If you had to stick to one DAW, which one would it be?

[jojoB3]

Yeah that's the point. AVID does NOT invest in bettering ANY of their products. Their game is strictly sales, that old 90's biz model schtick they cling to (because that's all they are, that's all they have - sales team). We can see all those caught on their hook.

It doesn't end at PT. They now own Sibelius and are running that scoring app into the earth as well. Complete garbage/patchwork coding - always doing the very least, that's AVID. Jesus H Christ, they haven't even wrangled MIDI. It's 2026.

They've shown you who they are. F*** AVID. Walk

PT is a good setup. I only have disdain for them because of the move to subscription without fixing the bugs in their perpetual license. I think it’s been greater than a decade since that happened, and I’m obviously still bitter

[machinesworking]

Honestly this argument is always kind of pointless to me, it shows that DAW is an overused term. Some DAWs are more like composing devices, Live being an example of a a DAW modeled as much if not more off of performance samplers and loopers as Pro Tools.

I know one professional who uses Reaper for his recording studio, although in recent years he's recorded less live bands and started working on film scores and his own music.

I've never owned Pro Tools, I've never needed to, I don't record live bands unless it's one I'm in, and mostly it's not live in studio, but for recording studios I really don't think Pro Tools has been beaten yet, if you want 8 separate headphone mixes with 8 separate scratch fx chains for each member of the band, then Pro Tools is the one to beat. It could be argued that Luna with UAD Apollo hardware would get you that level of latency, but Luna is new, I just don't think it is as road tested.

The reason you don't see it showing up in large numbers in DAW polls on KVR is obvious, this is a composers forum, and a bedroom producers forum, you simply don't need Pro Tools for those tasks, in fact I would argue that Pro Tools isn't as good as Cubase, Logic, Digital Performer, FSP etc. when it comes to using the DAW to write a song. DP, Cubase and Logic all started off as MIDI sequencers, and Pro Tools started off as an audio recorder and editor with outboard DSP. It's evident in their strengths.

[whyterabbyt]

Honestly this argument is always kind of pointless to me, it shows that DAW is an overused term. Some DAWs are more like composing devices, Live being an example of a a DAW modeled as much if not more off of performance samplers and loopers as Pro Tools.

I know one professional who uses Reaper for his recording studio, although in recent years he's recorded less live bands and started working on film scores and his own music.

I've never owned Pro Tools, I've never needed to, I don't record live bands unless it's one I'm in, and mostly it's not live in studio, but for recording studios I really don't think Pro Tools has been beaten yet, if you want 8 separate headphone mixes with 8 separate scratch fx chains for each member of the band, then Pro Tools is the one to beat. It could be argued that Luna with UAD Apollo hardware would get you that level of latency, but Luna is new, I just don't think it is as road tested.

The reason you don't see it showing up in large numbers in DAW polls on KVR is obvious, this is a composers forum, and a bedroom producers forum, you simply don't need Pro Tools for those tasks, in fact I would argue that Pro Tools isn't as good as Cubase, Logic, Digital Performer, FSP etc. when it comes to using the DAW to write a song. DP, Cubase and Logic all started off as MIDI sequencers, and Pro Tools started off as an audio recorder and editor with outboard DSP. It's evident in their strengths.

Yes but what's the point of salient and reasoned thoughts in a thread about what people choose to use when there's a puerile twat who's life is so sad they think its important to rage endlessly because someone choose to use a bit of software they dont use.
And its not even BONES this time.

[kraster]

Has zero to do with studios that are still tied to this absolute garbage pile of DAW coding known as Pro Tools. The company has had MORE THAN AMPLE time to better their product but instead they chose to milk their current base.

A ton of COMMERCIAL studios now use Logic, Reaper, even Cubase in some and are WAY happier dumping PT (along with their crap hardware). Cut the bulls***, it's 2026, son. Save the sales pitch.

