I think thats a good way of putting it Steve. I fully agree. The whole is rather nice. I also just like its looks. Why that is, is odd because X1 is not so very different yet X2 looks better to me. 

  I'm surprised at the lack of Touch enthusiasts.
  As soon as I watched the Cakewalk videos regarding Touch,I went on the Newegg website and ordered my Touch screen.
  I'm not one to throw money at my hobbies readily. My touch screen is absolutely one of my favorite studio purchases.
  If your not raving about it,you probably haven't tried it.  

Joe,

I haven't tried it yet, but plan to as soon as I can set aside money for a touch screen. With 3 family weddings and a vacation to California this year, it's taken a rather distant back seat!

  What sold me was the fact that it was free. i just wanted x1pro, but if you're throwing in x2 too.......

For me it's the simplicity of using it for my recordings, it just works great for me. The Pro Channel makes my mediocre recordings sound great. I haven't had to do much recording lately, but I know how well it works with my test recordings.

For me it was the overall way that the toolset seemed to be more transparent to my workflow...more integrated if you will. Of course the add-on tools are a bonus but I could easily do without some of them, maybe all of them. If it was one thing: it would be fX chains in the ProChannel.

Regarding the UI appearance: I have to sau that as much as I like the concept of the Inspector, Browser, Multidock and Screensets I find the actual details of the UI to be physically tiring. All of the retro look is wasted on me. Personally, the cleaner the better. YMMV of course.

Regards,

I have to agree with Mike. The interface is a nice GUI, but it gets a little "in the way" for me. I just removed the things about it that took up space, needlessly. If you take a look at the Sonoris Mastering Compressor, or Mastering EQ, you can (after using them) appreciate a nice, clean interface, where eye-candy is not the priority. Functionality is paramount. 

Something to consider for touch-screen users, is to give them the option of using screensets, or the ability to scroll around a huge board where the tracks are at the top, and the mixer is at the bottom, for example. This of using a large SSL or Neve console. Even if you only had a monitor's view of it (small section), you could quickly scroll to another part of it. 

What I'd like to see is the Flight Simulator graphics artists meet the DAW makers and give me a cockpit DAW! 

 
Because it's ..... er..... one more than X1.
 
So it's one better.
 
Simples.

Mike writes : "All of the retro look is wasted on me."

If by retro you mean that it looks like a real physical machine, then that's what I really like about X2. I've now spent hours 'on' a bunch of different daws thanks to the groove3 videos and I'm not too impressed by the competition's look. Logic Pro is really lolly pop, Live is so abstract it's hard to tell the different sections apart or distinguish the controls, kind of like you're in Tron, Protools is sort of blah... I get back to X2 and embrace the square edges and the reality of the parts. But then, if I could have real knobs and sliders I'd be even more happy.

I'm only talking looks, I still haven't gotten around to trying out much of the workflow.

I think thats a good way of putting it Steve. I fully agree. The whole is rather nice. I also just like its looks. Why that is, is odd because X1 is not so very different yet X2 looks better to me.

 
Thanks, John.  
 
The difference in X2 is difficult for me to put my finger on as well.   But I figure someday when I can afford a touch screen that will change.