Gone back to Cubase but here's what will bring me right back

[Bobby L'Avenir]

Bitwig focus on bugs atm. When they think the software is mature and stable enougth to work on features they will work on features. Bitwig work in fast tempo so caching up wont be a problem even if they fix bugs first. They wana make the software stable for those who use bitwig everyday and that is correect decision. We will get features later

Exactly on point not sure why but 1.3 brought a lot of problems for many users which is what really started slowing me down, hence why i went back to cubase (a daw i really want to leave for bitwig) and why they (bitwig) stopped to focus on killing off those bugs. It was only really at that point (as explained in my op) that i realised i would really really like to see the features i mentioned as they felt like fresh air with how quick i was able to work again. Totally agree with you and the choice bitwig made, if you're building a house you work on a stable foundation first before fitting any fancy garage or pool room.

[SLiC]

Bitwig focus on bugs atm. When they think the software is mature and stable enougth to work on features they will work on features. Bitwig work in fast tempo so caching up wont be a problem even if they fix bugs first. They wana make the software stable for those who use bitwig everyday and that is correect decision. We will get features later

Exactly on point not sure why but 1.3 brought a lot of problems for many users which is what really started slowing me down, hence why i went back to cubase (a daw i really want to leave for bitwig) and why they (bitwig) stopped to focus on killing off those bugs. It was only really at that point (as explained in my op) that i realised i would really really like to see the features i mentioned as they felt like fresh air with how quick i was able to work again. Totally agree with you and the choice bitwig made, if you're building a house you work on a stable foundation first before fitting any fancy garage or pool room.

But you voted against 'A' (just bug fixes for now) Bobby!?

[Bobby L'Avenir]

Ok so back to the topic we should be focussed on, this thread has had many views and it's disappointing so many good ideas could've been put forward but most of what's here to read is not really worth reading. I'll make it simple, just vote A or B.

A. who thinks bitwig should just fix the bugs and leave it at that, limit itself with no more new features, just leave it as it is now because it's perfect and only needs a few bug fixes. So basically bitwig has it's place at this task, pro tools, ableton, FL, cubase, logic etc have thier place at other tasks and nobody is to cross territories or attempt to be a one stop solution for all tasks? Biwig will never better the rest as the rest will always add a must have feature and be a step ahead as someone was saying, so just keep bitwig as it is and don't bother trying? (not getting my vote)

OR

B. bitwig should keep trying to fill the gap which makes daw users hot swap between different daws using rewire or bouncing stems. Bitwig should continue to innovate with bitwig but at the same time continue to improve based on customer feedback to the pint where users no longer need pro tools, logic, cubase, ableton, FL, Dance EJ ? (I vote B, and no that's not B for Bobby before anyone looking for confrontation over constructive discussion chimes in )

Maybe after a few votes (which isn't massively helpful but hopefully it will put a gap in between where this thread has gone and where we can make a fresh start) we can get back to breaking down just what it would take to drop having to use a number of daws to finish one piece of music. Hopefully at that point you ladies and gents will come forward with your own lists of majors feature requests so we can have that constructive discussion I was hoping but failed to prise out of ya, on my first attempt anyway

Something of a loaded Question Bobby! I don't think anyone is saying BWS should not continue to develop, but I will answer the question in terms of direction.

Firstly, why I think and work the way I do- I'm Old. I think there are many people (like me) who have used Cubase and Live as two totally separate applications over the last decade or so (some rewire, some just look at it as two separate types of creative process, quick, simple, limited can sometimes giver better results than in depth editing and analysis paralysis) so maybe we have a different paradigm to people coming in to the market in the last couple of years (when I started Live didn't use to even do Midi and Cubase as Pro 24 didn't do Audio!)

What I want from BWS is for it to be different to what I already have, not replace it. I think we can all agree stability is paramount, and that some sort of loop/comping type recording (which should be simple now that we have groups) is necessary- but after that I want to see the 'Integrated Modular Environment' as promised for V2....So all in all, I vote 'A', V2 and vive la difference

''Bitwig Studio is designed with a long-term vision in mind - that people can build their own instruments and effects right inside the software, share them with others effortlessly and collaborate in a room or over the internet in real-time''

So with your own logic employed why are you so against what bitwig was actually conceived to be, As a Dom put it himself not quoting him exactly but basically what he said (or what i hear) was that bitwig was made to be a happy medium taking the best of current workflows into one daw with some unique features that are simply a no brainer. Crash protection of plugins as standard in all daws anyone? Would you be against that?

