Digi won DAW war

[ducter]

Looking over the DAW landscape it is Digidesign who are setting the pace for the future. I am not saying it is undeserved, they have made all the right decisions and have really come out on top. But with the New large-format mixing desk they are threatening to claim another sector and dominant the audio world even more completely.

This will eventually reduce our choice of products and they will be able to maintain their prices at a higher level than if there was any real competition.

Steinberg, Sadie, Soundscape, SSL, Sonic Solutions,and Fairlight are not really in the same DAW league anymore. Sonic Solutions ‘No Noise’ is now just a plug-in. SSL is bringing out a 24 fader remote controller aimed at the ProTools client base. Apple and Emagic have a garage band going, but their Pro productq are linked to Digi hardware. Motu is the perhaps the one exception of a company that has had success in supplying both hardware and software.

The large mixing desk manufacturers missed out on picking up people like Opcode and building a " future-proof " product by adding a powerful software based audio editor and enhancing the mixing-automation features. Mackie on a different level tried with Soundscape to compete, but it ran out of steam.

So we are left with a one horse race where the admission ticket price is a bit higher than it should be. Does anyone have any worthwhile bets to place on any " outsiders " or thoughts on where the DAW race is going ?

[Yannick]

Originally posted by ducter
Steinberg, Sadie, Soundscape, SSL, Sonic Solutions,and Fairlight are not really in the same DAW league anymore. Sonic Solutions ‘No Noise’ is now just a plug-in. SSL is bringing out a 24 fader remote controller aimed at the ProTools client base. Apple and Emagic have a garage band going, but their Pro productq are linked to Digi hardware. Motu is the perhaps the one exception of a company that has had success in supplying both hardware and software.

Mackie on a different level tried with Soundscape to compete, but it ran out of steam.

Mackie did not run out of steam with Soundscape, quite the opposite is true. If Mackie hadn't bought Soundscape, and treated them like snot, the gap would have been a lot smaller by now.
This being said, Soundscape is an independant company again, and the gap is closing.
On a software level, there is not much missing compared to Protools. You get a lot more though, like the editing speed and a truly modular mixer. Of course Soundscape doesn't have a big 60000 dollar control surface, neither the track count in one box (up to 128 tracks, but you are working with one soft controlling up to four soundscape units). You can also mix DSP plugins with native (VST) plugins.
Also take a look on the soundscape forum (www.sydec.be) : there are NO discussions about mixing in the box versus analogue summing etc. This says a lot about the inherent quality (or the stupidity of the Typical Soundscape User )

We are trying out MOTU and Audiodesk - comes not near to the speed and functionality of Soundscape. This could of course be due to the fact that we've been working in Soundscape since '93.

Oh, and Soundscape has a Protools import/export function, so nothing (like the lower price) stands in the way of a Protools user to buy one, use one and fall in love

A happy scaper

[Stu Pidman]

Film at 11

[squizz]

are you serious?

digi hasn't won anything, yes there the industry standard but thats changing. have you used any of the other software options. i find the protools software no better than any of the other ones and personally i find neundo and samplitude much better platforms. and in buying something other than protools not only do you get a better software option but you dont get caught in digi's endless cycle of bullshit.

secondly, i don't think to many studios with large format consoles will be dumping them any time soon for the icon system. i will admit that the d-control is pretty attractive but is it really worth the cost. what will the resale price be on one of those things in a few years? Do you really want to spend that much on a controller? that alone will scare off alot of project studio owners.

i would raise the question if portool wasnt the industry standard and there was some type universal file format, how many people would still use protools? is it really worth the cost consider the fact that they will make some upgrades in a few years and your system will be obsolete? with other systems you can keep your hardware and change software. and with the ever increasing cpu speeds and third party dsp cards is propriety hardware even necessary?

think of the this a protools hd3 system with one 192 with just digital ins and outs is $15,000. Nuendo or the software of your choice with a lynx aes16 or rme card, a couple uad-1 cards and a tc powercore card is under $5000. is protools really worth the difference?

i just dont see digi far ahead of the pack. there the industry standard cause they were first not because there best, so i dont see it as they won the war. i dont think it will be long before there greed becomes there down fall, with there outrageous prices and propriety bullshit. digi wont even let other converter manufactures build cards for there system because they want people to pay $2000 for there digital in and out unit ($2000 for digital in and outs!). lucky for us apogee reversed engineered there connector so the people at least have an option. people will get tired of this foolishness eventually.

