Helpful ReplyWhat Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use?

Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 5 of 8
Author
BobF
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 8124
  • Joined: 2003/11/05 18:43:11
  • Location: Missouri - USA
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/06/18 23:51:17 (permalink)
FLZapped
Help files that are actually helpful.




I would like Help that tells me not how to do something, but also some examples of why the I might want to do it.  And PLEASE, PLEASE don't put the why in a video!!

Bob  --
Angels are crying because truth has died ...
Illegitimi non carborundum
--
Studio One Pro / i7-6700@3.80GHZ, 32GB Win 10 Pro x64
Roland FA06, LX61+, Fishman Tripleplay, FaderPort, US-16x08 + ARC2.5/Event PS8s 
Waves Gold/IKM Max/Nomad Factory IS3/K11U

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? 2017/06/19 00:02:18 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby jimfogle 2017/06/20 17:11:37
mred1953
I’ve used Cakewalk products for 20 years and I just spent almost three hours installing a plugin. Download this, open that, install this app, run as admin, iLok hell, run Gobbler at startup, (etc)



This is an industry problem.  I have some experience with website development on Wordpress and Joomla.  I consider these comparable environments because most of the "goodies" come through third-party plug-ins.  There certainly can be compatibility and stylistic issues with Joomla and Wordpress plug-ins, but there really is an industry-wide distribution and installation standard and it generally works pretty well.
 
And of course, we find another similar example with how Android and iPhone apps are managed.  You pay for it and then it is basically one click.
 
Getting all the DAW and VST makers to agree on anything would be quite an achievement, but it ultimately is in everybody's interest for this to work MUCH, MUCH more smoothly.
post edited by cparmerlee - 2017/06/19 01:54:31

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 storage

sonocrafters.com
gordonrussell76
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1879
  • Joined: 2006/12/15 05:28:08
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/06/19 17:06:23 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby Starise 2017/07/13 17:48:28
For me I want the DAW to be my partner in the studio, for me the biggest things that gets in the way of creativity is what I call the editing barrier. So my suggestions would be, and these are pie in the sky in some ways.
 
Fluid tempo detection, when I start playing around with something, I don't necessarily want the tempo locked in. In my ideal world I would noodle around and as I played the tempo would follow me in real time I could push and pull the tempo in the same way a drummer would follow me if I slowed or sped up, failing this allowing tempo to be control by a midi expression pedal within a user definable range would be awesome so I could tweak tempo as I went.
 
Voice control of editing and comping. I want to be able to shout out, quantize 8 bars of take 3, loop, put on new track and duplicate x4 please. Then take 8 bars of take 5 quantize loop and put in same track as duplicate x2 for chorus.
 
Sonar does it, and then I can straight away record another part of this new structure, I have not had to move from where I am sitting or put my instruement down and I am back creating.
 
For me this would be the ultimate in ease of use. As it is I noodle away building up issues in the take, then I am faced with an hour long editing session to clean up and bring order to the chaos before I can carry on building, and often the inspiration is lost.
 
So basically I want a virtual tape engineer or editor please.
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? 2017/06/19 17:22:06 (permalink)
gordonrussell76, Sounds like you need an assistant engineer and tea boy.

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. 
gordonrussell76
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1879
  • Joined: 2006/12/15 05:28:08
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/06/19 17:54:53 (permalink)
Konradh that would be the ideal solution, sadly I don't have the funds to pay an assistant engineer or even a tea boy.

I have a 6 year old daughter and longer term once she is a bit older I have plans to train her up to perform these functions, in the interim Sonar need to step up :)
 
G
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? 2017/06/19 18:54:33 (permalink)
A paperclip that pops up and says:
 
"It looks like you are trying to record a song."
MandolinPicker
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 720
  • Joined: 2003/11/05 18:51:51
  • Location: Oxford, AL
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/06/19 19:48:13 (permalink)
jpetersen
A paperclip that pops up and says:
 
"It looks like you are trying to record a song."




 
NO!!!   
NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!


The Mandolin Picker
"Bless your hearts... and all your vital organs" - John Duffy
 
"Got time to breath, got time for music!"- Briscoe Darling, Jr.
 
Windows 8.1, Sonar Platinum (64-bit), AMD FX 6120 Six-Core, 10GB RAM
razor
Max Output Level: -59.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1557
  • Joined: 2004/05/10 16:53:27
  • Location: Irvine, CA
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/06/19 23:05:20 (permalink)
Lava lamp! 

