DAW Features You'd Like to See Added to DAWs

[MikeRivers]

One of the things that bugs me is an inability to break loose from convention. Why do clipping indicators have to look like LEDs and be little circles? Why can't your fader turn red and display the amount the signal went over zero' date=' and double-clicking on a red fader would a) change the color back to normal and b) reduce it by the amount the level was over 0, plus another 0.2 dB. A single click would reset the color but leave the level unchanged. [/quote']

 

I guess the value of a display like that would depend on why you want to know about clipping and when in the process you're looking for it. Personally, I think that when I'm tracking, faders turning red would get annoying really fast, but that's because as much as I can, I work out of the "mixer" view and only look at the track panes when I have to edit something.

 

I think that a better indication of clipping might be in order. It evolved from any sample hitting full scale, to a number (sometimes selectable, sometimes fixed) of consecutive full scale samples, back to a single full scale sample after we went to 24-bit recording and nobody has any business getting that close to zero. But I think that with what we know about perception of clipping and the processing available, it might be possible to predict when clipping is likely to be audible, and only then flash a clip indicator. That way, when I'm recording, I'll get a warning to check the take for an unacceptable peak that I might not have noticed during the recording.

 

When I was working with the Mackie hard disk recorder, I was pushing for an alternate, simplified track display that would turn red when a track was armed so I wouldn't record on the wrong track (that could be a channel strip on the mixer view), and when not armed, would be green if a track was empty (remember, this was a 24-track recorder, not an add-a-track-whenever recorder) and yellow if there was anything recorded on that track, and only display the waveforms when asked politely.

 

[philboking]

I love Studio One but it is lacking 5.1 surround mixing and plug in functions

 

I agree - - surround will never take off unless the mix bus tools to make it happen become a minimum standard on every DAW, like stereo mixdown capability currently is.

[davie]

Not sure if there's already a DAW or plug-in with it, but it would be great if there's a plug-in or mode that allows you to view MIDI notes in the form of standard notation with the option to print it.

[WRGKMC]

Not sure if there's already a DAW or plug-in with it' date=' but it would be great if there's a plug-in or mode that allows you to view MIDI notes in the form of standard notation with the option to print it.[/quote']

 

I think its just a matter of the DAW you use. I used to use a program called Midisoft which created notation when you recorded midi and you could add musical notation to edit. I think Sibelius and Finale are your best programs for that now. There are others too like this free one. http://scorecloud.com/ moving the project to a full DAW program should be that difficult after you have it composed. Presonus Notion 5 looks like another.

 

Not sure other popular DAW's are going to include much notation. You bigger composing programs are what you really want for that stuff. Thay use that stuff in the TV industry all the time for creating sound tracks. They don't necessarily have to produce great sound quality to compose because you're only . dealing with midi data not sound. Sound can be edited in a daw where you assign virtual instruments, but I believe those composing programs do have great downloadable orchestra instrument packs now and will even do better then most DAW's Just not sure how good the analog capabilities are.

 

You'd figure a studio is going to track what people already know how to play and import what's already been composed for mixing. What you find in most DAW's isn't really composition friendly even though those programs are being used that way more and more. Heck I'd say most musicians cant even read music so buying those features is only going to appeal to a select few. I used that one program for a few years and even though I can read music it was an arduous procedure editing that way. Just being able to play the notes was so much faster then selecting notes and adding them to a staff. Maybe for touch ups it might save time, but punching in to add notes was still faster.

[davie]

I think it would be useful if you've written instrument parts and need a group of live musicians to learn it, especially if you compose directly from a DAW. Also might be useful if I need to go look back to what I recorded previously and re-play those parts, because I find it a bit inconvenient reading keyboard note markers on a grid.

[philboking]

I think it would be useful if you've written instrument parts and need a group of live musicians to learn it' date=' especially if you compose directly from a DAW. Also might be useful if I need to go look back to what I recorded previously and re-play those parts, because I find it a bit inconvenient reading keyboard note markers on a grid.[/quote']

 

This would be good if you play with people who read music. In my circle of people, no one does.

[WRGKMC]

 

I think it would be useful if you've written instrument parts and need a group of live musicians to learn it' date=' especially if you compose directly from a DAW. Also might be useful if I need to go look back to what I recorded previously and re-play those parts, because I find it a bit inconvenient reading keyboard note markers on a grid.[/quote']

 

Those two programs I mentioned do all of that plus a whole lot more.

[Porkchop]

As much as I like Digital Performer, their owner manuals suck. The manuals are dry, repetitive, and feel like you`re reading a Roland manual which is not saying much.

 

I honestly don`t think DP needs much more than what it has. I`m actually a bit overwhelmed with DP8. There are features I`ll never use, thats the truth.

 

I use the DAW like a recording machine so most of the features go untouched. I would actually like to see less mini-menus and less windows overall to reach certain functions.

 

As for a rhyming dictionary, I cannot use a computer to write music, to me the whole technology thing kills my creativity. I rather sit there with paper and pen.

 

 

 

 

Any manual could benefit with more examples. DP does a good bit of this, could probably do a bit more. But the manual is already huge!

[Porkchop]

The ability to load virtual instruments in a specific order for troubleshooting. some are more ram hungry than others. It should be like get in a single line, don't load all at once.

[Porkchop]

Not sure if there's already a DAW or plug-in with it' date=' but it would be great if there's a plug-in or mode that allows you to view MIDI notes in the form of standard notation with the option to print it.[/quote']

 

Digital Performer has this feature, called Quickscribe. It's actually quite intelligent. It takes a single track of piano and splits it properly into the bass and treble clefs without setting a single parameter. Interestingly, or not, when I export it into Sibelius, it crams the whole thing into one staff with ledger lines all over the place. Not too smart.

