Whats a great DAW software for recording?

best daw software for recording?

  • Sonar

    Votes: 75 14.0%

  • cubase

    Votes: 99 18.5%

  • acid

    Votes: 9 1.7%

  • adobe

    Votes: 20 3.7%

  • pro tools (m-audio)

    Votes: 67 12.5%

  • nuendo

    Votes: 15 2.8%

  • logic

    Votes: 77 14.4%

  • other (please specify)

    Votes: 173 32.3%
  • Total voters
    535
Hi All,

I'm a PC geek by trade, and I used Sonar in my home studio for years with varying degrees of love/hate. Eventually, the hate won out, and I stopped recording for years because I was always frustrated with the technology and it always got in the way of the creative process.

About 1.5 years ago I got my first Mac at home (a $599 Mac Mini) just to play around with it, and I fell in love with it. I know this isn't a Mac vs. PC thread, and I seriously don't care to get into the debate about it, but what really blew me away was how easy it was to record with Garageband, a piece of software that comes "free" with OS X. I recorded a couple of songs with Garageband just on a lark to see how it worked, and it was so enjoyable that it got me back into writing and recording again with a vengeance.

I've since upgraded to Logic Express 9 and a Mac Pro, and it's a beautiful thing. It was a little bit of a learning curve to go from Garageband to Logic, but the features are amazing. Again, the best thing for me though, is that everything just works. If I want to record something, I plug in and record and I never, ever have to troubleshoot technical issues, or wonder why I can't hear what I'm playing through the monitors, or gee...why isn't my MIDI keyboard triggering that software instrument...it just works. Period. (Excuse me for a moment while I go find some wood to knock on.)

I'm sure that all of the DAWS people have mentioned have very similar features, so I have a feeling Logic doesn't differentiate itself too much in that regard, but I do have to say that the built in software instruments and effects in Logic are phenomenal. Also, it's probably more a function of the hardware than the software (however, I'm sure the software plays a part in this too), but at one point on my last project, I was running 52 tracks of audio in Logic, with several effects on most tracks, and I didn't have a single issue.

I'm still amazed about what is possible with a computer at home these days. No matter what gear you use, it's a great time to be a home studio hobbyist! :D

Best Regards,

Dave DeWhitt
www.soundclick.com/davedewhitt
By the way, the tracks "Coming Home" and "Don't Come Around" on my Soundclick site were both recorded with Garageband, "Signs of Life" and "Falling Right In" were both recorded with Logic Express 9
 
I've used cubase, Logic, sonar, adobe, nuendo, and protools. I personally like pro tools the best hands down. well with the exception of nuendo. Nuendo is a great DAW as well.
 
OK one thing I dont get is how one DAW is better than another? yeah there is the obvious things like reason and logic are better for MIDI because they are built for that, and pro tools is better for audio. why is that, by nature I use cubase, I have used reason, logic and protools. But i really dont get how one is better than another, I create an audio track in cubase press record then record, I create an instrument track in cubase and select the sound bank/vst I want then press record etc. Like alomost every DAW out there, so far everyone I know loves protools but the only reason I see to that is because It mostly used in the industry and they want to be likethe big boys. as for quality there is no difference audio is audio and MIDI is MIDI a DAW is just really a visual aid. I belive people should work with what they work with best, I've tried protools didn't like it so I stuck with what I had. People say "well . . . is quicker to use and has faster editing" what do they mean by this? a DAW works as fast as you can click the mouse or as fast as you can press a short cut.
 
singlespeak said:
But Logic can do everything that the two others do at least as well and much more, doesn't that qualify as better in your opinion?
Click to expand...

Yes. . . but how? dont get me wrong im not trying to start a DAW war here. with the exeption of reason that will only handle MIDI, protools can use MIDI and Audio so can logic. what attributes mean that one is 'better' than the other? and why do those make it better.
 
singlespeak said:
But Logic can do everything that the two others do at least as well and much more, doesn't that qualify as better in your opinion?
Click to expand...

But his question is what does Logic do better and how?
And what does Logic do that any other DAW doesn't do?

There's an argument to be made for included feature set (effects and virtual instruments and the like), but that's an argument of value and is a subjective thing because one person's vital included tools can be completely ignored by another person and they can both be making excellent music.

If you know all the ins and outs of a pro level DAW you can absolutely make it do anything that any other DAW does.

It's all about which path up the mountain works best for you, it's all entirely subjective, and there's absolutely no best DAW.

There. Problem solved.:D
 
benherron.rrr said:
OK one thing I dont get is how one DAW is better than another? yeah there is the obvious things like reason and logic are better for MIDI because they are built for that, and pro tools is better for audio. why is that, by nature I use cubase, I have used reason, logic and protools. But i really dont get how one is better than another, I create an audio track in cubase press record then record, I create an instrument track in cubase and select the sound bank/vst I want then press record etc. Like alomost every DAW out there, so far everyone I know loves protools but the only reason I see to that is because It mostly used in the industry and they want to be likethe big boys. as for quality there is no difference audio is audio and MIDI is MIDI a DAW is just really a visual aid. I belive people should work with what they work with best, I've tried protools didn't like it so I stuck with what I had. People say "well . . . is quicker to use and has faster editing" what do they mean by this? a DAW works as fast as you can click the mouse or as fast as you can press a short cut.
Click to expand...

Like most things in this world, 'better' is a subjective term, depending on the individual user's preference.

Pro Tools may have won awards and be venerated in the industry, or what have you - but, to the best of my knowledge, I've been led to understand that once you go Pro-Tools, all of your hardware has to reflect this. Apparently, you can't use Pro-Tools, without a dedicated sound card, for instance and all of it's control surfaces, etc have to be Pro-Tools compatible. If you're used to using something and then think "oh, I want to try Pro-Tools", I've heard it doesn't work like that. If this is so, then it would be like using a PC and then suddenly switching to a MAC, then realising you have to go out and buy MAC versions of all your software. If this is true, then for that reason, Pro Tools would be absolutely useless for my personal needs. I want to be able to buy generic hardware and cobble a system together on the cheap - which is what I've done.

