Topic: what is your DAW of choice?

Hello everyone, just picked up a Fireface UFX II and looking to possibly move to a different DAW (been using Sonar for years but I am basically starting over after 10 years or so).

On a Windows 10 system, primarily use Waves plugins an do mostly audio work though occasionally some synths.

Just looking for opinions on a solid software setup that is less "bloated" than Sonar and simple to use as well as will play nicely with RME/PC. Budget is not an issue, I am willing to pay for a solid DAW with good support, etc.

Apologies if this is in the wrong forum but thanks in advance!

Re: what is your DAW of choice?

Hi.  Used Sonar for many years here too.  After checking out Reaper, ProTools, DP, Studio One I ended up switching to Cubase (already have Live and Reason but use those for just electronic ambient music). Quite happy with it.  One of the things that gave me a little trouble at first was the routing, but got the hang of it pretty quick and there is a lot of flexibility which is why it was there was a bit of a learning curve.  After getting burned by Gibson, I like the fact that Steinberg/Yamaha is in it for the long haul, too.
But you should download different trial versions and see which one works best for you.  Most have them available.

Cheers from SF

FireFace 800 (D 3.125, fw 2.77), AMD FX-8370, 990FXA-UD3,  Win 10 x64 1909, 16Gb DDR3-1600, GTX950

Re: what is your DAW of choice?

thanks for the input ...

question about Pro Tools specifically - were you able to use it with the RME interface on PC? I wasn't sure if it needed to be used with AVID's proprietary hardware. The PT route I am interested in only because of transferring/exporting files to be used with PT equipped studios.

Agreed that Cubase was definitely on the short list.

Re: what is your DAW of choice?

sonicaudio wrote:

question about Pro Tools specifically - were you able to use it with the RME interface on PC? I wasn't sure if it needed to be used with AVID's proprietary hardware. The PT route I am interested in only because of transferring/exporting files to be used with PT equipped studios.

Agreed that Cubase was definitely on the short list.

Yes, PT can be used with ASIO interfaces on Windows or Core Audio on Mac.  I was mainly turned off by their new subscription model. Never ending money drain.  Cubase is a little pricey up front (but check the website for crossgrade prices - they're not always obvious), but the yearly upgrade prices are very reasonable and they don't play games - everything's always very straightforward.

FireFace 800 (D 3.125, fw 2.77), AMD FX-8370, 990FXA-UD3,  Win 10 x64 1909, 16Gb DDR3-1600, GTX950

5 (edited by ramses 2019-12-08 11:03:39)

Re: what is your DAW of choice?

If you are not forced to use PT for compatibility reasons with other studios then I think you are better off to take another DAW of your choice, because PT is limited to 32 channels i/o for marketing reasons.

I would consider Cubase an alternative professional solution, because Steinberg is instantly working on the product to get features in, that their customers miss from other DAW solutions and to make the workflow better.

Steinberg has also a premium product, Nuendo, which has special features for post-production and game production. Since a while both products have the same code basis. Also Cubase participated from that.

What I personally dislike with Cubase, that they are not traditional enough with their product in terms of the GUI / look and feel. Earlier versions were more friendly to the eye. Since version 10 they introducted a dark look with too intense white / dark contrasts.

I think Steinberg simply exaggerated at this point, it's for me no longer really fun to work with the software. But that's my personal opinion, there are voices that say the exact opposite.
But this also proves that as a SW company Ergonomics should be important and not just implement some kind of stupid look, just so that the marketing department is happy and can say, hey, we now have a new cool look. I am very disappointed from that.

Switching to Nuendo in the hope that the premium product will be a bit more conservative with changes, can unfortunately be forgotten. Steinberg is bringing the products together more and more so that Nuendo is basically just Cubase + Nuendo extra features. Nuendo 10 now has the same dark look with the too bright accents.

Cubase once looked so elegant with subtle grey tones and colour contrasts....

Just look at it. If you like the new look and get along well with it, then there's nothing to stop you from relying on Steinberg and Cubase. And there are great videos by Holger Steinbrink aka tsching that show you how to use Cubase very quickly. I can really recommend them and the special Cubase Masterclass videos.

In contrast to this view on the market, what the market leaders are and what this brings to you ....

I know a mastering engineer who simply uses Reaper because it has all that he needs.
Reaper might be more efficient, because it does not have zillions of features, that you potentially do not need.

I personally noticed that its very hard to switch to another DAW if you are already used to the workflow of one product, if you used it already for a long time. So choose wisely ;-)

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, Win10 Pro 1909, Cubase, UFX+, Octamic XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS BE/R BE, RayDAT, ARC USB

6 (edited by MetalHeadKeys 2019-12-08 15:14:49)

Re: what is your DAW of choice?

Hello!

You could give Reaper a try! It has an evaluation period, but with unlimited functionality!
The workflow is a breeze, in terms of routing and bussing.

For example, let's say you have 4 guitar tracks and you want to sent them to a Guitars Buss.
You just create a new track by double-clicking, drag it on top of the four tracks, click on the bottom right hand corner of it to turn it to a buss, and then click on the fourth track's bottom right hand corner to indicate where the bussing ends! Total 4 clicks!

Also, when you create a new track(by double clicking), you don't, firstly, have to define what kind of track that would be.
It depends on the Input you set!

For example, let's say you need 2 mono tracks, 1 stereo and a MIDI track.
You, first, create 4 tracks
Then you set each input accordingly, let's say AN1 for the first mono, AN2 for the second, ADAT3/4 for the stereo and USB MIDI for the midi track. Arm them, and you 're good to go! (You can name them, afterwards if you like)

In Pro Tools, you should have hit Shift+Ctrl+N four times, define each one, name them, arm them, and then record.
And what's with the naming with Pro-Tools? You name a track, let's say 'BackingVocalsFemale', and you get 'Bc^%F^*Vls' lol
Don't even think about naming a track 'BackingVocalsFemaleBuss', you 'll be searching for hours in a 60 tracks project! lol

In Cubase/Nuendo, I don't know(I haven't used them since version 5.0/3.0)

Some more things are:

1. If you want to have vsts on the Input and print them on real-time, you can have them, visually, on the same track.
When you arm a track, a button named 'Input' appears on the track's GUI, and you can load them there. And these are individual from the vsts you use for your mixing.

Also, you can use unlimited vsts on each track, if you need them! Well, only limited by your PC's power! And by the way, Reaper has a great implementation of multicore functionality(if not the best).
In Pro-Tools you can have 8 plug-Ins per track, render the track if you need more, add 8 more etc.

2. Reaper's GUI is fully customizable! There are tons of themes on the Reaper site! You can, even, have a Pro Tools layout if you like! Or an SSL's console one! Or whatever dark or bright theme you prefer!
Also, shortcuts are fully customizable!

Well, I entered full review mode about Reaper smile , but I thought it could be useful to you!

There is another alternative of a DAW, if you like traditional consoles' workflow, with VST functionality as well, called "Harrison MixBuss". There are two versions of it!