# DAW Wars - Is it time to think about a new Daw (currently DP/PT combo)



## edhamilton (Sep 19, 2019)

I have a few weeks open, and when these rare breaks occur, I find myself poking my head up and checking out other DAWS.
I've been on DP since it was only just a P, and PT when it was ST.
That's a lot of years on those eco systems.

Should I be looking at Cubase, Logic, Reaper etc ?

Without starting or causing a rash of "Daw insecurity syndrome" which inevitably leads to the reaction of "must defend my DAW choice!" ....

what say ye of the learned brain trust at VIcontrol?


----------



## stigc56 (Sep 20, 2019)

Mac or Pc?


----------



## Jeremy Gillam (Sep 20, 2019)

You are probably just procrastinating. Workflow and collaboration possibilities might be considerations if you're a pro, and cost if you're an enthusiastic amateur (perhaps stop paying a premium for Avid/Apple). It seems like all systems are pretty great these days though!


----------



## cmillar (Sep 20, 2019)

I was a long time DP user as well (since before it was a 'Digital' Performer!)

Having switched over to Cubase 10 this year, I'm very happy with my choice for several reasons.

- it's never crashed on me (using 2009 (5,1) MacPro with 24 GigRAM and a 2011 MacBook Pro with OSX Sierra). SSD's for everything.

- seeing as I'll most likely transition into the PC world sometime in the next year or so (after being an Apple fan for over 25 years I don't want to play their upgrade games especially when I can get far more PC power for the money) I know that Cubase runs fine and it might even be better on a PC machine.

- the software V.I.'s that come packaged with Cubase are actually useable! (and can totally replace some of my other softsynths)

- all my V.I.'s run great on Cubase, and my favorite Waves plugins are fine.

- I love the Cubase audio editing scheme. Suits my thinking.

- I can configure any custom keystrokes I'm used to to work with anything (just like DP). You can work really quickly in Cubase.

- the Steinberg dongle licensing system works fine. 

I'm still finding out great things about Cubase. As in DP, there are many features that I won't even need...but it's nice to know that they're there.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Sep 20, 2019)

edhamilton said:


> I've been on DP since it was only just a P, and PT when it was ST.
> That's a lot of years on those eco systems.



Then why change?


----------



## dzilizzi (Sep 20, 2019)

Cubase would probably be your choice if you switched. But really, coming from PT, the workflow is different enough that it would take time to learn. If you have the time, I'd say go for it. Otherwise, I'd probably stick with what you have. The audio workflow in Pro Tools is still probably the best around. It's midi where Cubase shines.


----------



## johjoh (Sep 20, 2019)

What surprises me is, after many years and even more "wars", the community hasn't really created a set of "use cases" or "workflow patterns" that people use when working with a (or a combination of !) DAW's.
Individual preference / frequency of using a particular pattern will vary - influenced by the genre you're working in, the overall process & your role in there, the approach you take (very simplified example : write first, then record / improvise before the computer / program computer ,etc), etc.
Not everyone will need or even want the same patterns supported, but at least we could start looking at DAW's from a more abstract level and , and eg make a short-list of those that on first sight seem to match your needs/habits/wants and are worth a hands-on try-out.

The two tools you master each are very capable, and I know dat DP has some features most filmmusic composers wished their DAW would support too.
The question is : maybe those things are not (so) relevant to you work (anymore).

I'm currently testing several DAW's as well, and I wish there was some kind of Wiki / structured info where I could find things like : 
- how (easy) does this daw solve the "record non-clocked performance and be able to adapt tempotrack , correct/edit the recorded performance itself of a combination those two" 
- which one can handle multiple "ideas" at once (without interference)
- how easy can you create multiple different mixes from same sources (eg : grouping of stereo instruments, at the same time a separate grouping of multiple mic-positions of the same instruments)
- etc

FYI : i'm looking into Cubase, Logic, Studio One, Reaper (ableton will stay for particular uses)
(not only into filmmusic yet, hence no DP, too much VI's to be productive in PT )


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> Cubase would probably be your choice if you switched.



Why exactly?

I'm not saying it wouldn't, but they're all pretty amazing!


----------



## greggybud (Sep 20, 2019)

edhamilton said:


> what say ye of the learned brain trust at VIcontrol?



