Any Mixcraft users here? What's wrong with it? ;)

[ferez21]

I wish more people discover Mixcraft, and i hope the upcoming version 10 will be the game changer for Acoustica.

I'd rather be happy that it's a niche product... if more people used it, they would raise the prices, and would be forced to put loads of stuff in the (then frequent) paid upgrades, to justify those prices. Meaning that Mixcraft would end up like the other feature uber monster DAW's.

You have a point here, but it's like, i really appreciate the company and i wish for them for their user base to grow because they deserve it, they made a fine piece of software, but on the otherhand you are right.

[chk071]

I never looked into Mixcraft, but, the GUI looks alright. I'm a fan of simplicity, so, if it's a DAW which focuses on that, it would be a plus for me.

And it costs as much as an upgrade to the next major version of Studio one or Cubase, that's nice too.

[ferez21]

I never looked into Mixcraft, but, the GUI looks alright. I'm a fan of simplicity, so, if it's a DAW which focuses on that, it would be a plus for me.

And it costs as much as an upgrade to the next major version of Studio one or Cubase, that's nice too.

And if you catch the Humble Bundle sale, you can get it for $30 (Recording Studio version) together with Voltage Modular Ignite
I've just recently discovered that Cherry Audio and Acoustica are basically the same people, hope to see more integration of the two in the future.

[stearine]

It's kind of like a moped -- fun to ride, but nobody wants to be seen on one.

[chk071]

Can you decide whether you want to install the additional instruments and fx on installation? Might give the trial a try, but, don't want to end up with dozens of instruments and fx I might even have to uninstall manually...

Actually, apart from the Toneboosters plugins, I don't think I'd be interested in any of the additional content.

Edit: Just ran the installer of the trial, and, nope, no option to not install the additional content. Shame.

[ferez21]

Can you decide whether you want to install the additional instruments and fx on installation? Might give the trial a try, but, don't want to end up with dozens of instruments and fx I might even have to uninstall manually...

Actually, apart from the Toneboosters plugins, I don't think I'd be interested in any of the additional content.

Edit: Just ran the installer of the trial, and, nope, no option to not install the additional content. Shame.

You can choose to skip the legacy stuff. The Instruments sit quietly in Mixcraft's directory
, And they can be disabled from within Acoustica (disabled as to not appear in the plugin list).
It is overall a small installation, i didn't see the included content as obtrusive since it doesnt spread it in random directories on your drive.

I've installed 10 different DAWs in the last 2 weeks and none had the option to excluded content during their installation, so that's not really unusual.

I'll also say that some of Mixcraft's plugins that i initially overlooked, turned out to be pretty decent, like the Octave Reverb for example.

[antic604]

They're currently running a -25%, so full flagship version is $149!

[ferez21]

On a side note, I've been using FL Studio for more than a decade, qnd it's a very powerful and flexible piece of software, but Mixcraft is so fun and sufficiently powerful for most needs, it just doesn't get in your way when composing. It's not without its faults but it was a really nice surprise to discover it, i almost dismissed it before even installing it because i remembered seeing the older versions online years ago thinking Mixcraft is an amateur-ish DAW.

[chk071]

Just installed the trial. GUI is not my cup of tea. It's quite unclear, as there's a lack of contrast, which makes the GUI look crowded even though it isn't, and there's a lot of stuff going on that resembles some early 2000's GUI's. No VST browser. Adding a VST track requires first adding a track, then selecting the VSTi. Bad. MIDI routing doesn't allow MIDI in from other plugins, so you can't use arpeggiator plugins like BlueARP, Cthulhu or Cream without some extra third party MIDI loop devices. Very bad. I don't really like the looks and feel of the MIDI editor either. Default behavior is zoom the display when you scroll the mousewheel? Seriously? Not good, not good. I also didn't like that the controls for a clip in the track view/clip editor are cramped together, so that you accidentally change the volume envelope, when you just want to resize, or move the clip.

Seriously, even for $150, I expect more than that. Sorry for ranting, but, if so many impressions in the first 10 minutes are so bad, then I don't even want to dig deeper, and see what else is wrong about the DAW. There's a lot of work for them to do to even get near what the big ones are offering.

