One aspect of a DAW that you would remove ?

[machinesworking]

Cubase wanting to create a new folder on every new project - does my head in. Once a month I have to go through and clean up all the crap it leaves behind.

Because of this, I just use the same folder every time as default and then when I want to save an idea which appears to be progressing anywhere, I'll use the backup feature to save it in a new folder with the assets.

I just hate any DAW that wants you to name a project before you're ready to commit. Shit, most times I don't even know what genre idea I could be coming up with when I open it, let alone a name!

Ditto right there.. Sometimes I work on a tune for awhile before I even begin to come up with a title for it. My MPC is filled with projects DnB01, DnB02, DnB27, etc.. At least let me start working on the project before I have to pick a name, a place to save it and create all the folders for it, just like I can in Ableton Live, Logic Pro, Renoise, etc.

Thanks for reminding me though, its about time to go clean out all the Untitled-1, Untitled-2, etc folders on my audio drive just from me wanting to try out a new plugin I bought haha.

Ugh, I thought this was an exclusive Digital Performer issue. I hate it, I thought I had a solution at least on Mac OS since you can lock a file from modification, so lock a template file etc. but doing so messes with some basic DAW functionality in practice. All the other DAWs besides DP and Cubase are doing this right. I might have lost one project once because the DAW crashed before I saved the project. IMO totally worth "the risk". I do not get it, and DP users in general are all so old and faithful they don't know how other DAWs do it.

[mothra]

Ugh, I thought this was an exclusive Digital Performer issue. I hate it, I thought I had a solution at least on Mac OS since you can lock a file from modification, so lock a template file etc. but doing so messes with some basic DAW functionality in practice. All the other DAWs besides DP and Cubase are doing this right. I might have lost one project once because the DAW crashed before I saved the project. IMO totally worth "the risk". I do not get it, and DP users in general are all so old and faithful they don't know how other DAWs do it.

Funny you mentioned that last part.. A few weeks ago, whenever MorphEQ came out, I fired up Cubase and started a session just to play with the plugin and see how I liked it. Turned out I made a breakbeat I really liked and stuff started working.. A little bit into it Cubase 12 crashed on me for the first time (haven't had any issues up until 12.0.40), and thanks to that stupid feature, I was able to grab one of the backup song files it created and reopen it and recover what I was working on. If it weren't for it creating everything at startup and the autosave/backup feature leaving 10 copies in the folder I would've lost all of that. I still hate that feature but I guess once in awhile it can be a little useful hah.

Man I forgot DP worked that way. I attempted to learn DP a few times over the years (I've always used MOTU interfaces since I can remember) but I just never 'got it'. We used Audiodesk a few times to record our band practices in a pinch but, the layout was too confusing to me. Now that I've been using an MPC the last 2-3 years or so, I think I finally figured out how you used the 'chunks' that baffled me (why would you want sequences inside your sequence?) but some of the other ways it does stuff (like having to use two tracks for a virtual instrument) still make me go HUH?

[machinesworking]

Funny you mentioned that last part.. A few weeks ago, whenever MorphEQ came out, I fired up Cubase and started a session just to play with the plugin and see how I liked it. Turned out I made a breakbeat I really liked and stuff started working.. A little bit into it Cubase 12 crashed on me for the first time (haven't had any issues up until 12.0.40), and thanks to that stupid feature, I was able to grab one of the backup song files it created and reopen it and recover what I was working on. If it weren't for it creating everything at startup and the autosave/backup feature leaving 10 copies in the folder I would've lost all of that. I still hate that feature but I guess once in awhile it can be a little useful hah.

To be fair what other DAWs do is use a scratch folder for unsaved work, so in Live and Reaper for example it will generally ask you next time you start up the DAW if you want to recover your work. I've only had Bitwig hang on me once, the whole plug in sandboxing thing it does is really the future, and I would be surprised if others don't over time follow through with it. Especially all the teething pains that VST3 has brought.