I'm not sure why one would limit it to just this forum. But anyway you may wish to check this site out that does a good job comparing and reviewing DAWS. Basically, that is his hobby. He knows DP very well I think, and there is a wealth of information here:






About


Things that you want which you can't find anywhere else




admiralbumblebee.com





You can read and compare forever. At some point you just have to jump in and do it, regardless of which one you choose.

Good luck!


----------



## dzilizzi (Sep 20, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Why exactly?
> 
> I'm not saying it wouldn't, but they're all pretty amazing!


I figured if he was using Pro Tools and DP, he would need track count and video, which Cubase supports. Does Studio One do video? I haven't really tried to do it on S1. And track count is a little more limited from what I understood. I could be wrong of course. When it comes to music stuff, I tend to be wrong a lot. 

I would like a wiki on these things as well. I know that generally, Cubase is known for being the best at midi due to the expression maps. But if you don't do orchestrated music, maybe expression maps are not that big a deal. In which case, I kind of like working with midi in S1. To me, Cubase makes it very complicated. With audio, I like Pro Tools because the playlist is easy to work with when recording and editing takes. I have done it in Cubase, but it takes a few more steps (and refreshing my knowledge on how to do it) and for me is a little more complicated, but generally does the same thing. I haven't recorded audio in S1 yet. Or any of my other DAWs.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 20, 2019)

No DAW is "known for being the best at MIDI!"

What about, oh, say, Logic?


----------



## edhamilton (Sep 21, 2019)

What daw is currently the best at hosting massive templates without using VEP?? I'm trying to stay in one machine (had enough of slaves and have boxed all 4 of them recently), am fully using 64 gigs of ram and will likely push past that soon. VEP has been awesome and a mess at times. Would be nice to not need it.

Which daw now leads in the audio/mixing side of things?

Visually I find DP to be an unhappy thing. Crazy to come to that conclusion since I've been using it since 1987! But I hate staring at it lately.

PT is something I still love to do all things audio on. I'd like to love the audio/mixing side of my composing DAW as much as I love PT.

Those are a few of the things that every couple years gets me thinking about trying a new DAW.
Then the phone rings - deadlines are agreed to - and years evaporate before I have a minute to consider such a change again.

Chunks are what keeps me on DP.
The VI hosting workflow are what makes me want to throw it out the window.

just a few thoughts as to why think about changing questions.

I assume that each daw has a dedicated team doing their best to advance their platform. So every couple years I ask a few friends, check out their work flows and ask a few questions in various forums.


----------



## dzilizzi (Sep 21, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> No DAW is "known for being the best at MIDI!"
> 
> What about, oh, say, Logic?


I don't own a Mac, so I really know nothing about Logic. Sorry, I am going by what I am told. Does Logic have expression maps? I was told the things Cubase can do with midi are more extensive than other DAWs. Is that more correct? 

Personally, I would rather do midi in Pro Tools. But I do like the Chord Track option in Cubase. Even if I decide to draw or play my midi, I can see what chord I've selected for that bar. Makes it easy for me because my memory sometimes sucks. I frankly would stay with Pro Tools for the OP. Easy to use (he knows it), big track counts, great with audio, he probably doesn't need a chord track, and the midi works. Why switch? Really there is no reason to.


----------



## kgdrum (Sep 22, 2019)

I happen to be a long time DP user(since DP3) but frankly I find it hard to deal with(small fonts) and for me just too complicated,for me it's not at all intuitive.
Unfortunately I suspect most of the better DAWs are more complicated than a simpleton-drummer such as myself will ever adjust to.
Logic intrigues me(I love Alchemy from the Camel Audio days).But Logics reputation of being hard to learn and understand has kept me from making the move.
I used to get so much more done years ago using a Roland VS-1680 just playing music then cutting and pasting the audio.
Yes it was limited but it was simple & easier for me to use.
Todays DAWs imo as capable as they are in the right hands are just way too complicated.
I'd love to find a Daw I can adjust to...............


----------



## Alex Fraser (Sep 22, 2019)

kgdrum said:


> I happen to be a long time DP user(since DP3) but frankly I find it hard to deal with(small fonts) and for me just too complicated,for me it's not at all intuitive.
> Unfortunately I suspect most of the better DAWs are more complicated than a simpleton-drummer such as myself will ever adjust to.
> Logic intrigues me(I love Alchemy from the Camel Audio days).But Logics reputation of being hard to learn and understand has kept me from making the move.
> I used to get so much more done years ago using a Roland VS-1680 just playing music then cutting and pasting the audio.
> ...


