Top 5 Favorite Features of Music Programs You Use?

[Anderton]

What got me thinking about this was people over the Cakewalk forums talking about which features they'd like to see...not that there was a lot of agreement ...as well as a thread asking why they use Sonar.

 

Just as there are "deal-breakers" that keep you from using a program, what are the "deal-makers" that cause you to use particular programs? In deference to where I got my inspiration, here are my top five favorite features in Sonar:

 

1. You can create and edit Acidized files. Sony Acid is the only other program I know that does this. Given I have a huge library of Acidized files going back over a decade, this is very important to me.

 

2. Workflow. For the tasks I do, it seems to take fewer clicks to accomplish them than with many other programs.

 

3. The strip silence option, with the ability to automatically add fade-ins and -outs, has saved me HOURS when doing narration.

 

4. Sonar handles video well, making it easy for me to insert a video, then create a soundtrack for it using time-stretching and such.

 

5. I do a lot of different audio tasks, and no matter what I throw at it - whether video, creating loop libraries, remixing, narration, whatever - Sonar can handle it.

 

And here are my top five favorite features in Ableton Live:

 

1. Indestructible audio engine is great for live performance.

 

2. Extremely laptop-friendly if you load projects on a USB stick and designate all the samples as disk samples - you don't use system RAM or the hard drive on your laptop.

 

3. The MIDI mapping is on a par with Reason's, which is also excellent.

 

4. The bundled effects are highly original, not just the usual stuff.

 

5. The Session View/Scene paradigm works really well for me (after I wrapped my head around it).

 

What about you?

[Anderton]

I would have thought there were certain compelling features that would make you use the programs you use...do you just use the programs because they look pretty ?

[UstadKhanAli]

I don't know very much about DAWs in general, a comical statement since I use one several times a week, so it's not something I think about. By this I mean that I've only used Pro Tools for the past eleven years.

 

1. It doesn't crash

2. When I go to remix people's stuff, it most often comes in Pro Tools sessions

3. It's backwards-compatible with older PT sessions, even going back sessions done in the Clinton Administration and perhaps beyond.

4. Editing is powerful, easy, and fast.

5. Recording is easy and fast and rock solid.

6. Elastic Time works extremely well. Oooops, that's 6.

[gubu]

ProTools LE 7.4

 

1. Editing is simple

 

2. Routing is simple

 

3. I can run around 12 tracks with plugins and aux busses on an 11 year old 1GHz eMac!! On the odd sessions that have had higher track counts, I just submix things like drums and/or print effects. It slows down the workflow for sure but the whole system (apart from expensive plugin bundles) cost around

[Jeff da Weasel]

Here's a weird one for you: Rogue Amoeba's Nicecast (free for limited version, $59 for licensed). It's audio broadcasting software for the Mac that I use for Internet streaming of live shows.

 

1. Immediately recognizes any audio interface that's connected.

2. Stores as many different stream addresses as you could want for fast and easy connection.

3. Offers a multitude of broadcast quality levels (customizable bit rate, sample rate, # of channels and CPU usage).

4. Has plenty of options for broadcasting live as well as setting up pre-recorded broadcasts through a wide variety of apps (iTunes, Garageband, Skype, many more).

5. It always freaking works! Not once in doing over 400 shows has any screw-up been a problem of Nicecast (though the Shoutcast servers it feeds can definitely drive you batty occasionally).

 

There you go. Probably weren't expecting a broadcast app, but some of us do more than work with DAWs.

[Anderton]

Actually Jeff that's great info.

[blue2blue]

I use Sonar (8.5) because its predecessor (Cakewalk Pro Audio) was the first pc hosted DAW to hit market, as I recall it. I'd been using Mastertracks Pro, and I liked it OK, it wasn't too crashy (although much more so than I became used to after I switched to the almost rock solid Cakewalk Pro Audio in '97.

