"Hybrid" or double DAW system

Anyone here use a "hybrid" (or double might be the better word) DAW system?

What I mean is combining an outboard hardware audio interface DAW (Sonar, Cubase, ProTools, etc.) with a soundcard-based DAW (PGMusic's PowerTracks Pro Audio, Band-In-A-Box).

Would that type of system be easily integrated, or would there be all kinds of messy conflicts? I suppose there would be a lot of switching back and forth between the soundcard and the outboard interface--is this feasible.

And would it be worth it?

I'm not sure what you're saying. Cubase, Sonar, and ProTools (LE) are software just like Power Tracks or BIAB. With Pro Tools you have to use one their supported audio interfaces. With Cubase, Sonar, or just about anything else you could use whatever soundcard or interface (which are really the same thing) you wanted to. What exactly are you trying to do?

If what you mean by hybrid is a stand-alone DAW working with computer DAW, the answer is definitely yes. I know plenty of people that record on a stand-alone, fly tracks to the PC for editing, and fly them back into the stand-alone.

On PGMusic's PowerTracks forum, one guy posted about integrating PowerTracks, BIAB, and Sonar on the same system. But I thought PowerTracks and BIAB can only go through a soundcard, not a separate audio interface. In the PowerTracks manual, nowhere does it mention going through an audio interface--it indicates soundcard only. Is that wrong?

Why two DAWs in the first place?

(Assuming you mean to use two DAWs simultaneously on the same machine.)

I own a super old copy of PowerTracks somewhere (or it may be gone, it was on one floppy) but it's been a long time since I looked at their docs.

But I do use Band in a Box (which, of course, is hardly a DAW) frequently -- and sometimes simultaneously with Sonar when I'm working out a song arrangement using, say, drum or other tracks from BiaB.

In those cases I use Band in a Box with my tower's SB-clone interface and Sonar with my MOTU 828mkII as usual. (Previous versions of BiaB were hinky under those circumstances. It could be done but there could be hangups.)

Sometime I'm just using BiaB and I want to use the MOTU for various reasons (say to record in a vocal to process through their vocal harmonizer utility which is pretty basic except for one thing -- it will use the harmonic structure of the song... if you have some jazzy chords going on things can get pretty cool).

BiaB 2005 (the last version I've upped to) certainly allows you to change sound interfaces and definitely will use my FW MOTU. Of course, like so much in BiaB, the implementation is pretty wacky and hard to figure the gotchyas at first, but it does work.

....J/K

You need to lay out the reasons why you think you need to use these different applications together. I'll bet SONAR will cover 99% of the functionality on its own or with the help of a free VST plug.

In fact, lay out the reasons why you want to record at all. Is it to get the ideas out of your head, record other people

wbcsound, your reply has the ring of truth to it, and it's what I've been leaning toward anyway.

But all that was really out of curiosity--you see, some guy on the PGMusic forum posted how he had this complex system integrating Sonar, PTPA, and BIAB; claimed it gave him all kinds of way cool options, etc.

I understand I don't need all that--I WILL be getting the Sonar 6 Power Studio (Sonar 6 Studio Edition with a Cakewalk usb2 interface), and I'll just go to it. You're quite right, I'm sure.

He probably just didn't know how to use any one of those particular programs REALLY well so he just used each of them half arsed'dly.

The furthest i've gone is integrating fruity loops into cubase sx for a particular project. But fruity loops is made for that.

I don't understand what you mean by some programs have interfaces and some have soundcards...Your interface is your soundcard and your soundcard is your interface. The main difference between a pro audio soundcard/interface and a consumer one is that most pro/prosumer interfaces use ASIO drivers which is better for multiple in's and out's. I don't know of any pro audio progrrams that would really expect you to make use of say....a soundblaster pro

However, pro tools does force you to use it's own hardware exclusively, and in pro tools HD setups ( i think that's what it's called) it supplies it's own external processing to suppliment your computers power.

One reason , I seen many go for a "double DAW" -- > you can use a Roland VS 2480 --with a 24+ channel: automated fader unit and a 24 channel input (digital/analog)-- {used for "round $1k} -- for a lot less than purchasing a dedicated, multi channel controller/ board & a 16 channel pre >> ....just V-fire wire the tracks to your PC ...

While I am not a DAW wizard (I am still using Sonar 3.1); you really don't need to use any more than 1 program to run your studio these days. Something like Live, Cubase, or Sonar (even Logic, DP or Acid) will do whatever audio and/or midi things you could ever want. And with kick ass dual and quad processors, running out of CPU isn't that much of an issue anymore.

But, if you like your Sonar and Live for example - you can easily rewire one into the other and your flexibility increases by a level of magnitude (or 2).

Think streamlined, not complicated - you will be happier (I am).

Thanks for all the replies. Incidentally, what, exactly, is Ableton Live "able" to do that other DAWs can't do? In other words, what's the big selling point of the name, "Live?"

Not sure what is meant by "rewiring" one DAW to another.

I may put BIAB 2007 onto my music computer (when I have it built), but that doesn't mean I'm going to go nuts trying to "rewire" it to Sonar!