DP to Logic convert here. Just a quick chime in to say that I think you’ll find a transition to Logic really easy from DP. Apple have worked hard over the years to make Logic an easy move. There’s even a “training wheels” option which hides a lot of the more complex stuff..


----------



## David Kudell (Sep 22, 2019)

The last Logic update with load instrument plugins as needed was a game changer. Now I can do the massive 700+ track template that I thought you needed Cubase or VEP for. Also, it’s very stable on my iMac Pro.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Sep 22, 2019)

David Kudell said:


> The last Logic update with load instrument plugins as needed was a game changer. Now I can do the massive 700+ track template that I thought you needed Cubase or VEP for. Also, it’s very stable on my iMac Pro.


Yep, very much so.


----------



## cmillar (Sep 22, 2019)

kgdrum said:


> I used to get so much more done years ago using a Roland VS-1680 just playing music then cutting and pasting the audio.
> Yes it was limited but it was simple & easier for me to use.
> Todays DAWs imo as capable as they are in the right hands are just way too complicated.



Right!...I used to synch my Roland VS880 to my Mac PowerBook running Performer. Have to say, some of my most memorable and creative work was a result. Had to really think through every musical thought and come up with something that wasn’t just “throwaway “ or based on libraries.

FWIW I’m loving the switch to Cubase and Steinberg products.


----------



## waveheavy (Sep 22, 2019)

I recommend staying away from Digital Performer 9+ on a PC. They really need more error support for the PC platform. Too many situations where if you don't hit the right command at the right time, the system crashes. DP was mainly a Mac product, and has only been available for Windows for a few short years. It still needs software development work with Windows.

I'm not a pianist. I'm a guitarist. But it seems to me that Pro Tools would be the best bet for one who plays the piano, as performance is king with virtual instrument MIDI input. And Pro Tools is still the standard for recording, mixing, and post production.


----------



## JohnG (Sep 22, 2019)

IDK -- I've heard a lot of good music and a lot of not-so-good music produced by all the aficionados of different DAWs.

The latest DP does allow you to resize, in case people (as I see in this thread) still are unaware of that improvement. 

I love-love-love the notation editing in DP and would really pine for it if I switched. Even though it's slow.

And I keep hearing that you can't put 2,000 midi tracks on some DAWs -- don't even know if that's true.

Anyway, I'm not arguing that "mine's the best," just that I'm not sure switching will make anyone a better composer.


----------



## edhamilton (Sep 22, 2019)

JohnG said:


> Anyway, I'm not arguing that "mine's the best," just that I'm not sure switching will make anyone a better composer.



This of course, is always true.

I think at this point, my goal is to reduce resistance (as defined in the War of Art - Pressfield).
Reduce frustration 10%
Increase fun 10%.

Aaron Sorkin explains in this west wing scene -


----------



## JohnG (Sep 22, 2019)

Well Ed, as good a show as that may be, I don't think that analogy really works with DAWs because the switching cost is substantial. I've been on one for over 20 years. Like anyone in that position, even if it's not the ideal tool, it's daunting to think of switching. It's not just a piece of kelp.


----------



## anp27 (Sep 22, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> Does Logic have expression maps? I was told the things Cubase can do with midi are more extensive than other DAWs. Is that more correct?


Logic natively has it's own version of expression maps although from what I've seen it's not as extensive as the way Cubase implements them. However, since using Audio Grocery's Articulation maps system I simply do not crave Cubase's expression maps. The AG stuff is really robust but can be as simple or complex as you want it to be. You can save all of your maps so you set it up once and never have to worry about it again. It's really quite elegant.


----------



## InLight-Tone (Sep 22, 2019)

johjoh said:


> What surprises me is, after many years and even more "wars", the community hasn't really created a set of "use cases" or "workflow patterns" that people use when working with a (or a combination of !) DAW's.
> Individual preference / frequency of using a particular pattern will vary - influenced by the genre you're working in, the overall process & your role in there, the approach you take (very simplified example : write first, then record / improvise before the computer / program computer ,etc), etc.
> Not everyone will need or even want the same patterns supported, but at least we could start looking at DAW's from a more abstract level and , and eg make a short-list of those that on first sight seem to match your needs/habits/wants and are worth a hands-on try-out.
> 
> ...


