Which DAW Has the Best GUI?

[machinesworking]

I know GUI and UX very well. And they go hand in hand when discussing “the best GUI”.

The fact is something can be good looking without being useful, i.e. the user interface can be hindered by design choices based on looks. The UX can suffer because of GUI choices.

And I just tried the Studio One demo and can’t see what the wonderful look is all about. Not to talk about the terrible workflow.

Weren't you the one arguing that Reaper has a good GUI? Not a soul that doesn't use Reaper thinks it looks good. The UX is mostly great, completely customizable, but the GUI has issues that are blatant to most even with custom themes.

You can't try any DAW for a couple hours and expect to adopt to it's UX except at the most basic level, and that will be hindered by differences between you're preferred DAWs workflow and the new one.

[Jace-BeOS]

I like the graphics in FL Studio but I dislike the actual workflow.

I hate that Logic went flat and ugly, but I mostly like the workflow.

I've found the workflow is far better when you lay out everything to be visible. I love this layout almost as much as the old Temper midi sequencer.
flworkflow.png

Maybe. If it didn’t crash on me while simply playing the demo projects, I might’ve spent more time learning how to operate it.

[apoclypse]

How obvious is it that everyone has just voted for the host they use? It's pathetic. I cannot believe I am the only person to vote for Cakewalk, it's GUI is very clean, clear, uncluttered and consistent, at least from the screenshots I've seen. I also can't believe Live has the most votes, it's GUI is awful. There is nowhere near enough contrast between control and the background which means you have to stare at it closely to see what's going on. As a Cubase user, I certainly can't believe anyone thinks it's GUI looks nice. It's a horrid mish-mash of colours and styles. I think it looks awful. If it all looked like the native plugins, it would be incredible but seeing those nice GUIs feels like the devs are taunting me.

My Top 3 would be Cakewalk, Studio One and Logic. Whenever I see any of them in YT videos, I think "ooh, that host looks nice, I should try it out" but I never do. Learning Cubase was enough of a struggle for me, although switching again probably wouldn't be nearly as hard.

Why most vote for the DAW they use?
Because GUI was probably considered when they chose or got used to their DAW.
GUI is also much more than just looks, so judging a DAW’s GUI from screenshots might be the only pathetic thing in this thread.

You're mixing up GUI with UX.
GUI = "graphic user interface", not as much about the whole experience as UX "user experience".

And I picked DP and Studio One. I don't own Studio One, it's just much better looking to me than most, and people rave about it's UX. I don't plan on getting it ever, but it's nice to look at. I like the way Live looks but IMO at times it's adherence to a singular look gets in the way of the UX, especially with the included plug ins. I really relied on track colors and having a system more in Live than any DAW I've used.

I'll never understand the argument that something looks bad because it's dated. Not all modern GUIs are great. I love Bitwig, but I don't particularly like it's GUI, it's too toy like. Apparently I'm in the minority here.

I know GUI and UX very well. And they go hand in hand when discussing “the best GUI”.

And I just tried the Studio One demo and can’t see what the wonderful look is all about. Not to talk about the terrible workflow.

Terrible compared to what?

[TheMaestro]

I know GUI and UX very well. And they go hand in hand when discussing “the best GUI”.

The fact is something can be good looking without being useful, i.e. the user interface can be hindered by design choices based on looks. The UX can suffer because of GUI choices.

And I just tried the Studio One demo and can’t see what the wonderful look is all about. Not to talk about the terrible workflow.

Weren't you the one arguing that Reaper has a good GUI? Not a soul that doesn't use Reaper thinks it looks good. The UX is mostly great, completely customizable, but the GUI has issues that are blatant to most even with custom themes.

You can't try any DAW for a couple hours and expect to adopt to it's UX except at the most basic level, and that will be hindered by differences between you're preferred DAWs workflow and the new one.

And? Reaper looks good. Especially with the modified theme I use. It both looks great and works great.

[TheMaestro]

How obvious is it that everyone has just voted for the host they use? It's pathetic. I cannot believe I am the only person to vote for Cakewalk, it's GUI is very clean, clear, uncluttered and consistent, at least from the screenshots I've seen. I also can't believe Live has the most votes, it's GUI is awful. There is nowhere near enough contrast between control and the background which means you have to stare at it closely to see what's going on. As a Cubase user, I certainly can't believe anyone thinks it's GUI looks nice. It's a horrid mish-mash of colours and styles. I think it looks awful. If it all looked like the native plugins, it would be incredible but seeing those nice GUIs feels like the devs are taunting me.

