# DAW Choice



## synthnut (Sep 20, 2011)

I am looking to move on to a different DAW ....I'm worn out with D.P. and will be moving on to either Cubase 6, or Studio One ......Which would you go with , and why if you had to make a move ? .....

Keep in mind that I still have quite a few midi modules, and keyboards, so midi is important ( I'm old school ) but also do vocal and virtual .....Thanks, Jim


----------



## muziksculp (Sep 20, 2011)

Wait for Studio One Pro (Version 2) to be released, compare it to Cubase 6, then choose the one that fits your needs, and taste. Although, I don't think you can go wrong with Cubase 6, it is one of the most popular DAWs on the market. 

I use Cubase 6, I like it a lot, It is a fantastic DAW, but I am also very excited about adding Studio One Pro (V2) as a second DAW option. Version 2 should be out in the near future, hopefully Oct. 2011. 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## MacQ (Sep 20, 2011)

Cubase 6 is my current DAW, and I'd say you can't go wrong there. Studio One I demo'd recently, and while it's very much like Cubase (all of the key-commands seemed to be the same, so I was up and running quickly) ... it's missing some of the features I rely on, like the MIDI input transformer.

Depending on what kind of stuff you do, I think Studio One could be the answer. It's certainly more slickly designed, and might be more intuitive. I found it easy to use, at any rate.

But Cubase is the thing for me, since SX in 2002. Wow, almost 10 years of Cubase ... no wonder I like it.

~Stu


----------



## Gabriel Oliveira (Sep 20, 2011)

REAPER


----------



## José Herring (Sep 20, 2011)

Can't go wrong with Cubase. It's getting better and better all the time. It's work flow is fantastic and routing wise it does things that no other DAW seems to be able to do right now.


----------



## Daryl (Sep 20, 2011)

I would make two suggestions, whilst you are looking:

1) Make sure that it is cross-platform. This will give you the best flexibility and future-proofing, should your needs change over time.

2) Have a look at "supported Hosts" on all the sample developers' forums. Make sure that your choice is there. If not, you might have a rocky road.

D


----------



## Stephen Baysted (Sep 20, 2011)

Cubase 6/Nuendo 5.5 + Pro Tools 9 here. Damn good combo for me. Whatever works for you though - Cubase 6 has a fully functioning demo, so you can check it out.


----------



## Dietz (Sep 20, 2011)

Cubase / Nuendo is the safest bet, if you ask me. Self-explanatory on the surface, but super-deep if you need sophisticated options. Cross-platform all the way. 64 bit. Huge user-base.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 20, 2011)

As a longtime Cubase user on Mac, I'd add one caveat. Because of it's particular scheme, you can use Logic at a substantially lower latency when inputting VI's and audio.

That said, I love the workflow on Cubase 6. The program has been vastly improved over the years. There are annoyances as on all DAWS, but I find it a pleasure to work on.

(Btw-Every time I see Dietz's sig, it makes me laugh).


----------



## synthnut (Sep 20, 2011)

Thanks guys .....One thing that I forgot to mention is the fact that I do use Mac and PC, so it's already important to me to have a program be cross platform ..... and do WELL when it iS used in a cross platform situation .... Thanks for making this decision easier .... Sincerely, Jim


----------



## adg21 (Sep 20, 2011)

Have you considered pro tools, I use pro tools and Cubase at the moment, cross-platform, and like them both for different reasons. With the advent of VE Pro, which I don't have (yet), I think pro tools is a good option as it's MIDI functionality is as good as any these days.


----------



## Daryl (Sep 21, 2011)

adg21 @ Wed Sep 21 said:


> Have you considered pro tools, I use pro tools and Cubase at the moment, cross-platform, and like them both for different reasons. With the advent of VE Pro, which I don't have (yet), I think pro tools is a good option as it's MIDI functionality is as good as any these days.


That would depend on your needs. For me the MIDI in Pro Tools is far too basic.