This website covers all the different DAW's and then some pretty thoroughly:
Admiral Bumblebee DAW Charts


----------



## dzilizzi (Sep 22, 2019)

anp27 said:


> Logic natively has it's own version of expression maps although from what I've seen it's not as extensive as the way Cubase implements them. However, since using Audio Grocery's Articulation maps system I simply do not crave Cubase's expression maps. The AG stuff is really robust but can be as simple or complex as you want it to be. You can save all of your maps so you set it up once and never have to worry about it again. It's really quite elegant.


Sometimes I think about getting a Mac just to try Logic. But it makes it a very expensive DAW.


----------



## barteredbride (Sep 22, 2019)

edhamilton said:


> I have a few weeks open, and when these rare breaks occur, I find myself poking my head up and checking out other DAWS.
> I've been on DP since it was only just a P, and PT when it was ST.
> That's a lot of years on those eco systems.
> 
> ...



Just to throw in a different thought, why don´t you just stick with Digital Performer and spend the weeks you have free working on some personal projects? Or dedicate the weeks to practicing piano, learning a new instrument, or learning a new VI synth?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 22, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> I don't own a Mac, so I really know nothing about Logic. Sorry, I am going by what I am told. Does Logic have expression maps? I was told the things Cubase can do with midi are more extensive than other DAWs. Is that more correct?



The problem with only going by what you're told is that people will often tell you things that are completely subjective. Every DAW has unique features or ways of doing things, and what one person deems crucial - for instance expression maps - another person wouldn't use.



dzilizzi said:


> Personally, I would rather do midi in Pro Tools



Pro Tools' MIDI is probably the simplest to use if you don't rely heavily on editing, i.e. if you're a good enough player.

I'm not, and I also do a lot of copying and pasting (and transposing, and on and on) when I'm sequencing, so I wouldn't like to use Pro Tools for that. But I do use it for audio editing and anything that isn't sequencing music.


----------



## dzilizzi (Sep 22, 2019)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> The problem with only going by what you're told is that people will often tell you things that are completely subjective. Every DAW has unique features or ways of doing things, and what one person deems crucial - for instance expression maps - another person wouldn't use.
> 
> 
> 
> Pro Tools MIDI is probably the simplest to use if you don't rely heavily on editing, i.e. if you're a good enough player.


I was kind of assuming from the OP's use of PT and DP that he probably does a lot of scoring to video. Otherwise, why use both? In which case, he might like expression maps. Really, I see no reason to switch. Both are good DAWs, the only reason to switch is because you are annoyed with the upgrade price for PT. 

I actually edit in midi a lot in PT. It is very simple to use. I draw in a lot of my stuff. I find Cubase to be a pain to do midi in. If you don't select the whole track, it only lets you edit the single bar(s) you highlighted, changing from pencil to something else requires extra clicks, and I can't edit multiple tracks by just clicking on the tracks. The big negative with PT midi is no arp. I haven't found an AAX arp out there and PT does not come with one. How can a DAW not have an arp built in? It makes no sense whatsoever. I don't use them much but they are really nice for bass instruments. Yeah, it isn't much work to draw it in, but an arp is just so easy.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 22, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> I was kind of assuming from the OP's use of PT and DP that he probably does a lot of scoring to video. Otherwise, why use both? In which case, he might like expression maps



Lots of people who score to video don't use expression maps, in fact I'd venture to guess *most* don't!

There are many different ways of switching articulations.

In any case, my only point is that there is no best or only when it comes to DAWs unless you're talking about Live, which is oriented to triggering clips. And even then, you can certainly do everything it does in other DAWs (and v.v. - you can work linearly in Live).


----------



## Dewdman42 (Sep 22, 2019)

edhamilton said:


> What daw is currently the best at



Opinions will vary...



> hosting massive templates without using VEP?? I'm trying to stay in one machine (had enough of slaves and have boxed all 4 of them recently), am fully using 64 gigs of ram and will likely push past that soon. VEP has been awesome and a mess at times. Would be nice to not need it.



I personally think Cubase is the best at this at the moment. But quite likely Reaper and S1 can also handle it. Logic is the worst at this aspect, depending how massive you need. You can definitely handle a thousand tracks in Logic now, maybe a few thousand, but its folder organization, searching for tracks, etc.. all are maybe the worst of the bunch. This is coming from a guy that uses and prefers LogicPro for other reasons.




> Which daw now leads in the audio/mixing side of things?



I think most people will say ProTools, but I don't know ProTools and don't intend to ever pay for it to learn it. I think all the major DAW's are quite adept at audio and mixing, not sure there is a clear winner there.



