Which DAW to use OPINIONS.

[stinkopants]

Greetings,

I picked up GPO a while ago and it just sat on my back burner; but I'm looking at starting up and using it.

I am curious what DAW's people are using and which seem best suited overall for the use of GPO? Or, are most DAW's not robust enough in the MIDI department, making a dedicated MIDI sequencer type of program, like FLstudio, more important?


Any feedback/opinions welcomed.


Thanks

[swinkler]

You're about to get many opinions on this one.

The simplest answer even though it sounds like a cop out is it depends. It really depends on how you work. Many including myself have good luck using GPO with notation software like Finale or Sibelius. Many have good luck with a dedicated sequencer/DAW like Sonar, Reaper, Cubase, Digital Performer and the like.

The main advantage of a dedicated sequencer is the ability to more easily manipulate the midi data (or perhaps manipulate in a different manner) AND certainly manipulate audio data and mix with effects, etc.

So sit back and consider what folks suggest. But first I would suggest thinking about how you work to create your music. As I said I'm more of an "old school" composer who used to work with pencil and manuscript paper, so the transition to Finale was a somewhat natural one for me. Lately I take the midi exported from Finale and import it to Reaper to tweak the performance aspects. This is what works for me.

[Plowking]

Hi there,

As swinkler says, it depends.

But if you are comfortable with MIDI and want to really fine tune it, then most DAW's would do the job. Reaper is a good inexpensive one. And as mentioned with a DAW you get the full use of audio manipulation and effects.

If you're able to read music notation, then I always recommend to anyone a combination of Finale 2010/11 with GPO4 - they work great together and take away a lot of the messing with the technical side, leaving you to compose and orchestrate in a more traditional form. You can always export to a DAW for fine tuning afterwards - though I found the Human playback feature of Finale more than suitable as a final render.

If you want to get into the tech side of it (and can't read notation), then straight to a DAW is the way to go. Just be prepared for a fairly steep curve at the start as you get to grips with all the possible ways to use the instruments.

[stinkopants]

Ok,

Well since I am more of "by ear" kind of person then the standard DAWs' look like the way to go.

Now I am not a total rookie with DAW's, having worked in Adobe Audition quite a bit, however, it's midi portion isn't very robust; and I think was even removed entirely in the latest version.


So, in light of that; which of the two do people consider to have the shorter learning curve: Cubase, or Sonar? I have heard here and there that Sonar is quite steep in the learning curve, not lending well to the uninitiated. (or is there another that people find comparable to those)




Thanks again.

[Steve Johnson]

Ok,

Well since I am more of "by ear" kind of person then the standard DAWs' look like the way to go.

Now I am not a total rookie with DAW's, having worked in Adobe Audition quite a bit, however, it's midi portion isn't very robust; and I think was even removed entirely in the latest version.


So, in light of that; which of the two do people consider to have the shorter learning curve: Cubase, or Sonar? I have heard here and there that Sonar is quite steep in the learning curve, not lending well to the uninitiated. (or is there another that people find comparable to those)




Thanks again.

Based on my previous experience, I found that Cubase was fairly easy to learn. I went with Sonar 8.5 last December only because my version from Cubasis in the original GPO was obsolete, and buying the full version of Cubase was more expensive. Yes, Sonar does have a steep learning curve, but I've been happy since I started using 8.5 Studio. However, I'd suggest steering clear from Sonar X1 as it apparently continues to have problems.

Hope this helps!

Steve

[briff]

And be sure to try Reaper (http://www.reaper.fm) for free first. I switch to that from an old version of Sonar.

[rbowser-]

Greetings,

I picked up GPO a while ago and it just sat on my back burner; but I'm looking at starting up and using it.

I am curious what DAW's people are using and which seem best suited overall for the use of GPO? Or, are most DAW's not robust enough in the MIDI department, making a dedicated MIDI sequencer type of program, like FLstudio, more important?


Any feedback/opinions welcomed.


Thanks

Hi - As was predicted on this thread, you could get as many different opinions as people who reply.

Major DAW software programs like Sonar and Cubase can all handle MIDI very well. You differentiated FLstudio as a dedicated MIDI sequencer program - it's no more powerful than the other programs, they're all dedicated MIDI sequencers.

I use Sonar 8.5--BUT the bummer is, you can no longer buy that. Cakewalk has gone to X1 which though working for some people, just hasn't made it for many of us. I wouldn't recommend X1 to anyone.

That leaves me without a good suggestion - I tried a version of Cubase quite some time ago, and didn't care for its logic. Sonar (used to be) much easier to figure out, imho.

If you read notation, I still would recommend you get a DAW recording program first, especially if you play a keyboard. There's nothing as satisfying as working your music in a direct, muscular way like you do in a sequencer as opposed to a notation program which produces a creative disconnect with a lot of people - it emphasizes the cerebral rather than the gut. - Maybe that characterization of the two main types of software will help you think more about the kind that appeals most to you personally.

Randy

[Iacobus Rodelus]

Since I have a traditional notation background, I tend to gravitate towards a software tool like Finale or Sibelius to get my ideas down.

That being said, there's no reason why you can't import the MIDI from those apps into a DAW application for tweaking purposes. Many solutions abound and the only advice I can give is to try out any of them. (Many, if not all, can be downloaded as fully-functional 30-day trials.) What works for one may not work for another. You can get a general overall feel for an app by downloading a manual in PDF (Acrobat) format before diving in with the trial download.

As others have mentioned: Be absolutely prepared for a learning curve no matter what you choose. You'll have to establish a workflow that works with the app you've chosen.

[Randy Fellmy]

I want to second the recommendation to try Reaper first. The trial version is full-featured, and aside from a short nag screen, it will continue to function indefinitely. That doesn’t mean it’s OK not to buy it ($60 for personal use) if you choose to keep it; but as a practical matter, you can feel safe doing a “real” project with it, knowing your work won’t be held hostage when the trial runs out, even if you don’t care to buy it.

Don’t let the low price, absence of hype and customer-friendly lack of copy protection fool you: Reaper is a serious Digital Audio Workstation capable of most anything you need to do.

(There is one exception: Reaper will not render MIDI into staff notation. At all. Then again, you pretty much need a notation program to do that well, anyway.)

[fastlane]

Metro 6 (Sagan Tech) is one my DAWs. The interface is little "classic" compared to Reaper or DP and it has track and number of instruments or effects limitations but it might be a good one to at least give a spin with a free demo download . I bought the full version years ago when Cakewalk sold it. It's now back with the original developer.

It has a uncluttered layout with a pretty low learning curve, strong MIDI editing features and is pretty easy on the CPU.

The SE version is now Mac/Windows compatible. Although it's pretty limited it would always work fine for a smaller project or creating a midi file to import into a larger DAW.


Phil