I still use Acid Pro and Orion. It's kinda like being bilingual in Hebrew and Latin.

 

couldn't have put it better. ( also, learning software is part of the fun for me, but it's really down to what kind of music i am trying to do. they all have fantastic aspects and i have always found it impossible to stick to one daw. ( at least since the times when all you had was cubase on an atari).
i try to use studio one as much as possible at this time. i am excited to see what 3 will have to offer. my main concern at this moment is not so much to do with which daw is best blah blah, but can i write good, melodic music to begin with. so i am not conflicted and cannot even say which daws i really dislike.. : )
( if logic was on pc still i would probably be moaning about that : )

 

I don't think anybody here but me works with Adobe Audition. I started using it because it was in a computer someone gave me. I have tinkered in some of the other DAWs (I like the synths in FLS, StudioOne came with my PreSonus interface, Reaper seems pretty intuitive to me). The newest version has all kinds of nice little tweaks. But most of my recording is live instruments. I don't think I would be using it if I were more into Techno or electronic stuff. And if you start working with your own video, Audition and Premier software work together nicely. I'm all legit and working in the cloud now, and Audition 2015 and Windows10 are running together like a well oiled machine. Nice to not have to deal with "bugs".

 

Nope.

I used sonar, acid pro, reason, reaper, pro tools, fl studio, studio one, cubase, logic (8, 9,10), ableton, bitwig.

My go to daw - cubase.
My fsu daw - ableton live
daw i'm interested in - SO3

Daw it's just tool. It must be flexible and inspiring for you. There's no trend (at least for people with three-digit IQ).

 

I think it's because the former cool edit pro is primarily an audio editor.

 

It's always a matter of personal taste and workflow. Certain DAWs have certain strengths -- I use Digital Performer for MIDI composition, which it's excellent at, and Pro Tools for audio recording, editing and mixing, which it's excellent at. The inverse, however, is that, while DP is getting better all the time, it's still awkward to use for audio editing or recording, and Pro Tools' MIDI implementation is still pretty lousy. Cubase's (and Nuendo's) strength used to be its sheer number of included plugs (and later, VIs, since Steinberg was the first company to make them). Ableton Live was designed as a live performance program, allowing you to play and manipulate your audio and MIDI tracks in real time. FL was originally designed as an inexpensive, entry-level DAW and most of its features are designed to be extremely simple and direct to use. Reaper is an open-source program with a unique, "honor-based" registration system. Each program has its merits and weaknesses. If you go by what someone else tells you to use, you're basing your choices on someone else's preferences and not on what works best for you. If you're getting great results and love using whatever DAW you're working with, that's the one to use. Simple as that.

By the way, everyone telling (or teaching) you that Pro Tools has the best audio quality is most likely referring to old-school Pro Tools, or what's now "Pro Tools HD". Until recently, there was only the professional-level Pro Tools and Pro Tools LE, and the professional version required proprietary cards to run both audio and their plug ins. To that end, it really was better than just running a regular DAW. Nowadays, most computers are fast enough to run high quality plugs with little or no latency, and most interfaces are equal to or surpass Pro Tools' stock interfaces. Even AVID has conceded this point -- they have "regular" Pro Tools that can use third party interfaces and even their HD software now has a "native" version that only requires a card to mix audio. However, it is still the "industry standard", for better or worse, meaning you're about 100 times more likely to be able to bring your Pro Tools-based project into a commercial studio and have it mixed or otherwise engineered with no trouble than you are if you brought in your FL Studio based project.

 

Worst daw or best daw... its like best genre or worst genre.... no meaning!!

 

Reaper is commercial program with flexible trial

 

I Still use Acid Pro...

Tried all the others but none seem to do the things i want as quick as Acid...

Literally everything i need to do can be done on one screen without selecting menus or tabs etc...

Easy, quick and with great time-stretching and superb sound quality...