Stephen Davis
 
Cakewalk by Bandlab
Windows 7 Pro 64-Bit
ADK DAW - (out of business 2018)
Intel i7 4930K CPU
Core i7 SB-E MOBO
16 GB DDR3 RAM
7 TB Storage
Layla 3G SoundCard (11.5 ms Roundtrip Latency)
UAD-2 DSP
WaveLab 8 Pro 64-bit 
Sound Forge 10 Pro
M@
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 221
  • Joined: 2015/01/07 17:58:56
  • Location: Innsbruck, Austria
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/06/20 01:21:01 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby jimfogle 2017/06/20 17:11:11
First of all: Do not bloat the product with 'additional' stuff to make it 'easier to use'.

Second: Let the software be as it is and give the user guidance to use it. Many forumites state they like videos to follow along to...

! My suggestion however would be to implement something similar as used in computer games: an in-game guide. It tells you where to click in order to accomplish certain task and explains how/why. The program then does not respond to anything else but waits for user to click (the blinking button?). Then the next step is explained and again Sonar waits until the user follows 'orders'.... (sort of like a Makro step-recorder being played back)

There should of course be several 'chapters' with different levels of experience to the guide. E.g. start with setting up project. Then setup screen real estate. Then maybe import audio / import midi files, record audio, use fx, organize vst's, write automation, etc.etc. untill finally a demo-song has been created in full detail and has covered 'every' aspect of the DAW and shown 'every trick in the book' or at least up to a certain semi-pro level.

That way every user can join in at whatever level he/she is follow whatever topic he/she is interested in and learn in real-time.

Also there could be monthly 'chapters/tutorials' added....

N.b:
I'm not a programmer and might be wrong in assuming this might be relatively easy to implement as the DAW would only have to take control of the users Input device and display according pop-up messages....?

Tracking: Sonar Platinum (X3 Producer, X2 studio, X1 expanded, 8.3) (64bit)
System: Win10 Pro (64bit), Asus  P8Z77 V Le Plus, I7-3770k, 16GB Ram, SSD System drive, Raid1 Recording & Backup drive, VS-700 Set, TC Konnekt 48
Instruments: Roland Juno Stage, Kawai CA5, Washburn X50Pro, Blackstar-One100, Merida,...
Muziekschuur at home
Max Output Level: -62 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1442
  • Joined: 2006/03/01 03:30:22
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/04 18:05:48 (permalink)
When you listen to Harrisons DAW you'll hear more 'console sound'. I would like to have a box wich could give me an overall option to make Sonar (using the channelstrip colouring) use a heavier colouring or less so...   Or maybe with something like CTRL + and CTRL -  to have more or less colour. 

Cakewalk Sonar Platinum Windows 7 32bit & 64bit (dualboot) Gigabyte mobo Intel dual quad 9650 & 4GB Ram RME DIGI9636 & Tascam DM24.  M-audio Rbus & SI-24 Alesis Pro active 5.1 & Radford 90 transmissionline monitors. Roland RD-150 piano Edirol UM-880 & alesis fireport.
Remote recording Alesis HD-24 & Phonic MRS 1-20.
P.A. D&R Dayner 29-8-2 & behringer MX8000 (& racks)
Rackpc Sonar Platinum with win10 AMD X6 1055T, 16GB Ram
 Dell inspiron 17R 6gb ram W10 two SSD's Sonar Plat.
JohanSebatianGremlin
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 402
  • Joined: 2016/03/17 22:27:15
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/04 22:46:02 (permalink)
Disclaimer: In the grand scheme this is probably a minor complaint but I think its valid non the less. 
 
When it comes to tutorial videos and whatnot, know your audience. Step away from the priceless conference room table, tell the CEO he's wrong and KNOW YOUR AUDIENCE.
 
Perfect example of what I'm talking about is the cakeTV comping video. Nice video. And since I haven't used comping much, I've had to refer to it a few times to remind myself how to do this and that with the feature. 
 
Like any how-to video on a comping feature should, it starts by showing you how setup to record comp takes, then it goes into how to edit those multiple takes into a completed composite track. And do that, it makes use of several takes of a pre-recorded vocal track. And that is the point at which we get into the meat of my issue with it.
 
