Best DAW for large take numbers/comping etc.

[whyterabbyt]

I'll also have a look at Cakewalk, but my eyes aren't amazing and I have always found Sonar to be the hardest DAW to 'read'.

Weird. Sonar's the only DAW Im aware of that was compatible with JAWS, the screenreader for the visually impaired.

https://www.cakewalk.com/Support/Knowle ... ired-Users

[jens]

In my opinion Reason has by far the cleanest - least messy - implementation of all DAWs I tried so far - easily beats Reaper, Cubase, S1 and a few others by a few miles in this regard. Whatever takes you throw at it (a huge number of additonal recordings of all lengths and positions) it handles it all gracefully and within the same single clip that can be entered for comping by a simple double-click. It also has its own independent snap- and zoom-settings by the way.

Reaper's take-management is a tragedy in comparison.


Such a shame that the Props new CEO is doing his best to kill Reason DAW as quickly as possible.

[dellboy]

That point of contention centers on the premise that recording means loop markers, doesn't it.
In the paradigm of recording essentially live performance to tape takes might have meant different bits of tape and splicing later but takes per se only means you did it again. My experiences in studios were not very lavishly budgeted affairs with tape to spare, so doing another take used the same piece of tape recording over the last (false) take, and this other thing was at one time unheard of. So you punch in and record over. (older days than this you committed to a single contiguous performance direct to the record.)

So I supposed the other one arguing against this doesn't get what punching in is, where you have this one bit that didn't work and you punch in at that juncture and punch out in time.
A whole lof of people opining on these matters at KVR have no idea of the history, or experience with playing music, it's all been constructed in a DAW, everything a 4-bar cookie-cutter, nothing is an actual performance on the spot. So naturally here's a fair bit of "HUH!?!" or 'it's a puzzler'. Even right alongside 'that we associate with comping'.

Your analogy of punching in and out over the same piece of tape does not fit the modern idea of takes as it was destructive. Digital recording allows to keep the original take and do another. I tend to work in the way you suggest, because if I get it wrong I just hit delete and do it many time over until I get it right. This is the same as punching in and out on an old tape machine over the same place until you get it right. Trouble is, you are left with just the final take with nothing to fall back on.

[syntonica]

I would say try the DAWs that didn't grow up as loop-based:
Protools
Logic
Studio One
Cubase
Digital Performer

I've never had the luxury of comping to tape. On 4-track cassette, it was do-overs until I got the least sucky take. That included bounces where the EQ was not quite right due to different tape biases. Fun times.

It sounds like the OP is happy with the S1, so rock on! I understand wanting to get things one and done in the studio. Time is indeed money.

Question: what does the studio have that you cannot get at home? For me, these days, the only answer is peace and quiet!

[ZargonTheMagnificent]

Question: what does the studio have that you cannot get at home? For me, these days, the only answer is peace and quiet!

For me it's a nice sounding room, sound proofing and the ability to track at ear damaging levels (wearing ear protection, because I'm old and have tinnitus, obvs) for 8 hours straight without any body calling the police!

Hopefully I'll achieve that at home soon, but I haven't yet. Even if I do, I not sure I'd be able to have a BIG room that sounds nice.

[syntonica]

Question: what does the studio have that you cannot get at home? For me, these days, the only answer is peace and quiet!

For me it's a nice sounding room, sound proofing and the ability to track at ear damaging levels (wearing ear protection, because I'm old and have tinnitus, obvs) for 8 hours straight without any body calling the police!

Hopefully I'll achieve that at home soon, but I haven't yet. Even if I do, I not sure I'd be able to have a BIG room that sounds nice.

The only thing I mike anymore is vocals and I'm hatching a plot to do that in my car, while parked at the side of a lonely road. Fresh batteries are my friends.

I've previously resorted to throwing a heavy blanket over me, my microphone and computer before. It makes a perfectly dead space to record vocals and add the treatment later.

[dellboy]

Yes, I would think you must be right. I guess I don't know anything about the modern phenomenon of pure bedroom button-pushers.

It has nothing to do with button pushing or live loop mode.