 

The matter of fact is pro-tools was one of the first major daws to be used in studios at a professional quality.

lets not talk about bed rooms producers, and people using early cubase on their atari's.

throughout the first incarnations of pro-tools it has been the leading competitor, look at all the major studios. to this day they still use pro-tools as standard, some may use logic as well and in other cases cubase. but the fact is pro-tools is still the majority.

you didn't have to collect parts from different companies you could get a full pt rig that would do exactly what you needed.
not to mention one of the biggest reasons pro-tools was successful was the amount of editing to audio you could do.
it could be used on all operating systems, and had hardware DSP.

it's pretty much the reason why windows has the most sales in the computer market. they were the biggest at the time and the competition wasn't big enough/cheap enough/stable enough.
although that percentage has now dropped in the computer market and now apple have took percentage same has happened in the daw world.

nowadays it basically comes down to user preference. personally i started using cubase on v2, graduated to logic pro on v7 discovered pro-tools at v8 and ableton at v7.

these days i only use Logic & Ableton. as these are the DAWS that suit my needs.

pro-tools probably isn't the most popular with "producers" today. mainly because it doesn't have as much MIDI capability as many of todays DAWS.

but in terms of "engineers" and recording studios it's still the leading market. because people stick to what they know.

i realised you posted this back in jan. but i've only just seen the reply, apologies for that

but that's "why i posted that crap"

 

U may not like avid,i don t,i think they r a bunch of cunts,but my despise for avid doen t make me hate pro tools.I think it s perfect for me,and it s maybe the best someone can have,although comapring DAW's nin 2015 doesn t make much sense to me.There s isn t a perfect daw on the market right now,in fact some features r prerogatives of certain DAW and they lack in others.But this means that these features exist ,so the fact that a DAW misses a certain feature,forcing a customer to choose another brand,is a marketing choice.The perfect DAW coula already exist if someone decided to gather all the features from all the major existing secuencers into one.But since it doesn t happen because of a silly marketing strategy,the only thing we can do is opting for the reltively perfect DAW,that is the one that suits our needs.
For example the best thing for me wuld be the integration of an powerful multitrack sequencer in sibelius.And nobody even considers the idea,they prefer to integrate a mediocre score editor in their sequencer,or rely on rewire,which,in my opinion is just a useless resources consuming feature

 

I've only ever used Acid pro, and now Reaper

Before that I used to just use stuff like 16 track digital recorders hooked up to samplers and synths

And going really old skool....4 track tape recorders, anyone remember them, or am I just showing my age? '0)

I thought acid pro was great, really easy to get something up and running, but then as time moved on and technology improved it sort of fell behind the others, as it was limited to 3gb ram I think so I ended up testing a few out and finally went for Reaper, and I'm so glad I did now, I love it, workflow is really easy

I hate learning curves though with new software, cubase has just never clicked with me, too many boxes popping up everywhere for my liking, fruity loops was quite good, but it was more of a sequencer than a digital recorder I thought

 

Nobody talks about money here? It's a pleasure to see that so many lucky people have the opportunity to test all the expensive daw available, and don't tell me that there are trial versions, so complex softwares require learning that is rarely less than several months, and a true assessment can be carried out only on a fully operational version.
The standards: they become significant because the first professional product available will be the one with the greatest number of installations, and rarely a professional has desire and time to learn processes and interfaces sometimes completely different and often non-intuitive or hidden. But this certainly does not mean it's the best.
In my case the garments of choice are:

• cost
  
• workflow
• stability
  
• adaptability to the kind of music I work on (and flexibility to accept other sporadically)

On the basis of these I'm still on Studio One 2.5 (I am pondering whether to switch to version 3), I find reaper very interesting too, probably new version 5 will be a very good alternative.
But I never tried Cubase 8 (7, 6 etc), Cakewalk, Logic, Protools.....I think my opinion is a little limited ......sorry

 

Reaper it great man, give it a try

 

Reaper is awesome, wish there's simplest way to have multi drum sampler instrument with step sequencing and than resolving midi to parts, it's possible with little messing, but explain all that to some newbie, yeah, I barely understand what is done lol

 

Heh heh, I'm not even too sure what ya on about there either Xsze

multi drum sampler? midi to parts?

 

There's no perfect DAW. That's why you should learn more than one thoroughly. A lot of the problems we have with everything is completely subjective. The best DAW, worst DAW, ugly, pretty, etc., all dependent on the user using it.

 

YES.

 

Yeah, it's like you got in one place different ReaSamplOmatic5000 inserts for individual samples like drum machine (kick, snare, hat,etc..) and than you got there step sequencer so you can get something going, after you decide you like that, you record MIDI from step sequencer and than resolve that MIDI to individual channels (individual kick, snare, hat,etc..) so you can mix them separately, there's ReaDrums template which have that setup and MegaBaby step sequencer, resolving MIDI is possible too (just creates extra parts one can move in appropriate places or re-route, which makes template useless than), but it's not as intuitive as I would like compared to Logic's Ultrabeat solution.

 

Nice one Xsze, I'm going to have to check them out