Go watch that video and you'll see and hear a track with multiple takes of a vocal track. And every single note of every one of those tracks is absolutely perfect. They're not all the same, but any one of them could end up being a keeper track all on its own.
 
Question for the CEO: If I'm able to record absolutely perfect tracks not just one time, but five times in a row, why do I need a comping feature? Answer: I don't. At all. Ever. In a word, duh. Comping ain't for that guy, its for the rest of us who tend to screw up notes and flub parts here and there. 
 
So why do you insult our intelligence by creating how-to videos with nothing but spot-on perfect takes? Are you that insecure about your product that you can't dare let it be seen recording actual mistakes and then showing the feature you designed and built to fix those mistakes do its actual job and turn those five iffy takes into one out of this world keeper take?
 
Know your audience. I know you probably like to ease yourself into blissful sleep every night by imagining a world where the likes of Sting and Paul Simon are using your product but here's a clue-by-four for you, they ain't using now and they never will.
 
Us amateurs are the ones paying your bills and keeping your lights on. Know and respect your audience and make your tutorial videos for us. Show mistakes. Show imperfect timing. Show imperfect notes. Then show how your feature can fix them. Respect us, don't insult us.

 
If gear was the determining factor, we would all have a shelf full of Grammies and a pocket full of change.  -microapp
 
i7, 32gb RAM, Win10 64bit, RME UFX
Joe_A
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 458
  • Joined: 2008/07/06 23:16:14
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/05 17:24:47 (permalink)
Lenses for basic recording and presets for plugs. Better web marketing...

jambrose@cfl.rr.com  Sonar Plat. Lifetime. Started in Sonar 4, each through 8.5.3PE.
Scarlett 18i202nd gen., Edirol FA-101, M-Audio Firewire 410, AMD Phenom II 1045T six core processor, 8GB DDR3, AMD Radeon HD 6450, dual displays, 1.5 TB SATA HD, USB 2, Firewire 1394A, 1394B, 18/22 mixer, EV Q-66, Yamaha HS50M monitors, few guitars, Fender Cybertwin SE, Fender Cyber foot controller, Boss RC20-XL, misc pedals, etc. Win Home Prem 64 bit.
Joe_A
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 458
  • Joined: 2008/07/06 23:16:14
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/05 18:27:37 (permalink)
Because sadly some things can be done as a placebo effect to repackage the same steps.

jambrose@cfl.rr.com  Sonar Plat. Lifetime. Started in Sonar 4, each through 8.5.3PE.
Scarlett 18i202nd gen., Edirol FA-101, M-Audio Firewire 410, AMD Phenom II 1045T six core processor, 8GB DDR3, AMD Radeon HD 6450, dual displays, 1.5 TB SATA HD, USB 2, Firewire 1394A, 1394B, 18/22 mixer, EV Q-66, Yamaha HS50M monitors, few guitars, Fender Cybertwin SE, Fender Cyber foot controller, Boss RC20-XL, misc pedals, etc. Win Home Prem 64 bit.
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? 2017/07/05 21:54:39 (permalink)
@JohanSebatianGremlin: There is a Sonar video by Brandon Ryan claiming to show how to record a live band - and yes, he records a live band. But they get everything perfect in one take.
 
No drop-ins, no overdubs, no second vocals, nothing.
 
It then continues as a normal how-to-mix-in-Sonar tutorial.
 
What a disappointment.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3D6js9Pzqs
post edited by jpetersen - 2017/07/05 22:22:19
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? 2017/07/12 14:22:46 (permalink)
One of the things I have always found annoying / inefficient / deficient about SONAR is how difficult it is to copy the setup from one track to another.  I had to do this about 4 times last night as I was doing a series of Melodyne edits followed by track bounces. 
If I have a set of effects on one track, then I ought to be able to pick up a "paintbrush tool" and "paint" those effects on other tracks in a matter of seconds.
In fact, it seems to me that SONAR is only capable of CTRL-dragging individual effects, not entire effects chains.  And there is nothing you can do with ProChannel plug-ins.
What I end up doing is bas-ackwards to me.  I clone a track that is set up the way I want it and then I drag the clips into that new track.  That's a PITA.  You can do something similar with track templates -- also a PITA.
 
Similarly, there ought to be an easy way to copy plug-in settings from one track to another when I already have the plug-in inserted in the target strip.  And there ought to be an easy way to copy the settings from one track to 5 other tracks all at once.

