Posted in : Forum : Audio Software Chat
Discuss all things related to audio software such as Acid, Cubase, Reason, GarageBand, Wavelab, Soundforge, Fruity Loops, Traktor, Ableton Live etc
I just wanted to start this thread and state my opinion for what its worth. Many of us use differant software that we all rant and rave about but at the end of the day what we all have is a completely blank canvass.. Its exactly the same as a painter looking at a white frame armed with some oils or water colours, we record and programme onto a canvass its either great of a bit crap..LOL
We can't blame a DAW they all record at a similar rate give or take, they all have instruments, midi control, and effects.. Can you imagine an artist like Turner having a discussion about the quality of his oil paints against other artists rather then actually painting the picture..
From this day forth i vote we actually ban any talk of whos got the best DAW, its boring and actually quiet embarrassing to read for all concerned.
Your post doesn't address the difference in prices though. For me that was a big factor in choosing Reaper. Jmo
I knew i hadn't mentioned a catch, darn it.. Well congrats your canvass is slightly less expensive than a few others..
I forgot the :-) Reaper is cool
So what you're saying is FL studio is easily the best DAW known to man and if you're using anything but, you should feel bad and lonely on the inside?~~~~~~~~~~~~
+1 For breaking the forum interface.
Totally agree with you mate!...but just watch this thread spin out of control though! lol
100% agree!!! I own Pro Tools 11, Cuabse 6, Fl Studio Producer 11, and Studio One, I am a teacher so I get them at a huge educational discount which is why I own all of these. But it doesn't matter which DAW I use I get the same results, main difference is the workflow. They all are great, my recommendation is to pick one that you can afford and learn it inside and out. The main thing needed to get great sounding tracks is having an good understanding of eq and compression and decent gear (not super expensive), which is a whole other topic.
I actually think a great way to record as a song writer is just record your track with open audio.. Play every thing live, sing, play guitar, keyboards tap out a rythum.. If it sounds great then start thinking about production techniques.. you hear a thousand crappy songs with amazing production now, is that what DAWS bring us..I don't know.
While i'm on one.. LOL the proof of my last statement is in the music.. Think about it, really think.. Everything in music at the moment is about vintage.. Vintage synths, vantage hardware, analogue, tape saturation, modeling ancient recording desks.. Why how can this be with all the technology we have, why model the past… I'll tell you, it sounds better, alot better.
Even todays artists crave the past.. The beatles are still one of Itunes top selling artists period (Old age pensioners that could never of dreamed of owning a computer).. My point is not that technology is bad but surely its worth turning off the computer writing a song, perfecting that song and then recording it on the computer. That includes playing synths live like Kraftwerk would have done originally, they are using DAWS now but living off there past.
I think it comes down to personal preference as all Daws really do the same, some cost more, some have more bells and whistles than others, but still all do the same thing.
Most songwriters and musicians are just that musicians and songwriters, there not producers. They might know how to press record and even how to record to a click, for instance a lot of the accapella's on this site is really bad quality although the words and way something is sang is good, but it ends up not usable, so is this down to their DAW??, possibly.
so I put it that it really does matter what you use for the purpose of the project. i'm making a sampled track I could use ACID, I'm making a track and using vocal I don't need to edit then i'd use reason 5, I want record a band i'd use Logic/Pro tools, i'm making a remix of a track clipping vocals ect.. then i'd probably use fruity or Cubase. so it depends what type of producer you are and the product you want to create, I don't think money should come into it when choosing a DAW just choose one you can use to get the most out the project.
So overall a DAW is not the same as another although processes in the DAW can be worked out to get similar results and also different plugins ect make a huge difference with OVERUSED PRESET'S available for a certain sound. plus how do different DAW's handle the same plugin, for instance the Massive Vst, I load 10 massive channels into fruity and play various rhythm's and notes using all of them, fruity glitches and sometimes crashes, so I do the same with Cubase I can get to 15 channels before any issues, but then I load another type of Vst into Cubase and it glitches yet when I use it fruity no problems. So compatibility becomes an issue on some DAW's.
So I believe that comparing DAW's should be done for the purpose you want it for.
Anyways that's my 2 pence.
Talking about craving the past..I don't do that,I'd just like to see all the wannabe producers actually learn an instrument and create some real music from within themselves!
@planetjazzbassyou seam to have this stuff figured out (not saying that as a mocking joke or anything)
and yeah I really regret ever comparing DAWs.
But hey, in my humble OPINION... You get what you pay for.
I know what you are saying there Dave, I personally couldn't imagine recording a song without my guitar. But I do think today's DAW's really open a lot of doors for musicians.