Man I forgot DP worked that way. I attempted to learn DP a few times over the years (I've always used MOTU interfaces since I can remember) but I just never 'got it'. We used Audiodesk a few times to record our band practices in a pinch but, the layout was too confusing to me. Now that I've been using an MPC the last 2-3 years or so, I think I finally figured out how you used the 'chunks' that baffled me (why would you want sequences inside your sequence?) but some of the other ways it does stuff (like having to use two tracks for a virtual instrument) still make me go HUH?

I used DP back in 2000 mostly for MIDI, so working in patterns that you can stack into songs made perfect sense. Once you add in virtual instruments it gets tricky, but the benefits are huge. I don't always work linearly, might come up with two parts to a song, then flesh it out. having the ability to have a verse, break etc. in a separate Chunk allows for less messy timelines. In Logic or Reaper I would end up dragging those parts to measure 400 or something to drag back in at various points etc. Mostly it's great for when you're mixing, since you can copy the entire sequence, bounce all tracks to audio, then without any consequence delete the original tracks with plug ins etc. in the copied Chunk. Then you can always go back to the VI Chunk if need be, but you're free to add CPU sucking mastering plug ins to the mix with no worries at all.

DP11.11 just combined MIDI and Instrument tracks, MOTU finally buckled. Separate files still make sense when you're using multiple sequence and their virtual racks, but beyond that their V-Racks don't allow track or plug in automation, only MIDI. Anyway, I'm obviously into DP, but I still don't like the fact that you have to make a project every time you want to mess around with something, it makes me more likely to open up Bitwig for sure.

[fairlyclose]

Funny you mentioned that last part.. A few weeks ago, whenever MorphEQ came out, I fired up Cubase and started a session just to play with the plugin and see how I liked it. Turned out I made a breakbeat I really liked and stuff started working.. A little bit into it Cubase 12 crashed on me for the first time (haven't had any issues up until 12.0.40), and thanks to that stupid feature, I was able to grab one of the backup song files it created and reopen it and recover what I was working on. If it weren't for it creating everything at startup and the autosave/backup feature leaving 10 copies in the folder I would've lost all of that. I still hate that feature but I guess once in awhile it can be a little useful hah.

To be fair what other DAWs do is use a scratch folder for unsaved work, so in Live and Reaper for example it will generally ask you next time you start up the DAW if you want to recover your work. I've only had Bitwig hang on me once, the whole plug in sandboxing thing it does is really the future, and I would be surprised if others don't over time follow through with it. Especially all the teething pains that VST3 has brought.

Man I forgot DP worked that way. I attempted to learn DP a few times over the years (I've always used MOTU interfaces since I can remember) but I just never 'got it'. We used Audiodesk a few times to record our band practices in a pinch but, the layout was too confusing to me. Now that I've been using an MPC the last 2-3 years or so, I think I finally figured out how you used the 'chunks' that baffled me (why would you want sequences inside your sequence?) but some of the other ways it does stuff (like having to use two tracks for a virtual instrument) still make me go HUH?

I used DP back in 2000 mostly for MIDI, so working in patterns that you can stack into songs made perfect sense. Once you add in virtual instruments it gets tricky, but the benefits are huge. I don't always work linearly, might come up with two parts to a song, then flesh it out. having the ability to have a verse, break etc. in a separate Chunk allows for less messy timelines. In Logic or Reaper I would end up dragging those parts to measure 400 or something to drag back in at various points etc. Mostly it's great for when you're mixing, since you can copy the entire sequence, bounce all tracks to audio, then without any consequence delete the original tracks with plug ins etc. in the copied Chunk. Then you can always go back to the VI Chunk if need be, but you're free to add CPU sucking mastering plug ins to the mix with no worries at all.

DP11.11 just combined MIDI and Instrument tracks, MOTU finally buckled. Separate files still make sense when you're using multiple sequence and their virtual racks, but beyond that their V-Racks don't allow track or plug in automation, only MIDI. Anyway, I'm obviously into DP, but I still don't like the fact that you have to make a project every time you want to mess around with something, it makes me more likely to open up Bitwig for sure.

Reaper has the subproject thing that you might find handy as a type of Chunking

[machinesworking]

Reaper has the subproject thing that you might find handy as a type of Chunking

Before DP11 came out with MPE support I was really looking to switch to Reaper, and subprojects never caught me as being even close to Chunks. They are IMO a very Cockos approach to saving resources that's probably 100% useful in movie mockups, but I couldn't see myself using it for verse chorus etc. type writing like you can with Clip based DAWs like Bitwig and Live, or Chunks as a composing device in DP.