However, I do agree that VE Pro makes Pro Tools usable for composers who use Virtual Instruments.

D


----------



## adg21 (Sep 21, 2011)

This might be true, but in what way do you feel it's basic in Pro Tools?

The main thing I notice is the lack of the Cubase expression map and VST expression 2 which for me are the main Cubase perks

I don't really feel I'm missing anything in the editing features (which are fairly advanced) or controller lanes or anything, but maybe I just don't dig deep enough. 

Routing, audio editing and mixing and most other things are a lot more to my taste in pro tools


----------



## Daryl (Sep 21, 2011)

adg21 @ Wed Sep 21 said:


> This might be true, but in what way do you feel it's basic in Pro Tools?


For a start I couldn't work without the Logical Editor.

D


----------



## rannar (Sep 21, 2011)

I was a Cubase user for just over 6 years (from 2002), then I got a chance to try Studio One when it came out. 
I said to myself "let's make a few projects in it before saying anything". 
And oh was I surprised! It's such a time saver, even for me after years in Cubase. The interface itself is beautiful and inspiring to work with. I ditched Cubase and have been working in Studio One for about 2 years now. I don't miss anything really, although I know Cubase has some deeper and more complex features that could be very useful in many situations. Even some simple features that could be handy sometimes. But if you are creative you can work yourself around the missing features and get what you want anyway. 

I also should point out that I have not worked in Cubase 6, and there have been some new interesting updates for sure. But nothing that makes me want to jump right back. I'm way too impressed with what Studio One does to the speed of getting my musical ideas into final products. Right now I'm excited to see what the news in Studio One v2 are going to be.


----------



## Daniel (Sep 21, 2011)

Steinberg Cubase & Propellerhead Reason ---> superior DAW.

For fun:
http://www.musicradar.com/tuition/tech/the-15-best-daw-software-apps-in-the-world-today-238905/15 (http://www.musicradar.com/tuition/tech/ ... -238905/15)

Best,


----------



## JohnG (Sep 21, 2011)

Daryl @ 21st September 2011 said:


> For me the MIDI in Pro Tools is far too basic.
> 
> However, I do agree that VE Pro makes Pro Tools usable for composers who use Virtual Instruments.
> 
> D



Daryl, I assume you mean by this that, "PT has been somewhat shaky / non 64 bit / otherwise not the best v.i. host. Now with VE Pro doing the hosting, PT is a viable DAW."

Is that what you meant? On the same machine?


----------



## Daryl (Sep 21, 2011)

JohnG @ Wed Sep 21 said:


> Daryl @ 21st September 2011 said:
> 
> 
> > For me the MIDI in Pro Tools is far too basic.
> ...


Sorry that I wasn't clear. What I was trying to say was that people who were using PT to host Virtual Instruments are getting dreadful performance, because RTAS is really not up to snuff in this regard. Most of the composers I know who use PT for MIDI have traditionally run standalones for all the virtual instruments. VE Pro makes that all unnecessary, and has made things much easier and even just possible for those composers who don't want to be limited by their hardware for the number of audio returns that they use.

Obviously it gets around the 64bit limit nicely as well.

D


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Sep 21, 2011)

adg21 @ Tue Sep 20 said:


> Have you considered pro tools, I use pro tools and Cubase at the moment, cross-platform, and like them both for different reasons. With the advent of VE Pro, which I don't have (yet), I think pro tools is a good option as it's MIDI functionality is as good as any these days.



No, it isn't IMHO. It has improved but it is still not in the same league MIDI wise as Logic, Cubase, DP, or Sonar.


----------



## JohnG (Sep 21, 2011)

Thanks Daryl (and others).

(Personally, I am still hanging with DP, in case anyone is curious, but I have a client seeking advice on his somewhat antiquated setup, so one keeps an open mind.)


