I used to be frantic about Cubase,i still sort of am but i dont try to force it on any one any more.
Only occasionally i get mad about it and then i usually find some S1 fan boy and let the steam out,but other than that im just a regular guy like any one else

 

tfw people dont have a clue what a good daw is... discussing about reaper or cubase when there is magix music maker out there... smh

 

try every daw you can. Anyone has a prefernce and will told you DAW X is better than every other one. They are just tools, choose the one you feel more comfortable with

 

Thread clean up!!!

Keep it humble guys, this thread is about the view of your DAW, not to challenge your fellow members and functions & Flaws.

Share your Opinion & move on...Please & Thank You

 

Honestly, I'm not sure that any single DAW has the complete music production process nailed down... I am currently on the search for my ideal "arranging" or "writing" workstation which I feel is the strong point of DAWS like FL studio, Studio One3, Logic and Ableton (from the time i've spent in each and also watching my co-producers and friends)

Most of my pro work is done through Cubase 6.5, 7.5: using it like an advanced sampler. However, I don't use it as many composers do... since I do mostly pop radio style productions... for me, midi is immediately printed to audio for manipulation. I think Cubase (and ProTools, if you KNOW IT WELL) is really one of the best workstations for "layering up" simple parts (AS WAV AUDIO) to produce multi-dimensional arrangements around simple existing demo tracks.

However, I think it's terrible at simply getting a song going from scratch; considering I routinely start beats, tracks and demos in other systems (like hardware sequencers, ipad software sequencer, other daws, etc) in order to save time. As soon as I have a definitive arrangement, I'll get a Cubase project going where I can really ENGINEER the tracks and get the sound RIGHT.

I can then take single-layer arrangement stems from various sources, (or the stems from other guys (co-produce) using Logic, fl studio or Ableton) and basically "re-engineer" the entire sound; live tracking HI-RES overdubs, phase-correcting instrument sections, managing the L-C-R stereo imaging of all the final parts, thickening up weak parts with sampling, timing and tuning of every element on the grid, creating space, stacking up the parts as many is needed and automating (on the grid) all the special goodness that makes a simple drum beats come alive.

Each set of layers goes in a folder and gets permanently stuck together for looping. One simple beat might end up with about 100 layers that just make up what you hear as the drum part. I know some other guys that have discovered just how good Cubase is for these specific kinds of "POST PRODUCTION" tasks but I don't see it being talked about usually... other than the "composer" workflow which leans on MIDI triggered sampling on the timeline, I think this is what Cubase does naturally and easily.

After the sound is pretty much there, it gets summed down to stereo buses like: elec kit1, amb kit1, perc tops, sample-rip1, roomy kit 1 etc..basically stereo groups printed to a later mix session (using a completely diff template). at this point, any conventional DAW that has excellent automation, wav editing, and mix-bus abilities is fine; basically anything that you can get a production mix going in works... this is where I think many DAWS are competitive as long as you keep the gain structure from the production stage and take care with your sends to not alter the phase too much (with eq etc). Even after this stage, pro stuff usually goes to a mixer... yet another DAW session.

To me, its easy to see how not ONE single software setup really can be the best for all these different stages of the process (if necessary for the project requirements) ... which is why co-production can be such a great thing for the sound of a finished track... different guys working in different daws, taking care of different aspects of the music in a more reasonable amount of time. and even when I have used Cubase or pro tools exclusively for a track, I'll have to use different preset templates for different stages of the process... arranging, production, vocal production, post-production, mixing, mastering etc.

Just my thoughts on this topic. Carry on.

 

Im building a new monster rig for Cool Edit Pro 2.0,join the revolution now or you will be sorry.

 

Each DAW has it's own learning curve and I have usually found the steeper the curve the more options and features one gets, though many of those features may not be needed or used. It really depends on what you are looking for. For me it's about scoring to picture, so extensive midi manipulation and sound creation are my driving force, and that has had me on Motu since 1991.