Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Is the Future of the DAW?

djmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 223 posts

Re: What Is the Future of the DAW?

#131

Post by delgaudm »

MrVandemar wrote: post #128
delgaudm wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be happy too,it's mostly templates: project templates, individual fx presets, fx chain templates for corrections, sweetening and mastering, export/render prsets, filename templates, And lots of keystroke macros that help me speed up my work. Things like specific keystrokes for punch and roll, quick edits and ripple delete. It's an amalgamation of lots of small optimizations. Reaper is also really good at UI custo…

Any pointers on where to start with all that? I can grok Audacity (which is a handy but terribly basic program). When it came to Reaper, I found it very confusing, and never managed to do much with it. My needs are basically voice only.

Yeah, of course! But, this will be a thing that I hope doesn't get flagged. I have a totally free course for configuring reaper for VO at academy.boothjunkie.com. it goes through all my initial optimizations for reaper. If you're comfortable with your VST setup, this will go a long way in getting you started, and you can incorporate your VO chain.

If you want to take this out of HN and talk more specifically, my website is in my profile and I'd be happy to help however I can. If you want to dig deeper into anything specific, I'd be happy to share any experience I have.

Re: What Is the Future of the DAW?

#132

Post by wazoox »

pdntspa wrote: post #105

To be honest, I really like existing tools and workflows and I don't really want that to change. > Open a DAW from the year 2000 and it’s highly likely you’ll recognise the vast majority of the features — both functionally and visually — from any DAW you might use today. This assertion that "old is bad" really, really needs to die. Change for the sake of change is bad. I don't see why all these new innovations can't…

"Open a Word processor from the year 2000...", "Open a spreadsheet editor from the year 2000...", "Open an image editor from the year 2000...". This is completely silly; most desktop software still exists in a form that is a recognizable evolution from Y2K versions; DAW is no exception, big deal indeed!

Re: What Is the Future of the DAW?

#133

Post by MrVandemar »

tomduncalf wrote: post #113
jrm4 wrote: post #106

Feels like "what is the future of the word processor" but with some weird expectation that you're expecting to see leaps and bounds. Look, FWIW, my favorite music making "stack" is - Fruityloops (as in, sure I'll use FL Studio but it was pretty much solid for me when it was called that) - Sony ACID. Still unbeatable to me for quickly layering/previewing multiple tracks of loops - Cool Edit Pro/Adobe Audition. Still m…

> I don't know why Audacity remains so popular, it's way clunkier than the above Presumably because it’s free, but I’m with you on the clunkiness. The UI looks very dated. I can recommend OcenAudio, which is free though not open source, and for me offers just the right level of functionality in a clean user interface. It’s very similar to how I remember the old versions of Cool Edit pre-Pro, which I thought were amaz…

> The UI looks very dated.

If the UI is clunky to use, that's something that needs to be fixed. If the UI works okay, but only looks dated, that's ... fine and there's every good reason to leave it as it is.

Why? Because altering the look of the UI is strongly coupled with altering the usability of the UI. This leads to regressions in usability, making the product "look better" but "work worse".

Leave things alone. I don't care if the UI looks like Motif or TCL or a TUI, but if it works in a smooth, intuitive and pleasing way, there's no reason to change it.

The VIM interface is the very definition of "extremely dated", and that's fine.

Re: What Is the Future of the DAW?

#134

Post by alsetmusic »

pdntspa wrote: post #105

To be honest, I really like existing tools and workflows and I don't really want that to change. > Open a DAW from the year 2000 and it’s highly likely you’ll recognise the vast majority of the features — both functionally and visually — from any DAW you might use today. This assertion that "old is bad" really, really needs to die. Change for the sake of change is bad. I don't see why all these new innovations can't…

I’d say the current tools are mostly refined and properly mature. I would rather see innovation with plugins, with DAWs staying pretty much as they are.

Re: What Is the Future of the DAW?

#135

Post by pdntspa »

gnulinux wrote: post #124
pdntspa wrote: post #105

To be honest, I really like existing tools and workflows and I don't really want that to change. > Open a DAW from the year 2000 and it’s highly likely you’ll recognise the vast majority of the features — both functionally and visually — from any DAW you might use today. This assertion that "old is bad" really, really needs to die. Change for the sake of change is bad. I don't see why all these new innovations can't…

Really??? Uh, it's probably my fault but as a hobbyist composer (day job software engineer) I can personally say that tools I use absolutely and utterly suck. They're immensely buggy. My workflow includes: - LilyPond for writing the final notation - MuseScore 4 for playing around, MuseScore 3 for playing MIDI - REAPER as DAW, SFZ plugin for midi soundfonts - Audacity for processing WAV files - music21 python lib if I…

I'm pretty content with FLStudio (with various VST plugins) and Sound Forge, and Audacity when I need to work with something in a weird format. Sometimes the plugins can get crashy but I just bounce to WAV and unload the offending plugin.