The ONLY thing one should factor in a DAW (from commercial studios to home studios) is STABILITY AND PERFORMANCE. They all do the needed basics.
The Reaper dev team is #1 in regard. Deal with it, sucker.

Pro tools is still by far the most used DAW in studios. That doesn't mean other DAWS aren't used but Pro Tools because of the hardware integration is still top of the heap. Even more so in Post.

I use Pro Tools every day for work and it's rock solid. Like other commenters say I'm not a particular fan of AVID but I can work for one day and it pays my yearly subscription. More than worth it for me.

Live is my favourite Daw for my own personal use but Pro Tools is by far the one I use with paying clients.

Reaper is excellent but it's practically nowhere to be seen in studios. Pro Tools strength is its integration with all kinds of hardware setups. Reaper is not even on the same planet in that regard.

[Jim Roseberry]

I knew the response was Reaper.
I could smell it.
There's nothing wrong with Reaper, it's a fine DAW application.

If the comment was:
"I feel burned by Avid... because of my experience from 15 years ago"
I totally understand the sentiment.

If you're going to call ProTools 2025.12 code-base "crap" or "unstable":
It lends more credibility if you're speaking from current experience (vs ProTools 11 from 15 years ago).

Like it or lump it:
- The vast majority of professional studios use ProTools
- ProTools 2025.12 runs extremely well (rock-solid stable and CPU efficient)

To bring this back on topic:
Because of my career, I have the option of using any of the major DAW applications.
Of late, I've been doing sessions collaborating with others in a commercial studio environment.
Those sessions have gone well... and I've really been enjoying the process. In the future, there will be more sessions.
As such, and to my original post, it makes sense that I'd choose ProTools.
Trying to project a bum 15-year-old PT-11 experience on my scenario doesn't change this.
ProTools 2025.12 has been working great. The client (who's paying) loves the results. I'm enjoying the process.
If that's hard to understand... or "BS"... that's a you problem.
Oh wait, some rando on KVR had a problem with ProTools 11 fifteen years ago. Guess I need to switch DAW applications.

[jojoB3]

Your colleagues don't share your enthusiasm either.
I've seen Logic, Reaper in many commercial studios and most smaller professional studios.

AVID doesn't have a dev team they have a marketing team. The product comprised of patch work coding making it the least streamlined, inefficient daw out there. Save the AVID spiel. Nobody's buying it.

[BONES]

No matter what DAW application you're using, you should measure your audio interface's Record Offset (in samples).

Why? If it was an issue, you'd hear it and do something abut it but, in 25 years of recording stuff into my computer, I've never heard a problem. And if you can't hear a problem, then there isn't a problem so why go around inventing problems for yourself? Ignorance is bliss.

Less focus on tech... more focus on music

This goes to my point - spend less time making problems you have to solve and you will have more time to focus on your music. There is a great adage in the world of film and video production - "we'll fix it in post", which means don't sweat the little stuff, just get your takes down and worry about the problems, if/when they arise, in post-production.

Cubase here. What intrigues me most here is seeing Pro Tools right at the bottom and Reaper right at the top. The rest seems consistent to me.

No surprise when you think about the price of each.

Yes but what's the point of salient and reasoned thoughts in a thread about what people choose to use when there's a puerile twat who's life is so sad they think its important to rage endlessly because someone choose to use a bit of software they dont use.

Sure but we've gotten used to your pointless, stupid interventions over time, you don't need to feel bad about it.

[BONES]

"industry standard" my a$$

Industry standard doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job, it just means it's the tool you need to know inside-out if you want to work in the industry, mostly because it has been around the longest. In fact, it is often the industry-standard tools that get the least attention, precisely because they are the industry-standard and workflows are built around them, which makes it almost impossible for someone else to come in an usurp their position, even if it is a better tool, so the vendor doesn't have to put any effort in to maintain their position at the top of the heap. It's true of Adobe in my profession. I hate most of their products - if you hadn't used Photoshop for 30 years, you could open it up tomorrow and be able to use it straight away, it has changed so little over that time - but if I want to work, I need to know how to use their products. Avid have a similar position with professional video editing and, whether you like it or not, Pro-Tools is the application that will get you work in a recording studio.

