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
240v said:
No Studio One love? This program is great! It might not have all the features that it's competitors may have (hey, it's still version 2), but it's awesome and comes with Komplete Elements and a nice 14GB of sounds for VI's and drums. It's included effects are decent too!
Click to expand...

I gotta admit that you don't need ALL the features of any DAW to make a decent recording. A good ear will take you a long way. If you can get a good track laid down you can produce a decent recording. I just love playing with all the features of Sonar X1. It's very addictive :)
 
First of all let me say that it is not always "good" to use one DAW for your recording and music production/mastering. You can record with one DAW and then bring it into your preferred mixing DAW.
I personally use FL Studio for mixing, because it is very straightforward and comes with awesome vst plugins. It also has an easy-going workflow that is unique.
For recording, I like to use Adobe Audition (it is also wonderful for mastering). I play the instrumental on fl studio, leave it in the background, then open adobe audition and record while I listen to the beat.

Check out my blog:
(ckmusicprod.tumblr.com)
 
scdaymon said:
Hi there again.
As you may read from a previous post, I'm a Mixcraft user.
But I must confess that I'm really tempted to move to REAPER.

I have written this question in another thread, but maybe here is the right place (so excuse the repetition).
I am a beginner and I've been researching some things about recording and production, reading a lot, seeing a lot of videos etc.
I tried a little of Cubase 5 Se or LE (it came along with my interface), but really dislike it.
Tried Ardour (Linux DAW) but it appears to difficult to work either.
And I also have Mixcraft 5, for a long time now. I actually bought it. A long time ago, but I was very busy at the time, so I’m just really starting to discover MIXCRAFT also.
I can see it's really easy to work with it. Very intuitive and simple.
But it seems to me somehow limited: for example, I do not see how to set the recording level (not to transient in concrete values: -13dB values, for instance – the value that my interface advises), and when I tried Reaper, it seems possible to do this: you just arm the track, and set the wanted record volume (you even see the light peaking – it’s a simple thing, but very important to assure we do not ruin good performances).
But, my main reason to consider to move to REAPER, and I’m sure you will think that’s a really stupid reason: is the wonderful user manual!!!
I mean, it’s not just a REAPER manual, is actually a real manual about recording, mixing, effects, etc..
I have learned a lot reading the Reaper manual.
And since I’m such a beginner, I was thinking: “If I’m going to have a “learning curve” in this DAW world (recording, producing, mixing, mastering), and if I’m learning so much with REAPER manual, why not to move to REAPER also.
Guess that if MIXCRAFT could have a manual like that, I would not consider moving. Cause, you now, sometimes I think we lose a lot the perspective of what we’re supposed to do: CREATE MUSIC!!!

So… what do you think?!
Click to expand...

sc.....

What version of Mixcraft are you using? I use Mixcraft 5 and learned a lot from their YouTube instructional videos and they're support forum has always been pretty good. I also printed the Mixcraft manual in color and took it to my local Kinko's to be bound.

Anyway, it's your choice. Use what YOU like because YOU are the one that will either enjoy the experience or become discouraged by it.
 
BassMan53 said:
sc.....

What version of Mixcraft are you using? I use Mixcraft 5 and learned a lot from their YouTube instructional videos and they're support forum has always been pretty good. I also printed the Mixcraft manual in color and took it to my local Kinko's to be bound.

Anyway, it's your choice. Use what YOU like because YOU are the one that will either enjoy the experience or become discouraged by it.
Click to expand...

Hi there BassMan.
I also use Mixcraft 5.
And you're right... they do got an awesome collection of video tutorials. I also learned a lot from them.
But about the manual, I'm really feeling that it could be improved.
In my opinion, it's not even a manual. It's just a "glossary" or something like that. (try to read something from Reaper Manual, or even Studio One, and you'll see the difference).
And that really is an important subject to me, cause I want to learn the most I can.

However, I must admit that MIXCRAFT is the easiest DAW I've worked on, and it never failed me in anything. It's like I'm constantly being amazed by ti's functions. But I'm still a begginer myself.
Who knows...maybe I'll stick with MIXCRAFT.
Or maybe I'll keep searching for the perfect DAW... for me.

