Poll: How many DAWs do you use?

[ozmuso67]

It's easier be more creative with limits than with too many choices that only creates confusion.

I agree with this. I currently have 3 daws, Studio One, Reaper and FL Studio, but only ever use S1 these days. Tried cubase for a while as well, but in the end realised it was too much work keeping up with, and working with, many daws.

So 1 DAW it is for me. Now the next step is to reduce the number of VSTs and VSTi's I use. Goal is to increase creativity by reducing the choices.

[noiseboyuk]

I'd love to be just one DAW really. But music = Cubase, audio post = Pro Tools. Then for archives I have Sonar and Pyramix, but I really struggle to even find my way round those now. I do have Ableton Live on the MacBook, but only for using with Launchpad for mobile audio triggering. Oh, does Adobe Audition count? Still use that loads for basic editing / mastering chores, and sometimes simple multitrack edits are simpler to do there.

All round that's MORE than enough.

In the past year or two, Pro Tools' development has been considerably better than Cubase's, the reverse of how things were until a couple of years ago. If Steinberg continue to do such a poor job and Avid give a bit more love to midi, I really will be seriously considering jumping to PT for everything.

[pekbro]

I guess its different for everyone, to me reducing choices or options doesn't
increase creativity or create confusion at all. Working under constraints is
definitely a way to go if that's what you happen to be after at the time,
much like painting with a limited palette. However, that's not something
I would want to have to do all the time.

The tools inspire me in different ways, but I'd have to say for the most part
they are all equally inspiring. You guys don't want to know how many DAWs
and plugins I actually own and use. And yes I do use them all. That only
encompasses the music thing, the computer graphics thing is way worse
actually.

For me it's always been that way with everything, and one of the main things
that has always kept my skill set in demand.

[Septimon]

I started with Cubase and was happy with it for years. I then tried Live out of curiosity. Meanwhile i sold Cubase Pro but still sometimes use Cubase Le. i still like Cubase‘s channel presets for mixing.
I switched for the following reasons
- Live’s Session view /Loop arranging Funktion
- easy routing
- ability to Load Plugins without glitches in playback
- no dongle
- easy audio to midi
- easy drum slicing
-M4L VJ Plugins
- it‘s Rock solid

[aMUSEd]

I have owned or tried almost every DAW apart from Windows only (and at the time, prohibitively expensive) DAWS like Samplitude, and Cubase which I refuse to get into as I think Steinberg have a cheek expecting people to pay (a lot) for half way releases. However most I don't use as DAWS but own because they have certain instruments I like and use them more for sound design/experimentation - eg Logic for Alchemy and Sculpture and some cool fx, Reason I also use as a plugin rack really and Live I use mainly for M4L. The hosts I tend to actually create music in are Tracktion and Bitwig, and Reaper when using more demanding plugins or want more complex automation.

[machinesworking]

These types of threads always come back to the same debates on whether less=more creativity and production it seems. To me anyway if you need to limit your choices in order to get creative you're struggling with something else besides the equipment in front of you, but I do not knock whatever it takes to get someone to feel like they can write.

Here's what gets to me in the writing process, when I get to a section in the process where I know it can be done better, is done better in another DAW, or with another plug in etc.

>>>Considering the rendering options and MIDI options of different DAWs for instance:
In DP I would say without being overtly critical that DP is well suited to working with big sample libraries, so it's no wonder that people doing orchestral mock ups use DP more than the general population, and it's not much of a wonder that rendering choices are limited, that a lot of these folks have 200+ templates that have stems built in for various sections, so real time rendering of the stems is to them not a big deal. When you use DP for electronic music, which has no template to speak of then all of a sudden you're confronted with this slower cumbersome rendering process compared to other DAWs.
Jumping to Logic, MIDI controllers are all one port in Logics mind, so you have to assign MIDI channels to all your hardware controllers, then take note as to which channel etc. Rendering is a little better.
Reaper, rendering is great, naming conventions for the selected stems etc. it's just as easy as pie. The MIDI editor is a PITA, it's 'possibly' powerful, but I still have not been able to get a key command together in Reaper for simply changing the grid quantize size up or down a notch. It's just not as thought out as DP or Logic.
Live, MIDI editor sucks, quantize is as basic as it gets, some conventions are just flat out gone like an Event List etc. It also requires a manual drag to get full screen, is permanently attached to other windows, is a POS. <<<<

With all that in mind, I'm not at all bogged down by choices when I use these DAWs, I know right away that the song I'm working on would work well with which DAW, because I'm aware of what the strong and weak points of each DAW is. Same applies for plug ins and music equipment in general.

When I read posts about clutter creating confusion I mostly think is it because they don't know their gear? If you only have time or the patience to learn one DAW and a handful of plug ins, that's cool, but there's always this assumption that everyone who has a huge collection of gear is not making music and just GASsing it up. This is easily proven false by nearly every professional musicians studio photos.

I liked Defender about 1000X more than Pacman. Nobody is wrong there.

[jancivil]

I guess its different for everyone, to me reducing choices or options doesn't
increase creativity or create confusion at all. Working under constraints is
definitely a way to go if that's what you happen to be after at the time,
much like painting with a limited palette. However, that's not something
I would want to have to do all the time.

