http://www.rmllabs.com/MainSite/index.html

 

It's a great piece of software but the GUI looks like a comeback to Windows 3.1...

 

Yes but,
Not pretty because a DAW is a tool not art.

 

SAWStudio Amazing Sound Quality DAW 64bit full integer

 

dinosuar daw

 

Good software, but looks ugly as Opcode Studio Vision.

 

Bingo First person that gets it.

 

The only thing I feel compelled to criticise about SAWStudio is 1) Price, and 2) Workflow doesn't suit me. I really tried to use it. Make sense of it. No go for me.

However, it's a really lean, efficient, stable, and incredibly well working DAW. I wonder why it took them so long to make a x64 version.

Although... for mixing you might not necessarily need more than 2GB. Instruments, samplers especially, consume RAM like there's no day after tomorrow. There's not many VST FX I can think of that waste precious RAM and CPU like Native Instruments and IK Multimedia, for example. Pretty graphics > 20MB, audio DSP code < 1MB. I often wonder why does it have to be like that.

[cos people like pretty things? No matter the cost. lol]

Cheers!

 

Last edited: Jan 6, 2019

Looking at something ugly doesn't help you become a good producer.
DAWs can sound good and look pretty at the same time.

 

Last edited: Jan 6, 2019

In general I'm really not much of a visual guy, but that guy really hurts the eye. It can work like nothing else, but with that guy I'll never know.

 

Yes, it should be done with minimum number of colours/hues, neutral looking, not eyes piercing... Without all those rainbow-mix colours, stupid fonts, unreadable texts... Grey interfaces are the most standard, calm and modern... But the engine inside is still topnotch even it was done maaany years ago. He just needs a guy for GUI design... And modernize up to nowadays stable/fast daws... Vst3 support if it is not there... And more

 

I have no idea about the Software but nothing says you just hit rock bottom louder than using "Comic Sans" as a font on a website (or anywhere else). If you look up "the ugliest font ever created" or "worst font ever used in web design" Comic Sans is literally top 1 in every list.

I actually thought this font was long dead and forgotten, since browsers learned to display more than just the 5 built in Microsoft Windows 3.11 fonts.

 

First, i d like to say that I deeply respect small companies who tries to make their living in the worl of audio

But, graphics and fonts asides, 1000usd for SawStudio64!!?!

If the price is fair, then it should be almost 20 times better than Reaper...
As i have some doubts, maybe I'll buy it just to ckeck the assumption... or maybe not... let me check my wallet... suspense... hum, definitly not...

 

I use NI plugins (instruments+FXs) because I find they sound sweet and they have the essential features,they are fast,and the workflow is great too.
And if they are nice,better it is!

Some devs make ugly softwares and they don't sound better than the others.It's worst yet.

 

sometimes you need gorgeous looking GUI to be inspired

 

there's no excuse for making a gui that is bug ugly.
if it's a question of money, that's undertandable.
but the interface has to be a consideration if you are trying to sell your product.
i bet there are users who would probably do it for free or close to.
you can be functional at the very least. Or make it skinnable.
otherwise i can't see this having a large user base.
it's like he's cutting off his nose to spite his face.

edit: Jesus, comic sans font on the website??

 

But the big problem is this this software is sold 1000$.

When a customer spends this amount of money he may wish a not horrible GUI.

 

Sawstudio was the very first DAW I learned. I have money, so it was no issue for me to purchase it. I chose it as my first as it came highly recommended to me from a producer friend based in Hollywood. For those coming from other DAWs, Saw doesn't feel like a windows program at all. It's basically a well laid out mixer with a tape recorder, along with the easy to use editing features. That is how I feel when I use it. There are no presets to anything. You have to really know how to use EQ, Comps. Gates, etc. Moving on, Saw provides that old school feel and environment that I love. I'm not going to say it's better or worse than others. That is pointless. If the GUI is not to your taste, simply move on. These are all tools and all will do the same things. Pick one and be done with it. Focus on your craft.

 

Last edited: Mar 22, 2019

SawSTudio's big selling point is that the whole thing is (or used to be) written in Assembler, so the entire DAW package is smaller than some plugins, shockingly fast and responsive and capable of first-class results. The problems are that it's a complete fruit bat when it comes to the GUI, the workflow and sheer learning curve. It's always a decade behind the times and it's got an utterly loyal following who, having mastered the eccentricities, love the software to death.

It does nothing that other software can't. It's just whacky.

 

That is true. It really is fast and that's one of the reasons I love it so much. I even use it on my really old computers without a problem. I also don't use more than 15-18 tracks for any song. I had the pleasure of sitting in with Vince Clark (Erasure) a few times, and I liked how he did so much with a small number of tracks and kept everything simple. So I copied his style and never looked back. I used to work on hardware sequencers, and those LCDs were quite small and monochrome, so the GUI for Saw was a complete upgrade to me. The Glass House shade I use now makes it really sexy. But honestly, the GUI doesn't matter to me at all. It never did. Most Saw users are the old school guys who came from hardware, because the workflow is just like working with hardware. That's why I like it.