Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Plug-in hosts and other software applications discussion
machinesworking
KVRAF
2332 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle

Post Tue Feb 11, 2020 10:13 pm

BONES wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:59 pm
"Works for you" and "works for me" is completely beside the point. Something can work for you and still be objectively bad.
I don't think workflow is the only reason to use a tool. What's objectively bad is using more than one DAW and having it make being creative seem like a chore, and the same thing applies in reverse, I think if using one DAW that's missing features you want to use is making it seem like a chore, then it's time to rethink what you're doing.
That's because no-one has offered up anything better, at least so far. Because there is sure as hell plenty of room for improvement in my workflow. I still mostly bumble around Cubase and, whilst I am surprised at how much work I am getting done in it, I'm sure I can learn better ways of working that will make it even better for me.
For sure, I personally think Cubase is a great DAW, but I fear the stability, upgrade cycle, dongle etc. I really think they nail a lot of things very well though.
Ultimately, though, I still find Orion much better in many important ways and if there was a really good way of starting a project in Orion and then moving it to Cubase with a minimum of compromise, I'd be all over it. But there isn't and the compromises involved in working like that far outweigh any benefits. And if you want to add a "for me" at the end of that, then that will be a "for me" for someone who has been using Orion for 20 years, produced five albums with it, the last of which was a chart-topper in our genre (well, no. 2 for the album but no. 1 for the first single from it) and never really found Orion limiting in any way. So if the compromises are going to be unacceptable for me, you have to imagine they are objectively unacceptable, surely?
Yeah, workflow would be key, the bit I've heard of your music it sounds like you use a good amount of track automation? That's something that makes starting in Orion and going to Cubase a PITA for sure. This sort of thing is why I always wanted a better rewire, Reaper is the only DAW I've used that rewires into another and keeps VSTs. Unfortunately it's not really that different than DP, and isn't a clip firing DAW.

Without pointlessly quoting all you points, let me say that you've listed a bunch of things but given absolutely no indication of how you use the two together. It reads as though you use DP10 for live performance and Bitwig for something else. Where do the two cross-over?
This might be just a wires crossed thing here then. I've mostly used Live and either DP or Logic over the years. For years I used Live in performance, but also for it's clip based composing at times, and DP/Logic for more detailed songs and mixing and mastering etc.

BTW, I really like the sound of DP10's song chaining. It is something I have been looking for since I left my hardware sequencers behind in the late 90s. I've looked at DP before and I thought it looked pretty good. I'm not sure about the clip thing, though. I tried it in Bitwig but couldn't see the point. The way Cubase does it - clips within the timeline - is really all I need to develop an idea and turn it into a song. I never saw Orion's pattern based workflow as one of its strengths, either, but it worked well enough.
The song chaining thing embarrassingly enough I never paid much attention to until recently. I had a couple songs in my last band where I was playing clips in Live in performance, so I wrote off using DP for live use. Basically once you render songs to audio, whether stems, single files or what not, you can add them into a single project as separate Sequence Chunks, each of these can be set up easily to load one after the other when a song finishes. You can set it to automatically load, or just load to bar one. For me I mostly play guitar Live, I set up amplitube to load into a V-Rack separate from the song sequences, and fire PC messages to change patches in Amplitube. This same thing could be applied to a soft synth or two, with each song loading a MIDI track that addresses that soft synth. Theoretically you could load entire songs of non rendered tracks into a single Progect, with FX and VSTs etc. but you would be pretty foolish to do that live IMO.

It's a linear approach to performance compared to Live/Bitwig, but it's a lot better in many ways since it actually allows you to view the song in a timeline unlike the Bitwig/Live way.