Keep Ableton as your limited but fast daw and Cubase as your mega feature rich daw, bitwig sits in the middle to cover both in many ways otherwise what you want is a slightly better than ableton limited daw, which opposes your own opinions. I'f I wanted a Cubase clone (even though my list contains a few nuggets from ableton and S1) my feature list would hardly be a 50 or so mixture of features and fixes otherwise what the hell have Steinberg been doing the last 17/18 years they've had to develop?

I think people just get stuck in their ways and reject change for the sake of rejecting change, sometimes people even impose limits on something because they don't want it to become too big so everyone and their cat , is using it because it will loose the exclusivity they feel they have as a user within a small user base. You see people do that a lot with artists they once followed whilst they were underground, as soon as that artist blows they accuse them of selling out but they didn't sell out, they just don't offer any exclusivity anymore seen as they're massive and everyone now owns a piece. Not saying that's what's going on with any particular person, just an observation.

Anyway you voted A, fair enough, thanks for voting
Who agrees? who votes for B and who votes for more cats (that was just a joke, no more cats please )

[Bobby L'Avenir]

Bitwig focus on bugs atm. When they think the software is mature and stable enougth to work on features they will work on features. Bitwig work in fast tempo so caching up wont be a problem even if they fix bugs first. They wana make the software stable for those who use bitwig everyday and that is correect decision. We will get features later

Exactly on point not sure why but 1.3 brought a lot of problems for many users which is what really started slowing me down, hence why i went back to cubase (a daw i really want to leave for bitwig) and why they (bitwig) stopped to focus on killing off those bugs. It was only really at that point (as explained in my op) that i realised i would really really like to see the features i mentioned as they felt like fresh air with how quick i was able to work again. Totally agree with you and the choice bitwig made, if you're building a house you work on a stable foundation first before fitting any fancy garage or pool room.

But you voted against 'A' (just bug fixes for now) Bobby!?

come on dude, you know I'm talking long term, this bug fixing session bitwig are on will be a few months if you consider how far they've come in less than a year. Now more importantly, i've been going on about people not reading things properly and flying in with comments based on there own views without actually reading mine first. Can someone post what my first feature on page 1 says?

Ok so who votes
(A) keep bitwig as it is and limit it as much as possible so you still need a bit of pro tools or logic etc on every project you work (or even almost every project)

vs

(B) take on customer feedback to add the "BASICS", just "BASICS" needed to make bitwig a one stop solution you can use to complete projects from start to finish without even having to install another audio app

[SLiC]

Ok so back to the topic we should be focussed on, this thread has had many views and it's disappointing so many good ideas could've been put forward but most of what's here to read is not really worth reading. I'll make it simple, just vote A or B.

A. who thinks bitwig should just fix the bugs and leave it at that, limit itself with no more new features, just leave it as it is now because it's perfect and only needs a few bug fixes. So basically bitwig has it's place at this task, pro tools, ableton, FL, cubase, logic etc have thier place at other tasks and nobody is to cross territories or attempt to be a one stop solution for all tasks? Biwig will never better the rest as the rest will always add a must have feature and be a step ahead as someone was saying, so just keep bitwig as it is and don't bother trying? (not getting my vote)

OR

B. bitwig should keep trying to fill the gap which makes daw users hot swap between different daws using rewire or bouncing stems. Bitwig should continue to innovate with bitwig but at the same time continue to improve based on customer feedback to the pint where users no longer need pro tools, logic, cubase, ableton, FL, Dance EJ ? (I vote B, and no that's not B for Bobby before anyone looking for confrontation over constructive discussion chimes in )

Maybe after a few votes (which isn't massively helpful but hopefully it will put a gap in between where this thread has gone and where we can make a fresh start) we can get back to breaking down just what it would take to drop having to use a number of daws to finish one piece of music. Hopefully at that point you ladies and gents will come forward with your own lists of majors feature requests so we can have that constructive discussion I was hoping but failed to prise out of ya, on my first attempt anyway

Something of a loaded Question Bobby! I don't think anyone is saying BWS should not continue to develop, but I will answer the question in terms of direction.