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 21, 2011)

You can use others ideas, and designs, or customize your own DAW using Reaper.
I was just about ready to buy a slave PC and VE Pro to host a large template, but Reaper developers showed me how to save another 1000 USD.
I'll never spend another dime on unnecessary upgrades or bugs left behind by bloated architechure.
No dongles either...

It's DAW with many faces.
Below is the custom arrangement set up.
I have live perfomance set ups.
Record while perform set ups. 
Hardware integration set ups.........

My favorite set up is the .07 msec. @ 96k where my hosted instruments play back as fast as a hardware Motiff Rompler...


----------



## PeterMalick (Sep 21, 2011)

+1 for REAPER!!

I've got about a jillion hours in Pro Tools, but still considering moving recording and editing to Reaper.


----------



## Nostradamus (Sep 21, 2011)

Reaper is great, but if the OP depends on file exchange in the professional biz, I think there's no alternative to Pro Tools.

By the way, here's a really beautiful Reaper theme:

http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=74685


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 21, 2011)

Wisely put Nostrdamus...
ProTools integration with hardware consoles is also a great feature, and file transfers excell.
And RADO 4 is an excellent theme.
He even incorporated the vertical collapsabilty of the TCP which allows more screen space while still having enough of a TCP for metering.


But most impressive is the weekly updates like the one we just got.

__________________________________________________________

v4.1rc1 - September 21 2011
+ (rc1) Toolbars: store toolbar assignments in screensets

+ Actions: toggle multichannel track metering, now in track menu
+ API: added SetProjectMarker3() and AddProjectMarker2() for setting custom marker colors
+ API: threading fixes for GetSetObjectState() and other related APIs
+ Directory cleanup: now looks for media references in project bay media items
+ Envelopes: fixed editing point values for FX wet/dry envelopes
+ Envelopes: pitch envelopes snap configuration (1 semitone, 50 cent, 25 cent, 10 cent, 5 cent, 1 cent, off)
+ Fades/crossfades: prevent unintentional crossfade edits when media items are adjacent but not crossfaded
+ FX: fixed possible excess midi notes on loop when PDC FX are used
+ FX: improved undo state tracking when copying/moving FX between tracks
+ FX: if project samplerate set and loading project, try to initialize loaded plug-ins at correct rate (avoid later reinit)
+ FX: pin mappings are now stored more safely, fix for possible race conditions
+ Freeze: actions to render tracks in-place with FX, then save/remove existing media and online FX
+ Freeze: menu actions in FX chain window to freeze track up to last selected FX
+ Grouping: fix for rare item group reuse bug
+ Media explorer: fixed crash issue when group policy prevented embedded explorer (falls back to non-explorer view)
+ Metering: new multichannel tracks default to multichannel metering enabled
+ Metering: master multichannel metering is now optional
+ Mixer: scroll improvements/fixes
+ Mixer: opening/unhiding mixer now makes last selected track visible
+ MIDI: use MIDI track name event when importing files
+ MIDI files: options to automatically snap time signature changes, tempo changes on file import
+ MIDI editor: switching sources via filter window no longer unhides all other sources
+ MIDI editor: undo fixes, especially related to list editor
+ MIDI editor: note properties fixed reset of combo boxes on multiple note selection
+ MIDI editor: inline editor marquee fix
+ MIDI editor: fixed bug when quantizing notes that were drawn in (not painted or recorded)
+ MIDI editor: fixed context menu doubleness when clicking above piano keys
+ Mouse modifiers: support ripple edit (off, one track, all tracks) while moving items
+ Mouse modifiers: import/export mouse modifier support (.ReaperMouseMap files)
+ OSX: better behavior when using modal windows (such as save as with convert) when REAPER inactive
+ Playback: corrected minor rounding bug on playback start in certain instances
+ Relative snap: avoid clearing snap offset when copying media items
+ Render: new user setting for tail length to use in project render, stem render, track freeze
+ Render: fixed certain issues with filename wildcards
+ Scale finder: button to use selected notes in MIDI editor 
+ Sends: shift+drag IO from unselected track to selected uses all selected tracks as receivers
+ SRC: fixed quality/synchronization issue (4.0x regression)
+ Toolbars: store toolbar assignments in screensets
+ Topmost pin buttons: bug fixes, buttons now remember their last states (based on window title)
+ Track manager, region manager, project bay: columns can be reordered
+ Track manager: added freeze column/button
+ Vertical zooming: scrollbar fixes, better behavior
+ Video: improved rendering accuracy, support for rendering with playrates
+ Video/FFmpeg: updated API to support the newest FFmpeg/libav version (v53)
+ VST: support effSetSpeakerArrangement notifications for plug-ins 
________________________________________________________