In fact FL just added a python integration that I haven't even begun to explore yet, but you can use it to generate piano roll scores (among other things?)

foobar2000 handles tagging and DaVinci Resolve/Blender/ZGameEditor handles video.

Every time I've tried to do anything in Linux for music its been a headache. Granted its been a while now. But I'm a little too invested in the Windows audio ecosystem to switch.

Re: What Is the Future of the DAW?

#136

Post by dimgl »

gnulinux wrote: post #124
pdntspa wrote: post #105

To be honest, I really like existing tools and workflows and I don't really want that to change. > Open a DAW from the year 2000 and it’s highly likely you’ll recognise the vast majority of the features — both functionally and visually — from any DAW you might use today. This assertion that "old is bad" really, really needs to die. Change for the sake of change is bad. I don't see why all these new innovations can't…

Really??? Uh, it's probably my fault but as a hobbyist composer (day job software engineer) I can personally say that tools I use absolutely and utterly suck. They're immensely buggy. My workflow includes: - LilyPond for writing the final notation - MuseScore 4 for playing around, MuseScore 3 for playing MIDI - REAPER as DAW, SFZ plugin for midi soundfonts - Audacity for processing WAV files - music21 python lib if I…

> Linux audio processing

Just use Windows and all of these problems go away. When I make music my stack is basically Ableton Live, NI Komplete and Spitfire Audio and I have exactly 0 of these issues.

Re: What Is the Future of the DAW?

#138

Post by FelipeCortez »

gnulinux wrote: post #124
pdntspa wrote: post #105

To be honest, I really like existing tools and workflows and I don't really want that to change. > Open a DAW from the year 2000 and it’s highly likely you’ll recognise the vast majority of the features — both functionally and visually — from any DAW you might use today. This assertion that "old is bad" really, really needs to die. Change for the sake of change is bad. I don't see why all these new innovations can't…

Really??? Uh, it's probably my fault but as a hobbyist composer (day job software engineer) I can personally say that tools I use absolutely and utterly suck. They're immensely buggy. My workflow includes: - LilyPond for writing the final notation - MuseScore 4 for playing around, MuseScore 3 for playing MIDI - REAPER as DAW, SFZ plugin for midi soundfonts - Audacity for processing WAV files - music21 python lib if I…

give any mature, non-Linux DAW a try. it’s cool to try to keep it all open source but with music software you get what you pay for. I recommend Logic Pro

Re: What Is the Future of the DAW?

#139

Post by eweise »

gnulinux wrote: post #124
pdntspa wrote: post #105

To be honest, I really like existing tools and workflows and I don't really want that to change. > Open a DAW from the year 2000 and it’s highly likely you’ll recognise the vast majority of the features — both functionally and visually — from any DAW you might use today. This assertion that "old is bad" really, really needs to die. Change for the sake of change is bad. I don't see why all these new innovations can't…

Really??? Uh, it's probably my fault but as a hobbyist composer (day job software engineer) I can personally say that tools I use absolutely and utterly suck. They're immensely buggy. My workflow includes: - LilyPond for writing the final notation - MuseScore 4 for playing around, MuseScore 3 for playing MIDI - REAPER as DAW, SFZ plugin for midi soundfonts - Audacity for processing WAV files - music21 python lib if I…

I really like Logic, especially on my M1 mac mini. The latency is really low, external midi works great, very intuitive interface. Years past I've fought with audio interface and latency issues. Now it all just works so I can focus on my marginal song writing and intrument playing.

Re: What Is the Future of the DAW?

#140

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

FelipeCortez wrote: post #138
gnulinux wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really??? Uh, it's probably my fault but as a hobbyist composer (day job software engineer) I can personally say that tools I use absolutely and utterly suck. They're immensely buggy. My workflow includes: - LilyPond for writing the final notation - MuseScore 4 for playing around, MuseScore 3 for playing MIDI - REAPER as DAW, SFZ plugin for midi soundfonts - Audacity for processing WAV files - music21 python lib if I…

give any mature, non-Linux DAW a try. it’s cool to try to keep it all open source but with music software you get what you pay for. I recommend Logic Pro

> you get what you pay for

you can pay whatever you want for ready-to-run versions of Ardour (US$1 up). Need it to be better? Pay more! :)

Post reply on HN