My Top 3 would be Cakewalk, Studio One and Logic. Whenever I see any of them in YT videos, I think "ooh, that host looks nice, I should try it out" but I never do. Learning Cubase was enough of a struggle for me, although switching again probably wouldn't be nearly as hard.

Why most vote for the DAW they use?
Because GUI was probably considered when they chose or got used to their DAW.
GUI is also much more than just looks, so judging a DAW’s GUI from screenshots might be the only pathetic thing in this thread.

You're mixing up GUI with UX.
GUI = "graphic user interface", not as much about the whole experience as UX "user experience".

And I picked DP and Studio One. I don't own Studio One, it's just much better looking to me than most, and people rave about it's UX. I don't plan on getting it ever, but it's nice to look at. I like the way Live looks but IMO at times it's adherence to a singular look gets in the way of the UX, especially with the included plug ins. I really relied on track colors and having a system more in Live than any DAW I've used.

I'll never understand the argument that something looks bad because it's dated. Not all modern GUIs are great. I love Bitwig, but I don't particularly like it's GUI, it's too toy like. Apparently I'm in the minority here.

I know GUI and UX very well. And they go hand in hand when discussing “the best GUI”.

And I just tried the Studio One demo and can’t see what the wonderful look is all about. Not to talk about the terrible workflow.

Terrible compared to what?

Compared to Reaper, Cubase, Reason, and the praise it apparently gets.

[jamcat]

How obvious is it that everyone has just voted for the host they use? It's pathetic. I cannot believe I am the only person to vote for Cakewalk, it's GUI is very clean, clear, uncluttered and consistent, at least from the screenshots I've seen. I also can't believe Live has the most votes, it's GUI is awful. There is nowhere near enough contrast between control and the background which means you have to stare at it closely to see what's going on. As a Cubase user, I certainly can't believe anyone thinks it's GUI looks nice. It's a horrid mish-mash of colours and styles. I think it looks awful. If it all looked like the native plugins, it would be incredible but seeing those nice GUIs feels like the devs are taunting me.

My Top 3 would be Cakewalk, Studio One and Logic. Whenever I see any of them in YT videos, I think "ooh, that host looks nice, I should try it out" but I never do. Learning Cubase was enough of a struggle for me, although switching again probably wouldn't be nearly as hard.

Why most vote for the DAW they use?
Because GUI was probably considered when they chose or got used to their DAW.
GUI is also much more than just looks, so judging a DAW’s GUI from screenshots might be the only pathetic thing in this thread.

You're mixing up GUI with UX.
GUI = "graphic user interface", not as much about the whole experience as UX "user experience".

And I picked DP and Studio One. I don't own Studio One, it's just much better looking to me than most, and people rave about it's UX. I don't plan on getting it ever, but it's nice to look at. I like the way Live looks but IMO at times it's adherence to a singular look gets in the way of the UX, especially with the included plug ins. I really relied on track colors and having a system more in Live than any DAW I've used.

I'll never understand the argument that something looks bad because it's dated. Not all modern GUIs are great. I love Bitwig, but I don't particularly like it's GUI, it's too toy like. Apparently I'm in the minority here.

I know GUI and UX very well. And they go hand in hand when discussing “the best GUI”.

And I just tried the Studio One demo and can’t see what the wonderful look is all about. Not to talk about the terrible workflow.

Terrible compared to what?

Compared to Reaper, Cubase, Reason, and the praise it apparently gets.

Interesting. Details, please.
Particularly your critique of the workflow.

[lessera]

ah yes... when that happens, all the bickering and self-important exaggeration will stop. and no-one will ever attach their ego to the program they use, ever again.

If what you post ever happens, I swear I will fly to where you are located, and buy you a dozen beers of your choice.

[rod_zero]

Live and is not even close, bitwig copy pasted most of the concepts but had to add 3d shaped cause they must felt compelled to add touch of their own after all they copied.

