SAWStudio?

[bduffy]

I'm sure that many on this forum have spent thousands on software

Only the Cubase users.

I forget, HanafiH: did Steinberg kill your family or something?

Or you could try the Google Suck Test...

Code: Select all

Samplitude	1,010,000	707	0.07%
Propellerhead	4,100,000	18,800	0.46%
Mackie Tracktion	72,100	404	0.56%
Cubase	8,360,000	99,600	1.19%
FL Studio	3,470,000	44,600	1.29%
Cakewalk Sonar	1,630,000	21,300	1.31%
Saw Studio	56,100	758	1.35%
Nuendo	2,130,000	38,100	1.79%
energyXT	205,000	5,950	2.90%
Protools	3,900,000	130,000	3.33%

How many Google hits for the DAW of your choice over how many hits also have the word suck.

Sawstudio sucks a bit more than Sonar but a whole lot less than Nuendo.

Poo Trolls of course sucks more than everything else put together.

Funny you mention "trolls"...

[Bill OC]

deleted

[Lord Snarebottom]

I'm sure that many on this forum have spent thousands on software

Only the Cubase users.

I forget, HanafiH: did Steinberg kill your family or something?

Or you could try the Google Suck Test...

Code: Select all

Samplitude	1,010,000	707	0.07%
Propellerhead	4,100,000	18,800	0.46%
Mackie Tracktion	72,100	404	0.56%
Cubase	8,360,000	99,600	1.19%
FL Studio	3,470,000	44,600	1.29%
Cakewalk Sonar	1,630,000	21,300	1.31%
Saw Studio	56,100	758	1.35%
Nuendo	2,130,000	38,100	1.79%
energyXT	205,000	5,950	2.90%
Protools	3,900,000	130,000	3.33%

How many Google hits for the DAW of your choice over how many hits also have the word suck.

Sawstudio sucks a bit more than Sonar but a whole lot less than Nuendo.

Poo Trolls of course sucks more than everything else put together.

Funny you mention "trolls"...

Yeah, only an addled moron would use something like that to prove any kind of point. I'd google HanafiH and stupidity, but I think I'll take it on faith that it's near 100%.

[Jason Brian Merrill]

do you really think he was serious?

how sensitive are people on this forum going to get?

[Jason Brian Merrill]

SAWSTUDIO is aimed at pro's (which, lets face it, is not the core constituency of KVR), many who have remained customers for years. It also has far better support than your average music store boxed product.

Yeah it can be pretty wierd looking.

I don't know a pro who would lay a finger on that thing. That's not to say it sucks or pros don't use it, but it's got a really archaic structure and is missing tons of features we take for granted nowadays.

Wait: that sounds like Pro Tools. Forget what I said, I guess "pros" will eat it up!

I know a studio near montreal that uses SAWstudio and Protools. Go figure.

(IMO they both suck, but whatever)

[LijEyasu]

Sheer insanity. All of the amateur opinions here reaffirm my beliefs about a large portion of the KVR community. The people earlier in the thread that commented about the price of SAWStudio do not seem to understand true Value For Money. These same people will go out and buy Cubase, a UAD card, $1000US in effects, etc. In the end, they will end up near or above the asking price of SAWStudio.

I'm not a fanboy. I also had reserverations about SAWStudio--based solely on the GUI. I didn't understand that Bob was recreating the workflow of a console. The built-in EQ, Compressor, and delay, sound better than many of the 3rd party VSTs that I see paraded around here. The key to SAWStudio is understanding the workflow. You have to download the demo and play with it. It isn't designed to replace ACID/Ableton/FL/Cubase. It's a console, and thus geared towards audio. I agree that the asking price of Midi Workshop is a little steep; however, once you understand that it syncs 100% perfectly with the audio engine, as it is the same engine, you'll be impressed. It's not a midi wrapper running on top of an audio engine.

To summarize, SAWStudio is geared towards audio work, e.g., mixing/recording. It doesn't have a drum pattern sequencer, or loop mangling tools, etc. It literally takes the place of a $40,000+US console. You're getting a lot of bang for your buck, in addition to a highly optimized DAW. Download the demo, watch the videos, and be amazed. Watch the three part series where he records that band. Listen to that analog console quality.

[Jason Brian Merrill]

Sheer insanity.

indeed!

It isn't designed to replace ACID/Ableton/FL/Cubase.

huh?

It's a console, and thus geared towards audio.

ummm okay, just like all the OTHER hosts out there?

I agree that the asking price of Midi Workshop is a little steep; however, once you understand that it syncs 100% perfectly with the audio engine, as it is the same engine, you'll be impressed. It's not a midi wrapper running on top of an audio engine.

as are 90 percent of the other hosts out there

To summarize, SAWStudio is geared towards audio work, e.g., mixing/recording.

just like cubase, pro tools, logic, samplitude. etc etc i could go on

It doesn't have a drum pattern sequencer, or loop mangling tools, etc.

too bad, other apps seem to have a few of these even tho they are ALSO multitrack apps....