Clip and Scene launching makes sense to people like me who think of a song in fairly traditional terms: main part, verse, chorus, bridge, break etc. Rearranging parts on the fly to see what works best order wise etc. or if you think of it as a huge sampler that you're playing.
I don't just work in one host. We are using Cubase for production but we'll still be playing live with Orion, at least for the time being. Cubase isn't anywhere near stable enough to be trusted on stage and all our songs exist in Orion anyway. We'd have to port a lot of old songs into Cubase to play 'em live. What I won't be doing, going forward, is starting something in Orion and then moving it across to Cubase to finish it. Any new material we have will start and finish in Cubase. If, once it's finished, I need to port it to Orion to play live, we'll see how well that works when we need to.
Yeah crap, that's always been my fear about Cubase, stability. Don't get me wrong, no DAW is 100% stable an update or upgrade can always bring some instability, but Cubase has never had a good reputation that way.
Live was solid, then they messed it up in version 8, Logic had a crap 7. DP has had growing pains on Windows, with some people solid and others having bugs, IMO probably related to unstable VSTs that Win DP can't handle etc.
Bitwig isn't bad, I could see using it live, I don't think it looks that elegant for that though, besides fantastic Push2 and general controller support. but right now before posting, I just experienced a lag between Push 2 and Bitwig, the drum pattern on Push 2 is like youtube where the timing is off.

User avatar
BONES
GRRRRRRR!
9803 posts since 14 Jun, 2001 from Somewhere else, on principle

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Wed Feb 12, 2020 9:34 pm

machinesworking wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 10:13 pm
I don't think workflow is the only reason to use a tool.
No but it should be the most important one. Surely the way to realise your musical goals to the highest standard is to put as few obstacles as you can between your initial idea and the finished piece? That's what good workflow will do for you.
What's objectively bad is using more than one DAW and having it make being creative seem like a chore...
Worse than that is telling yourself it's not a chore and choosing to put up with it.
I think if using one DAW that's missing features you want to use is making it seem like a chore, then it's time to rethink what you're doing.
I agree wholeheartedly but the solution is not to use multiple DAWs, it's to find one that works better for you.
For sure, I personally think Cubase is a great DAW, but I fear the stability, upgrade cycle, dongle etc. I really think they nail a lot of things very well though.
You just have to work out how serious those things are. I used to think dongles were an unacceptable PITA but eventually I worked out that they are actually just about the most flexible way to license stuff - install the application on 50 computers and plug the dongle into whichever one you want to use. The upgrade cycle is something you can choose to opt out of. I haven't upgraded to 10.5 and can't see why I would. Even stability is a relatively minor inconvenience. It's made working a bit stop-start at times but I haven't lost any work yet.

And that's what I'm trying to say - there will always be compromises, you just have to work out which ones are worth putting up with and which ones aren't, and I honestly can't see any way that having to move between hosts mid-project is anything but a completely unacceptable compromise.
Yeah, workflow would be key, the bit I've heard of your music it sounds like you use a good amount of track automation?
Dog, no! We use almost none. What you perceive as automation is probably velocity modulation, which is one of the most important aspects of the way we work. When we do use automation, it is mostly in the mixer, for turning effects on and off or doing volume fades. I can only think of one song where we've used automation on an instrument, on our third album.
That's something that makes starting in Orion and going to Cubase a PITA for sure.
Not really because if you use MIDI cc's for automation, it should come across in the MIDI file. The PITA is that you lose your mix, your effects and the patches (for both instruments and effects) so you have to do a lot of prep to make it all work.
This sort of thing is why I always wanted a better rewire
Even that seems like a lot of hassle to me. Better to find a host that you can use inside another, maybe, like Maschine.
I've mostly used Live and either DP or Logic over the years. For years I used Live in performance, but also for it's clip based composing at times, and DP/Logic for more detailed songs and mixing and mastering etc.
The trick, then, becomes working out the best point in the process to move from Live to DP to minimise the disruption. I still use Orion for mucking about, testing things and the like, mostly because it opens in one or two seconds and you get a totally empty screen to start from, exactly like a blank canvas. Cubase's GUI is cluttered and crowded, even before you do anything. However, I am determined to get to a point where I am equally comfortable doing that mucking around in Cubase because after I move the last new song onto Cubase this weekend, I never again want to have to go through that process.
Clip and Scene launching makes sense to people like me who think of a song in fairly traditional terms: main part, verse, chorus, bridge, break etc. Rearranging parts on the fly to see what works best order wise etc.
We work like that, too. We'll have an initial arrangement but once we've got lyrics written, we'll rearrange as necessary to suit them, whilst trying to make sure all the arrangements are at least a little bit different to one another.
NOVAkILL 4.0 : Dell G7 (Core i7, 8GB RAM, RTX2060, Win10), UR44C, Cubase, DUNE, Thorn, TRK-01, Equator, Vacuum Pro, Arcsyn, Aparillo, Phase Plant, Pigments, Union, Analog Keys, Ultranova, Uno, Skulpt, Craft 2.