Music software must be one with the worst GUI design practices, cluttered mess, stupid realistic graphics cause people using it "should be able to relate", so much cheap nostalgia cues.

[Simonff]

I used FL Studio, Studio One, Sonar and Reaper and I like Sonar's gui. It's simple, clear and customizable. I wish more daws would have customizable functions. And I never looked in Live's direction because of it's 2000s style gui

[antic604]

I used FL Studio, Studio One, Sonar and Reaper and I like Sonar's gui. It's simple, clear and customizable. I wish more daws would have customizable functions. And I never looked in Live's direction because of it's 2000s style gui

That's such a b/s. Live's GUI obviously was designed in very early 2000s, but it's definitely not how GUIs looked back then. If anything, it was futuristic.

[jonljacobi]

Live does belong to a school of UI aesthetics that cropped up around that time, but WTF, I like art deco so who am I to judge? If you don't like a thing, you don't like it. Doesn't make it bad, doesn't necessarily make it good if you like it. Now if you want to talk efficiency, that's a completely different story because it's quantifiable through testing.

[chk071]

I know GUI and UX very well. And they go hand in hand when discussing “the best GUI”.

The fact is something can be good looking without being useful, i.e. the user interface can be hindered by design choices based on looks. The UX can suffer because of GUI choices.

And I just tried the Studio One demo and can’t see what the wonderful look is all about. Not to talk about the terrible workflow.

Weren't you the one arguing that Reaper has a good GUI? Not a soul that doesn't use Reaper thinks it looks good. The UX is mostly great, completely customizable, but the GUI has issues that are blatant to most even with custom themes.

You can't try any DAW for a couple hours and expect to adopt to it's UX except at the most basic level, and that will be hindered by differences between you're preferred DAWs workflow and the new one.

And? Reaper looks good. Especially with the modified theme I use. It both looks great and works great.

Then just use it, and live happily ever after.

Won't change that it looks terrible for many people though. And... has been pointed out a gazillion times now, a theme will only change the things which it is supposed to change, nothing more.

[TheMaestro]

I know GUI and UX very well. And they go hand in hand when discussing “the best GUI”.

The fact is something can be good looking without being useful, i.e. the user interface can be hindered by design choices based on looks. The UX can suffer because of GUI choices.

And I just tried the Studio One demo and can’t see what the wonderful look is all about. Not to talk about the terrible workflow.

Weren't you the one arguing that Reaper has a good GUI? Not a soul that doesn't use Reaper thinks it looks good. The UX is mostly great, completely customizable, but the GUI has issues that are blatant to most even with custom themes.

You can't try any DAW for a couple hours and expect to adopt to it's UX except at the most basic level, and that will be hindered by differences between you're preferred DAWs workflow and the new one.

And? Reaper looks good. Especially with the modified theme I use. It both looks great and works great.

Then just use it, and live happily ever after.

Won't change that it looks terrible for many people though. And... has been pointed out a gazillion times now, a theme will only change the things which it is supposed to change, nothing more.

Wow. Insightful.

[fmr]

Music software must be one with the worst GUI design practices, cluttered mess, stupid realistic graphics cause people using it "should be able to relate", so much cheap nostalgia cues.

In your opinion

IMO, if it wasn't for those "cheap nostalgia cues" we would not be here discussing DAWs, and would be still using tape recorders and mixing desks.

[machinesworking]

And? Reaper looks good. Especially with the modified theme I use. It both looks great and works great.

Won't change that it looks terrible for many people though. And... has been pointed out a gazillion times now, a theme will only change the things which it is supposed to change, nothing more.

Wow. Insightful.

Not that you're going to change your opinion, but your logic is off here. Reaper cannot change certain GUI elements with themes, people have pointed out that it's those GUI elements that make Reaper ugly to them.

Here's a simple break down.

"Reaper looks good"
The overwhelming consensus is it does not, even with themes.

You have every right to argue that it looks good to you, but that hasn't been what you're doing here. It's as silly as me arguing that everyone is wrong about Bitwig, I think it's fugly, but I realize that's my taste, not the majority. I think it looks like a kids toy, but it's also quite practical as most elements are touch compatible etc. So GUI issues lose out over UX.

Anyway enjoy Reaper, it's a great DAW, this thread was doomed to silly debate anyways.