is cakewalk a good daw?

[Hewitt Huntwork]

Cakewalk was my first sequencer. I worked for them briefly in the 90s and as a user stuck with them for over 20 years. Reliability issues forced me to change and I've never looked back.

[l33t4e]

Anyone who has posted here that used this prior to it being taken over by Bandlab generally has a negative opinion about it. It's so much different now though. It's very stable and reliable for me, thanks to the monthly updates. The support is amazing. I find it easy to use compared to other DAWs, looks better than all the other ones I've tried, and even has features other high priced DAW's don't have. All for the price of FREE! It's not a freemium product either.

[Saffran]

So, what year are we looking back at?

[progmatist]

Unless they changed that (which I doubt), you can directly type in any time in the goto dialog directly. And, of course, you may set makers in Cakewalk, too (press m). There is also a marker view. However, I do not understand why you would at all do the setting of cue points in a sequencer. Clearly, it is a job for a wave editor. And your initial complaint was about the audio quality and not workflow. So what settings do you use?

To answer your question, it's set to 24/96 at every level. I don't know why you keep referring to Cubase as a "sequencer." Steinberg, the parent company developed and still owns the ASIO sound driver standard. Ditto with the VST/VSTi plugin standard. Both are completely audio based, and remain the most widely used on the PC platform.

Anyone who has posted here that used this prior to it being taken over by Bandlab generally has a negative opinion about it. It's so much different now though. It's very stable and reliable for me, thanks to the monthly updates. The support is amazing. I find it easy to use compared to other DAWs, looks better than all the other ones I've tried, and even has features other high priced DAW's don't have. All for the price of FREE! It's not a freemium product either.

Bandlab is a company based in Singapore, a country whose entire economy is based on the information trade. One has to wonder for what BandLab is using one's personal information. Like Facebook, I suspect we're the product, not the customer.

[progmatist]

Unless they changed that (which I doubt), you can directly type in any time in the goto dialog directly. And, of course, you may set makers in Cakewalk, too (press m). There is also a marker view. However, I do not understand why you would at all do the setting of cue points in a sequencer. Clearly, it is a job for a wave editor. And your initial complaint was about the audio quality and not workflow. So what settings do you use?

To answer your question, it's set to 24/96 at every level. The way Cakewalk exports is either a selected clip, or the entire length of the project. Clips MUST be split, in order to be selected and exported. There's no way around that.

I don't know why you keep referring to Cubase as a "sequencer." Steinberg, the parent company developed and still owns the ASIO sound driver standard. Ditto with the VST/VSTi plugin standard. Both are completely audio based, and remain the most widely used on the PC platform.

Anyone who has posted here that used this prior to it being taken over by Bandlab generally has a negative opinion about it. It's so much different now though. It's very stable and reliable for me, thanks to the monthly updates. The support is amazing. I find it easy to use compared to other DAWs, looks better than all the other ones I've tried, and even has features other high priced DAW's don't have. All for the price of FREE! It's not a freemium product either.

Bandlab is a company based in Singapore, a country whose entire economy is based on the information trade. One has to wonder for what BandLab is using one's personal information. Like Facebook, I suspect we're the product, not the customer.

[AKJ]

There is actually more to set than just bit depth and sampling rate. But with your last statement you made quite clear that your intention is just to say bad things about a free product.

[daviddaymusic]

I never tried Cakewalk, but I'm wondering the same.

[instred]

Anyone who has posted here that used this prior to it being taken over by Bandlab generally has a negative opinion about it. It's so much different now though. It's very stable and reliable for me, thanks to the monthly updates. The support is amazing. I find it easy to use compared to other DAWs, looks better than all the other ones I've tried, and even has features other high priced DAW's don't have. All for the price of FREE! It's not a freemium product either.

I used it before being taken over by Bandlab and no I did not have a negative opinion about the program. Sure there was some things I want added or worked on but it was my DAW of choice!

[instred]

Also a lot of us stopped posting on KVR about Cakewalk Sonar because we usually were attacked and told to download Reaper.
Funny I have multiple DAW's and Cakewalk by Bandlab is still my primary DAW of choice. Works for me.

[progmatist]

As promised, here are examples of differences between a clip recorded in Bandlab Cakewalk and Cubase 10.5, both processed in RX8. The subtitles in the video should be self explanatory.

I used a very noisy record to best illustrate those differences. First, Cakewalk had somewhat of a brickwalling effect directly in the recording process, but no limiter was used. More significantly, the high end is progressively rolled off the Cakewalk version, with each step in RX8 de-noising. The RX8 settings were identical with both recordings.