[ferez21]

Just installed the trial. GUI is not my cup of tea. It's quite unclear, as there's a lack of contrast, which makes the GUI look crowded even though it isn't, and there's a lot of stuff going on that resembles some early 2000's GUI's. No VST browser. Adding a VST track requires first adding a track, then selecting the VSTi. Bad. MIDI routing doesn't allow MIDI in from other plugins, so you can't use arpeggiator plugins like BlueARP, Cthulhu or Cream without some extra third party MIDI loop devices. Very bad. I don't really like the looks and feel of the MIDI editor either. Default behavior is zoom the display when you scroll the mousewheel? Seriously? Not good, not good. I also didn't like that the controls for a clip in the track view/clip editor are cramped together, so that you accidentally change the volume envelope, when you just want to resize, or move the clip.

I'm afraid that most of your observation is due to lack of familiarity, most of the things you've described are easily doable.
You can by default stack as many instruments as you want in each channel, so for an arp, you simply place the arp in a serial chain before the Instruments you want it to apply to.
There is also a default embedded MIDI note filter on each instrument channel, which is a great feature for multi instruments.

Yes you need to add a track before placing a VST, with keyboard shortcuts it takes 0.8 seconds.

There is a searchable VST list once you click a channel's piano symbol, and you can immediately start typing and find your desired VST.

You can change mouse scroll behaviour in the settings.

The GUI can use some tweaking but i got used to within a week and it honestly doesnt bother me.
The MIDI editor is very clean and convenient. (On the other hand, two weeks in with Tracktion's Waveform and i despise the GUI).

You can route MIDI from any channel to any channel, and you can route MIDI to effects too with a single click (which is the fastest I've seen on amy DAW ive tested).

I'm afraid that you are judging it too soon, for me it was refreshing how things easy are, but maybe your brain is wired towards other DAWs and you kind of expecting Mixcraft to be the same, but it's not, it might be different but it's endlessly easier, at least for me.

At the end of the day it might not be your cup of tea, but you need to give it a fair chance before saying it doesn't have this or that feature, because it does, it's just probably not where you expect it to be from your familiarity with other DAWs.

Seriously, even for $150, I expect more than that. Sorry for ranting, but, if so many impressions in the first 10 minutes are so bad, then I don't even want to dig deeper, and see what else is wrong about the DAW. There's a lot of work for them to do to even get near what the big ones are offering.

I beg to differ, I've ditched my beloved FL Studio on which I've spent hundreds of dollars on over the years, and I'm quite happy and can do 95% of the things i used to do in FL Studio (having something like Patcher for parallel chains is nore or less the only thing i miss).
Mixcraft has comping that FL doesn't, and also a proper performance mode, and much more convenient routing (for my use cases), very good Melodyne integration, FX that are visible right on the arrangment window without the need to reach out to the mixer back and forth (which is a blessing for a single-monitor workflow).
It has a built in distortion, compression, and 2 types of analyzers built into each mixer track too, which are very useful.

If you don't see any of these features appealing, maybe it's not for you.

The compromises i had to make in the process are very small in comparison to the faster workflow i get from Mixcraft. YMMV

[ferez21]

On another note, i had easier time with Waveform when i tested it for 10 minutes, then i bought it and i regret it because it is just horribly convoluted and complicates your life with even the most basic stuff.

Mixcraft took a bit more to get around initially (maybe an hour or two), but i think its workflow is really really great after some more extended use. First impression can decieve, it all depends on your mindset

[chk071]

Yes you need to add a track before placing a VST, with keyboard shortcuts it takes 0.8 seconds.

That's not an argument if most other DAW's let you drag & drop an instrument, and create a track, in the blink of an eye.

There is a searchable VST list once you click a channel's piano symbol, and you can immediately start typing and find your desired VST.

Not the same as an instrument browser, because, you have to create a track first, then click the piano symbol, then click on instruments, and then finally you can choose an instrument for the track.

You can change mouse scroll behaviour in the settings.

Again, not an argument. It's a shitty behavior out of the box, regardless if you are able to configure it differently or not.

The MIDI editor is very clean and convenient.

Not in my eyes. It looks and feels very inconsistent.

Guess we simply have to disagree on all that. (Even though I'm surprised that you see all those things so benevolent.) TBH, I'm not surprised that the DAW isn't very popular now, though. Things like that don't come out of nowhere.

[ferez21]

Yes you need to add a track before placing a VST, with keyboard shortcuts it takes 0.8 seconds.