[Paul Turpin]

yes - Digi is a standard - and is in the lead

but its not over yet.

The real battle is still coming and the next chapter is probably foretold with Apple buying eMagic. Look for new "Pro" interfaces for Logic that - along with a G5 - will really give Digi some trouble from these very capable Native systems. All they need to do is solve a couple problems :
1. native latency - which has come a long way with core audio but has farther to go
2. proTools is still easier to use for tracking than Logic - easier to edit at the waveform level too.

but the paradigm is :
Final Cut Pro knoked down Avid
will a Pro DAW from Apple do the same to ProTools?

[manning1]

there are lots of good alternatives for a daw user imho.
for the small studio , a few decent pre's, an rme sound card
and the new magix music studio 2005 (based on samplitude)
at 80 bucks is all anyone needs imho.
just add good players and ...well you get the idea.
for the bigger studio maybe a nice console into outboard a/d/a
into the computer.
the magix product will do 64 tracks. who needs more ?

[DannyDay]

Originally posted by Paul Turpin

Final Cut Pro knoked down Avid
will a Pro DAW from Apple do the same to ProTools?

I don't quite understand why this hasn't happened yet (I'm not that learned about the ins and outs of the DAW biz). It seems as if Apple wanted to do it they could.

This will most probably _the_ battle. I don't see how Steinberg and the rest make any money with all the cracks and all. It'll be interesting to see. If Digi isn't quaking in their boots, they should be. I think Digi won't last as the big dog much longer without some big changes.

I love and use ProTools all the time, but we'll see... heck who knows.
DD

[joeq]

Originally posted by squizz



think of the this a protools hd3 system with one 192 with just digital ins and outs is $15,000. Nuendo or the software of your choice with a lynx aes16 or rme card, a couple uad-1 cards and a tc powercore card is under $5000. is protools really worth the difference?

I think if you want/need pro tools it is. (my Ford Taurus gets me where I need to go, yada yada, insert comment about sports car here.) If you are talking TDM, Pro Tools' competition is stuff like Radars and Fairlights- not native DAWs.


The latency is a big issue for many of us and the industry standard thing alone can bring in enough extra money to throw the cost effectiveness to the other side of the equation.


I'm not saying the software or the sound is necessarily "better" in any technical way than other DAWs, but I personally have derived quite a bit of benefit from the widespread perception that it is! That alone makes it "worth" the extra money for me.

[squizz]

i hear all this talk of latency problems with native but my system gets 2 millisecond latency, thats around what protools gets i believe.

the comment about protools tdm being compared to fairlight,radar, etc. and not native systems. i disagree. with radar and fairlight your kind of comparing apples to oranges. Protools is a full blown DAW, radar and fairlight are hard disk recorders with some editing capability. Protools to a native system is a better comparison, they both do more of the same thing. the feeling that all the real PRO's use protools is BS, i've been to alot of "pro facilities" that use nuendo or logic. fact of the matter is most of your clients probably couldnt tell what software your using. If i ran a recording facility i seriously doubt i would lose to much clientele cause i dont use protools, as long as my results were good.

TDM is no better than any native, it just has a name brand thats it. the sports car analogy does not apply here, a better analogy would be something like calvin kliene jeans as apposed to levi's or something cheaper. they essentially do the samething they just have a different name on the ass.

[nativeaudio]

Originally posted by squizz
i hear all this talk of latency problems with native but my system gets 2 millisecond latency, thats around what protools gets i believe.

What kind of latency are you talking about...? Latency on Audio Instruments? Offset from record source to placement in the arrangement? Or; the most important one, the latency between your audio source (say, a microphone) and the same signal monitored back to the artist during record...?