Has zero to do with studios that are still tied to this absolute garbage pile of DAW coding known as Pro Tools. The company has had MORE THAN AMPLE time to better their product but instead they chose to milk their current base.

Why should they? Who is going to topple them from top spot in the industry? Time is money and time spent training up your operators on a new DAW is money down the toilet.

A ton of COMMERCIAL studios now use Logic, Reaper, even Cubase in some and are WAY happier dumping PT (along with their crap hardware).

They may have those applications installed for their client's convenience but they won't be using them themselves.

The ONLY thing one should factor in a DAW (from commercial studios to home studios) is STABILITY AND PERFORMANCE.

Yeah, don't factor in that you won't get a top-class engineer or producer who is as comfortable using Reaper as they are with the tool they have used for their entire professional career. You have to provide the tools that will attract the best talent and in any industry that is almost certainly going to be whatever the industry-standard tools are.

Yeah that's the point. AVID does NOT invest in bettering ANY of their products. Their game is strictly sales, that old 90's biz model schtick they cling to (because that's all they are, that's all they have - sales team). We can see all those caught on their hook.

I think you might have missed the most important point - Avid doesn't make a living from the music industry, they are a video-editing company. They undoubtedly bought Digidesign so they could use its technology in Media Composer and their other NLE products. They probably wouldn't give a shit if music studios stopped using it. You might want them to care but they don't, because they don't have to.

It was the same when I worked for Autodesk - they acquired Discreet Logic, the part of the company I worked for, and slowly set about running it into the ground because it was less than 10% of their business and they saw no reason to waste resources on it.

[ozinga]

If somebody starting out wants a career as a recording, mixing or post engineer or media composer and hoping to start out as an assistant, intern, coffee boy etc in a commercial studio or with a composer, guess learning which common software raises their chances to find a job.
That is the reason it is the industry standard not what it does or does not.
It is not seen as a DAW, it is the recording and mixing gear of a studio that years ago replaced the tape and desk due to the support of their DSP Cards when computers were not powerful enough and it is established and apparently still does the job fine for a lot of commercial facilities. So for them it does not matter if Reaper does thousand things better than Protools.

[jojoB3]

Bones again

You mention only Reaper. Why is that?
It's because you did some research and realized that the Cockos dev team are the best in the business and that quality is #1, the only thing that matters. Once again you speak in circles to avoid the point.

Logic today has also shown PT the door in many busy studios.
Some are looking for a composition tool that offers useful vi versions and aim for FL, Ableton, etc. with DAW features. Even they have shown more care and quality compared to AVID/PT.

[whyterabbyt]

Sure but we've gotten used to BONES' pointless, stupid interventions over time, you don't need to feel bad about it.

FTFY.

[Jim Roseberry]

Your colleagues don't share your enthusiasm either.
I've seen Logic, Reaper in many commercial studios and most smaller professional studios.

AVID doesn't have a dev team they have a marketing team. The product comprised of patch work coding making it the least streamlined, inefficient daw out there. Save the AVID spiel. Nobody's buying it.

My colleagues don't share my enthusiasm? What colleagues?
Can you find a single pro that doesn't use ProTools? Of course.
That's like using the rare Linux DAW user... as an example that pro studios are running Linux.
If you walk into any professional studio that interacts with the rest of the industry, it's virtually guaranteed that they'll be using ProTools.
But hey, Rando guy from KVR had a problem with ProTools 15 years ago.
No professional studio could possibly be productive, efficient, thriving using ProTools... because Rando says so.

The reality of the situation is this:
ProTools 2025.12 works extremely well (Mac and PC).
Many folks are using it (pros and amateurs), being productive, and actually enjoying the process.
Trying to project your bum 15-yo experience onto others' is not only odd... it's irrelevant.
You can't speak to my experience.