This much work would require further revenue from one of the bloated DAW's w/ Dongles.....


----------



## synthnut (Sep 22, 2011)

A lot of good food for thought ..... much more of an eye openner than antisipated .....Thanks so much for the input .....Jim


----------



## vancomposer (Sep 24, 2011)

CUBASE 6... will NEVER change!


----------



## Walra48 (Sep 24, 2011)

Cubase 6.04 here on a Mac Pro Westmere 6 core 3.33 w/32 GB RAM & VE Pro. Been a Cubase user since 1994.


----------



## Dracarys (Sep 24, 2011)

If you're PC I would go Cubase, although it's mixer is a little unconventional and annoying compared to Logics or Pro tools, it's a great DAW and very stable.

Pro Tools on a PC has been garbage, in my experience.


----------



## synthnut (Sep 24, 2011)

Some of the programs that run PC or Mac run good on one or the other .....Seems like they are ported for one OS , and were afterthoughts for the other OS ..... It shows on how the program runs on PC or on Mac ..... 

This being said, does Cubase run just as well on a Mac as it does on a PC ? .....How about Reaper ? .....Studio One ? .......Thanks, Jim


----------



## spacegaier (Sep 24, 2011)

Casalena @ Sat Sep 24 said:


> If you're PC I would go Cubase, although it's mixer is a little unconventional and annoying compared to Logics or Pro tools


In what regards? I am using Cubase and find it rather conventional, but then again I never used anything else (except Reaper at the beginning).


----------



## Walra48 (Sep 24, 2011)

> This being said, does Cubase run just as well on a Mac as it does on a PC ?



Windows allows for lower latency on its audio interface drivers. I work comfortably at 256 on OSX. Apart from that Cubase 6 works great on both systems. Personally I prefer OSX.


----------



## stonzthro (Sep 24, 2011)

I use Logic and have for a long time but Cubase certainly develops lots of hardware for its userbase - especially these new babies - very nice looking!

http://www.audiomidi.com/Steinberg_CMC_Controllers.aspx

Wish these worked with Logic - might in the future, but Apple has little if no interest in developing hardware products like this...


----------



## Dracarys (Sep 25, 2011)

spacegaier @ Sat Sep 24 said:


> Casalena @ Sat Sep 24 said:
> 
> 
> > If you're PC I would go Cubase, although it's mixer is a little unconventional and annoying compared to Logics or Pro tools
> ...




Well after working on an SSL, Neve, and other recording consoles, I kind of got used to the conventional "Out's over In's", and the way patch cables were set up.
In Pro Tools and Logics case the mixer is input over output.
Cubase doesn't give you this, sometimes when I want to side chain I like to set the input of the instrument to same as which ever I'm chaining, instead of just using a send. There is no simple In's and Out's on the mixer, and everything seems cluttered. Parallel compression is also easier in Pro Tools/Logic, to me anyways.
Instead you have to use the quadro bus, which I still haven't tampered with enough.
With logic and pt the mixer displays everything necessary, instead of having to hit arrows or switch through menu's.

To the OP, it's been said that Cubase is better on a PC, and Pro Tools on a mac, from many people, but nothing is set in stone. Haven't heard Hans Zimmer complain about Cubase on a mac.