> Visually I find DP to be an unhappy thing. Crazy to come to that conclusion since I've been using it since 1987! But I hate staring at it lately.



I agree, its one of my main gripes with it. I like Logic's Appearance absolutely the best. S1 comes next, followed by Cubase. Reaper is last place after DP even in my view. I don't care that it has theming it has too many other usability issues.




> Those are a few of the things that every couple years gets me thinking about trying a new DAW.
> Then the phone rings - deadlines are agreed to - and years evaporate before I have a minute to consider such a change again.



No harm in trying something new, but there is a usually a pretty steep learning curve to master one like you already must be able to do with DP and PT. If you're getting work done, why change? I have a good buddy that swears by DP.. Its not for me, but mainly I think he swears by it because after decades of using it, he just knows it like the back of his hand and he can focus on music. There is a lot to be said for that.



> Chunks are what keeps me on DP.



Cool feature. Nobody else has anything like it.



> The VI hosting workflow are what makes me want to throw it out the window.



I agree

Honestly, there are so many things to point out about all of them, good and bad..its a rabbit hole... I'd suggest for $200 you can grab logicPro and just play with it for a while off and on. See how that goes. Reaper is also free/cheap to try. Cubase and S1 are more expensive, but you can usually find S1 for sale used for around $150, not a bad price to check it out, Cubase is the most expensive one to get and try out, but I put Logic and Cubase in a tie for my favorite and on this forum I think you will find most people are in either Logic or Cubase in a tie for first choice, Reaper being a distant 2nd place but a very very devote following...A few people using DP but not talking about it much they just have been using it a really long time and know it inside and out like you.......and S1 way down in last place, hardly anyone here using it because mainly it lacks articulation related tools.

cheers


----------



## anp27 (Sep 23, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> Sometimes I think about getting a Mac just to try Logic. But it makes it a very expensive DAW.


You can always buy refurbished or a second hand Mac, not so expensive anymore.


----------



## JohnG (Sep 23, 2019)

Dewdman42 said:


> I put Logic and Cubase in a tie for my favorite and on this forum I think you will find most people are in either Logic or Cubase in a tie for first choice,



I agree those are the most popular, but I am skeptical about whether that is proof of anything scientific about capabilities and "better-ness."

*Popularity Equals Quality?*

Cubase is popular in part because of Mr. Z -- not bagging it, since obviously lots of guys write great music with it, but I think he's been pretty influential on a lot of would-be composers. And Logic is popular in part because it has such a big presence in education. My kids' school uses it and pretty sure they get it free or at a reduced cost.

Not saying for a minute that makes either one in any way inferior, but I think that does account to some extent for their popularity. For a long time, Digital Performer was the choice at Berklee so everyone who graduated from there until recently knew how to use it.

*How to Decide*

When I look at the kind of analysis that someone referenced earlier, it does seem that the final winner kind of depends on what you are accustomed to and what, as @Nick Batzdorf mentioned, are your "must-have" features. DP just added a bunch of features, for example, that I doubt I'll ever use but it appears that Reaper users love that stuff.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 23, 2019)

JohnG said:


> For a long time, Digital Performer was the choice at Berklee



Probably because they're across the river from one another!


----------



## greggybud (Sep 23, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> changing from pencil to something else requires extra clicks,



Unless I'm missing something it should be just1 click. A right click to open the tool box, then make your selection. Of course this can be streamlined with KC's or better yet, tools such as Metagrid and others.



dzilizzi said:


> and I can't edit multiple tracks by just clicking on the tracks.



I do this every day, both key and drum editors. Or do you mean since a part on a track may not be focused, it doesn't work?


----------



## JamieLang (Sep 23, 2019)

I have read some of this thread--maybe not every word, but I don't really see the "why" here. I used to piss off some of my IT dept coworkers with this attitude, but (IMO/E) you need to write down on paper what you think something else will bring to the equation. All I see is that you want to "Reduce resistance"--let me tell you, a "new DAW" is resistance for a LONG time. Even though I have plenty of opinions about my experiences with various DAW and midi sequencers--the important one here--is that using familiar tools, which ARE more than "capable", is the path of least resistance.


----------



## edhamilton (Sep 23, 2019)

JamieLang said:


> I have read some of this thread--maybe not every word, but I don't really see the "why" here. I used to piss off some of my IT dept coworkers with this attitude,


----------



## Saxer (Sep 23, 2019)

This DAW discussions are a bit like: Which instrument is easier to play and the best to express yourself? Trumpet, piano or violin? Ask a trumpet player, ask a violin player, ask a piano player: the three answers will not help.
Switching DAWs is a bit like taking the guitar from a guitar player and replace it by an accordion. You know exactly what to play but you don't know how.