[squizz]

im talking latency from my workstation back out to the artist (in and them back out of my audio interface). its actually a little less then 2 on the way in and a little less then two on the way out at 48k. so some where around 4 milliseconds total at 48k (and even less at 88.2 or 96k). i believe protools does 3 at 48k. not only that but if that little latency is still a problem i have the ability to use direct monitoring option.

[Ruphus]

Havn´t experienced all the SW existing ( never seen SawStudio for instance ), but if it was quality that ruled the market and if the differences remained relatively in the way they are ... at least PT LE would have no chance I think. ( And TDM aint all that different at least in editing features, right?)

But I assume Digi has the biggest turnover and profits of all, so provided the company owners wouldn´t make wrong decisions in taking too much money out of the pott and instead invest into their SW department they could improve the software and make it competitive. Improve navigation in the editing window, scrolling and highlighting options, include good plugs and take off that veil of the sound.

For now, however, what I find in Samplitude makes it a distinctively better host than PT.

And latency is no issue with it. For now only with armed stereo tracks, but I think with the coming update also with mono. ( And for the time being I go directly through the Lynx cards standalone mixer. This has the disadvantage of no FX for the headphone mix, but gives about no latency.)

Its really interesting to see what will happen. Should the differences stay relatively like they are I can´t imagine any practical reason for anybody to stay with PT when he can have Samplitude, Sequoia or Dawstudio ( people rave about that one ) with first class hardware and one of the flying PCs which are to come soon. All that for less money.

Digis big advantage has been relatively high stability, but these days that aspect has quite changed already.

Ruphus

[manning1]

ruphus ine used magix music studio (based on samp) using all sorts of junk sound cards. i just dont get any latency or misaligned tracks. it seems the programmers have included some pretty fancy compensation scheme because even with sound cards i knew had terrible driver latency my tracks all lined up.
i'm very impressed by magix.

[nativeaudio]

Originally posted by squizz
im talking latency from my workstation back out to the artist (in and them back out of my audio interface). its actually a little less then 2 on the way in and a little less then two on the way out at 48k. so some where around 4 milliseconds total at 48k (and even less at 88.2 or 96k). i believe protools does 3 at 48k. not only that but if that little latency is still a problem i have the ability to use direct monitoring option.

Hi, Pro Tools Mix actually does a little less than 2ms and Pro Tools HD just above 2 ms, both @ 44.1.... Haven't tested Accel yet.

Anyway, may I ask what hardware are you using? Mac/PC? OS? I'm curious, because 4 ms is better than all other real life tests I've seen...

[nativeaudio]

Originally posted by manning1
i just dont get any latency or misaligned tracks. it seems the programmers have included some pretty fancy compensation scheme [...]

No programming can compensate for the built in latency that happens when recording/monitoring in real time. Even only A/D and D/A takes time, often around 2 ms.....

[StuartMac]

Well, I thought long and hard about what I wanted from my system. In the end I couldn't see past the all-round benefits of RADAR running in tandem with a DAW (usually Samplitude, often Cubase SX2) - and it cost me LESS than the Pro Tools rig I was after.

Every so often I feel almost obliged to invest in Pro Tools - but for what??? I can't see that it offers me anything I don't already have.

[djui5]

How do you define "Won"?


That's the real question....


If you consider "won" as who's on top of the DAW industry in terms of sales and implementation into just about every commercial studio on the planet....not to mention all the lap-tops and home studios...then yes...they won.

[Ruphus]

Originally posted by manning1
ruphus ine used magix music studio (based on samp) using all sorts of junk sound cards. i just dont get any latency or misaligned tracks. it seems the programmers have included some pretty fancy compensation scheme because even with sound cards i knew had terrible driver latency my tracks all lined up.
i'm very impressed by magix.

Hi Manning,

Yep, I think they are really good in what they do.
The "funny" thing is that Samp had been recommended to me from start when I bought the first computer parts and so it was the first app. It seemed to work alright already back then. [ Only troubles appearently from HW.] But it had no midi and me thought midi was the big bang. Thus switched to Steinjerk and that was the beginning of a long, long horror trip. Years later escaped to PT which seemed like a haven in the native sea. Still crashes, but yet much better in general. Today I know of the big, big mistake I did at the beginning. It gave me years of desperation instead of just turning on the rig and hit the red button.