----------



## Daryl (Sep 25, 2011)

Casalena @ Sun Sep 25 said:


> With logic and pt the mixer displays everything necessary, instead of having to hit arrows or switch through menu's.


You can display anything you like in the Cubase mixer, AFAIK. Which particular things are you missing?




Casalena @ Sun Sep 25 said:


> To the OP, it's been said that Cubase is better on a PC, and Pro Tools on a mac, from many people, but nothing is set in stone. Haven't heard Hans Zimmer complain about Cubase on a mac.


That's because he's using a PC. :wink: 

Regarding PT on Windows, in terms of performance it is better than OSX< but in terms of functionality it is not. There are real differences with how it works, so if you need these features, then you have to sacrifice performer and go with OSX. if you don't, you have a choice.

I have to say, if I was just mixing, I would probably use PT on OSX, but as I'm mostly a MIDI user, I don't use PT for that at all. Too limiting for me.

D


----------



## zacnelson (Sep 26, 2011)

Personally I couldn't live without PT's Elastic Audio. I know Reaper doesn't have anything like this, but what about Cubase or Logic?


----------



## Nostradamus (Sep 27, 2011)

zacnelson @ Mon Sep 26 said:


> I know Reaper doesn't have anything like this, but ...



... but ... that's plainly wrong.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 27, 2011)

oooops..............
Some vocalists I work with can't get that out of tune pitch no matter how hard they try.
Reapers Elastique driven by a slow rate on a Sine LFO can drift in realtime while simultaneously sending the vocalist an untreated output in their monitor while we totally destroy their voice or just give it that rebellious drunken drifty sound.


----------



## muziksculp (Sep 27, 2011)

http://pro.magix.com/en/samplitude/overview.459.html

Samplitude Pro X 

Any interests in this DAW ? (PC only for now).


----------



## Peter Alexander (Sep 27, 2011)

muziksculp @ Tue Sep 27 said:


> http://pro.magix.com/en/samplitude/overview.459.html
> 
> Samplitude Pro X
> 
> Any interests in this DAW ? (PC only for now).



I personally think that Samplitude is amazing. Not just for audio editing, but also its audio engine really picks up more detail in the samples then other engines. I tested this a while back with Cubase, Logic and SOnar, and Samplitude was the best sounding by far.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 27, 2011)

Cubase has Elastique, which i assume is the same algorithm.


----------



## zacnelson (Sep 27, 2011)

I'm talking specifically about Elastic Audio, NOT the elastique algorithm. Completely different. When I first got into Reaper a month or 2 ago I performed extensive research using the excellent Cockos forums and it is absolutely clear that Reaper does NOT have the elastic audio functions available in PT, as attested by multiple users of BOTH platforms. There is even discussion on the Cockos forums of ways to try and get the same result using Reaper, which involve time-consuming and clunky work compared to 2 or 3 clicks in PT. I'm not criticising Reaper for not having elastic audio. I'm just saying it doesn't have it, and since it was introduced it has revolutionised my audio editing in PT and I couldn't go to another platform unless the same thing was available. Basically with elastic audio in PT you can treat audio like midi in terms of timing. I'm NOT talking about beat detective here; elastic audio is far more complex and marvellous. I can take a song with multiple audio tracks and change the tempo to anything I like and the entire song sounds perfect at any speed, without artifacts, without waiting for the computer to process or render anything. It can also be used to quantise the timing of audio if you need to. I think you have to experience EA to know how effective it is, there is a video on youtube where someone demonstrates tempo changes on a song. Elastique is a pitch-shifting tool and nothing to do with elastic audio.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 27, 2011)

zacnelson @ Tue Sep 27 said:


> I'm talking specifically about Elastic Audio, NOT the elastique algorithm. Completely different. When I first got into Reaper a month or 2 ago I performed extensive research using the excellent Cockos forums and it is absolutely clear that Reaper does NOT have the elastic audio functions available in PT, as attested by multiple users of BOTH platforms. There is even discussion on the Cockos forums of ways to try and get the same result using Reaper, which involve time-consuming and clunky work compared to 2 or 3 clicks in PT. I'm not criticising Reaper for not having elastic audio. I'm just saying it doesn't have it, and since it was introduced it has revolutionised my audio editing in PT and I couldn't go to another platform unless the same thing was available. Basically with elastic audio in PT you can treat audio like midi in terms of timing. I'm NOT talking about beat detective here; elastic audio is far more complex and marvellous. I can take a song with multiple audio tracks and change the tempo to anything I like and the entire song sounds perfect at any speed, without artifacts, without waiting for the computer to process or render anything. It can also be used to quantise the timing of audio if you need to. I think you have to experience EA to know how effective it is, there is a video on youtube where someone demonstrates tempo changes on a song. Elastique is a pitch-shifting tool and nothing to do with elastic audio.



Okay, I'll take your word about the algorithm, though it seems odd there is no copyright infringement. Have you used Cubase 6? Between Elastique and Audio Warp, to change timing of an entire sequence with audio and MIDI, you select all audio with one click and hit a checkbox, then simply change your sequence tempo to whatever you like. The results sound very good to me. I don't know that they are totally artifact free, but to my ears, neither is Melodyne. I can't speak to PT which I don't use.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 27, 2011)

I gotcha now. Like Audio Snap in Sonar, or Warp Marker in Live, Flex Time in Logic. PT seems to be the one that's everyone likes the most.

That could be a really useful tool with Kontakts String Runs, or some smoking Dave Weckyl drum loops that need to be merged with other audio bits.

Reaper has lots of DJ types over there so I am sure they're busting the devs balls to get this down to a click or 2.
The dynamic split trick works really well but it's a very tedious way to stretch parts in more than a few places.
Much better using time selection and a right click.


----------



## dasindevin (Sep 28, 2011)

go cubase! 

I love steinberg's audio editing, handles video pretty well, NOW is very stable on my end (even with with jbridging waves, uad and lexicon lxp), the multitrack editing is darn useful, it's time stretching is workable, the tuning isn't on par with melodyne, but can definitely help in a pinch, and though the plug ins are a little banal, Reverence is a solid engine for convo verbs... 

I stumbled into cubase after bouncing around from logic, dp and pt - just seemed to have the best balance of tools and workflow (for me, at least) 

Also helps that the post house i work out of is primly nuendo based... ha  

I have been very happy with my cubase choice (been about 2 years of heavy use)


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Sep 28, 2011)

Ì did a recent Playback test and Samplitude did play back the file with more detail. It was a very minute difference but it was there.

I am a Cubase user and dont plan to shift to Samplitude because the features and ease of use in Cubase is quite good. I also like how Cubase is laid out. Samplitude looks to cluttered to me as of now.

Furthermore, it could just be that Samplitude's Real-time playback is more accurate and that once Cubase sums the tracks in question, it probably gives the same results. 

I have yet to test this. And I am not in a world class facility so my results dont really count. I did perform the test with 3 other friends all of which came to the same conclusion.

I might consider summing my tracks into a PT machine via the Audient ASP2802 summing mixer once my studio is ready and mix inside PT.


Best,

Tanuj.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 28, 2011)

dasindevin @ Wed Sep 28 said:


> go cubase!
> 
> I love steinberg's audio editing, handles video pretty well, NOW is very stable on my end (even with with jbridging waves, uad and lexicon lxp), the multitrack editing is darn useful, it's time stretching is workable, the tuning isn't on par with melodyne, but can definitely help in a pinch, and though the plug ins are a little banal, Reverence is a solid engine for convo verbs...
> 
> ...



I've heard A/B's of Cubase and Melodyne on solo vocals and actually thought Cubase was better in some cases. I'm not a Cubase fanboy, but I'm pretty relieved with Timestretch and pitch change on C6. C5 flat out sucked in those arenas.


----------