 

Stability and dependability proved to be a big plus. (Although I have run into some plugins that could send Sonar to its knees in recent years. But plugins are often implicated in DAW instability from not inextensive reading on the topic.)

 

Work flow and, particularly, editing tools/features are huge for me in staying with Sonar. I love stuff like clip FX and clip automation that is independent from track FX and automation. I also really, really love some of the little things, like how dragging one audio clip over another turns the top one translucent so you can see through it when 'splicing' or overlapping two clips. For a while I was doing a lot of solo acoustic guitar editing and that was killer; it would also be hugely helpful in spoken word editing, which I did a lot of during the mid and late 90s when I was doing production for a German public radio stringer.

[philbo]

My 5 favorite features of Reaper:

1) Track summing (stem submixes) using folders

2) The patch bay

3) The price & cost for new versions

4) The customizability of pretty much everything

5) The ITB mix sound (it's really quite excellent)

[hahuusko]

Reaper is my favorite DAW.

 

1. No dedicated audio/midi/aux/group/etc. tracks, just tracks that can be whatever you want and can be routed wherever you want

2. The tool-less audio editing is fast when you have learned the necessary keyboard shortcuts

3. No bloat. It starts very fast and works well even on relatively old and slow computers

4. No copy protection dongle or any other artificial limitations on anything

5. The bugs are fixed and new features implemented quickly

 

I also like Logic. I use it sometimes for midi based stuff, while I use Reaper for audio recording and mixing.

 

1. Quick swipe comping (I wish Reaper had something like this)

2. Lots of good bundled effects and instruments

3. The notation options are pretty good

4. It looks nice

5. Umm...otherwise I do prefer Reaper

[Anderton]

 

1) Track summing (stem submixes) using folders

 

 

Can you elaborate as to what that is? It sounds intriguing...I assume it's different from regular folder tracks, like in Cubase, Sonar, etc.?

[Anderton]

 

1. Quick swipe comping (I wish Reaper had something like this)

 

 

Actually I wish EVERYTHING has something like this, but it's not compelling enough to make me switch to Logic.

[techristian]

I know that there has to be a better way to sync video and audio than what I'm using ! I'm up to files 1/2 long and the audio (recorded separately) drifts. I line up the audio visually comparing it to the camcorder audio and I have gotten very good at it, but the last time I made the mistake of mixing to 44.1 and then converting to 48 khz. The drift was so bad that I had to cut it about 40 times.

 

Anyway, audio FOR VIDEO is my biggest challenge. Good MIDI instruments is also important

. Everything else is easy. I don't use Acidized stuff. If I want that effect I just paste in succession.

 

Dan

[philbo]

 

Can you elaborate as to what that is? It sounds intriguing...I assume it's different from regular folder tracks, like in Cubase, Sonar, etc.?

 

 

I'm not familiar with how other DAWs implement folder tracks, so I can't address that...

 

Well, let's say you have 10 or so drum tracks you'd like to make a stem from. You put them at the bottom (so they are all together), the create a new empty track above it, click on the empty track 'folder' button, and all the tracks below are automatically mixed and routed to it. (You may have to select all the drum tracks and turn off the master send on those individual tracks if you had it turned on before, though.)

 

There's probably a much simpler way to do it, but I found this works and ran with it...

[Anderton]

 

I don't use Acidized stuff. If I want that effect I just paste in succession.

 

 

But the cool thing about Acidized files is that (like REX files) they follow tempo changes. I prefer music with tempo variations, so as long as the variations aren't extreme, they do the job.

[blue2blue]

I forgot a crucial feature of any software (DAW, plug, etc) I use must have: no iLok.

 

Having read thousands of posts from people frustrated beyond tears by that peculiar and apparently singularly annoying system, I can't imagine I would ever buy into such a scheme or any software that attempted to impose it.

