is cakewalk a good daw?

[Danilo Villanova]

+1 vote for cakewalk. I´ve been using Cubase for 25 years, and will not stop to do so. But a friend of mine and me decided to start writing songs together in a raw and not so overperfectionistic fashion, and needed to find a platform that would be compatible for both of us. Cakewalk ended up being the choice because it´s free and unlike any other freebie outthere seems to have no limitations at all. I do find it a bit hard to get used to how moving segments around, and other workflow related things, since I´m used to how it´s done in Cubase and the look of it is not as great as Cubase. But this is stuff you´ll get used to, and I´m getting there. I´ve had one crash these last two months, and I´m not so sure if that´s a plugin causing it. I´ve had crashes in Cubase too though, so I would not consider cakewalk less stable.

Ah one thing: I found it rediculously hard to find out how to install it, after having downloaded Bandlab but I finally got there.

Have you tried the new Arranger for moving sections around?

https://youtu.be/-tneNJJVq2k

[jens]

What do you mean "real" slip editing? It does have that function and comping also works pretty well.

No, it does not really have it even though they claim it.

Each take is like an Independent single file. Thus it is not possible to expand a take beyond the boundaries it has been recorded within.

E.g if you loop-recorded between bar 9 and bar 17 you can not expand a take to bar 8 or bar 18
(you can, but it will be empty instead of showing what has actually been recorded)

So e.g if you record anything with a slow attack (say - really just a stupid example - Cello), you're f**ked - you'd have to expand the loop, but Sonar is already more than messy enough without the overlaps this would cause.


So no, not a good DAW (to answer the initial question). I had to learn that the hard way.

I don´t really get what you mean. If you set your loop boundaries to record, it is logical that your DAW records within those boundaries. not before and after. If you need something to be recorded before a bar line, like an early attack, or a pickup note, you just need to take that into account and set the loop start there, nobody forces you to use bar lines. If you start recording right on the first beat of bar 9, and the cello attack needed to start earlier, I do not see how you would expect that to be recorded. Even if all takes were a single file, you´d lose that first attack no matter what. And if you played the same eight bars continuously several times in a loop, I do not know what you expect to happen if you try to expand a take to cover a bar that you did not play, even if the eight bars that you did play were recorded to a single file.

*lol*

[robbie111]

2020.04 update had a lot of nice new features and the 2020.05 is going to feature offline activation for those who don't want to be hooked up to the internet with their music computer.

[Erisian]

2020.04 update had a lot of nice new features and the 2020.05 is going to feature offline activation for those who don't want to be hooked up to the internet with their music computer.

Offline activation is a fantastic step forward.

[anttimaatteri]

does it have all the features of other daws im thinking to try it

yes, and you can even make music with it!

[Erisian]

does it have all the features of other daws im thinking to try it

yes, and you can even make music with it!

[jinotsuh]

2020.04 update had a lot of nice new features and the 2020.05 is going to feature offline activation for those who don't want to be hooked up to the internet with their music computer.

Offline activation is a fantastic step forward.

A small point I know, but you will still have to activate once every approx 6 months or end up in 'Demo' mode.
https://discuss.cakewalk.com/index.php? ... ent=129529

As a free DAW it can't be beat, it's when up against paid DAW's the cracks start to show. This is just going by what I have read, but it seems to have made a lot of head way in the bug squashing and stability areas, but there is still a long way to go as there were a lot of bugs and issues that have mounted up over the years. I still can't bring myself to try CbB, maybe one day, maybe not, I am quite happy where I am.

One thing for sure, if it works good for you it can be great, and if it doesn't it can be a disaster, and for a lot of people in the past it has been the later. Personally I never had many issues with it. I left during the Platinum era when they were still calling releases after cities or towns or whatever. After 1 release there was a fair performance hit, it was noticed by many others on the forums as well. There was of course also a laundry list of quirks and oddities that all users got use to and put up with, and there was always a certain kludgeness and clunkiness that had to be accepted and overlooked. So I had a look around at the outside world and came across this thing called Studio One which just release version 3, I demo'd it, and the rest is history, haven't looked back since.

I do of course keep any eye on things over there in Cakewalk land, as I do in REAPER land, I had used them for many years, but I have absolutely no desire to ever go back to them, after breaking free you can see things much more clearly, and see things how they really were/are.

Go back? no thanks, not even if it's free.

[jens]

Even if all takes were a single file, you´d lose that first attack no matter what. And if you played the same eight bars continuously several times in a loop, I do not know what you expect to happen if you try to expand a take to cover a bar that you did not play, even if the eight bars that you did play were recorded to a single file.