machinesworking
KVRAF
2332 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Wed Feb 12, 2020 11:31 pm

BONES wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 9:34 pm
I agree wholeheartedly but the solution is not to use multiple DAWs, it's to find one that works better for you.
At this point I'm not convinced it exists.
What I do mainly is like you mention, minimize the amount of moves one would make, and rarely switch DAWs mid songwriting process. I generally wait until final mixing and mastering to import to DP if I'm working in another DAW. This way you just select "render all tracks as separate audio files". import those files into DP. It used to be a PITA to do it the other way around because DP was missing that feature, but now it's almost as good as what Reaper offers rendering wise.
And that's what I'm trying to say - there will always be compromises, you just have to work out which ones are worth putting up with and which ones aren't, and I honestly can't see any way that having to move between hosts mid-project is anything but a completely unacceptable compromise.
I agree, I've only done that back when Live would leave me in a rage when dealing with MIDI editing etc.
Even that seems like a lot of hassle to me. Better to find a host that you can use inside another, maybe, like Maschine.
The problem with that is resources wise, rewire and a DAW as a VSTi both use only one CPU. If someone besides Propellerheads had done rewire and had bothered to update it to run as a separate process, which IMO should be possible then it would be a smooth experience. As it stands I've never bothered much with either method, mostly rendering tracks after I've finished etc.

The trick, then, becomes working out the best point in the process to move from Live to DP to minimise the disruption. I still use Orion for mucking about, testing things and the like, mostly because it opens in one or two seconds and you get a totally empty screen to start from, exactly like a blank canvas. Cubase's GUI is cluttered and crowded, even before you do anything. However, I am determined to get to a point where I am equally comfortable doing that mucking around in Cubase because after I move the last new song onto Cubase this weekend, I never again want to have to go through that process.
Yeah I think I have a very clear idea why you would be flummoxed by anyone voluntarily exporting MIDI and plug ins between DAWs if you're being forced more or less to do this a dozen or more times by a possible end of the line scenario with Orion. I'm terrible that way, I just render the audio and keep MIDI files; there's at least two entire albums worth of stuff in Live that will probably never move to DP or Bitwig, and if it goes according to plan I might end up selling Live Suite, it will help fund my move from Roli to Linnstrument. I like the Rise 49 here, but the impetus playing wise with the Roli for me is to push down hard for the aftertouch and slide up for cc74 whatever I've assigned to that. This locks my fingers and bunches up the rubber on the bigger keys worse than on the Block. It's good looking for sure, but I'm not convinced by it anymore, and am willing to pony up for Mr. Linns version.

Oh, and I have a Syncrosoft dongle for VEP and an iLok with a couple dozen plug ins on it in the studio here. I'm just not interested in bringing one with me live. :borg:

User avatar
BONES
GRRRRRRR!
9803 posts since 14 Jun, 2001 from Somewhere else, on principle

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:11 am

machinesworking wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 11:31 pm
What I do mainly is like you mention, minimize the amount of moves one would make, and rarely switch DAWs mid songwriting process. I generally wait until final mixing and mastering to import to DP if I'm working in another DAW.
I'd go the other way, I'd want to get it to DP as soon as possible, even if you haven't finalised an arrangement. Surely the longer you leave it, the more flexibility you lose? What use is Clip View once you have a verse and a chorus? I'd be saving each as a MIDI file and getting 'em into DP ASAP.
This way you just select "render all tracks as separate audio files". import those files into DP. It used to be a PITA to do it the other way around because DP was missing that feature, but now it's almost as good as what Reaper offers rendering wise.
But once you've rendered a track you've tied one hand behind your back. You can't easily/elegantly do any more sound design, which is often more effective than any mixing trick you might want to employ. e.g. more effective to finesse an envelope or two than apply a transient shaper and hope it can do the job.
I agree, I've only done that back when Live would leave me in a rage when dealing with MIDI editing etc.
How hard can editing MIDI be? Don't all hosts pretty much do it the same way?
Even that seems like a lot of hassle to me. Better to find a host that you can use inside another, maybe, like Maschine.
The problem with that is resources wise, rewire and a DAW as a VSTi both use only one CPU. If someone besides Propellerheads had done rewire and had bothered to update it to run as a separate process, which IMO should be possible then it would be a smooth experience.
Maschine just runs as a VSTi. It used to work fine in Orion on my ancient Core i5, I can't imagine it causing any headaches for a newer system.
Yeah I think I have a very clear idea why you would be flummoxed by anyone voluntarily exporting MIDI and plug ins between DAWs if you're being forced more or less to do this a dozen or more times by a possible end of the line scenario with Orion.
It's not something I had previously not thought about, it has simply reinforced long held beliefs. I used to have to do it every time I bought new hardware and it was soul destroying.
Oh, and I have a Syncrosoft dongle for VEP and an iLok with a couple dozen plug ins on it in the studio here. I'm just not interested in bringing one with me live. :borg:
It would be more hassle for me to leave mine at home, as it's always plugged into the Overhub.
NOVAkILL 4.0 : Dell G7 (Core i7, 8GB RAM, RTX2060, Win10), UR44C, Cubase, DUNE, Thorn, TRK-01, Equator, Vacuum Pro, Arcsyn, Aparillo, Phase Plant, Pigments, Union, Analog Keys, Ultranova, Uno, Skulpt, Craft 2.