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 storage

sonocrafters.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? 2017/07/13 16:42:51 (permalink)
Can't you do that by cloning a track?  Of course, that won't help if the second track already exists., although you could drag audio and MIDI from the track to the clone.

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? 2017/07/13 17:17:43 (permalink)
konradh
Can't you do that by cloning a track?  Of course, that won't help if the second track already exists., although you could drag audio and MIDI from the track to the clone.


 
Yes.  Exactly.  That's a real PITA.  This is one of those things that seems a lot easier in StudioOne.  I don't remember the exact procedure because I haven't used that for a couple of weeks.  But my recollection was that it was very easy to take the effects from one channel and put them on any other channel.


The original question was how to make DAWs easier to use.  I would say stop trying to make it look like studio hardware.  Probably only 10% of the people using DAW technology today has ever even been in a studio with all those relics of ancient hardware, each with its unique approach to controls.  Just stop.  It makes no sense to model something that only Grandpa knows about.  Design the DAW world for the new user who is a lot more familiar and comfortable with (mostly) consistent GUIs. 
 
Of course, most of this hodge-podge comes from VST merchants who seem to put a lot more work into making the GUI look like an old hardware product than in actually getting good-sounding results quickly.
 
The "paintbrush" metaphor is practically universal in modern apps.  When we are talking about a DAW, a paintbrush tool should be able to do all of this:
  • When loading the paintbrush, if you clock on a channel strip in the white space where there are no effects or other controls, this picks up every attribute of the channel strip, including pan, fader, sends, effects, etc.
  • When loading the paintbrush, if you click in the area of the fader, you pick up only the fader, pan, and trim.
  • When loading the paintbrush, if you click on an individual effect (including PC effects), you pick only the attributes of that one effect.
  • When loading the paintbrush, if you do a rubber band stretch across multiple effects, you pick up the attributes of all the effects within the rubber band.
  • When loading up the paintbrush, if you click in the PC strip white space, you pick up everything in the PC strip.
  • When painting. the brush deposits all the attributes it has picked up.  If an effect already exists, then its attributes are updated.  If an effect does not exist for the painted channel, the effect is inserted into the target track in the same position as the donor track.
  • And you should be able to sweep through multiple tracks while painting -- causing all of the touched tracked to get the paintbrush attributes.
I realize there are ways to accomplish this today, but the goal should be to make everything as seamless, intuitive and productive as possible.
 
 

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 storage

sonocrafters.com
Keni
Max Output Level: -17.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5769
  • Joined: 2003/11/04 10:42:15
  • Location: Willits, CA USA
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/13 18:01:43 (permalink)
Not trying to be facetious.. but a Virtual Engineer plugin is an idea I've been thinking about.

I'm supplying PA/recording services for a festival this weekend and must rely on a friend who is not an engineer to mix when i am performing (yeah, i get to do both at this gig)

Keni Fink
Keni - Facebook
Deep Space Records
http://www.reverbnation.com/inexile
http://www.cdbaby.com/artist/inexile
Out Of My Head Music (BMI)

SPlat/MacPro/Dual Xeon 3.06GHz 6-core (12 total)/64GB/Win8.1X64/Presonus 1818VSL/Soundscape SS8IO-1
JohanSebatianGremlin
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 402
  • Joined: 2016/03/17 22:27:15
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/13 18:46:40 (permalink)
Keni
Not trying to be facetious.. but a Virtual Engineer plugin is an idea I've been thinking about.

I'm supplying PA/recording services for a festival this weekend and must rely on a friend who is not an engineer to mix when i am performing (yeah, i get to do both at this gig)

How would that work?

 
If gear was the determining factor, we would all have a shelf full of Grammies and a pocket full of change.  -microapp
 
i7, 32gb RAM, Win10 64bit, RME UFX
Keni
Max Output Level: -17.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5769
  • Joined: 2003/11/04 10:42:15
  • Location: Willits, CA USA
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/13 21:29:04 (permalink)
JohanSebatianGremlin
Keni
Not trying to be facetious.. but a Virtual Engineer plugin is an idea I've been thinking about.

I'm supplying PA/recording services for a festival this weekend and must rely on a friend who is not an engineer to mix when i am performing (yeah, i get to do both at this gig)

How would that work?


