is cakewalk a good daw?

[Roman Empire]

What I don´t like is that unlike in cubase, I can´t just mark a section with the mouse and then move it. I first have to select the selection tool, and then the moving tool.

cakewalk_move.gif

You don't have to use the Select and Move tools.
Just using the Smart tool, you can select clips using the RIGHT mouse button and then move them by dragging one of the selected clips from their title bar with the LEFT mouse button.

Strange, that´s pretty much what I did - I thought. Let me get back later on this one!

[TS-12]

Yes it’s an excellent DAW, one of the best

[progmatist]

I started using Cakewalk Home Studio 8 in the late 90s, and rode the upgrade train from Sonar version 1 through X3, before Gibson made it a subscription service. I skipped only version 5. At the beginning of this year, I came to the stark realization I've been using entirely the wrong DAW platform for more than 2 decades. Here's how:

When using Bandlab Cakewalk for recording and editing vinyl records, I was constantly plagued by random distortion. As part of the troubleshooting process, I downgraded to Sonar X1. That did help somewhat, but not entirely. My next step was to dust off an old Cubase 7 Elements license. The difference was night and day. First, the sound was pristine, apart from the usual surface noise. Second, I heard much more of what one would expect to hear from 24/96 Hi-Res. Here's the real kicker: the Izotope RX7 and RX8 I use to clean vinyl noise works substantially better on a Cubase file. The Decrackle module in particular, I previously concluded was unusable. If I raised it to a level at which it had any effect at all, it severely degraded sound quality. With a Cubase file, Decrackle works phenomenally well.

I can draw but one conclusion from this experience: Cakewalk/Sonar must generate an inherently inferior audio file. I'd much rather this not be true, but sadly it is. I now have to go back and re-record hundreds of vinyl records.

BTW: For those not wishing to break to bank, I've found $60 Reaper produces audio files similar in quality to Cubase.

[lfm]

I can draw but one conclusion from this experience: Cakewalk/Sonar must generate an inherently inferior audio file. I'd much rather this not be true, but sadly it is. I now have to go back and re-record hundreds of vinyl records.

And you updated no preamp and/or A/D converters like upgrading audio interface in this time?
Those things make huge differences to recordings.

I know I did vinyl recordings using inferior preamps compared to now, which I am to redo for this reason.

I never use built in dithering in Cakewalk, only Waves L2 stuff instead.

[progmatist]

All hardware is the same, the only difference being the software. Cubase clearly outperforms Cakewalk in audio quality. The fact Izotope RX7 & 8 are able to more effectively clean vinyl noise from a Cubase generated file illustrates there's a fundamental difference in the way Cakewalk encodes audio files. Further evidence is Cakewalk/Sonar has long generated W64 files unreadable by pretty much any other audio recording, playing, and/or processing software.

[Saffran]

All hardware is the same, the only difference being the software. Cubase clearly outperforms Cakewalk in audio quality. The fact Izotope RX7 & 8 are able to more effectively clean vinyl noise from a Cubase generated file illustrates there's a fundamental difference in the way Cakewalk encodes audio files. Further evidence is Cakewalk/Sonar has long generated W64 files unreadable by pretty much any other audio recording, playing, and/or processing software.

I don't use that filetype so i have no problem cleaning up vinyl.

[AKJ]

All hardware is the same, the only difference being the software. Cubase clearly outperforms Cakewalk in audio quality. The fact Izotope RX7 & 8 are able to more effectively clean vinyl noise from a Cubase generated file illustrates there's a fundamental difference in the way Cakewalk encodes audio files. Further evidence is Cakewalk/Sonar has long generated W64 files unreadable by pretty much any other audio recording, playing, and/or processing software.

Pure nonsense.

[lfm]

All hardware is the same, the only difference being the software. Cubase clearly outperforms Cakewalk in audio quality. The fact Izotope RX7 & 8 are able to more effectively clean vinyl noise from a Cubase generated file illustrates there's a fundamental difference in the way Cakewalk encodes audio files. Further evidence is Cakewalk/Sonar has long generated W64 files unreadable by pretty much any other audio recording, playing, and/or processing software.

Pure nonsense.

Yeah, he probably has the default 16-bit for recording set. At least it was in old Sonar 4 days, so anything recorded become 16-bit files unless that preference was increased.

So long ago it was not obvious that audio interface did more than 16-bit as I remember it. There were some other daw I had to increase that too as I recall 20 years ago, even more recently so for some reason remained default. If he had hardware from 90's one never knows.

My hdd portastudios were only 16-bit at the time. My first dac beginning 90's were only 16-bit chips. So updated dac 15 years ago with more modern stuff now doing 24/96 as well.

Interesting enough Waves, as I bought my first 2013 did not support 96k on all plugins then in the Gold bundle. That was fixed like 2014, 2015 or so.

As I understand it daw only collect and save what ASIO drivers send. Probably why daws don't have recording level knob as such, adjustment of this as recorded must be on interface level. That this basic level would be something that makes a difference, seems odd.

I have some vinyls I plan to re-record but due to that I know preamps I had before were not that good. I thought then I would never play vinyl again, but is what I do frequently now, updated both motor belt and stylus too. Things are a changing.

[progmatist]

FYI: I was referring to W64 as a second example, not what I use by default. W64 is Wave 64, a variation on the WAV file format which permits file sizes exceeding 2GB. Cakewalk/Sonar automatically transitions from WAV to W64 when a recording in progress exceeds 2GB.

I have identical results with modern audio interfaces by, Steinberg, Presonus, Focusrite, and an older Native Instruments Komplete Audio 6. All are set to true 24/96. More recent versions of Cakewalk/Sonar default to 32bit Float, not 16bit.

I likewise have never had a "problem" cleaning vinyl recorded in Cakewalk/Sonar. The effectiveness and sound quality are far superior with Cubase.

What I wouldn't give for you all to be right, and me wrong. Then I wouldn't have to go back and re-record hundreds of records.

[Steve Bolivar]

This whole thing of DAW X sounds better than DAW Y goes back years. I think it started with "Samplitude has a better mix engine than all other DAWs". I read or saw an in depth test of all major DAWs and when they were all set up with identical settings the final tenders all nulled out. But when the only settings the tester adjusted were sample rate and bit depth, not everything nulled out. The culprit was the pan law. What pan laws are are you using in Cubase and Sonar?

[progmatist]

When processing vinyl records, rarely will I even touch the pan control. Only when the original recording is so egregiously out of whack, it begs for correction.

[Saffran]

Seems a bit fishy.
You create an account on KVRaudio only to say that Cakewalk has bad audio?
But where is the other people backing you up?
Surely there must be a lot of them if the audio is noticeable bad.
Could it be that your situation is rather extreme? But then why bother create an account. Maybe you're an employe of Cubase?

[progmatist]

I went for more than 2 decades without knowing my beloved Cakewalk audio was "bad," as you put it. It wasn't until I compared Cubase and Cakewalk audio side by side I realized how drastic the quality difference was. I hear equally superior audio quality in Reaper, and an old M-Audio Microtrack I still own. And don't call me Shirley.

[Saffran]

And the question still remains.
Why is you the only one that has discovered this?
Why has people that test different daws for a living not noticed this?

[progmatist]

Why has people that test different daws for a living not noticed this?

Perhaps none of them have recorded and/or processed vinyl records, in Hi-Res at every stage including the finished product, including noise reduction in their testing. That's why I feel compelled to share my not so common experience, discovered almost by accident.