User avatar
BezO
KVRist
247 posts since 19 Jul, 2005

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Thu Feb 13, 2020 11:21 am

I use just one, Studio One. But I certainly understand why folks use multiple DAWs.

I started with Pro Tools and used it for years, up to version 8 on a 2010 iMac. When I upgraded my computer, Pro Tools 8 wasn't compatible and their upgrade model had changed. I didn't like it and took that time to research DAWs.

Being a Mac user, Logic was a logical choice. It seemed to do everything I needed, especially since I was transitioning ITB and planning to use virtual instruments exclusively. Logic was perfect for what I was doing until I missed some of my hardware. Hard synths weren't a problem. But Logic doesn't play nice with external sequencers, and my MPC became a major part of my workflow. After only a year or so, I was again searching for a DAW and finally understanding why folks used more than one.

I've since settled on Studio One. Similar to Logic, it started out great. Integrating my MPC was seamless for the most part. A bit more set up required, but not very difficult to integrate my synths. But then I started getting crashes. Then my Komplete Kontrol would disconnect on occasion. Then my KK would disconnect almost everyday. I'm working it out, getting not as much help from support as I would expect. I've come to really like S1, so hopefully this is user error and I can continue learning the DAW, because it's been the most efficient of the 3 I've tried. But it's also had the most problems.

They all have their strengths & weaknesses. Something you consider basic in one is absent in another. For example, I didn't know stereo panning was a "feature" until I left Pro Tools. It had been added to Logic by the time I got on, but it was an option. Stereo balancing is the default, and I still don't understand why anyone would prefer it. Stereo panning is not even available in Studio One. You have to use a plugin. Crazy!
The groove baby, the groove...

EnGee
KVRAF
6154 posts since 7 Oct, 2005

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Thu Feb 13, 2020 11:47 am

....
Last edited by EnGee on Fri Feb 14, 2020 3:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Using Win 10/Live 10 Suite mainly these days 8)

machinesworking
KVRAF
2332 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:05 pm

BONES wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:11 am
I'd go the other way, I'd want to get it to DP as soon as possible, even if you haven't finalised an arrangement. Surely the longer you leave it, the more flexibility you lose? What use is Clip View once you have a verse and a chorus? I'd be saving each as a MIDI file and getting 'em into DP ASAP.
.........
But once you've rendered a track you've tied one hand behind your back. You can't easily/elegantly do any more sound design, which is often more effective than any mixing trick you might want to employ. e.g. more effective to finesse an envelope or two than apply a transient shaper and hope it can do the job.