I must notice that a lot of experts suggest that we record and mix in a DAW, and then take the mastering stage to another DAW.
It is suppose to change the role of musician\producer to a more neutral vision of the things (and a different environment from that one where you recorded and mix, may help that neutral vision).

:guitar:
 
scdaymon said:
I must notice that a lot of experts suggest that we record and mix in a DAW, and then take the mastering stage to another DAW.
Click to expand...

I have heard that too but I don't feel the need with Sonar. It must be like typing up your resume on one computer and printing it on another. Sonar has more than adequate tools and capability to mix AND master. I am pretty sure that most other reputable DAWs have similar capability
 
GuitarLegend said:
Sonar has more than adequate tools and capability to mix AND master.
Click to expand...

I really must check Sonar. It's one DAW that I didn't yet gave a try. Guess that's because a friend of mine got it once, but he completely hate it (he never told me why however). I always though it would be too hard.. too tech.
Bet they've got some sort of Demo.
I'll check this out...
 
scdaymon said:
I really must check Sonar. It's one DAW that I didn't yet gave a try. Guess that's because a friend of mine got it once, but he completely hate it (he never told me why however). I always though it would be too hard.. too tech.
Bet they've got some sort of Demo.
I'll check this out...
Click to expand...

I really like Sonar X1 but even before that, I had Sonar 4 Producer and Sonar 8.5 and didn't have any issues with them. I didn't upgrade to X1 out of necessity, I was just curious about what they had changed. But once I started using it, I never went back to the earlier versions. There are plenty of videos available that cover the basics and even some advanced stuff. I can't believe that anyone would complain about its complexity unless they are just technophobes. You don't have to use everything its got to make a recording but when you really want to do some serious work its all there ready to go. With Sonar X1 you can even turn off the panels you don't use so it doesnt clutter the screen but having said that, the whole screen is configurable with a range of docking options to suit your own preferences. So if its got too much, you just turn them off (or hide them). I don't think you could complain about it not having enough. At the same time, I never see any features on any other DAW that Sonar either doesn't have or can't do in some other simple way. Right now their pricing seems very attractive. I am in two minds about that because I paid the previously higher price willingly. It's just annoying that it's a lot cheaper now. But I have no complaints about its operation or capability
 
A bit out of context (from the previous conversation), but still on topic:

I read in some of these posts that many people use Audacity as a DAW. I really don't think that Audacity is a DAW! Sure it can record and add effects, but it is supposed to a properly called DAW to do a lot more than that. It's a cool program as an external audio editor (to work WITH a DAW). And it’s its main advantage (which is not be underestimated, cause is really an advantage) is being FREE, but beyond that… in my opinion, there are even better audio editors to work with.
For instance: Nero Wave editor (which I’m using for many years now).

(Ps: Any if you guys now a software called “Nero Sound Trax”. It was, also years ago, my first experience with something remotely like to a DAW. Very cool thing…)

Anyways, it’s something really annoying that such a sophisticated software like a DAW, needs an external audio editor!
 
I go back and forth between Digital Performer and REAPER... but mostly use REAPER.

cheers

PS- And I use Digital Performer for sequencing back tracks in gigs! :)
 
I would have said that Sonar does everything, that you don't need to go to another program to do something but having said that, Sonar does use plugins that are integrated into the program. It does make it a true Digital Audio Workstation as everything is done within the one development environment. I never have to go outside of it for anything. Other programs that you don't consider a DAW only need to import the particular function they are missing in order to move it closer to what you would call a true DAW. Some are more complete than others but as long as they do something that falls under the banner of working with digital audio information then is it fair to exclude them from the general group? If the program is capable of recording, editing and processing digital audio then what more does it need to be a DAW?
 
GuitarLegend said:
I would have said that Sonar does everything, that you don't need to go to another program to do something but having said that, Sonar does use plugins that are integrated into the program. It does make it a true Digital Audio Workstation as everything is done within the one development environment. I never have to go outside of it for anything. Other programs that you don't consider a DAW only need to import the particular function they are missing in order to move it closer to what you would call a true DAW. Some are more complete than others but as long as they do something that falls under the banner of working with digital audio information then is it fair to exclude them from the general group? If the program is capable of recording, editing and processing digital audio then what more does it need to be a DAW?
Click to expand...