So, outside of Pro-Tools (and ignoring Apple Macs for a moment), which DAW suits you best is the one you are familar with, happy in using and offers the best value for money.

yes, I am sure they will all offer pretty much the same thing, but I am of the understanding that Pro-Tools offers a lot of sophisticated features I'd probably never use in a hundred years. I'm willing to bet it deals with surround sound... It might be much more sophisticated than what I use, but for what I want, no better.

Obviously, there are features which stand out in some. IE: FL Studio has no capacity for working with music notation, whereas Cubase does. Some DAWs have more mixer strips or allow more instrument channels. Some DAWs require you to input very detailed settings each instrument track, or they won't work, whereas some detect what you are trying to do and set the channel up for you automatically. Then there are all the different versions, from demos and 'Lite' versions, which allow you to make a little ditty with a handful of instruments, up to full producer editions, which offer everything the company has to offer, including special deals on plug-ins & upgrades etc.

I think that some people will diss things, because they're too easy to use; others, because they are too complex. The one I am using, it's selling point was "Make dance music in seconds". To my mind, it's turned out to be totally universal for all kinds of music-making, sampling, audio-mastering and recording tasks. I haven't yet found anything I can't do with it, that I want to do with it. Is it the 'best'? Probably not by some standards but my standards are all that matter, 'cos I'm the one using it.

Hope this helps.

Dr. V
 
Last edited:
Guitarshot said:
if your using 5 plugins on each track you may want to rethink your career options
Click to expand...

Why do you say this? Sometimes it is useful to be able to load several FX units into one track, to get a compound effect. FL Studio, for instance, allows up to eight on each mixer strip.

I'm using a single core system and I've never had any big memory issues when stacking effects.

Dr. V
 
benherron.rrr said:
what attributes mean that one is 'better' than the other? and why do those make it better.
Click to expand...
Nothing. What's "better" is a personal choice and depends on a person's level of comfort with a given environment, workflow, needs, etc, etc.

Logic, thanks to its Envornment (not environment, in general sense, but the patching/attributes editing, etc thing that Logic calls Environment) makes it extremely flexible and customisable for accomplishing certain things. Although, by its nature it does bring in a level of complexity that not everyone wants to deal with (although it can be completely ignored if you so choose). It comes with some seriously capable instruments, and the only DAW that comes to it in this department is Sonar Studio (and only recently).

If you're working predominantly in audio, Pro Tools is more mature, faster, and maybe even "easier".

Cubase is pretty easy to get your head around, although it does have some pretty advanced features. Although at the same time it has some dumb limitations, mosly aimed at saving idiots from theselves (like not allowing to route a group track to another group track that has been created before it, to prevent feedback loops). However, with version 5, it has some cool editing functions, thus making things such as Melodyne redundant for example.

Each has its strenghts and weaknesses, so ultimately it does come down to what features you would use most, your preferences to workflow, etc.
 
I come to the Cakewalk forums and this one pretty much for homerecording type tips. I gotta say...the cake forum is a seething ants nest of controversy whenever a software name comes up in discussion that isn't Sonar. It's pretty funny really. Anyway, I use Sonar and the other day dl'd the Studio 1 demo to have a look. Studio 1 reminds me of Reaper a bit in layout. What is the best is whatever you like, right? Still funny to listen to the debates about which is best.
 
Monkey Allen said:
I come to the Cakewalk forums and this one pretty much for homerecording type tips. I gotta say...the cake forum is a seething ants nest of controversy whenever a software name comes up in discussion that isn't Sonar. It's pretty funny really. Anyway, I use Sonar and the other day dl'd the Studio 1 demo to have a look. Studio 1 reminds me of Reaper a bit in layout. What is the best is whatever you like, right? Still funny to listen to the debates about which is best.
Click to expand...

That's funny cause in the Cubase forum it's pretty much dead and if anyone mentions another brand they are mindless to jump on to that brand and relieve themselves of the monster that calls itself cubase (joke).
 
Ninja_Drummer said:
That's funny cause in the Cubase forum it's pretty much dead and if anyone mentions another brand they are mindless to jump on to that brand and relieve themselves of the monster that calls itself cubase (joke).
Click to expand...

Your probably right, but I have to tell you what Cubase 5 is an amazing step forward. Its a really great program that offers some really great features stock. Never used logic or sonar. I have used reaper and was a longtime user of cubase sx. In my opinion CB5 is leaps and bounds ahead of both.
 
Giving Reaper a try...

Greg_L said:
Reaper is user friendly - literally. If you want something changed or added to the program, go to the Reaper forum, recommend the change, and if it's a good idea, the next update will most likely have the change in it. They are constantly updatin g.
Click to expand...

I've decided to give Reaper a try. The last home studio I setup consisted of some mics, a tascam 8-track RTR and a soundcraft mixer. For less than the price of one sm57 I think I'm going to be pretty happy with Reaper. If I don't like it, I'll stop using it and try something else. I downloaded a free program called "Krystal" but it doesn't look nearly as nice. I love the shareware concept and will gladly paypal those cats $60 if I intend to keep using their software. It will be like a dream compared to my old home studio. Some peeps on here sound pretty darn spoiled by all the technology that's available. :eek: No offense. I'm sure I'll get there sometime soon myself... ;)
 
I actually own Logic (on my Mac), Cubase 4.5 and Studio One (on my PC) and have been using Reaper the past few weeks. I love it and it does everything the others do and very well. I'm buying it - it's that good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top