[monstermaker]

In Sonar I'd like to be able to put chord changes onto the big time screen to prompt me or anyone with me when I'm laying tracks down.

[Phil O'Keefe]

Not sure if there's already a DAW or plug-in with it' date=' but it would be great if there's a plug-in or mode that allows you to view MIDI notes in the form of standard notation with the option to print it.[/quote']

 

That was one of my biggest feature requests for Pro Tools for years, but they finally added it a few versions back.

 

Most modern DAW programs offer this now. Heck, one of the first computer-based MIDI sequencers I owned (C-Lab Notator, circa 1988) had editable/printable MIDI notation. I often find it's easier to identify and edit with this than using a piano roll / bar graph display.

 

What DAW do you use Davie?

[Phil O'Keefe]

In Sonar I'd like to be able to put chord changes onto the big time screen to prompt me or anyone with me when I'm laying tracks down.

 

That would be really useful - kind of a super-sized virtual chord chart to aid in tracking. I like it!

[davie]

 

 

Those two programs I mentioned do all of that plus a whole lot more.

 

Thanks. I'll check them out when I have the chance.

 

 

[davie]

 

That was one of my biggest feature requests for Pro Tools for years, but they finally added it a few versions back.

 

Most modern DAW programs offer this now. Heck, one of the first computer-based MIDI sequencers I owned (C-Lab Notator, circa 1988) had editable/printable MIDI notation. I often find it's easier to identify and edit with this than using a piano roll / bar graph display.

 

What DAW do you use Davie?

 

 

I'm currently using Reaper. Been using it for a couple of years now. Though one of my engineer friends recommends that I switch to Pro Tools, especially if I'm planning to have him mix my music. The price tag is a bit high. Come to think of it, maybe a universal DAW project conversion tool might be a good idea!

[WRGKMC]

In Sonar I'd like to be able to put chord changes onto the big time screen to prompt me or anyone with me when I'm laying tracks down.

 

That would be useful on complex songs where there's allot of chord changes, but I could and often do just bring up a word file that has the chords and lyrics which is another thing I like to follow.

 

Maybe a technical advancement like a wireless monitor system may be better. If you have a bunch of musicians sitting around the studio recording, how neat would it be to have music stands with a monitor screen (not just touch pads Velcroed to them) A full sized wireless monitor that adjust in height like a mic/music stand.

 

The engineer can put up the songs being played for all the musicians. Then if theres someone missing a part, the engineer can " post a flag at the chord saying, " Hey dummy, you miss this chord again Or I'm charging you an extra hours time if you screw that part up again" A pop up clock saying how much time they have left and even a track level display so the player knows he's cranked up too high or low.

 

Those notes, word files, sent to the wireless monitor music stands could be buttons added to the daw. There's a whole bunch of stuff there you could connect to sub system/monitors for the individual performers.

 

Selling it as a DAW add on for a pro studio might just be something people are willing to spend money on and I cant think of many pro musicians who wouldn't appreciate it. All you'd need is a scanner to scan paper copies of their music into the computer too.

 

Or you could just have one big wide screen TV to display things that can be seen across the room. The 40" Flat screen I bought costs maybe $250 and connects to a computer. Sure makes it easy on the eyes.

[Anderton]

In Sonar I'd like to be able to put chord changes onto the big time screen to prompt me or anyone with me when I'm laying tracks down.

 

I use AAS Strum for that, it has a chord readout. If you want to know more, I described how to use it in an article for Sound on Sound. It's been especially useful when working out what key to do a song in - I just try different keys and follow along with the chords until I hit the right key.

[144dB]

I'm a Steinberg user, so my comments and input are written from a Cubase/Wavelab perspective.

 

I'd like to see more fast/efficient ways to work with fluid tempos and meters. Not everything is dance music and four-on-the-floor pop that neatly fits on a graph. Steinberg's Time Warp is a good start, but I think more innovations that accommodate rubato and intentional tempo variations are welcome.

 

More integration of iPads would be welcome. Both Cubase and Logic support the use of iPads as remotes, but it could go much, much further. I may check out some of the new third party apps to see how much they have progressed (it's been a while).

 

Cubase needs better metering (Note: I'm using v6.5 and can't vouch for v8.x). The channel meters aren't VU and they aren't typical peak meters either. Wavelab's master meter is awesome with both RMS and peak values shown simultaneously, and it's far easier to work with than Cubase.

 

Gubu's idea is great, as is Philboking's clipping idea. I second both.

 

To Craig's point about conventions, if we started from scratch without the biases of 50 years of multi-track tape, a DAW would probably look and behave quite differently. I love some of the retro graphics and slick skins from UA, etc., but sometimes those old interfaces fall short. I'd trade the vintage look for better metering and features any day of the week.

 

Last but not least, some features that facilitate practicing would be great. We're all musicians, and if we're not doing that, we're not advancing. I can think of several features, plugins, or apps that would make practice more fun and productive.

[1001gear]

Instruction manuals that don't assume you have a PhD in audio engineering

 

DACs that don't assume you're good at music and auto correct anything crappy.

[Goober(s)]

Not sure if there's already a DAW or plug-in with it' date=' but it would be great if there's a plug-in or mode that allows you to view MIDI notes in the form of standard notation with the option to print it.[/quote']

 

Logic and Garageband both do this.

 

However, in my experience, neither is all that great at it (especially Garageband - the feature is basically unuseable ).

[Folder]

Not sure if there's already a DAW or plug-in with it' date=' but it would be great if there's a plug-in or mode that allows you to view MIDI notes in the form of standard notation with the option to print it.[/quote']

 

Sonar does this. It can be a bit quirky though and it's not perfect.