Cubendo is not a restraint or a palette here. It's a sequencer and where I write automation for VE Pro which is where my palette resides. I'm installing Nuendo as we speak and I got rid of several gigabytes of its content. As a 'music for picture' host it does have a folder of Foley or 'Sound FX' I'm going to keep on the drive though.

I don't find a restricted palette amounts to a spur to creativity or having a broad and wide palette confusing either. I do have a simple workflow that is linear and I do some things the hard way compared to what I see as I look around and compare notes. I know my way around Logic, didn't want to learn DP as too different; life is short. Those are two with awkward relations with VE Pro, sold 'em.

I would never debate what works for someone else. Re: "it's no wonder that people doing orchestral mock ups use DP more than the general population," big orchestra people use VE Pro. VE Pro works smoothest, less complications with Cubendo. DP, OTOH is supposed to be unique in its music-for-picture workflow with things like Chunks...

So rendering: outputs from VE Pro. You enable as many as you need in Cubendo and export audio. If I was using DP it would be with VE Pro as well. If you send audio to it, it is now an external FX rack as far as Cubendo is concerned and you have to do realtime (this is one of the use cases where Logic had to have a whole plugin written for it by VSL and it is clunky). This is the only time I have ever perceived a need to realtime render. I suppose if you're going to manually mixdown and can access the mixer (you can with VE Pro). I'm not real knowledgable on things I don't use, so... I don't know what the general population is doing. DP is not super popular at KVR. I liked the idea of it but opening it up and having a gander, well, life is short. I'm just a stupid musician.

[machinesworking]

I guess its different for everyone, to me reducing choices or options doesn't
increase creativity or create confusion at all. Working under constraints is
definitely a way to go if that's what you happen to be after at the time,
much like painting with a limited palette. However, that's not something
I would want to have to do all the time.

Cubendo is not a restraint or a palette here. It's a sequencer and where I write automation for VE Pro which is where my palette resides. I'm installing Nuendo as we speak and I got rid of several gigabytes of its content. As a 'music for picture' host it does have a folder of Foley or 'Sound FX' I'm going to keep on the drive though.

I don't find a restricted palette amounts to a spur to creativity or having a broad and wide palette confusing either. I do have a simple workflow that is linear and I do some things the hard way compared to what I see as I look around and compare notes. I know my way around Logic, didn't want to learn DP as too different; life is short. Those are two with awkward relations with VE Pro, sold 'em.

I would never debate what works for someone else. Re: "it's no wonder that people doing orchestral mock ups use DP more than the general population," big orchestra people use VE Pro. VE Pro works smoothest, less complications with Cubendo. DP, OTOH is supposed to be unique in its music-for-picture workflow with things like Chunks...

So rendering: outputs from VE Pro. You enable as many as you need in Cubendo and export audio. If I was using DP it would be with VE Pro as well. If you send audio to it, it is now an external FX rack as far as Cubendo is concerned and you have to do realtime (this is one of the use cases where Logic had to have a whole plugin written for it by VSL and it is clunky). This is the only time I have ever perceived a need to realtime render. I suppose if you're going to manually mixdown and can access the mixer (you can with VE Pro). I'm not real knowledgable on things I don't use, so... I don't know what the general population is doing. DP is not super popular at KVR. I liked the idea of it but opening it up and having a gander, well, life is short. I'm just a stupid musician.

I hear you, yes, most people using DP also use VEP.
The main reason I would suppose is the Tracks window in DP is pretty easy on the eyes for 200+ templates compared to the others, and Chunks works well with VEP as far as having multiple scores in separate sequences containing only MIDI, all accessing the same instance of VEP. So you can have dozens of parts of a 90 minute movie all available without dealing with a timeline that has Auxs and VSTi's all in it as well. All that stuff (VEP plug ins etc.) is in a 'virtual rack' available to every sequence.

Takes a while to get used to it, and Cubase/Nuendo is wicked powerful, so you're set, but you begged the question as to why movie and orchestral score people like DP, it's because the things that are awkward to people coming from Cubase, Logic Sonar etc. (V-Racks, Chunks, MIDI tracks separate from VSTi's ) are strong points when it comes to movie scoring.

[EnGee]

I use mainly two: Cubase and Reason. Sometimes one of them, and sometimes both rewired. Reaper for testing and FL Studio for fun

[jancivil]

you begged the question as to why movie and orchestral score people like DP, it's because the things that are awkward to people coming from Cubase, Logic Sonar etc. (V-Racks, Chunks, MIDI tracks separate from VSTi's ) are strong points when it comes to movie scoring.

Sure. Except in Cubendo {rack} MIDI tracks are separate from the Instrument Channel as well (so for me, MIDI volume is the amount of energy going to the instrument but the real audio level is after that in VEP where I really mix). Another downside of Logic IME, for instance CC7 is hard-wired to the Instrument Channel.

[Vortifex]

..

[Distorted Horizon]

Reason, Reaper and Bitwig. I've been giving an eye to FLS for fun..

But why current setup?

Reason is pure inspiration. But working in pianoroll is annoying sometimes and I prefer Bitwig way of doing that.
Reaper is awesome workhorse that I've modified to work like liquid.
Bitwig is kinda combination of both, but doesn't have all the strong points that Rea daws have.

[Acid Mitch]

I have Samplitude and Fruity Loops but only Samplitude gets used.

[Caine123]

Why do people use 2 ? Just curious!

[Zexila]

Why do people use 2 ? Just curious!

Read the freaking thread than, almost everyone explained why.