At some point you have to commit. System resource, wise habits from back in the day have stuck by me, and honestly the times I didn't render all tracks to audio before mix down and mastering have ended with various computer configurations and failures resulting in going back to projects from 20 years ago where X plug in no longer exists etc. I actually think committing is a good thing, of course you always have the track in (in my case) Ableton to go back to if you're really convinced that a sharper envelope will help a particular synth stand out etc. In a way it's a good thing it makes it that much harder because it forces you to think about whether or not that's truly the problem.
How hard can editing MIDI be? Don't all hosts pretty much do it the same way?
Bitwig, FL, Live, ReNoise etc. all do a lot of things really great, but old school DAWs like Cubase and DP have amazing features that can save a lot of time. I wanted to remove a hi hat line on the break on the 1st and 3rd beats, this was possible in 3 or less moves with the search function in DP, but a matter of selecting and editing a hundred individual beats in Live. Hours VS a minute. I'm sure there are features of Orion you will miss editing wise, but I would bet there are a lot more new ones in Cubase that will eventually be of great use to you, since it's an even older DAW with a MIDI background. Very arguably, Cubase, DP and Logic are going to be filled with MIDI editing features that the others will probably never get, since they're 30+ year old DAWs that started as MIDI sequencers.
Maschine just runs as a VSTi. It used to work fine in Orion on my ancient Core i5, I can't imagine it causing any headaches for a newer system.
Maschine like all VSTi sequencers that are essentially DAWs unto themselves behave drastically differently in different DAWs. Orion might be lean with it, in cubase you might see a 25% CPU hit. That's been my experience with Maschine and MPC2. Obviously all that is going away as we move into the future, but Maschine etc. will just use more resources the more are available etc.

I would love a Rewire 2 that had bidirectional MIDI and audio routing between two DAWs with the only distinction being a locked transport. This is entirely possible with audio routing programs on OS X coupled with MTC and Inter Application MIDI, it's just not an elegant all in one solution. I'm sure it's possible on Windows as well, so why someone doesn't produce this I don't know? Set it up to also work on a network and you could collaborate with anyone using any DAW etc.

EnGee
KVRAF
6154 posts since 7 Oct, 2005

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:09 pm

.....
Last edited by EnGee on Fri Feb 14, 2020 3:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Using Win 10/Live 10 Suite mainly these days 8)

User avatar
Touch The Universe
KVRAF
4015 posts since 2 Oct, 2008

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:13 pm

Orion to sequence or sound design, otherwise start tracks - loads within seconds, no clutter
Studio One to arrange and get serious finishing tracks - organized, intuitive, powerful
fl studio to crop best parts of songs and work with loops - save as each slice is fastest method to save files and loops to slice is fastest way to blend different bpm loops
Ableton to perform the songs I finish in Studio One or make songs with Push 2
High Quality Soundsets for Lush-101 | Hive | Electra 2 | Diversion | Halion | Largo | Rapid | Dune II | Thorn | and more.

gminorcoles
KVRist
42 posts since 22 Feb, 2019

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Thu Feb 13, 2020 5:58 pm

I use more than one daw because I am in transition. I am using fl studio which is good for quick midi composition but when my songs get more complicated it gets hard to change them.

I am currently trying to decide between Cubase and DP.

Someone should channel all their aggression into helping my make that decision so I don’t make the wrong choice.

DP looks interesting but for legacy machine reasons my best music computer is windows. My Mac is a new mini which is a bit slower but more importantly the audio interface is not very good.

So DP on pc is a bit off feeling. The chunk clip thing looks promising but then Cubase, while not having this chunk sequence elegance, seems to do every thing well when it comes to MiDi which is my primary concern. My recording is pretty simple in terms of audio I just hit record.

EnGee
KVRAF
6154 posts since 7 Oct, 2005

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Thu Feb 13, 2020 6:43 pm

.....
Last edited by EnGee on Fri Feb 14, 2020 3:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Using Win 10/Live 10 Suite mainly these days 8)

gminorcoles
KVRist
42 posts since 22 Feb, 2019

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Thu Feb 13, 2020 6:45 pm

I will be comparing logic DP and Cubase side by side until i decide.

machinesworking
KVRAF
2332 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:57 pm

gminorcoles wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 5:58 pm
I use more than one daw because I am in transition. I am using fl studio which is good for quick midi composition but when my songs get more complicated it gets hard to change them.

I am currently trying to decide between Cubase and DP.

Someone should channel all their aggression into helping my make that decision so I don’t make the wrong choice.
If changing or rearranging songs is a priority then IMO DP is going to win.

Quick breakdown of strong points for either:

Cubase will do VST3 better. IMO at this time, at least on OS X, VST3 is bug prone compared to AU and VST2 in Live, Bitwig, Reaper, and DP.

