please link me a modern video explaining digital performer to me

[HREQ]

I opened up demo for 3 hours now, the daw is so confusing

[jonljacobi]

It is indeed. Read my review at Macworld.com and you might get a bit better view of the overall concept. https://www.macworld.com/article/615329 ... eview.html

[Jim Roseberry]

If you're on a PC, Digital Performer is the worst low-latency performer out of all the major DAW applications.
Say you've got a 12th Gen CPU (12900k/s) and want to run Helix Native at 96k using a 32-sample ASIO buffer size.
You can do this glitch-free in Reaper, Cubase/Nuendo, StudioOne, etc.
With DP, it's nothing but glitches.

DP does have some nice features specific to hard-core composers.
It is not the most intuitive DAW application (especially for those new to DP).
Unless you have specific reasons for needing DP, I'd go a different direction.

[HREQ]

If you're on a PC, Digital Performer is the worst low-latency performer out of all the major DAW applications.
Say you've got a 12th Gen CPU (12900k/s) and want to run Helix Native at 96k using a 32-sample ASIO buffer size.
You can do this glitch-free in Reaper, Cubase/Nuendo, StudioOne, etc.
With DP, it's nothing but glitches.

DP does have some nice features specific to hard-core composers.
It is not the most intuitive DAW application (especially for those new to DP).
Unless you have specific reasons for needing DP, I'd go a different direction.

I just tried it out cause two of my favorite composers/producers have been using it since 1998 to make music (not orchestration either, trance,pop, etc) I find it interesting cause its a mysterious daw to me lol

One of them cited trying to move to cubase and couldnt cause they liked the midi editing in DP better or something like that...

[jonljacobi]

A huge part of any DAW is knowing it and being used to it. DP is not difficult to use once you know it, but it is not going to be particularly intuitive for anyone coming from another DAW. As with Ableton Live. The first thing to know is that organizationally, everything is part of a chunk and these chunks can be arranged into larger compositions. The nomenclature is a big hurdle. If you didn't grow up in the days of "'sequencers" it can be odd indeed.

I did, and I still found it difficult to wrap my head around. Excellent features though. If you own a MOTU interface (which are excellent BTW) I find Performer Lite much easier to get your feet wet with.

[jonljacobi]

YouTube has a bunch of DP videos, though I can't remember an effective overview.

[mothra]

A huge part of any DAW is knowing it and being used to it. DP is not difficult to use once you know it, but it is not going to be particularly intuitive for anyone coming from another DAW. As with Ableton Live. The first thing to know is that organizationally, everything is part of a chunk and these chunks can be arranged into larger compositions. The nomenclature is a big hurdle. If you didn't grow up in the days of "'sequencers" it can be odd indeed.

I did, and I still found it difficult to wrap my head around. Excellent features though. If you own a MOTU interface (which are excellent BTW) I find Performer Lite much easier to get your feet wet with.

This right here.. I've tried several times to get acquainted with DP (my interfaces have been MOTU since the dawn of time) but the whole 'chunks' and workflow of it threw me for a loop. When I got an MPC Live a few years ago, that finally helped 'unlock' DP and how it worked as I HAD to learn how to use it. They both work very similar, in DP you get to store sections (or whole compositions) as a 'Chunk' and can then chain them together to make one piece. The MPC uses 'sequences' which can either be a whole project if you want, or most folks break down the song into sections, or 'sequences' or 'chunks' and we string them together in the MPC's Song Mode when we're done. Its a little bit different than something more linear like Logic/Cubase/etc but its getting that workflow down that is the big hurdle.. I kinda like it because it lets you focus on the individual sections a little easier than having everything there in front of you to distract you.

One thing that still annoys the hell out of me with DP though, VI's take two tracks STILL. You have to create an instrument track for the actual plugin, then a separate MIDI track to play it. Every other sequencer in the world is one single track with your plugin and the MIDI data.

[elnn]

One thing that still annoys the hell out of me with DP though, VI's take two tracks STILL. You have to create an instrument track for the actual plugin, then a separate MIDI track to play it. Every other sequencer in the world is one single track with your plugin and the MIDI data.

No, they updated it.

[mothra]

One thing that still annoys the hell out of me with DP though, VI's take two tracks STILL. You have to create an instrument track for the actual plugin, then a separate MIDI track to play it. Every other sequencer in the world is one single track with your plugin and the MIDI data.

No, they updated it.

Damn too bad, only a few years too late. No way I'm switching to learn another DAW at this point.

We did use the free AudioDesk that came with my interfaces to record our practices and it worked pretty nice, but AudioDesk is basically DP without any of the MIDI functionality.

[jonljacobi]

Motu has really done a ton of work to DP the last couple of years. It’s come further than any other DAW I’m aware of in that time. ARA2 support is the latest.