[Zooey]

 

I forgot a crucial feature of any software (DAW, plug, etc) I use must have: no iLok. Having read thousands of posts from people frustrated beyond tears by that peculiar and apparently singularly annoying system, I can't imagine I would ever buy into such a scheme or any software that attempted to impose it.

 

 

I've got a collection of 100 legally licensed plug-ins that use it. I can't even imagine going through the process of challenge-response for all of them.

[WRGKMC]

I Have several different DAW programs I've used over the years but I'll stick with the things I like in sonar best.

 

#1. One button cleanup. When you're done with a project, you delete the picture icon, empty the recycle bin and hit the

files cleanup button and sonar will find all the tracks that no longer have a picture cache icon attatched to them and bring them up in a list to delete.

This is much better than some daw programs that force you to go digging for those wave files on a drive or setting up individual file folders for every project.

 

#2 Cakewalk automatically names the wave files with recognisibe sequence based on the song name and track numbers. This is very cool because

you can have a logical means of finding a file from another track from another verson of a song and import it. If you've ever looked at the names

Cubase assigns to wave files you'd know how cakewalk is superior here.

 

#3. Sonar has non destructive editing while you're working on a project. So long as you dont save the project and close it, you can undo just about

anything you do mixing. You can also open a project, save it with a new name, and work from the project that has a new name to make all your

changes and the original file is left fully intact.

 

#4. If you do overload you CPU trying to run too many high resource plugins, crash sonar, it will ask you if you want to save the project

before the program closes. This has saved my ass a few times. It always seems when I am just putting the final touches on a mix and

got things right, I forget to hit that save button. You can also set it to autosave ever so many minutes if you want but I found myself

fogetting that was turned on and didnt work off a backup copy and had those changes saved perminantly so it would require me to change

my workflow methods for this to work well.

 

(I must note I only use a single 3Gig processor. It works flawlessly but I need to go easy on the high resource plugins.

I "can" render plugins to tracks and remove them from the plugin cues to reduce overhead which is a work around that works fine.

But I may just run the memory up to the edge. It ususlly causes the playback to just stop, but after too many times of that it can cause

the program to close so the save function can be a blessing in those cases)

 

#5. There are many others here. Blue mentioned the transparency feature aligning edited tracks in which is great. The plugin package is great too.

But I'd have to say the simplicity of using the transport, saving the song and deleting the previous tracks is probibly the most benificial to me.

I do allot of live sessions and work the daw from about 10' away with a wireless mouse and keyboard on a small stand next to my mic stand.

I can hit the record button, play a number with the band, hit stop, hit file save as, and save the song, then hit edit delete tracks and then hit

record again for the next song.

 

I do this weekly recording 6~8 songs a week with my recording buddies and it only takes about 15 seconds to save and get the tracks

ready to record another song. With Cubase theres a big delay of maybe a minuite after you hit stop as the program finishes rendering the

tracks before you can delets the existing tracks and record another song which is a pain in the ass having to wait playing live.

[Goobers]

 

Here's a weird one for you: Rogue Amoeba's Nicecast (free for limited version, $59 for licensed).

 

 

Figured I'd add that Rogue Amoeba's Audio Hijack is also good:

 

1. It does what it says it does (snarfs up audio from any source on your computer).

2. The free version is more than enough (capturing audio clips 10 minutes or less is free).

3. The title makes you feel like a rebel.

4. zero learning curve

5. easy to get audio in and out of program

[Mileskb]

What got me thinking about this was people over the Cakewalk forums talking about which features they'd like to see...not that there was a lot of agreement ...as well as a thread asking why they use Sonar. Just as there are "deal-breakers" that keep you from using a program, what are the "deal-makers" that cause you to use particular programs? In deference to where I got my inspiration, here are my top five favorite features in Sonar: 1. You can create and edit Acidized files. Sony Acid is the only other program I know that does this. Given I have a huge library of Acidized files going back over a decade, this is very important to me. 2. Workflow. For the tasks I do, it seems to take fewer clicks to accomplish them than with many other programs. 3. The strip silence option, with the ability to automatically add fade-ins and -outs, has saved me HOURS when doing narration. 4. Sonar handles video well, making it easy for me to insert a video, then create a soundtrack for it using time-stretching and such. 5. I do a lot of different audio tasks, and no matter what I throw at it - whether video, creating loop libraries, remixing, narration, whatever - Sonar can handle it.