If you do orchestral work Cubase has a solution for changing expressions (pizzicato, marcato etc.), DP currently lacks this, it's key triggers.

Cubase is very well supported by controller keyboard manufacturers, transports and faders all work out of the box.

DP10 is starting to compete in Live and Bitwig territory with it's Clips. It arguably has the
most extensive list of variations on how to put a song together, or rather it's not arguable, there are more ways to go from point A to point B in DP than any other DAW out there.

Live performance, and IMO the way that DP holds all 'versions' of a song or even completely different songs in Chunks, is unique to DP.

Negatives or differences that might sway someone one way or the other.
DP at least on OS X is as CPU friendly as Logic, Cubase is only slightly better than Ableton Live, which is a resource pig.

There is no way to constrain MIDI to a certain range of notes by MIDI track in DP. My controller keyboard can do this and sends out separate ports as well as channels, but if your keyboard can't there's not a built in solution in DP.

Steinberg have a relative to the norm, aggressive update cycle, it's a noted fact they've promised to fix bugs in a cycle only to release a paid upgrade with the bugfixes.

Cubase while supporting VST2 and 3 does not support AU. there's a relatively tiny handful of AU only plug ins.

DP10 does not host MIDI on it's plug ins, you always load a VST, AU or built in plug that has audio out, but only hosts track automation. A separate MIDI track must be instantiated for MIDI input to the VST/AU etc. This is probably not changing, and IMO it's due to the nature of V-Racks which are plug in racks that exist outside of Sequences. V-Racks facilitate fast switching between Sequences (otherwise the plug ins would reload or have to be instantiated each time a Sequence is changed in the Chunks window). It's never been a real trial to me but I get why people would prefer a single Sequence per open Project and single track with MIDI and VSTi, AUi plug ins.

In general that's the big question you have to ask yourself. IMO Cubase is a really great DAW and it's in my experience pretty easy to figure out. Steinberg are aggressive about new features which has resulted in varying degrees of stability over the years, but you're not waiting around like you are in most DAWs. DP10 is arguably the most complex to understand DAW, it's got two linear arrangement editors in Tracks and Sequence windows, and now Clips. It has two other non linear ways of arranging songs or groups of songs in the Song and Chunks areas.
DP10 has a 30 day demo which is only enough time if you dive in and spend that time learning DP. As mentioned there are demos for Cubase as well. Again in my opinion DP10 will be a little harder to grasp, since it's not as clear what you're supposed to do to write a song in it. It's wide open, but for me that's what I like about it. Even then I'm not going to lie and say it's not frustrating at first if you try to figure it all out at once. Probably best to stick to a single arrangement ( or Sequence Chunk in Dp10 terms ), and figure out that first before going near V-Racks and Chunks.


DP looks interesting but for legacy machine reasons my best music computer is windows. My Mac is a new mini which is a bit slower but more importantly the audio interface is not very good.

So DP on pc is a bit off feeling. The chunk clip thing looks promising but then Cubase, while not having this chunk sequence elegance, seems to do every thing well when it comes to MiDi which is my primary concern. My recording is pretty simple in terms of audio I just hit record.
You're on either system really, but if you're to say Windows, then both have reports of instability. Years ago Cubase was more stable on Windows, but recent reports say that oddly enough that switched to it being more stable on OS X.

With DP and Windows IMO it's a matter of system variables, because some people have no issues with it, others are plagued with bugs. (it could be a VST3 or 12).

Anyway there's a start for your consideration. Hope that helps.

EnGee
KVRAF
6154 posts since 7 Oct, 2005

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Thu Feb 13, 2020 9:31 pm

. . .
Last edited by EnGee on Fri Feb 14, 2020 3:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Using Win 10/Live 10 Suite mainly these days 8)

gminorcoles
KVRist
42 posts since 22 Feb, 2019

Re: Why you use multiple DAWs ?

Post Fri Feb 14, 2020 3:27 am

machinesworking wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:57 pm
Anyway there's a start for your consideration. Hope that helps.
Most helpful, detailed opinion. Best post I have seen in a while. It can be hard to find DP users compared to Cubase which is another thing that makes me cautious about dp. Not that popular compared to Cubase which, aside from the absolute merits of each tool, can carry some risk.

I appreciate your time.

Return to “Hosts & Applications (Sequencers, DAWs, Audio Editors, etc.)”