It's a totally unique feature of Reaper though, and I should look into it one of these days. I keep Reaper around because a few of my old songwriting buddies use it.

[EnGee]

I would remove:
1. Bitwig's annually upgrade plan and replace it with a "normal" major version plan.
2. Reason's Codemeter protection and online login, and make it like Live or S1.
3. Cubase stupid Mac mimic in Windows about that main bar on top!

Those above annoyed me. I don't have to deal with them now as Logic is excellent (or almost) for my needs.

[Tj Shredder]

First of all by a huge amount: plugin scanning. Its useless. Scan it when you want to use a plugin the first time and simply remember that result…
Different types of tracks. Simply allow any track to have all possible media combined…
Proprietary formats…
Copy protection and pirates all together…

[syntonica]

I would make all DAWs use one single plugin format. Period. No extra/proprietary features. None. No more multiple formats strewn all over your drive. Devs can focus on real DSP and not waste 90% of their time trying to get multiple formats to run on multiple DAWs because everybody has their own interpretation.

(I know this is CLAP's goal. If it doesn't win, then I hope something else does win.)

[Tj Shredder]

I would make all DAWs use one single plugin format. Period. No extra/proprietary features. None. No more multiple formats strewn all over your drive. Devs can focus on real DSP and not waste 90% of their time trying to get multiple formats to run on multiple DAWs because everybody has their own interpretation.

(I know this is CLAP's goal. If it doesn't win, then I hope something else does win.)

ProTools uses one and Logic a different one. But that isn’t all DAWs. There was a time in the past, it was called VST2 and only Logic and ProTools didn’t support it. It seems world domination tendencies in private companies work against it…
CLAP should be it, but it will take some years to ripple through. And it will not be all DAWs either, because Steinberg has to reject it for (evil) political reasons…
On the other hand CLAP only has a chance because even now nobody needs to waste 90% of their time trying to get multiple formats to run on multiple DAWs. The mostly used common libraries take care of that already.

[Boy Wonder]

About 15/20 years ago, I thought "soft quantize", or whatever it's called in Cubase, was cool. Piano tracks weren't lined up perfectly and that was fine for a human feel. Now, though, everything's changed. Most, if not all, music I hear is rigidly tight. There's no need for soft quantize anymore.

[FAS122]

Not sure if this counts, but outdated stock samples/presets. I don't want developers to "remove" them per se, just to chuck them in a "legacy" folder or something so they don't become bloat but are still accessible (looking at you, Reason).

[syntonica]

About 15/20 years ago, I thought "soft quantize", or whatever it's called in Cubase, was cool. Piano tracks weren't lined up perfectly and that was fine for a human feel. Now, though, everything's changed. Most, if not all, music I hear is rigidly tight. There's no need for soft quantize anymore.

I've always done this manually, even hard quantize. I know I tried the soft quantize feature on some DAW in the past before, but it was so awful, I just went back to doing it by hand. Maybe it's implementation has improved since?

[seangm]

nvm

[_leras]

oh f**k he is back.

oh f**k someone is adding useless off topic comment.

For me I'd take the grouping from Cubase and add the way it works in Bitwig. Then I could have easy grouping next to the actual tracks, and also the group channels separately with an easy group bus view for mixing next to the master channel.

For Bitwig I'd leave the channel grouping, but also add a group channel mixing view separate from the channel mixing.

So, would get best of both worlds for both DAWs I use.

[chk071]

oh f**k he is back.

oh f**k someone is adding useless off topic comment.

Well... I'm not sure who he meant with his comment, but, if you take a look at the frequency of these threads, then it's pretty damn clear that someone suffers from severe chronical boredom, and self-display addiction.

And, no, this can't be solved by simply ignoring the threads. At some point, you'd have to ignore 90% of the bullshit here, and, what's the point in that? You rather will stop visiting the site instead. and, that can't be it really, because of some bored, uninspired, and selfish individuals who spoil it for everyone else.