 

I'm going to have to cheap out and kinda give a +1 for all of the above except the Acidized part. While I do you some Acidized files, I'd replace #1 with the learning curve. I've used Sonar since it was Cakewalk... no version number as I recall, it was a DOS program at the time. While it has drifted away from it's early sequencer days, that functionality is still there.

 

1. The learning curve. I've been using it so long (since Cakewalk DOS) that it just all makes sense to me and does everything I need. The terminology of Sonar is pretty straight forward.

2. Workflow. Again, it just makes sense to me, but thought it worth mentioning separately. Even down to documenting the project (track labels, markers, mix descriptions etc) which is part of EVERYONE'S workflow right???

3. Being able to add/edit envelopes on tracks. Especially when working with clients, the non-crytpic visual of them seeing exactly where a note or beat is being modified just seems to work for us.

4. Being able to add midi events easily, even for something as simple as a click track that is pleasing to the ear is simple.

5. Working with audio tracks that were recorded on other platforms and other software and exporting audio. I've always been able to get things to line up in the end. I'm guessing other software has this feature, but I use the "export audio" feature almost every session to do a quick'n dirty mix. Just un-mute the tracks I want... get them to play with a roughly mixed level, then export as stereo wave file. Perfect for emailing, put on USB Drive, upload, whatever... Great for giving someone a couple of versions of their tracking as well and takes just a few moments.

 

Lots more.. but those are my favorite.

[Mileskb]

What got me thinking about this was people over the Cakewalk forums talking about which features they'd like to see...not that there was a lot of agreement ...as well as a thread asking why they use Sonar. Just as there are "deal-breakers" that keep you from using a program, what are the "deal-makers" that cause you to use particular programs? In deference to where I got my inspiration, here are my top five favorite features in Sonar: 1. You can create and edit Acidized files. Sony Acid is the only other program I know that does this. Given I have a huge library of Acidized files going back over a decade, this is very important to me. 2. Workflow. For the tasks I do, it seems to take fewer clicks to accomplish them than with many other programs. 3. The strip silence option, with the ability to automatically add fade-ins and -outs, has saved me HOURS when doing narration. 4. Sonar handles video well, making it easy for me to insert a video, then create a soundtrack for it using time-stretching and such. 5. I do a lot of different audio tasks, and no matter what I throw at it - whether video, creating loop libraries, remixing, narration, whatever - Sonar can handle it.

 

I'm going to have to cheap out and kinda give a +1 for all of the above except the Acidized part. While I do you some Acidized files, I'd replace #1 with the learning curve. I've used Sonar since it was Cakewalk... no version number as I recall, it was a DOS program at the time. While it has drifted away from it's early sequencer days, that functionality is still there.

 

1. The learning curve. I've been using it so long (since Cakewalk DOS) that it just all makes sense to me and does everything I need. The terminology of Sonar is pretty straight forward.

2. Workflow. Again, it just makes sense to me, but thought it worth mentioning separately. Even down to documenting the project (track labels, markers, mix descriptions etc) which is part of EVERYONE'S workflow right???

3. Being able to add/edit envelopes on tracks. Especially when working with clients, the non-crytpic visual of them seeing exactly where a note or beat is being modified just seems to work for us.

4. Being able to add midi events easily, even for something as simple as a click track that is pleasing to the ear is simple.