That's not an argument if most other DAW's let you drag & drop an instrument, and create a track, in the blink of an eye.

There is a searchable VST list once you click a channel's piano symbol, and you can immediately start typing and find your desired VST.

Not the same as an instrument browser, because, you have to create a track first, then click the piano symbol, then click on instruments, and then finally you can choose an instrument for the track.

You can change mouse scroll behaviour in the settings.

Again, not an argument. It's a shitty behavior out of the box, regardless if you are able to configure it differently or not.

The MIDI editor is very clean and convenient.

Not in my eyes. It looks and feels very inconsistent.

Guess we simply have to disagree on all that. (Even though I'm surprised that you see all those things so benevolent.) TBH, I'm not surprised that the DAW isn't very popular now, though. Things like that don't come out of nowhere.

Well, I guess you don't agree with the workflow, that's ok, but to be honest most of your complaints are very very minor - if 1 seconds more to choose a VST (god forbid 3 clicks instead of 2), or the fact that you can customize the mouse's behavior but it just happened to initialize with a setting that doesn't work for you are deal breakers (though again, you can change it), I'm not sure what to say
The rest of your complaints that are not minor at first sight, are features that you assume Mixcraft doesn't have, but it does.

I think if you were in the mindset of actually seriously migrating to a different DAW as opposed to just playing with some DAWs out of curiosity, which will make you more thoroughly investigate each potential DAW, you would have had different findings.
I admit I went back and forth in the last few weeks testing Mixcraft, Bitwig (great DAW but not as quick for me as Mixcraft) and Waveform (have a potential but at the moment a clusterfuck of bugs an UI inconsistencies), changing my mind every other day, but after extensive testing I prefer Mixcraft.

[chk071]

Well, I guess you don't agree with the workflow, that's ok, but to be honest most of your complaints are very very minor - if 1 seconds more to choose a VST (god forbid 3 clicks instead of 2)

Actually, it's much more than that. In Studio One or Cubase, you click on the VSTi you want to add to a track in the instrument browser, hold the mouse button, drag it onto the timeline, and that's it - instrument track with the VSTi added. In Mixcraft, if you use the mouse, and don't memorize keyboard shortcut (which noone who just looks into the DAW will do), you have to - right click on the track list area, choose insert virtual instrument, then click on the piano symbol, in the popup window click on the menu where you can choose which type of instrument you want to load, click on the instrument you want to add in the menu on the right, and then you're there. That's a blazing 5 clicks, hopping through menus, and through window dialogs. And, that's only one example. I think that pretty much says everything.

Why don't they just add an instrument browser at the bottom? They have a sounds browser there, which I don't give two farts about.

[ferez21]

Well, I guess you don't agree with the workflow, that's ok, but to be honest most of your complaints are very very minor - if 1 seconds more to choose a VST (god forbid 3 clicks instead of 2)

Actually, it's much more than that. In Studio One or Cubase, you click on the VSTi you want to add to a track in the instrument browser, hold the mouse button, drag it onto the timeline, and that's it - instrument track with the VSTi added. In Mixcraft, if you use the mouse, and don't memorize keyboard shortcut (which noone who just looks into the DAW will do), you have to - right click on the track list area, choose insert virtual instrument, then click on the piano symbol, in the popup window click on the menu where you can choose which type of instrument you want to load, click on the instrument you want to add in the menu on the right, and then you're there. That's a blazing 5 clicks, hopping through menus, and through window dialogs. And, that's only one example. I think that pretty much says everything.

Why don't they just add an instrument browser at the bottom? They have a sounds browser there, which I don't give two farts about.

a VST browser would be nice but not nearly as crucial as anything else. With the longer process of selecting an instrument like you comically describe it (honestly man, this is a 1-2 second difference in reality) , I still find Mixcraft much quicker for me for laying out ideas, how do you explain that?
also, it's not fair to dismiss all the actually great features that actually save you time, like instrument chaining by default on every channel, including instrument effects, and the effect rack that is visible in the arrangement window, and comping, among many other features. Also Bitwig's like LFO and Audio modulator for every plugin, that was the feature that attracted me to try Mixcraft initially.

It's definitely not perfect and definitely not the prettiest, but it is much much better than you give it credit for, that's what I think.
It's not fair to say "it doesn't have feature X, it sucks" when you didn't bother to even check.