Since a while now my studio works like I had always dreamed of. ( Another good cause is that the PC got separated from internet and slimmed down. Should had done so long ago.)

Blabla ... very pleased with Samp.
Only, yet it seems like you have to engage the "Live Input" mode extra for when you want playback and monitoring inputs simultaneously ( while not recording ). Live Input mode again works only with stereo tracks armed, no mono tracks. One could work around by tracking in stereo and split the tracks afterwards, but for some inconscious reasons I feel reluctant to go that path.

Rather route through the cards mixer until update ( unless there happened a case before where FX was very much requested ).

Ruphus

PS: Today had the convolution reverb and a compressor on the master while tracking a two tracks percussion in loop for 1/2 hours to a 5 or more gigabyte session in 96k. No flaws, no hitch with merely an Athlon 1800 CPU.

[joeq]

Originally posted by squizz
the sports car analogy does not apply here, a better analogy would be something like calvin kliene jeans as apposed to levi's or something cheaper. they essentially do the samething they just have a different name on the ass.

what I meant by the sports car thing was not so much the implication of better performance but just that "worth" is often defined by "want". It may be "worth it" to pay 3 times more for something that's only slightly better or even just slightly different, if that's the only way you are going to get what you "want".

[squizz]

nativeaudio

I run two pc's with windows XP one for midi stuff one for recording. On the computer i use for midi programming i have a lynx one which can actually go down to under 3 milliseconds total in and out at 48k, but at that low a latency i start getting pops and click here and there when track count starts to build up. so i usually run the buffers a little higher and get under 4ms. And on my main computer i had an RME HDSP 96/52 which was a great soundcard and gave me real low latency. it pretty much gave me the same specs my lynx one gave me (but on 24 ins/outs). i recently moved to a Motu hd192 system (for the converters)and i have not had a chance to hook it up yet so im not sure what kind of latency that will give me but i suspect it will be good.

[squizz]

Joeq

i see what mean

[StuartMac]

Well, as far as I know the latency on a Radar with classic convertors at 48k is about 1.2ms, with no issues at all.

[PaRaNoId]

To the original post-



If you truly know what you are doing (are u a real AUDIO E N G I N E E R ?) You could get the same value and results from whatever is available. I hate digidesign's business ethic and software. So I couldn't disagree more. I use SONAR 3 and I can do things faster and have more fun doing it than in any other program I've used. It's cheaper, easier and underrated as hell for straight audio recording and mixing. Oh, so I don't have all the PT plug-ins. Booh-hoo. I just get irked about this subject..all necesarry apologies.

[James 'LA' Lugo]

I'm out here in LA and I work in conjuntion with many studios on sessions and all the work is protools! My buddy is PC Nuendo and he is in hell out here by himself on an island, loosing potential work. He is switching to mac protools. Digi bashing is a big thing and I understand why but I have 2 kids to feed and the other platforms are to hard to integrate. Nobody wants to reformat there sessions. Protools ROCKS!

[jtienhaara]

Originally posted by ducter
Does anyone have any worthwhile bets to place on any " outsiders " or thoughts on where the DAW race is going ?

Some will undoubtedly laugh at me but...

CreamWare

Johann
(Long-time lurker and CW fan :))

[Fletcher]

Yawn.

[jtienhaara]

Originally posted by Fletcher
Yawn.

Fair enough.

If you make the big bucks, then buy Pro Tools (or even Radar).

But for the semi-pro studio that wants power, a huge array of mixing and dynamics and EQ tools, and flexibility in routing between multiple sound cards (including 3rd party ones), CreamWare is often the only affordable option. Other companies like RME are in the same price bracket, but NOT the same power bracket.

Incidentally Fletcher have you used CreamWare? Or just from seen their lack-of-marketing?

Cheers,

Johann

[zimv20]

Originally posted by jtienhaara

Incidentally Fletcher have you used CreamWare? Or just from seen their lack-of-marketing?

i suspect his yawn was directed at the entire thread, not CW in particular

[jtienhaara]

Darnit. I'll go back to my CW cave now.