You just entirely misunderstood me, it appears. I don't know if you do not record much audio or if you never really tried anything else besides Sonar, but here is how it normally (i.e. the following applies to the vast majority of DAWs) works:


if you record in a (say) 8 bar loop, then the first bar of the secord take is actually bar nine of the whole recording. So if you slip-edit a clip which uses that take so that it starts one bar earlier,
the clip Plays from bar 8 through to bar 16 of your recording (i.e. nine bars of what you recorded) - it's there because you recorded it. The same goes for increasing the length of the clip at its end and the same goes of course for take three, take four and so forth.

Normally, you can access your whole recording from every take by increasing the clip size. Allmost all DAWs work that way. That's just standard. Like cars have rearview-mirrors, you see?

Sonar does NOT work like this though. And it's a royal PITA.

Got it?

[Aliens]

It's not what you have, it's what you do with it that counts

Needs more Lazerlight

[golden19]

I went with Cubase elements Case closed lol

[enroe]

does it have all the features of other daws im thinking to try it

Haha, you asked for "all the features"!

Cubase Elements only has a tiny small fragment of "all the features".
It is a very strongly stipped down version of the full version of Cubase.
Cakewalk on the other hand is the full featured pro-version - and
can be compared to the full version of Cubase.

But: If you are a beginner in composing or recording, then "Cubase
Elements" would be a very good choice.

[golden19]

does it have all the features of other daws im thinking to try it

Haha, you asked for "all the features"!

Cubase Elements only has a tiny small fragment of "all the features".
It is a very strongly stipped down version of the full version of Cubase.
Cakewalk on the other hand is the full featured pro-version - and
can be compared to the full version of Cubase.

But: If you are a beginner in composing or recording, then "Cubase
Elements" would be a very good choice.

Not a complete beginner I weighed up what elements is missing and comping is it really tbh Ive used reason and liked it but Cubase is way more faster to use , cakewalk does seem good but I got cubase elements for like £47 , I tried them all out and cubase is for me 24 instrument tracks and 48 audio is all I would ever need , variaudio I would like , where as even the free version of reason has pitch correction , cubase elements only has the basic pitch correction plug in , cakewalk didn’t have any , I tried out bitwig ableton reason, acid, samplitude studio, the lot but I like cubase the most , really wanted to like cakewalk mostly because it’s the only real free fully featured daw, but it didn’t call to me

[enroe]

Well, that sounds good! Then we'll hear from you soon at the KVR-cafe?

[JoseC.]

Even if all takes were a single file, you´d lose that first attack no matter what. And if you played the same eight bars continuously several times in a loop, I do not know what you expect to happen if you try to expand a take to cover a bar that you did not play, even if the eight bars that you did play were recorded to a single file.

You just entirely misunderstood me, it appears. I don't know if you do not record much audio or if you never really tried anything else besides Sonar, but here is how it normally (i.e. the following applies to the vast majority of DAWs) works:


if you record in a (say) 8 bar loop, then the first bar of the secord take is actually bar nine of the whole recording. So if you slip-edit a clip which uses that take so that it starts one bar earlier,
the clip Plays from bar 8 through to bar 16 of your recording (i.e. nine bars of what you recorded) - it's there because you recorded it. The same goes for increasing the length of the clip at its end and the same goes of course for take three, take four and so forth.

Normally, you can access your whole recording from every take by increasing the clip size. Allmost all DAWs work that way. That's just standard. Like cars have rearview-mirrors, you see?

Sonar does NOT work like this though. And it's a royal PITA.

Got it?

It seems that I understood you just fine. I just do not understand why in practice that is such a big deal, and I did not really get your example. I said that in your example you lose the first attack anyway (1st take), and I meant that extending the loop beyond the recorded 8th bar (bar 17 to bar 18, as you said in your example), IMO does not make much sense, but to each his own. I almost never record in a continuous loop, I set loop points and then I set an autopunch region inside it. My other DAW is Ableton, and though it records a long single file, its comping system is horrible, IMO. I do not care about compared DAWology, and what should be considered "more standard" (if that thing really exists) and what not. I try to learn and use each tool as it is. By the way, mirrors in cars are on their way out, cameras are coming.

And, of course, you are entitled to your own behind´s feelings, I would never argue that, *lol*

[jens]

*lol*

I never wrote "the first take" but rather "a take" in my original post (which you quoted in your first reply), so I don't get how you could have interepreted that as "the first take" - if my main interest was the first take then I would not need to loop-record at all, right?
Thus your point made really very little sense. That much about "I understood you just fine".

And now we moved from "how could this ever be possible" to "I don't see the point of it" - which I can believe very well as you said that you "almost never record in a continuous loop", which is why:

a) you did not really get what I was on about

b) you have not really anything worthwhile to add to it

but

c) still apparently could not possibly resist the urge to defend your favourite host from my mean attack