Yeah, it's a stretch. I'm probably a few years early with this one.

Thinking of an AI that can set recording volume, adjust compresson and tweak eq leaving further adjustments to the artist at a later time?

Crazy, yeah...

Keni Fink
Keni - Facebook
Deep Space Records
http://www.reverbnation.com/inexile
http://www.cdbaby.com/artist/inexile
Out Of My Head Music (BMI)

SPlat/MacPro/Dual Xeon 3.06GHz 6-core (12 total)/64GB/Win8.1X64/Presonus 1818VSL/Soundscape SS8IO-1
JohanSebatianGremlin
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 402
  • Joined: 2016/03/17 22:27:15
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/13 21:39:51 (permalink)
Well... More like nice idea if you could pull it off and make it actually work. But that'd be one heck of a trick I think.

 
If gear was the determining factor, we would all have a shelf full of Grammies and a pocket full of change.  -microapp
 
i7, 32gb RAM, Win10 64bit, RME UFX
Keni
Max Output Level: -17.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 5769
  • Joined: 2003/11/04 10:42:15
  • Location: Willits, CA USA
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/13 21:45:11 (permalink)
JohanSebatianGremlin
Well... More like nice idea if you could pull it off and make it actually work. But that'd be one heck of a trick I think.


Roland has an auto set function for their interfaces. They showed it years ago while owning Cakewalk...

Keni Fink
Keni - Facebook
Deep Space Records
http://www.reverbnation.com/inexile
http://www.cdbaby.com/artist/inexile
Out Of My Head Music (BMI)

SPlat/MacPro/Dual Xeon 3.06GHz 6-core (12 total)/64GB/Win8.1X64/Presonus 1818VSL/Soundscape SS8IO-1
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? 2017/07/14 03:47:32 (permalink)
JohanSebatianGremlin
Keni
Not trying to be facetious.. but a Virtual Engineer plugin is an idea I've been thinking about.
I'm supplying PA/recording services for a festival this weekend and must rely on a friend who is not an engineer to mix when i am performing (yeah, i get to do both at this gig)

How would that work?

I have some ideas on this.  None of this would match the skill of an expert sound engineer, but could provide some very acceptable results in many situations.
 
You are probably familiar with "Dugan-style" auto-mixers.  This is a simple algorithm for auto-balancing several microphones, especially in a panel discussion format.  It is crude, but effective for those limited situations.
 
I think it should be possible to develop a an algorithm that is like the Dugan, but allows operation on different parts of the spectrum.  Say for example, that there are 6 frequency ranges where we typically have to mix to get voices/instruments heard, e.g.:
0-60
60-200
200-600
600-2K
2K-5K
5K-20K
 
Imagine that for each of these 6 ranges, we would identify priorities for each track, maybe on a 1-10 scale.  The priority would identify which tracks were the most important to hear in that frequency range.  For example, in 60-200 maybe we call the kick drum a 9, bass guitar a 7, bari sax and bass trombone both are 6 and so on.
 
In the 600-2K range, the female vocal is a 10, the background vocals are 7s. Guitar is 7.5. Low strings are 4, cymbals are 3, and so on.
 
It would be the job of the DAW to translate those priorities into dynamic EQs, automation, or whatever to cause the instruments to balance in each frequency band consistent with the priorities.
 
And of course, we'd want those priorities to be changeable through automation, and the priorities might be different in the bridge section of a song.
 
If this could be done as a "macro process" (i.e. with the results of the algorithm being implemented as automation curves or settings on standard effects processors, then it would be cool to be able to freeze the automix actions, so that we could then go in and make further refinements by hand.

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 storage

sonocrafters.com
Rbh
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2349
  • Joined: 2007/09/05 22:33:44
  • Location: Indiana
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/14 04:51:28 (permalink)
I'd say very simply..... GET RID OF or minimize the use of ICONS, seriously - words have instant meaning - Icons require a translation through a visual que that doubles the processing necessary to do a very simple task. The musical DAW probably has programs from 10 - 20 different manufacturers and there's no standard base of these visual cues. That being said keeping track of supporting file locations for 10 - 20 programs is a nightmare typically. Eulas and licensing over a long period of time requires constant maintenance of passwords, email accounts, hardware locks  etc etc etc. Sonar in particular needs to better isolate the work requirements of the console view and track view. Better audio interface and VST IO naming would be more helpful.