I'm a Logic user since the beginning (back to Supertrack on C64). I am used to my rather personal workflow that other DAWs can't offer (like: "Wait, you can't open a score editor and a piano roll at the same time in Reaper??" or: "You have to open and close windows all the time in Cubase? Really??") But what does it help if you are used to another workflow?

There may be good reasons to switch DAW. But you should know the reasons and look for solutions. What are the situations you really need to change?


----------



## dzilizzi (Sep 23, 2019)

greggybud said:


> Unless I'm missing something it should be just1 click. A right click to open the tool box, then make your selection. Of course this can be streamlined with KC's or better yet, tools such as Metagrid and others.
> 
> I do this every day, both key and drum editors. Or do you mean since a part on a track may not be focused, it doesn't work?


Right click then click again on the pencil. Now I need to delete a mistake, right click, select eraser, click on note to erase, right click, select pencil, start again. Pro Tools has a smart tool. Once selected, I just move it a bit and it changes from the pencil to something else. Maybe not quite that easy, but close. 

I am talking piano roll, I guess this is the key editor. I can barely get it to edit one track in Cubase. I know you have to select the track, activate it or record something on it or the piano roll won't open. I use the chord track just to drag something into the track that I can change later. In Pro Tools, after I create an instrument track and assign an instrument, I just click in the track to open the piano roll. I can draw in anywhere and have sound. It is fast and easy. I can draw in modulation. In the track list, I can make it show multiple tracks or easily change the track I am editing if I see the notes aren't working. Studio One is like this as well. I have not tried working with the drum editor or the one with the key numbers. But I think in keyboard, not necessarily notes. And? I'm sure Cubase can do some of this stuff or maybe all of it. I just haven't been able to figure out how to do it quickly and easily. I try to find stuff in the manual but I don't think the way it was written.  

Maybe I should just say the workflow is not compatible with me and leave it at that.


----------



## edhamilton (Sep 23, 2019)

Saxer said:


> I'm a Logic user since the beginning (back to Supertrack on C64).



Man ... I remember that system! 
Nice to meet you Saxer. 
I think my start with Performer 1.0, dual floppy drives on a mac plus was a year or two after that?
Been a fun ride.


as far as "why" I'm looking at switching Daws - 
Daws used to jockey for position, one getting ahead of the other for a bit. Then the pack catches up and a different Daw breaks some new ground.
I literally never pay attention these days. No time.
So I've been asking around to see if maybe one Daw made a significant leap ahead of the others in the past couple years. Seems like the answer is no.
Parody only lasts for a while though. 

I think I still have the IQ points to learn a new DAW if it would be ultimately advantageous. I'm also fully aware that I will lose those remaining IQ points in the near future.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Sep 23, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Then why change?


Because DP is awful?  It's got a lot of issues which most other DAWs don't. Someone told me that when they contacted support to ask about why a feature wasn't working, the support staff just said that that feature has never worked properly and there's nothing they can do.


----------



## barteredbride (Sep 24, 2019)

JohnG said:


> Cubase is popular in part because of Mr. Z -- not bagging it, since obviously lots of guys write great music with it, but I think he's been pretty influential on a lot of would-be composers.



I think this is true to an extent, but of course Mr Z only uses Cubase in the first place because it´s a great DAW.

For me, when I hear a tune on the radio, I don´t think wow, that artist really knows Reaper really well. Or, that midi programming sounds ace on this song, it would never sound like this if they hadn´t used Cubase.

You can make great music on an DAW. Just try them out and see which one you like. There are features of other DAWs that perhaps we´d like that we haven´t got, but usually these features eventually appear in your own DAW in an update! Even if it just takes a while!

I´m still waiting for Steinberg to introduce a Chunks feature like DP though!!


----------



## Saxer (Sep 24, 2019)

edhamilton said:


> I think I still have the IQ points to learn a new DAW if it would be ultimately advantageous. I'm also fully aware that I will lose those remaining IQ points in the near future.


Ok, that's a good reason to switch DAW: keep the brain cells active! IQ grows with it's tasks


----------



## JohnG (Sep 24, 2019)

barteredbride said:


> I think this is true to an extent, but of course Mr Z only uses Cubase in the first place because it´s a great DAW.