It literally takes the place of a $40,000+US console.

please elaborate.

Download the demo,

already did

watch the videos,

already watched (painfully in that studio near montreal, the guy is an absolute freak who apparently seems otherwise in the dark about recording ANYTHING)

and be amazed.

didnt happen.

Listen to that analog console quality.

[koolkeys]

Nice post Jason. I would like to see one ounce of proof that SAWStudio replaces a $40,000 console. It can't, it won't, so stop fooling yourself. It's lacking on features compared to today's hosts.

You mentioned how it's not expensive if you consider a Cubase user will go and buy thousands of dollars in addons, including an audio card/interface. So does SAWstudio replace that also? Does it come with a DSP card? No.

It may be worth it to some people. I don't know why, but it might be. But to even think for a second that it can compete with any of the top offerings of today is absurd.

Replaces the console........of course it does. If it makes you feel better. No software can replace a good console. Not in terms of sound. In features, yes. Sound quality, nope.

Brent

[koolkeys]

By the way, I'm not doubting that SAW is good for you, or that it's not powerful. But it doesn't do what you said any better then any other DAW out there.

If you like it, good. You'll just have to realize that most will not agree with you. It doesn't make you wrong in your choice though.

Brent

[bduffy]

LijEyasu, I just have to say that I downloaded the demo, watched the videos, really tried to do something with it; but GOD, that GUI...Wow. Whether you think I'm a rank ameteur or not, that is one weird, disorienting environment to work in. It really seemed outdated to me, but I would have to devote a month straight (with no sleep) to make heads or tails of it. Maybe it sounds better than anything else, but I just can't determine that from a UI that lousy. By far the most difficult thing I've ever tried to use.

But I insist: if it works for you, great. I shouldn't atack it so. I just don't think it's very "pro" compared to most other hosts, which can handle way more track loads, more buses, and resemble standard workflows.

[defjamm]

Listen to that analog console quality.

http://www.cockos.com/forum/showpost.ph ... stcount=34

better read this (then understand what it means) and try it out yourself. if you get different results, you did something wrong. if you get the same results you'll understand that it doesn't sound better than any other mayor daw (and none of them sounds like an analog console).

i also checked the included eq, which is supposed to be great. it has the same asymmetric bells (the higher you go in the frequency) like 100 other digital eqs.

[LijEyasu]

I agree, the GUI takes time to get used to. You can change the skins though. When I first opened it, I literally laughed out loud. Then curiousity kicked in, and once I grasped the workflow, I was hooked. Use the 'F' keys (F1-F12). The workflow is unique indeed.

I disagree with the handling more tracks part. Most hosts will choke when mixing a large number of tracks, with a lot of effects. You can mix 72 tracks of audio in SAWStudio on a laptop. I wouldn't dare try that in another host. That's one of SAW's major features. The developer is a bit Star Treky, and wrote the entire thing in MASM32.

I'll also agree that SAWStudio isn't for everyone.

LijEyasu, I just have to say that I downloaded the demo, watched the videos, really tried to do something with it; but GOD, that GUI...Wow. Whether you think I'm a rank ameteur or not, that is one weird, disorienting environment to work in. It really seemed outdated to me, but I would have to devote a month straight (with no sleep) to make heads or tails of it. Maybe it sounds better than anything else, but I just can't determine that from a UI that lousy. By far the most difficult thing I've ever tried to use.

But I insist: if it works for you, great. I shouldn't atack it so. I just don't think it's very "pro" compared to most other hosts, which can handle way more track loads, more buses, and resemble standard workflows.

[LijEyasu]

You will find numerous posts like these. There is a definitely a difference in sound quality between some of the DAWs. SAW uses integer vs floating based calculations internally, thereby minimizing calculation errors caused by floating point rounding. To my ears, the only other daw that can compete is Samplitude. However, SAW is still more effecient.

Listen to that analog console quality.

http://www.cockos.com/forum/showpost.ph ... stcount=34

better read this (then understand what it means) and try it out yourself. if you get different results, you did something wrong. if you get the same results you'll understand that it doesn't sound better than any other mayor daw (and none of them sounds like an analog console).

i also checked the included eq, which is supposed to be great. it has the same asymmetric bells (the higher you go in the frequency) like 100 other digital eqs.

[funkadil]

Looks like a good mixing environment but I could never imagine using it for what I do....

[BertKoor]

You will find numerous posts like these. There is a definitely a difference in sound quality between some of the DAWs.

Could you name some of them that differ in the basic sound quality please? Because last time we did a nulling test, all of them passed to my knowledge.

Or were you talking about specific components like the EQ or compressor? I'd expect each single one to be slightly different in usability, but "sound quality" in general is not often messed up.

SAW uses integer vs floating based calculations internally, thereby minimizing calculation errors caused by floating point rounding.

Moot!! Rounding errors between floating point and integer arithmetics are at around -160dB if I'm not mistaken, buried deep below the noise floor. Nobody can hear that. Period.