Looking for a secondary DAW (for mixing/mastering) which will eventually become my primary DAW (for all things)

[chk071]

@gentleclockdivider: For example, when you want to play a multitimbral instrument with keyboard split on a single track. Or, if you want to use a mumtitimbral instrument with multiple keyboards.

Again, you can use multiple tracks for that, sure. You can also use multiple instances, and trigger those on different MIDI channels as well. But, maybe you want to play a mumtitimbral instrument with keyboard split zones, and don't want to use several tracks for that.

I tried with Savihost and Cubase AI, and, you can do that no problem. It's just Studio One that obviously only can use a single MIDI channel on a track. I don't understand this limitation.

It's fine though. Using multiple tracks has the advantage that you can apply third party fx for any layer anyway.

[mgw38]

I have used Studio One and Cubase, both, in the past, and both are superior in terms of mixing workflow (at least for me) as compared to Bitwig.

As of now, I only want to mix and master in the secondary DAW, but in the future, I might completely move to it in order to make it a one stop shop for everything I do.

Studio One and Cubase are both solid options. Studio One has this dedicated mastering page but that is primarily interesting if you use Studio One for the entire production workflow. It allows you to jump back and forth between mixing and mastering.

Cubase has integrated Atmos and Ambisonics workflows. Even if you are not into spatial audio, this is a nice thing to have.

[thecontrolcentre]

Actually, it's quite common to also mix when you master.

It might be common but it's wrong. Keep the two things separate ...

Yet hundreds of artists made thousands of professional records that way.

Wonder if you could actually substantiate that opinion.

I wonder if you can name these "hundreds of artists" who "made thousands of professional records" that way.

[musicproducerdee]

I have used Studio One and Cubase, both, in the past, and both are superior in terms of mixing workflow (at least for me) as compared to Bitwig.

As of now, I only want to mix and master in the secondary DAW, but in the future, I might completely move to it in order to make it a one stop shop for everything I do.

Cubase has integrated Atmos and Ambisonics workflows. Even if you are not into spatial audio, this is a nice thing to have.

That's very interesting. I am not into it at the moment, but most definitely in the future.

[middle_color]

...

Another perspective on mastering that i did not see yet mentioned in the discussion:
As i master, i make several versions of the same song. Then i export them and compare outside of a DAW for purely listener's experience.
I often use automation on mastering. Latency affects automation accuracy. That's why it is important for me to have shortest latency possible.
As i tested, out of "big"-names DAWs, only Reaper eliminates latency on track when it is frozen. Other DAWs eliminate CPU load but not latency when "freeze track".
Due to this limitation i use Reaper for mastering.

[musicproducerdee]

...

Another perspective on mastering that i did not see yet mentioned in the discussion:
As i master, i make several versions of the same song. Then i export them and compare outside of a DAW for purely listener's experience.
I often use automation on mastering. Latency affects automation accuracy. That's why it is important for me to have shortest latency possible.
As i tested, out of "big"-names DAWs, only Reaper eliminates latency on track when it is frozen. Other DAWs eliminate CPU load but not latency when "freeze track".
Due to this limitation i use Reaper for mastering.

I can master just fine with latency. It doesn't affect automation, unless you draw it in using a controller, while listening to it, real time. Also, any latency caused by plugins, is automatically compensated by the DAW. Mastering isn't really a low latency workflow.

[? ? ?]

If you are using automation for mastering it's something in the mix that should be fixed or you are over doing something in the mastering process (ie with EQing). Unless i'm missing something where mastering needs automation?? I never automated anything during the mastering process.
Do i get a cookie?

[vurt]

If you are using automation for mastering it's something in the mix that should be fixed or you are over doing something in the mastering process (ie with EQing). Unless i'm missing something where mastering needs automation?? I never automated anything during the mastering process.
Do i get a cookie?

you get 2.
pop in to your local cookie store and say i sent you

[ghettosynth]

Has anyone recommended Reaper yet? If not, that's what I suggest.

[? ? ?]

you get 2.
pop in to your local cookie store and say i sent you

How dare you; I only asked for one.

Has anyone recommended Reaper yet? If not, that's what I suggest.

Reaper isn't made for mixing and mastering. It's basically for making beats.

[middle_color]

If you are using automation for mastering it's something in the mix that should be fixed or you are over doing something in the mastering process (ie with EQing). ...

I absolutely do fix mix while mastering.

...Also, any latency caused by plugins, is automatically compensated by the DAW...

I don't think it is compensated ideally. Usually it shifts all automations further in time. That is all automations compensated regarding each other. But they are shifted regarding waveform.
When doing short spike automation or stairs-like automation, it is not uncommon to readjust (nudge) automation points in time after overall latency in a project increased.

[? ? ?]

If you are using automation for mastering it's something in the mix that should be fixed or you are over doing something in the mastering process (ie with EQing). ...

I absolutely do fix mix while mastering.

sigh.. nevermind

[ghettosynth]

Has anyone recommended Reaper yet? If not, that's what I suggest.

Reaper isn't made for mixing and mastering. It's basically for making beats.

I use rice vinegar for that, making beats, er, beets. Definitely using Reaper for mixing and mastering. I like that it has multiple speeds built in and follows voice commands, as long as I type them out, that is.

[Jac459]

I never liked Reaper enough to go to the mixing stage and I used cubase so long ago that let's say... I never used them.
I only have knowledge of Ableton, Reason and very much bitwig.
What is missing in bitwig to make it a good mixing and mastering tool? I must admit that I enjoy it with Ozone and fabfilter. You can AB very easily, your signal chain is crystal clear, at least much better than Reason so what is the issue?
I am not trying to argue, I am just curious.
I read the comment about latency but really to me the latency is very negligeable in particular at this stage of the workflow.
Thanks

[fedexnman]

I'd use your current host/daw . Bitwig or Live ? Maybe take advantage and get NI Komplete it's on sale til July ? I think it has Ozone and a bunch of mastering stuff now I believe ? Harrison mixbuss (Ardour) would be a good option to. Reaper ( I know you said NO ) StudioOne maybe get a used copy version 4 or 5 , version 6 is nothing special at the moment thanks Fender or Gibson or Ibanez can't remember who bought Presonus ...lol