Very true. I hope I didn't imply otherwise; it's obvious that Cubase is one of the top DAWs.


----------



## barteredbride (Sep 24, 2019)

No John! I didn´t take it that way at all...I agree though, he (along with Junkie XL) influenced a lot of composers to go down the Cubase route



Gerhard Westphalen said:


> Because DP is awful?  It's got a lot of issues which most other DAWs don't.



But then again, Ludwig Goransson won an oscar (for Black Panther) using Digital Performer and Ableton. So who knows!

Maybe it comes down to talent after all!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Sep 24, 2019)

Gerhard Westphalen said:


> Because DP is awful?  It's got a lot of issues which most other DAWs don't. Someone told me that when they contacted support to ask about why a feature wasn't working, the support staff just said that that feature has never worked properly and there's nothing they can do.



It's the old "stick with the devil you know" analogy . If productivity is good, and the urge to switch is just itchy feet, sometimes it's best to stay put. A new DAW brings a whole new set of issues, and in many cases, a steep learning curve that can really put a damper on things for a busy composer. MOTU might have customer support issues, but Steinberg's has deteriorated to the point that it's virtually non existent.

IMO, DP is not a bad DAW at all, it just has a very different workflow. It definitely has the coolest features for scoring to picture....such as streamers and chunks.


----------



## greggybud (Sep 24, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> I am talking piano roll, I guess this is the key editor. I can barely get it to edit one track in Cubase. I know you have to select the track, activate it or record something on it or the piano roll won't open.
> 
> Maybe I should just say the workflow is not compatible with me and leave it at that.



You are right. I was thinking right click to open the tool box, then simply hover over the new tool wihtout clicking, but you do have to click on it...therefore 2 clicks. Clicking is horrible. Maybe better to assign specific KC's or Metagrid. Cubase will automaticaly change tools depending on your actions, but not as much as some other DAWs such as Wavelab. For example the selector will change to the draw tool when opening an automation track ready to write or edit automation.

Yes, piano roll is the Key Editor. You have to have an event or empty part on the track to open the Key Editor.

Assuming your preferences are set, you should be able to double click a part which will open the Key Editor. Then, for editing parts on other tracks, hold ctr and click on another part on another track. Notice both parts are focused on the project page. Now in the Key Editor, you will find both parts show up however one of the tracks is a "softer color" which represents the 2nd track. To switch tracks in the Key Editor, go to the top of the key editor tool bar and find the function with a drop-down and select that track. A simple illistration would be editing drum and bass where it's important to see both events in the same editor.

Ultimately, yes, your workflow may not be compatible with Cubase. That's one reason why several exist.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Sep 24, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> and chunks


Except when you suddenly find that some of the chunks in your project got corrupted at some point after having finished those cues weeks before. Has happened on massive Hollywood films which is why at least one big name composer I know doesn't use chunks. 

It's definitely usable but certain things are just a massive hassle and literally cost thousands of dollars for certain composers to have people to deal with those things instead of using other DAWs that wouldn't have those issues.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Sep 24, 2019)

Gerhard Westphalen said:


> It's definitely usable but certain things are just a massive hassle and literally cost thousands of dollars for certain composers to have people to deal with those things instead of using other DAWs that wouldn't have those issues.



Fair enough, but the other DAW's have their own issues. Same s+#t, different pile . It strange that composer didn't back up his project files. It really all comes down to personal preference.


----------



## lydian91 (Sep 24, 2019)

DAW wars can be distracting, but I think there can be value in it. In Alan Silvestri's youtube interview for Steinberg, he mentions that these tools are "more than just software". We do have an almost familial connection with them. Each program has a different perspective and can accordingly affect the music you make. That said, I do feel that the grass currently isn't greener among any of the major DAWs. However...



edhamilton said:


> Daws used to jockey for position, one getting ahead of the other for a bit. Then the pack catches up and a different Daw breaks some new ground.



This is an important point. Broadly speaking, if we look at the DAW updates from the last 5+ years, it's been a lot of minimal UI/workflow enhancements and bug fixes coupled with new plugins. It makes sense though. Most of the major DAWs are operating on very old architecture, and these companies are now severely limited by how much they can innovate. They're boxed in, and now they have to play it safe. We get new plugins because that's the easiest thing to add without breaking existing features.

