DAW development stopped ?

[luxgud]

I haven't done much in the music world over the last few years and so I thought I'd have a look around the KVR for old times sake. It occurred to me that there's not too much new stuff to get excited about with DAWs.
Would it be a reasonable assumption to say that there isn't much more room for innovation - rather like the petrol engine in cars ?
I am not trying to be provocative, I genuinely felt this when having a look around today.

[Apheo]

Search for Bitwig. From version 2 they have some new and innovative stuff. (mainly the modulation possibilities)

[chk071]

Yeah, Bitwig was also the first thing which came to my mind. Also, Studio One, if you didn't know that already.

[Zexila]

Depends on expactations, but yeah, Bitwig.

[luxgud]

Yes Bitwig looks good - I do remember its two year gestation period
You could argue that Bitwig is Ableton Live derivative.

[TheKid]

Studio One 4 with ARA2-Melodyne integration will be a next big step. And while you're at it: the new composer help features with Studio One 4 seem great.

[Zexila]

You could argue that Bitwig is Ableton Live derivative.

So what, they all are similar in many ways, car is car, just what runs the engine is different, if you expect some 3D leap motion DAW, yeah, flying car, sit back and wait.

[luxgud]

Interestingly, Bitwig and Studio One were founded by ex Live and Cubase staff respectively.

[Nielzie]

If you look at it from a bussiness standpoint they wouldn't want to add too many new developments, features and innovations every time because they have to spread things out through future releases, to keep users hungry for upgrading so that the money keeps flowing in. The longer they can keep the pace relatively slow, the better, so it seems. As long as they stay competitive with each other of course!

And besides that it must be hard to be really innovative with groundbreaking stuff after all those years of development within the industry.

Maybe ultimately they could add algorithms to make the music for you, but what would be the fun of that

[chk071]

If you look at it from a bussiness standpoint they wouldn't want to add too many new developments, features and innovations every time because they have to spread things out through future releases, to keep users hungry for upgrading so that the money keeps flowing in. The longer they can keep the pace relatively slow, the better, so it seems. As long as they stay competitive with each other of course!

Well, exactly. As long as they stay competetive. If you have an innovative idea, and someone else comes up first with it by implementing it into their DAW, then it hasn't been much use. Also, the questions is how innovative you really can be. After all, people expect a certain workflow, certain features, and, everything which is too exotic comes with a big risk of being unsuccessful.

[Kalamata Kid]

See also Hollyhock 3
http://www.sensomusic.org/

[KBSoundSmith]

If you look at it from a bussiness standpoint they wouldn't want to add too many new developments, features and innovations every time because they have to spread things out through future releases, to keep users hungry for upgrading so that the money keeps flowing in. The longer they can keep the pace relatively slow, the better, so it seems. As long as they stay competitive with each other of course!

And besides that it must be hard to be really innovative with groundbreaking stuff after all those years of development within the industry.

Maybe ultimately they could add algorithms to make the music for you, but what would be the fun of that

Or that it's complex software that has to be tested and then kept compatible with decades worth of other software -- including operating systems -- because people are still afraid to upgrade from Windows XP. Just a thought, rather than the lazy, evil-corporate-monster-theory.

[Nielzie]

If you look at it from a bussiness standpoint they wouldn't want to add too many new developments, features and innovations every time because they have to spread things out through future releases, to keep users hungry for upgrading so that the money keeps flowing in. The longer they can keep the pace relatively slow, the better, so it seems. As long as they stay competitive with each other of course!

And besides that it must be hard to be really innovative with groundbreaking stuff after all those years of development within the industry.

Maybe ultimately they could add algorithms to make the music for you, but what would be the fun of that

Or that it's complex software that has to be tested and then kept compatible with decades worth of other software -- including operating systems -- because people are still afraid to upgrade from Windows XP. Just a thought, rather than the lazy, evil-corporate-monster-theory.

No no no, I don't mean lazy or evil, it's just a strategy that keeps everybody happy. The developers for continuation of their business and the users for.. well.. everytime some new things to look forward to, continues stability (good point!) and the continuation of support of the developer for the software that they bought.

[Zexila]

because people are still afraid to upgrade from Windows XP. Just a thought, rather than the lazy, evil-corporate-monster-theory.

Maybe because they finally ironed all bugs on that OS and moving on next just introduce more variables, but yeah, let's just stop supporting something we worked years on fixing and move on next thing, flawed logic, but whatever keeps selling new hardware I guess, software devs. aren't the ones pushing themselves into it, but aren't naive either, not all, but plenty.

[luxgud]

See also Hollyhock 3
http://www.sensomusic.org/

Genuinely impressed.

I'll be able to use my 3D Leap Motion device after all !