Differences not apparent in this downsampled example, but present in the original Hi-Res are the Cakewalk version sounds less open and transparent. The reverb characteristics sound more confined, and less free-flowing. Again, getting progressively worse with each step in RX8 the de-noising process.

Both platforms were used strictly for recording, with no processing whatsoever. Both files were imported directly from their respective audio data folders, into RX8. RX8 was then used to both trim and process the clips. Amplitude was left unchanged, with no gain boost or normalization. Clips were prepared for upload by downsampling to 16/44.1, using Repear's Extreme HQ (768pt HQ Sinc) Resampling Mode. I normally don't downsample at all...I did so here only for YouTube compatibility.

The following settings were used throughout the process.....

Steinberg Yamaha UR22 MKII
--------------------------
Sample Rate: 96KHz
Buffer: 1024 samples
Input latency: 15.333 msec
Output latency: 18.333 msec

Cubase
-------------
Bit Depth: 24
Sample Rate: 96KHz
Processing precision: 32 bit float
Mutli processing: active
Asio-guard: active
Asio-guard latency: 21.333 ms
Asio-guard level: normal
Audio priority: normal
Disk preload: 2 seconds
Record shift: 0 samples

Cakewalk
------------------
Sample Rate: 96KHz
Buffer size: 10.7 msec, 1024 samples
Dithering: none
Plug-in load balancing: deselected...(I've found recording quality is best with load balancing deselected, but processing quality best with it selected)
ASIO reported latencies........
Input: 15.3 msec, 1472 samples
Output: 18.3 msec, 1760 samples
Total Roundtrip: 33.7 msec, 3232 samples
Audio Data File Bit Depth Settings........
Record bit depth: 24
Render bit depth: 32
Import bit depth: original

RX8 Declick
-----------
Algorithm: Multi-band (random clicks)
Sensitivity: 2.0
Frequency skew: -2.7...(best setting I've found for specifically targeting vinyl pops and clicks)
Click widening [ms]: 1.5

RX8 Decrackle
-------------
Quality: High
Strength: 5.0
Amplitude skew: 0.0

[lfm]

Really interesting, thanks for posting.
Most shocking to me was how mellow the Cubase raw recording sounded compared to Cakewalk.
Like a blanket over it or something.
You even hear on static and noise there - it's not full range, kind of.

For Cubase this of course comes through in a bit softer touch even as processed - which you by choice prefer it seems.

I'm quite disturbed about how filtered Cubase raw file was, myself.
If this is exactly same gear as connected that is shocking still that raw would be that different.

Is this going through Windows sound or something?
That something is different.

You mention plugin balancing for Cakewalk - but are you using any plugins in this case?

I really have to setup my RIAA amp to input in computer and try myself.
Thanks for taking the time making this, really interesting.

With no doubt I would prefer the Cakewalk raw file, it feels full in range in comparison.
I downloaded with AnyVideoConverter Free from youtube, and get 44k audio doing that.
Not streaming it.

It's almost like mids are raised in Cakewalk a bit.
I sold some vinyl to a store in the 70's, and when they decided what price would be they had equipment that really enforced mids like this to hear noise stuff.

But still prefer to the muffled Cubase recording.

[Etienne1973]

First, Cakewalk had somewhat of a brickwalling effect directly in the recording process, but no limiter was used.

What could be the technical reason(s) for this?

[antic604]

It seems awesome, but - like Cubase, Reaper, Digital Performer - it is overwhelming for me and has 10x the features I personally need. I took it for a spin this weekend and was really positively surprised, but it took hours for me to do simple 4-bar loop, because trivial things like adding VSTs, midi clips, automation, even editing the MIDI, etc. are not obvious, or at least the defaults are "wrong".

But for a free software it's mind-boggling how much is there

[dellboy]

but it took hours for me to do simple 4-bar loop

Huh ?

I haven't used Sonar for a couple of years but my memory was that its at least as easy as other DAWs to do this simple task.

And don't forget that once you have your four bar loop ( or 8 or whatever) you can drag it onto the cell matrix and trigger the clip using the computer keyboard or a midi key.

[lfm]

I did some tests and judge for yourselves

Did a comparison of frequency content with Ozone cumulated graph and two wav files, recorded at 96k/24 and exported at 48k/16.
http://cloudmanfilms.ownit.nu/CakeCubaseRecordTest.JPG

http://cloudmanfilms.ownit.nu/CakeCubRecordTest.zip

I played back myself with Foobar2000 and having asio drivers and HD650 - not having each daw sounding differently. I felt the same as sample video, that Cubase playback was tiny bit muffled in highs, but Ozone graph show no such difference.

The large difference in video earlier I cannot hear. Might be a tiny bit muffled in Cubase, Cakewalk sound more open. But judge for yourselves.