I just got off the phone with a client.
He's taking a mixing course from a pro engineer based out of Nashville.
Want to take a lucky guess at what DAW application said Nashville engineer is using?
Go ahead... take a guess.
I'll give you a hint. It's not Reaper, it's not Logic, it's not Cubase/Nuendo, it's not Studio Pro.

FWIW, I actually don't care for Avid... nor Apple, Microsoft, Google, Meta, etc.
That's a different conversation.

[Jim Roseberry]

No matter what DAW application you're using, you should measure your audio interface's Record Offset (in samples).

Why? If it was an issue, you'd hear it and do something abut it but, in 25 years of recording stuff into my computer, I've never heard a problem. And if you can't hear a problem, then there isn't a problem so why go around inventing problems for yourself? Ignorance is bliss.

Less focus on tech... more focus on music

This goes to my point - spend less time making problems you have to solve and you will have more time to focus on your music. There is a great adage in the world of film and video production - "we'll fix it in post", which means don't sweat the little stuff, just get your takes down and worry about the problems, if/when they arise, in post-production.

The amount of Record Offset varies greatly (depends on the audio interface).
- Behringer Wing has ~18-samples (late)
- Orion Studio Synergy Core has ~146-samples (late)
Some audio interfaces may place the audio early.
Some audio interfaces have considerably larger Record Offset.

Using the Wing, you probably wouldn't notice that the audio was placed 18-samples late.
With the Orion Studio SC at 44.1k, that's 3.3ms later than what was actually played.
That's getting into the area of feel.
IIRC, the MPC Live 3 and MPC XL's onboard audio have a much larger Record Offset.
If you're talking 6ms, that's definitely affecting feel (vs original intention).

If anything, digital recording should be accurate.
The process itself shouldn't be changing timing/intention.
IMO, It's different if it's a choice (Input Quantization).

If Avid would provide a Record Offset parameter, it would be a one-time (set and forget) thing. They don't do it... hoping you'll buy an Avid audio interface.
All other major DAW applications do provide a Record Offset parameter.
Fix once... and audio is placed 100% accurately on the timeline.

[BBFG#]

Your colleagues don't share your enthusiasm either.
I've seen Logic, Reaper in many commercial studios and most smaller professional studios.

AVID doesn't have a dev team they have a marketing team. The product comprised of patch work coding making it the least streamlined, inefficient daw out there. Save the AVID spiel. Nobody's buying it.

My colleagues don't share my enthusiasm? What colleagues?
Can you find a single pro that doesn't use ProTools? Of course.
That's like using the rare Linux DAW user... as an example that pro studios are running Linux.
If you walk into any professional studio that interacts with the rest of the industry, it's virtually guaranteed that they'll be using ProTools.
But hey, Rando guy from KVR had a problem with ProTools 15 years ago.
No professional studio could possibly be productive, efficient, thriving using ProTools... because Rando says so.

The reality of the situation is this:
ProTools 2025.12 works extremely well (Mac and PC).
Many folks are using it (pros and amateurs), being productive, and actually enjoying the process.
Trying to project your bum 15-yo experience onto others' is not only odd... it's irrelevant.
You can't speak to my experience.

I just got off the phone with a client.
He's taking a mixing course from a pro engineer based out of Nashville.
Want to take a lucky guess at what DAW application said Nashville engineer is using?
Go ahead... take a guess.
I'll give you a hint. It's not Reaper, it's not Logic, it's not Cubase/Nuendo, it's not Studio Pro.

FWIW, I actually don't care for Avid... nor Apple, Microsoft, Google, Meta, etc.
That's a different conversation.

I'm probably wrong, but every time I hear Nashville mentioned I think of Harrison Mixbus.

[Michael L]

I'm probably wrong, but every time I hear Nashville mentioned I think of Harrison Mixbus.

You are totally right. Mixbus is exactly what you think of
( I think of cats )