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.

Lenses for basic recording and presets for plugs. Better web marketing...

Because sadly some things can be done as a placebo effect to repackage the same steps.

@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

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.

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.

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.
 
 

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
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?

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...