I7 930 2.8 Asus PDX58D
12 Gig
Appollo
CbB, Sonar Pro, Reaper, Samplitude, MixBuss
 Win7 Pro

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=902832
Rbh
Max Output Level: -52 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2349
  • Joined: 2007/09/05 22:33:44
  • Location: Indiana
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/14 05:18:57 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby RSMCGUITAR 2017/07/14 06:38:56
I'd like to add :----This thread is filled with rants - mine included, but I've been using Cakewalk for a very long time---DOS 3.0 . I've recently moved on as a long time user of Sonar 5  to the current Sonar Professional and I'd like to  commend Cakewalk Twelvetone systems for an awesome dedication to long time backwards compatibility. I have midi based projects that are more than 20 years old that I can bring up and use with the current version. That is very rare in this industry and I think it deserves an honorable mention. I haven't updated in 10 years and the portability from sonar Version 5 projects to the current is amazingly quick and consistent. I have a number of major competing DAWs on my system and Sonar smokes them all as the most well rounded full featured product.

I7 930 2.8 Asus PDX58D
12 Gig
Appollo
CbB, Sonar Pro, Reaper, Samplitude, MixBuss
 Win7 Pro

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=902832
anydmusic
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 251
  • Joined: 2015/07/17 08:30:23
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/14 09:50:50 (permalink)
There are some great comments here many of which I agree with.
 
Thinking about my personal experience many of the challenges that I have have are not with the recording or mixing tasks that I am trying to perform, although I know that I still have a lot to learn, but with the management of the ridiculous number of resources that I have available to me. 
 
Take a simple example like selecting a Rhodes sound for a track, I have five hardware modules and multiple VSTs from which I can source the sound that I want but the process requires me to use multiple different interfaces to search for the sound. What I would love is a way to search all of the available sounds from all of the installed VSTs and my Master.ins and allow me to audition and favourite within the list and when I find a sound I want to then be able to drag it into the project and set up the tracks I need to access that sound.
 
If there is a way of doing this I have missed it.
 
Something else I personally would find useful  would be the ability to add some personal notes to the specific item like Hardware Definitions, VSTs and Samples. The software equivalent of the "Post It".
 
I appreciate that there would be some complexity here given that we all have different setups and those setups change as we add or remove hardware and install, uninstall or upgrade software. It would also involve a high level of cooperation with other developers. For me though the challenge is less about how I create a midi track or add a compressor to a buss its much more about simplifying the process of selecting from the vast array of choice that I have.
 
I have a personal theory that The Beatles would not finish Sergeant Peppers if they recorded it today and that the limited choices they, and George Martin, had helped rather than limited the creative process.
 
Sadly my response to the challenges is often one that perpetuates the problem in that I add to my choices. Back to the Rhodes example, even though I know that based on all of the sounds available to me across hardware and VSTs, I have literally hundreds of really good Rhodes sounds, and that getting the right one is just a matter of auditioning them selecting one and possibly doing a little editing, I'm considering the Lounge Piano upgrade in the vain hope that it will provide a single point of reference for Rhodes sounds!
 
From a personal perspective most of my challenges are about Studio Management rather than Recording Management and Sonar is basically the Studio that I am trying to manage because most of what I use is hosted within Sonar. At the last start up Sonar reported I have 500 VSTs and it is the management of these on other resources that seems to add the most complexity to anything that I do.