5. Working with audio tracks that were recorded on other platforms and other software and exporting audio. I've always been able to get things to line up in the end. I'm guessing other software has this feature, but I use the "export audio" feature almost every session to do a quick'n dirty mix. Just un-mute the tracks I want... get them to play with a roughly mixed level, then export as stereo wave file. Perfect for emailing, put on USB Drive, upload, whatever... Great for giving someone a couple of versions of their tracking as well and takes just a few moments.

 

Lots more.. but those are my favorite.

[Lee Knight]

Drag and drop, etc. I love when a program takes into account the most intuitive way to do something... and they code the thing to do just that. If I have a file I'd like to import that must be converted first, if I drag and drop into a track, getting a message telling me to convert... it's a speed bump. But coding for that... that's smart. Anytime we can do the obvious and have it work shows a lot of empathy and willingness on the developers part.

[Philter]

Protools 7.4 HD

 

1. Intuitive and streamlined audio & midi editing interface.

2. Live monitoring through plugins and the mixer with negligible latency

3. Very stable & responsive. Predictable and reliable performance.

4. Easy to collaborate with producers and studios elsewhere.

5. I know how to use it really well already!

[Philter]

I like Reaper a lot too although I'm only using part of its features.

 

1. Extremely efficient and stable VTS/VSTi host, wonderfully un-bloated software

2. Great price, beyond fair

3. Responsive developers, evolves and improves rapidly in a very open manner, great community & forum, opposite of corporate (e.g. Avid.)

4. Cool, powerful routing & track design

5. I love how it's customizable. In this it's also the opposite of ProTools.

 

I'm thinking that by the time I'm ready to retire my ProTools HD system, it will be time to go native with Reaper. I'm just not digging the Avid vibe these days, and their prices seem extortionary.

[WRGKMC]

Maybe a good thread would be the top things you like the least about your DAW program. Most manyfacturers know whet their best features are

but they might not know the areas that need improvement, or just down right suck.

[MrKnobs]

I'm a simple guy.

 

I like that I can send my music tracks from my hard disk recorder to my computer and edit them more easily there. Heading and tailing, reducing peaks to get the overall level up, etc., all much easier with a mouse and a screen.

 

I like that my audio software (Audition in my case) converts effortlessly and beautifully between sample rates, depths, formats I need and formats I've never even heard of. One of the latter was a format my office voice mail used, so I was able to make a much better sounding outgoing message.

 

I like that my audio software accepts such a wide variety of plugs, like Drumagog as one of many examples. I can use my Steven Slate samples to make an old, poorly recorded kit sound much better than it did. Yay for hoarding old multitrack recordings in the hope of a future cure!

 

I like that Audition is wonderful for technical work as well as music. I make my living designing noise barriers, reflective treatments, quiet pavements, etc. Audition is as at home with analyzing impedance tube recordings as it is with making music. Adobe seems to be slowly eliminating the technical functions in what was formerly Cool Edit, and that makes me sad. However, I still have the older versions.

 

I like Audition's noise reduction features. Just last week my workplace asked me to help understand why a pavement noise file gave an anomalous result when analyzed, compared to other runs on the same section, same day. Since the main signal here IS actually noise, I denoised the file and revealed the voices on the recording that shouldn't have been there. I suggested to the guy who made the recording how the voices might have gotten there, the rest is up to him.

 

And finally, I like Harbal and Audition for helping me overcome my hearing loss I've discussed on this forum. SEEING spectra, being able to compare to the tonal balance of commercial recordings, KNOWING the extent and character of my hearing loss enables me to create better mixes that the mastering lab can easily tune up. Without the ability to partially compensate for my hearing damage with visual tools, I'd be in a very bad place.

 

I know that this thread is really about comparing audio software. I can't really contribute to that as I've only used Audition and Sonar, with a little Cakewalk thrown in a long time ago. I'm posting just to remind everyone that audio software in general is a great blessing to all of us, allowing us to do in minutes what would have taken hours or even weeks not so long ago, or would have been completely impossible.

 

Terry D.