Too bad Sonar isn't cross platform. It should be IMO! There are still many Mac users that work with audio. I think today a DAW should not be for only one platform. For ex: MOTU finally opened up. They should've done that years ago.

cheers
 
HugoRibeiro.Com said:
Too bad Sonar isn't cross platform. It should be IMO! There are still many Mac users that work with audio. I think today a DAW should not be for only one platform. For ex: MOTU finally opened up. They should've done that years ago.

cheers
Click to expand...

Yep. If it worked on Macs, I am quite sure there would be a lot more users. I never use a Mac so it's not exactly a problem for me
 
GuitarLegend said:
Some are more complete than others but as long as they do something that falls under the banner of working with digital audio information then is it fair to exclude them from the general group? If the program is capable of recording, editing and processing digital audio then what more does it need to be a DAW?
Click to expand...

I may say the workflow is one of the most important ones.
The guideline of this programs that we called a D.A. Workstation, that was thought and built to be a recording studio, with some characteristics that will make the audio work, flow in an organized and specific way.
I see a lot of differences between programs like Audacity… when compared to Pro Tools, Reaper, Cubase, Mixcraft, Sonar etc.
If the ability “to record, edit and process digital audio” would be enough so that a program could be considered a DAW, then something like “windows sound recorder” could also be considered a DAW, since it is able to do all those things.
I do understand your point of view, but in my opinion… that’s not enough for Audacity to be considered a DAW!
 
Last edited:
I didn't know you could edit or process audio with Windows Sound Recorder. Its just a recorder. That would be like calling a typewriter a word processor

I know there is a minimum standard for a DAW and I believe Audacity fulfills the requirements but I would be interested in hearing about your minimum requirements. I'm not being an icehole, I really would like to know what you have in mind.
 
Well bro... I guess I've stretched a things a little, when comparing Audacity to Windows Audio recording.
Don't guet me wrong. Probably you know a lot more about this tech stuff than me. But I always felt than Audaciy it's very different than a commonly called DAW. For instance, can Audacity hostage something like Ezdrummer?
 
scdaymon said:
Well bro... I guess I've stretched a things a little, when comparing Audacity to Windows Audio recording.
Don't guet me wrong. Probably you know a lot more about this tech stuff than me. But I always felt than Audaciy it's very different than a commonly called DAW. For instance, can Audacity hostage something like Ezdrummer?
Click to expand...

I don't think Audacity supports ANY virtual instruments. But it does allow you to import a range of audio formats. The short answer is no, it doesnt support ezdrummer. It is a recording and editing environment that supports plugins, just not VSTs
 
I voted other as I am using Ableton. My interest is music production: song writing specifically. I have version 8 suite so it has a great selection of sounds and effects, and I have Trilian and
Roben Papen RG as VSTs.
Back in the 80s I had a small backroom studio and in the late 80s early nineties I bought C-Labs Creator for the Atari. This I SMPTE time-locked to the analogue machine to combine vocals and guitar with MIDI. I have tried Cubase a few years back but didnt get on with it. Ableton seems to work more like Creator, to me, so that's why I went for it. I think the nearest thing to Creator may be logic?? - I can't say for sure, but I am running a PC. Anyway - Happy with what I have now.
8Track.
 
I'm very new to the world of home recording but I'm interested in learning more about it. I've used GB when recording scratch tracks of riff ideas and has seen Cubase being used once or twice when recording multiple tracks during live shows and practice sessions on a laptop. I'm considering PT because I hear it's the industry standard for DAW software but I've also heard great things about Logic Pro and think it may be easier to learn since I've use GB from time to time. I'm interested to hear any ones thoughts about either. I'm also interested in hearing any advise or comments about audio interfaces. I've just purchase a M-Audio Fast Tack that I'm playing around with. I would be interested to knowing what thoughts anyone has about multichannel audio interfaces and which brands and models you'd recommend.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top