Graham
Windows 10 64 bit - Intel i7-4790, 16GB, 2 x 256GB SSD
Cubase 9.5
Sonar Platinum (Rapture Pro, Z3TA 2, CA2A, plus some other bits)
Delta 24/96, UAD 1, UA25 EX, 2 x MidiSport,
IKMultiMedia - (SampleTank 3, Miroslav 2, Syntronik, TRacks 5, Modo Bass), Band In A Box, Sound Quest, VS Pro, Kinetic, Acid, Sound Forge, Jammer
Waves MaxxVolume, IR 1, Aphex Enhancer, Abbey Plates
Korg Legacy, VStation, Bass Station
kellyg
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 67
  • Joined: 2004/01/09 02:01:15
  • Location: Texas
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/15 04:36:25 (permalink)
Thoughtful comments all ...  I am a computer professional by occupation and I find Sonar as complex a piece of software to master as anything I use at work. I also recall my first attempts at using a DAW. I gave up on the first one I tried but ended up with Cakewalk 9 Pro Audio and have been using Cakewalk ever since. I would offer these suggestions.  
  • Along the lines of project templates, start with a set up matching your basic use of the DAW. Myself, for instance, I mostly record my acoustic and electric stringed instruments, and vocals. As I've gotten further along, I've added some midi drums, bass, and a few keyboard tracks to augment my acoustic sound. Otherwise. I never use a lot of the synths and advanced midi stuff. So, any way you can hide things that don't fit a particular mode of use, the better. 
  • The buy-at-your level suggestion prompted me to think -- I learn by taking a simple task I want to accomplish (e.g. record a guitar and a vocal track) and dig into the software help just enough to figure out what I want to do, not by going through the tutorials step by step. What would really be cool for someone whose learning is task based, would be to have feature groups, where you could start with a set of controls for achieving something simple, then as you discover the need for the more advanced features, enable those or step up to the next level of exposed features and controls. In Sonar, you might have a novice mode where most of the features are hidden except what it takes to record and mix a few tracks of audio with a metronome included, limit the number of effects. presets, etc. Then as ones expertise increases, expose more features, plugins, etc. In Sonar, it would be just a more task-based combination of things like task bar customizations, and project templates tied together in sort of a super-set geared toward one's level of use. 
  • Every feature, be it a clip to edit, a plug-in, a task bar module, should have some place to click on it and link to the help topic. My experience with Sonar is you have to get out of the workflow to get help, especially with the plug-ins. So, first, put the help close to the task at hand. Then, if there are more online aids such as video clips or blog posts, those should be linked in the help. So, lets say, I am editing a track and switch my track editing to work with transient markers. I don't know how that works. Instead of having to Easter-egg through the help system, there might be a region in the top-right corner of the track, or a tiny rectangle, whatever, that if I click on that, I get directed to the help topic. Then if there is a video online on Cake TV, the link is in the help topic. That way, instead of leaving the workflow, opening the help and trying to find the topic, or worse yet, windowing out to a browser and going an poking around on Cakewalk's site for half an hour, I could just keep drilling down into the helps available and then close back out to where I was in the project when I got curious. 

Kelly R. Gazzaway
mudgel
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 12010
  • Joined: 2004/08/13 00:56:05
  • Location: Linton Victoria (Near Ballarat)
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/15 15:42:25 (permalink)
kellyg
Thoughtful comments all ...  I am a computer professional by occupation and I find Sonar as complex a piece of software to master as anything I use at work. I also recall my first attempts at using a DAW. I gave up on the first one I tried but ended up with Cakewalk 9 Pro Audio and have been using Cakewalk ever since. I would offer these suggestions.  
  • Along the lines of project templates, start with a set up matching your basic use of the DAW. Myself, for instance, I mostly record my acoustic and electric stringed instruments, and vocals. As I've gotten further along, I've added some midi drums, bass, and a few keyboard tracks to augment my acoustic sound. Otherwise. I never use a lot of the synths and advanced midi stuff. So, any way you can hide things that don't fit a particular mode of use, the better. 
  • The buy-at-your level suggestion prompted me to think -- I learn by taking a simple task I want to accomplish (e.g. record a guitar and a vocal track) and dig into the software help just enough to figure out what I want to do, not by going through the tutorials step by step. What would really be cool for someone whose learning is task based, would be to have feature groups, where you could start with a set of controls for achieving something simple, then as you discover the need for the more advanced features, enable those or step up to the next level of exposed features and controls. In Sonar, you might have a novice mode where most of the features are hidden except what it takes to record and mix a few tracks of audio with a metronome included, limit the number of effects. presets, etc. Then as ones expertise increases, expose more features, plugins, etc. In Sonar, it would be just a more task-based combination of things like task bar customizations, and project templates tied together in sort of a super-set geared toward one's level of use. 
  • Every feature, be it a clip to edit, a plug-in, a task bar module, should have some place to click on it and link to the help topic. My experience with Sonar is you have to get out of the workflow to get help, especially with the plug-ins. So, first, put the help close to the task at hand. Then, if there are more online aids such as video clips or blog posts, those should be linked in the help. So, lets say, I am editing a track and switch my track editing to work with transient markers. I don't know how that works. Instead of having to Easter-egg through the help system, there might be a region in the top-right corner of the track, or a tiny rectangle, whatever, that if I click on that, I get directed to the help topic. Then if there is a video online on Cake TV, the link is in the help topic. That way, instead of leaving the workflow, opening the help and trying to find the topic, or worse yet, windowing out to a browser and going an poking around on Cakewalk's site for half an hour, I could just keep drilling down into the helps available and then close back out to where I was in the project when I got curious. 