Firstly, why I think and work the way I do- I'm Old. I think there are many people (like me) who have used Cubase and Live as two totally separate applications over the last decade or so (some rewire, some just look at it as two separate types of creative process, quick, simple, limited can sometimes giver better results than in depth editing and analysis paralysis) so maybe we have a different paradigm to people coming in to the market in the last couple of years (when I started Live didn't use to even do Midi and Cubase as Pro 24 didn't do Audio!)

What I want from BWS is for it to be different to what I already have, not replace it. I think we can all agree stability is paramount, and that some sort of loop/comping type recording (which should be simple now that we have groups) is necessary- but after that I want to see the 'Integrated Modular Environment' as promised for V2....So all in all, I vote 'A', V2 and vive la difference

''Bitwig Studio is designed with a long-term vision in mind - that people can build their own instruments and effects right inside the software, share them with others effortlessly and collaborate in a room or over the internet in real-time''

So with your own logic employed why are you so against what bitwig was actually conceived to be, As a Dom put it himself not quoting him exactly but basically what he said (or what i hear) was that bitwig was made to be a happy medium taking the best of current workflows into one daw with some unique features that are simply a no brainer. Crash protection of plugins as standard in all daws anyone? Would you be against that?

Keep Ableton as your limited but fast daw and Cubase as your mega feature rich daw, bitwig sits in the middle to cover both in many ways otherwise what you want is a slightly better than ableton limited daw, which opposes your own opinions. I'f I wanted a Cubase clone (even though my list contains a few nuggets from ableton and S1) my feature list would hardly be a 50 or so mixture of features and fixes otherwise what the hell have Steinberg been doing the last 17/18 years they've had to develop?

I think people just get stuck in their ways and reject change for the sake of rejecting change, sometimes people even impose limits on something because they don't want it to become too big so everyone and their cat , is using it because it will loose the exclusivity they feel they have as a user within a small user base. You see people do that a lot with artists they once followed whilst they were underground, as soon as that artist blows they accuse them of selling out but they didn't sell out, they just don't offer any exclusivity anymore seen as they're massive and everyone now owns a piece. Not saying that's what's going on with any particular person, just an observation.

Anyway you voted A, fair enough, thanks for voting
Who agrees? who votes for B and who votes for more cats (that was just a joke, no more cats please )

Studio One 3 is my 'happy medium taking the best of current workflows into one daw with some unique features that are simply a no brainer'...and I already own it, so I personally (and selfishly) don't need BWS to be that....I want it to be a fast, simple creative modular madness and mayhem DAW with ridiculous modulation and the ability to program my own effects (like MAX, so I can finally drop Live)...I think another 'do it all middle of the road DAW' isn't needed, so we disagree fundamentally....but who knows what the BWS Devs will do, its up to them and people (like you) will vote with their feet if they don't like the direction.

[polarity-dnb]

I AM currently using Bitwig as a one stop solution. no problems at all. What do you guys talking about?

[Bobby L'Avenir]

Ok so back to the topic we should be focussed on, this thread has had many views and it's disappointing so many good ideas could've been put forward but most of what's here to read is not really worth reading. I'll make it simple, just vote A or B.

A. who thinks bitwig should just fix the bugs and leave it at that, limit itself with no more new features, just leave it as it is now because it's perfect and only needs a few bug fixes. So basically bitwig has it's place at this task, pro tools, ableton, FL, cubase, logic etc have thier place at other tasks and nobody is to cross territories or attempt to be a one stop solution for all tasks? Biwig will never better the rest as the rest will always add a must have feature and be a step ahead as someone was saying, so just keep bitwig as it is and don't bother trying? (not getting my vote)

OR

B. bitwig should keep trying to fill the gap which makes daw users hot swap between different daws using rewire or bouncing stems. Bitwig should continue to innovate with bitwig but at the same time continue to improve based on customer feedback to the pint where users no longer need pro tools, logic, cubase, ableton, FL, Dance EJ ? (I vote B, and no that's not B for Bobby before anyone looking for confrontation over constructive discussion chimes in )

Maybe after a few votes (which isn't massively helpful but hopefully it will put a gap in between where this thread has gone and where we can make a fresh start) we can get back to breaking down just what it would take to drop having to use a number of daws to finish one piece of music. Hopefully at that point you ladies and gents will come forward with your own lists of majors feature requests so we can have that constructive discussion I was hoping but failed to prise out of ya, on my first attempt anyway

Something of a loaded Question Bobby! I don't think anyone is saying BWS should not continue to develop, but I will answer the question in terms of direction.