PJ's comments for me make 100% sense.. If i write a song i want to play it live as i was recording it.. this might sound a bit sad but i love nothing more than to pick up my guitar or bass and just play what i've recorded, make sure it works make changes etc.. What i hate is just creating a sample tune and having absolutely no idea of what ive just done 5 minutes later!!!! If my hard disc fails then i can honestly say me and my guitar can re create my song no problems.. I want that
SO if you don't play a live instrument but make music with a DAW you're not a musician? I use all methods available, be it live, or daw. Comparing DAW's is good to get what you want out of what you plan to do. Still comes down to personal preference.
I've used Reason, Cubase and Ableton extensively, and Ableton the only one I would ever use now. For my artistic purposes Cubase and Reason are just too rigid, they dont allow for good creativity, I tried trials of fl studio a long time ago and I never have gone further than that, fl studio is by far not on the same level as cubase and Ableton though imo. Reason is slightly better than fl studio but kindof like a play toy compared to cubase, cubase is very technical and rigid.,,,ableton is just the perfect DAW for me. Everyones different, so I agree to certain point about them all being equal, in that different peoples minds work differently so cubase could be a better output than ableton for some people, because they need more boundaries. With ableton since I bought it a while ago, I continually say to myself this is the perfect DAW, like every few weeks, I'll just be making music, anmd the program will just let me do exactly what I want artistically and I'll say in my head "this is the perfect DAW".
That's the key for me, the key question is "Does this DAW let me do EXACTLY what I want to do?" or otherwise, with other programs, I would always want to do something, but either not been able to find a good way, or just realized that it couldnt be done at all.
Because if the daw doesnt let me do exactly what I want and hear in my head, then I am being directed, bottlenecked by the program, and it's not my real music...it's me making music, under the confines of a computer "program". Ableton is like one of my guitars or my synth, it's literally like am instrument, all other daws felt like computer programs.
Nice thought there MAV, it makes sense that your song should easily be redone because you took the time to plan and create your track.
@ Phatkatz I love loads of elctro and sample based musicians but i prefer to write live rather than computer based.. I'm not saying thats right its just me, i dont place much importance in song writing on the fact i have a DAW or not.. Personal im probably wrong.. This is gonna sound sad but if i end up loosing everything money wise i always imagine the songs i've written, could i play them with a shit acoustic guitar and a few people throw coins in my hat because they like them.. LOL im a complete nutter sorry i need help.
No, you don't have to play a real instrument to make music, personally I think using a vst or some other virtual instrument is just like playing a real instrument its just done in a different manner, after all music is just sound in a rhythmic manner . @Mistermerlin I agree with what you are saying it depends on what your needs are when it comes to making music. As I mentioned earlier I own a lot of different vst's but I use FL Studio more than anything else because for a guy who records by myself it does exactly what I need even though I own the "industry standard pro-tools"
There seems to be some semantics muddying the waters...a person that makes music with an instrument (including the voice)is a musician....however due to the digital age the computer based DAW and all it's associated paraphernalia can blur the distinction of what is an instrument and what's not,there's a heap of sample based producers out there that can blow your mind and have reached a stage where they literally play their software like an instrument,these people are musicians in my view.....on the other hand there's people that use samples exclusively as they find them and arrange them within a DAW to create a track,Imo these are not musicians...it's no big deal,but if a person is really into music and gets the inclination to get more involved why wouldn't the obvious solution be to learn an instrument.
I agree with what pj is saying.. If any of you guys are thinking you love creating music id honestly recommend trying a live instrument, guitar or bass maybe real drums if you like like making beats, playing some synth stuff live.. If your good at triggering samples chances are you can play keys for real.. If your a great beat maker then you'd probavbly make a great bass player.. Spread your wings as i say.
These are all entirely different forms of musical preferences and philosophies that don't exactly correlate at all. It would be like telling a Dr. who specializes in heart surgery that he'd be great at brain surgery.
Just because it's in the same field doesn't actually mean it's the same concept.
Furthermore, this notion that "musical progression" is linear is laughs. Nobody starts off with a guitar the same way nobody starts off with a digital instrument; learning one doesn't make learning the other inherently easier by nature.
Music doesn't follow a strict set of rules that requires someone to understand the piano to begin producing in a DAW. The same way you wouldn't expect Bach or Beethoven to be the best digital musician.
In fact, i've noticed that the polar opposite of what this entire thread is proposing as "musical progression" to be true. People who generally play live music, are terrible at anything digital related and vice versa.
So how did you all come to the conclusion that an apple equates to a potato? Could it be because, again, these styles are not related at all?
You're only as good as how much effort you put into it, and how much passion you get out from it. Whether it's performing in a live band or playing with midi notes.
I like that 40A, well said im a total wierdo so its good to hear contradiction.. ;-P
! You need to Log In or Register to post here.
Be the first to hear about new posts and offers
Copyright © 2021
Looper Time : 2021-09-21 21:48:22 | Version l-3110