Just pressing F1 in any window or screen widget will open the appropriate Help file for that item. It's a system that is being constantly refined. At present Eli items open automatically in the Browser.

Mike V. (MUDGEL)

STUDIO: Win 10 Pro x64, SPlat & CbB x64,
PC: ASUS Z370-A, INTEL i7 8700k, 32GIG DDR4 2400, OC 4.7Ghz.
Storage: 7 TB SATA III, 750GiG SSD & Samsung 500 Gig 960 EVO NVMe M.2.
Monitors: Adam A7X, JBL 10” Sub.
Audio I/O & DSP Server: DIGIGRID IOS & IOX.
Screen: Raven MTi + 43" HD 4K TV Monitor.
Keyboard Controller: Native Instruments Komplete Kontrol S88.
tlw
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2567
  • Joined: 2008/10/11 22:06:32
  • Location: West Midlands, UK
  • Status: offline
Re: What Would Make DAWs (Not Just SONAR) Easier to Use? 2017/07/15 16:40:21 (permalink)
anydmusic
For me though the challenge is less about how I create a midi track or add a compressor to a buss its much more about simplifying the process of selecting from the vast array of choice that I have.
<snip>
At the last start up Sonar reported I have 500 VSTs and it is the management of these on other resources that seems to add the most complexity to anything that I do.


Create custom plugin lists using Sonar's plugin manager that only contain the ones you want to use is one way to go. Takes time to do but only needs doing once on a big scale then a bit of editing as you find new plugins you prefer tpo the ones you usually use.

And/or uninstall plugins you don't like or never use.

Having hundreds of plugins or many synths with hundreds of presets each isn't compulsory :-) Nor is using any of the presets - most non-synth plugins usually need configuring to work with your audio rather than the audio the preset-creator had when they created the preset anyway. And that's assuming they even ran any audio through the plugin rather than just dialing in a generic "bass guitar compression" or whatever.

You're right about the risks of drowning in complexity, having too much choice and too many options so nothing gets finished. My personal way round that is one reason why I prefer hardware synths, and often analogue ones with no ability to store presets at all. It removes some of the temptation to endlessly adjust stuff. It's an old-fashioned way of working where once something's been tracked the decision becomes either to keep it or decide at some point it's not needed after all or only bits of it are.

I then get hung up on other options and it still takes ages to finish anything :-) As a friend of mine puts it, "recording is like decorating a house, it's never finished, you just decide to stop at some point". Having a deadline to meet can help with that, as did the cost of paying for studio time by the hour in the days the only way to make a good quality recording was to hire an expensive studio.

Another approach is to deliberately restrict what plugins you use and get to know a few of them really well rather than using lots and hoping to find a plugin and preset that sounds OK.

Sonar Platinum 64bit, Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit, I7 3770K Ivybridge, 16GB Ram, Gigabyte Z77-D3H m/board,
ATI 7750 graphics+ 1GB RAM, 2xIntel 520 series 220GB SSDs, 1 TB Samsung F3 + 1 TB WD HDDs, Seasonic fanless 460W psu, RME Fireface UFX, Focusrite Octopre.
Assorted real synths, guitars, mandolins, diatonic accordions, percussion, fx and other 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? 2017/07/15 17:00:59 (permalink)
tlw
Create custom plugin lists using Sonar's plugin manager that only contain the ones you want to use is one way to go. Takes time...

In the spirit of making things easier, there ought to be a little button on EVERY plug-in's window (like the thumb tack button) that causes the plug-in to be disabled from the menus and bypassed when scanning.  This would need a confirmation box so that we wouldn't wipe something out by accident.  If it is disabled rather than being removed altogether, it wold be easy to re-enable it later if I changed my mind about its usefulness.
 
The idea here is that it is likely you will have the VST window open at the point you decide this really isn't something you want to see again.  One click (and a second click to confirm) and it is done.

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 storage

sonocrafters.com
Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 5 of 8
Jump to:
© 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1