Even in the old days with a tape machine a part was repeatedly played over and over between two markers until the musician finally got it right.

If the musician was truly competent the entire track could be recorded in one long "take" without the need to go back over any mistakes and re-record that part.

I think for me the confusion is to do with what appears to be Reapers unique ability to overdub parts repeatedly without the use of loop markers and create "takes" of varying lengths. I am not aware that either Cubase or Studio One can do this in the same way. But most of us now think of "takes" as between loop markers and has zero to do with Live or Bitwigs clip looping or button pushing.

[jens]

Which host can't record different takes of varying lengths? This certainly is NOT unique to Reaper at all.

I think it's a perfectly normal thing to want to do that either.

(e.g.: a first you only record the chorus vocals, but then you realize in order to get a smooth transition from the verse, you at least need to record the second half of the second verse at the same time as the chorus, so your loop and your take-length will have to change)

Loops can be a helpful tool - not more and not less than that.

[dellboy]

Which host can't record different takes of varying lengths? This certainly is NOT unique to Reaper at all.

I think it's a perfectly normal thing to want to do that either.

(e.g.: a first you only record the chorus vocals, but then you realize in order to get a smooth transition from the verse, you at least need to record the second half of the second verse at the same time as the chorus, so your loop and your take-length will have to change)

Loops can be a helpful tool - not more and not less than that.

Yes, you are of course right about takes of various lengths in DAWs other than Reaper,I was wrong, I watched some videos and now see how to do the same thing in Studio One and Cubase. Pressing the little cog next to the metronome in Studio One brings up a menu with "Takes to Layers", and Cubase has something similar. In Reaper it is on by default. I mistakenly thought that DAWs had to have loop markers to activate there take systems. Now I know differently.

[carrieres]

How To Comp Multitracks Using Reaper :
https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques ... ing-reaper

[v1o]

I'll also have a look at Cakewalk, but my eyes aren't amazing and I have always found Sonar to be the hardest DAW to 'read'.

Weird. Sonar's the only DAW Im aware of that was compatible with JAWS, the screenreader for the visually impaired.

https://www.cakewalk.com/Support/Knowle ... ired-Users

I don't think he's talking about screen readers. He's just talking about how the DAW looks and how easy it is to understand what's going on.

[whyterabbyt]

I don't think he's talking about screen readers. He's just talking about how the DAW looks and how easy it is to understand what's going on.

FWIW, i didnt think he was, i just found the contradiction weird.

[ZargonTheMagnificent]

I don't think he's talking about screen readers. He's just talking about how the DAW looks and how easy it is to understand what's going on.

FWIW, i didnt think he was, i just found the contradiction weird.

It's just more visually cluttered to me, so when I'm not wearing glasses (which is most of the time cos I'm an idiot) I struggle with Cakewalk. S1 I find much easier to see, same with Reaper (depending on skin, obvs).

As I say, it isn't a criticism at all. It's me and my eyes!

[Trensharo]

Cakewalk is really only visually cluttered when you have everything turned on in the control bar. Outside of that, the UI is unremarkable, and actually well-modularized so that things are kept in fairly good order. Probably a bit over-modularized, for my taste. The take system there is superior to REAPER, but Cakewalk is not good when it comes to editing audio, so I would reject it on that premise (personally).

This, however, is one area where software that was designed with a bigger focus on UX and workflow has an advantage.

For doing tons of takes and audio editing, I would still bias to Pro Tools over most other DAWs. I know people hate to see this suggestion, but it's just... proven in every mission-critical way possible. It's annoying having to install AAX for everything, though; especially if you have to go back and add them. Ugh.

Studio One is already owned by the OP, so he should simply use that. It's as good as Cakewalk for comping. Lots of DAWs have somewhat different takes/comping strategies. Whatever DAW you use, you're going to have to acclimate its way of doing this. None are likely to be perfect, per se, but there is always a "most tolerable" solution for you.

[ericzang]

different start and end points for takes

Have you already tried this script which does not split takes?
Script: FTC_Record takes without new splits (extend items).lua
https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=238985