The major DAWs are all very robust and capable of mission critical work, of course. I'm in DP when the pressure is on, and it allows me to get the job done. But just because something works well doesn't mean there isn't a better way that's more forward-thinking.

The development of notation software illustrates this the best. Can Finale and Sibelius get the job done and yield professional results? Absolutely. Is Dorico still a welcome and much-needed paradigm shift? Absolutely. Yes Dorico needs more time, but the point is that there's a team of people who are thinking very deeply about how to build a radically different tool that will carry us through the coming decades.

The DAW world is in a state of maintaining rather than innovating, particularly for composers. For me, the advent of Dorico has highlighted the complacency that has set in with DAW development. Yes, we ultimately have to put this discussion aside and get our work done, and we have to chose from the tools that are currently available. But seeing that these tools are aging, I think it's okay for us to want more from our software.


----------



## anp27 (Sep 24, 2019)

Gerhard Westphalen said:


> Except when you suddenly find that some of the chunks in your project got corrupted at some point after having finished those cues weeks before. Has happened on massive Hollywood films which is why at least one big name composer I know doesn't use chunks.



Yup, at one point I got really interested in DP just for the chunks feature alone. But then I started reading forums and stuff and a lot of people were saying that it didn't work well and was super buggy. So I was like, what's the point in that?


----------



## dzilizzi (Sep 24, 2019)

Doesn't Bitwig do chunks? I thought I heard something like that, but it was a while ago and Bitwig didn't look like something I wanted to try.


----------



## anp27 (Sep 24, 2019)

dzilizzi said:


> Doesn't Bitwig do chunks? I thought I heard something like that, but it was a while ago and Bitwig didn't look like something I wanted to try.


Bitwig uses the "Clips" system, exactly how Ableton does it. Not quite the same thing. I mean Bitwig was made by ex-Ableton developers anyway so yeah.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Sep 24, 2019)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Fair enough, but the other DAW's have their own issues. Same s+#t, different pile . It strange that composer didn't back up his project files. It really all comes down to personal preference.


Well, I mean, they did but this was at least a month after they had visited earlier cues so the backups didn't go that far back. Even in my studio I generally only keep about a month worth of daily backups on my project drive after which a new one is created. I think they did manage to find an earlier file (save as rather than backup of older versions of the same file) and get those cues salvaged.


----------



## Jack Weaver (Sep 24, 2019)

Ed,

Strangely, I don't actually know what kind of music you do while in your studio. I know you're a pro guitar player. And I know you take your monitoring seriously. 

I don't do a lot of recording live sources these days. My Pro Tools never, ever gets opened anymore, even to mix (don't know why I keep giving them $400 every year to upgrade - I have to get over that). I never liked MIDI in Pro Tools and have used Logic for that for most of this century. 

Logic has grown up in that time - flex audio, decent comping, etc. Video works well. Lots of people online with good, new techniques to share. If I focussed on massive templates I might have changed to Cubase a while back. However I tend to use more restricted templates for individual projects. Logic does need to get a better handle on track/group visibility like Cubase already has. But Logic is just so straight forward to use. Also, it's easy to patch in hardware in Logic. 

I've recently added Bitwig to the repertoire. I mainly did that for its modulation capability and interface with Eurorack. But honestly, I end up transferring files back over to Logic for mixing after totally messing with them in Bitwig. 

I did consider Live before I ended up choosing Bitwig. Live is impressive - mostly if you're doing EDM. I might have gone with it for a secondary DAW if it had had Eurorack control at that time (it does now). 

If you're happy with recording, mixing and MIDI in Pro Tools and you still want to go whoring after another DAW, I might recommend either Live or Bitwig as some 'inspirational' tools just to keep things fresh. They both seem pretty fun. 

Perhaps make a new DAW an 'add', not a replacement for the knowledge and skills you've already earned. 

.


----------



## edhamilton (Sep 24, 2019)

Hey Jack!
As always, your input is greatly appreciated.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 25, 2019)

lydian91 said:


> In Alan Silvestri's youtube interview for Steinberg, he mentions that these tools are "more than just software".



I'd say that's true, but the other side is also true: it takes 20 minutes to learn 88% of what you use an any DAW.

You record, you edit. Next.


----------



## spaunsam7 (Jan 20, 2020)

Looks like Ludwig joined the Cubase club as well. You can tell from the right computer monitor and also the small cubase icon in the center monitor's dock (You can find the full hi-res pic online). Then again, he might just be testing it on one of his latest projects. Interesting!


----------