Firstly, why I think and work the way I do- I'm Old. I think there are many people (like me) who have used Cubase and Live as two totally separate applications over the last decade or so (some rewire, some just look at it as two separate types of creative process, quick, simple, limited can sometimes giver better results than in depth editing and analysis paralysis) so maybe we have a different paradigm to people coming in to the market in the last couple of years (when I started Live didn't use to even do Midi and Cubase as Pro 24 didn't do Audio!)

What I want from BWS is for it to be different to what I already have, not replace it. I think we can all agree stability is paramount, and that some sort of loop/comping type recording (which should be simple now that we have groups) is necessary- but after that I want to see the 'Integrated Modular Environment' as promised for V2....So all in all, I vote 'A', V2 and vive la difference

''Bitwig Studio is designed with a long-term vision in mind - that people can build their own instruments and effects right inside the software, share them with others effortlessly and collaborate in a room or over the internet in real-time''

So with your own logic employed why are you so against what bitwig was actually conceived to be, As a Dom put it himself not quoting him exactly but basically what he said (or what i hear) was that bitwig was made to be a happy medium taking the best of current workflows into one daw with some unique features that are simply a no brainer. Crash protection of plugins as standard in all daws anyone? Would you be against that?

Keep Ableton as your limited but fast daw and Cubase as your mega feature rich daw, bitwig sits in the middle to cover both in many ways otherwise what you want is a slightly better than ableton limited daw, which opposes your own opinions. I'f I wanted a Cubase clone (even though my list contains a few nuggets from ableton and S1) my feature list would hardly be a 50 or so mixture of features and fixes otherwise what the hell have Steinberg been doing the last 17/18 years they've had to develop?

I think people just get stuck in their ways and reject change for the sake of rejecting change, sometimes people even impose limits on something because they don't want it to become too big so everyone and their cat , is using it because it will loose the exclusivity they feel they have as a user within a small user base. You see people do that a lot with artists they once followed whilst they were underground, as soon as that artist blows they accuse them of selling out but they didn't sell out, they just don't offer any exclusivity anymore seen as they're massive and everyone now owns a piece. Not saying that's what's going on with any particular person, just an observation.

Anyway you voted A, fair enough, thanks for voting
Who agrees? who votes for B and who votes for more cats (that was just a joke, no more cats please )

Studio One 3 is my 'happy medium taking the best of current workflows into one daw with some unique features that are simply a no brainer'...and I already own it, so I personally (and selfishly) don't need BWS to be that....I want it to be a fast, simple creative modular madness and mayhem DAW with ridiculous modulation and the ability to program my own effects (like MAX, so I can finally drop Live)...I think another 'do it all middle of the road DAW' isn't needed, so we disagree fundamentally....but who knows what the BWS Devs will do, its up to them and people (like you) will vote with their feet if they don't like the direction.

Fair enough, the selfish way isn't conducive to making a great product or a win win situation for the devs and the end user in my opinion so that's why i posted what i sent them, for us to discuss and review. Bitwig knew there were people wanting that middle ground and they were spot on, name one daw company that listens and interacts with the users as bitwig do? Maybe the guys at FL but that's it from where i'm sitting.

Adjust your view point for a moment though people, just look how defensive and how much passion is been shown for the product after one year? You could look at this thread as a negative but look again and you see people defending it (some from the wrong angle imo but it's still defending) and other people that are passionate about it improving. How many companies can say this about a product they launched after a year and few months? bitwig should be very proud, they're obviously on to something big and all i feel they need is constructive feedback from real world users, bedroom peeps along with folk with deadlines and clients on what works great, what doesn't, what's buggy, what can be improved. all this info can be put on the table when it's time to look at new ways to make bitwig even better for every user, not just the selfish ones who want to keep it limited.

Is it better for the head coach of you national football team to have 6 top strikers all fit and on form to choose from, a good headache to have (equalling tons of great constructive ideas from the bitwig user base to choose from is they want to) or only two top strikers and 4 donkeys that are out of form to choose from (equaling a few good ideas but tons more with no substance or real world thought or even worse, no ideas worth using from the users at all).
What headache would you want your countries football team head coach to have going into a world cup?

[SLiC]

On the contrary, the selfish way is how almost all great products were made....have you read Steve Jobs biography!

