig 4. Tyros 2, JV-1080, Kurzweil PC2R, TC Helicon VoiceWorks+. Rode NT2a, EV RE20. Presonus Eureka. Rokit 6s.
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/13 15:31:28
(permalink)
This is a very difficult question, because what might be my answer, might not be someone elses.
You can ask me and I will tell you.. don't water anything down in order to please novice users, but then you could ask this same question to a kid making tunes out of his garage in the Bronx and he could give you the perfect answer (Ala Hans Zimmer).
So what might appear to be skewed for some of us, is really not for others.
I remember being a teenager and thinking the older engineers in my circles were just clueless.
Sure they knew the trade, but their methods were azz backwards.
So I must respect that same feeling now because now I am the older one. There is a new generation of kids out there (Just like I was once). So its time for me to understand...They just might be correct.
With that being said, there's only so much we can do to make things easier. "A help module", Style dials", Insert track dialog menus".
There is one thing through out the years that never seems to change, Training.
That never gets old and yet I've seen cakewalk ignore/moving away from offering up videos to teach a new generation of musicians how to use the very tools they need to make music. Training videos are the key to learning. not just documentation.
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?
2017/06/13 15:37:14
(permalink)
chuckebaby
This is a very hard to answer question, because what might be my answer, might not be someone elses.
You can ask me and I will tell you.. don't water anything down in order to please novice users, but then you could ask this same question to a kid making tunes out of his garage in the Bronx and he could give you the perfect answer (Ala Hans Zimmer).
So what might appear to be skewed for some of us, is really not for others.
I remember being a teenager and thinking the older engineers in my circles were just clueless.
Sure they knew the trade, but their methods were azz backwards.
So I must respect that same feeling now because now I am the older one. There is a new generation of kids out there (Just like I was once). So its time for me to understand...They just might be correct.
With that being said, there's only so much we can do to make things easier. "A help module", Style dials", Insert track dialog menus".
There is one thing through out the years that never seems to change, Training.
That never gets old and yet I've seen cakewalk ignore/moving away from offering up videos to teach a new generation of musicians how to use the very tools they need to make music. Training videos are the key to learning. not just documentation.
This is the way I see it too. Actually I wouldn't change a single word in Chuck's posts.
|