No one has said they want it limited, but not everyone wants it mainstream, everyone has different needs and wishes and most of us have made our voices heard over last 2 years and are still here somehow managing to use BW despite not necessarily getting what we want when we want it.

I'm going to bow out gracefully from this thread as its just the same thing over and over again....go make music!

[askewd]

.I think another 'do it all middle of the road DAW' isn't needed, so we disagree fundamentally....

What I like about bitwig is that when they do add new aspects to their program, they put a lot of thought behind it and make it fit perfectly into the bw universe... By which I mean slick & neatly implemented in a way that makes it feel totally integrated rather than an after thought. Groups is a good example - perfectly implemented, better than other daws imo.

My point is that I see no reason at all why bitwig can not become a 'do it all' daw AND be a crazy fun modulating marvel too. At no point whatsoever do I see that bw should somehow turn into "middle of Road" DAW just because it's polished it's fundamental 'traditional' elements too . Why aim low? I doubt the devs are! It can still be fast, still let you do crazy modulations...and still rival other daws in all the 'traditional' areas. It's already close and only on v1!

I invested in BW early because I saw that this has potential to be best daw ever. Great devs, great attitude, solid foundation. From what I've seen so far my decision was perfectly justified and bw is still on course to achieve that lofty aim.

Have some faith

[Bobby L'Avenir]

.I think another 'do it all middle of the road DAW' isn't needed, so we disagree fundamentally....

What I like about bitwig is that when they do add new aspects to their program, they put a lot of thought behind it and make it fit perfectly into the bw universe... By which I mean slick & neatly implemented in a way that makes it feel totally integrated rather than an after thought. Groups is a good example - perfectly implemented, better than other daws imo.

My point is that I see no reason at all why bitwig can not become a 'do it all' daw AND be a crazy fun modulating marvel too. At no point whatsoever do I see that bw should somehow turn into "middle of Road" DAW just because it's polished it's fundamental 'traditional' elements too . Why aim low? I doubt the devs are! It can still be fast, still let you do crazy modulations...and still rival other daws in all the 'traditional' areas. It's already close and only on v1!

I invested in BW early because I saw that this has potential to be best daw ever. Great devs, great attitude, solid foundation. From what I've seen so far my decision was perfectly justified and bw is still on course to achieve that lofty aim.

Have some faith

Always posts worth reading with logic employed

This guy is a seriously talented producer working with big name clients too people. Just like he says, why aim low? Just like i said earlier, why stop at 80% when you can at least shot for 100%?

[Bobby L'Avenir]

double post

[Bobby L'Avenir]

On the contrary, the selfish way is how almost all great products were made....have you read Steve Jobs biography!

No one has said they want it limited, but not everyone wants it mainstream, everyone has different needs and wishes and most of us have made our voices heard over last 2 years and are still here somehow managing to use BW despite not necessarily getting what we want when we want it.

I'm going to bow out gracefully from this thread as its just the same thing over and over again....go make music!

I'd be lying if i said i was disappointed you feel like bowing out, just being honest. Good luck to Steve Jobs if he felt being selfish was the way to go, beside bitwig have teamed up with microsoft, of all companies on the planet, microsoft. The program even appears in their adverts so if you don't want it mainstream because you somehow think that's going break free the limits you want to keep bitwig within you should be able to see at least from the microsoft alliance that this isn't gonna go down how you want it to. Fair play for admiting you're selfish though, most wouldn't have had the courage to stand their ground and admit that

I get the impression bitwig don't want to go the selfish route and actually listen to it's users and work with them rather than against them with fair pricing to boot though. It's why i cared enough to make the list and post it here too. Like my op says i have total faith they'll nail this app so i don't need anything else on my system but Bitwig Studio. Mark my words within 3 years Bitwig will be the don of daws and live dj apps. To ensure this and make it happen sooner i'm going to and i encourage you all to feedback why you use other daws from time to time, break in down like i attempted to do so and send it in.

[CA.]

can't go back to cubase lol (got 7.5... somewhere on a hdd...) it's damn 80-90's DAW... not the future.

i like to drag clip <-> arranger clips & linear clips unlooped, the modularity... workflow.. and the way BWS is coded makes that i just can't leave, for production meaning.

OK, the daw is so young and need to grow..

[Cyoon]

same here, i tried to look back into cubase but couldn't stand it anymore. The small benefits in cubase are way less important to me than the big benefits of Bitwig. Also i can work around everything i miss from cubase, or change my habits a little bit.