The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
SAW Studio, response from Developer.
Old 21st December 2011
  #1
SAW Studio, response from Developer (Full Thread Added)

Hi Guys

I used to use SAW, and there are a few things about it I love (editing, and even the inbuilt channel comp and eq). I posted on the SAW user forum asking for the future of the product and why it isn't adapting. The response I got is astounding, truely.


"Originally Posted by Bob L View Post
Southpaw... these types of discussions never amount to anything useful... you and you alone have to decide what is more important to you and then make your choice.

Is there any reason why a Stradivarius violin should cost so much when you can buy another violin at Guitar Center for a few hundred dollars... I mean they both look the same... you can still play all the same notes on the cheaper one... and the Stradivarius hasn't changed much over the past 100 years... its way behind the times... right?

Why would anyone pay so much for a Ferrari when a Ford Pinto can do the same thing for so much less... I mean... they both can take you to the grocery store and back... right?

Why should you buy a Neuman micrphone for thousands of dollars... there are now dozens of mics that look just like a Neuman that only cost a few hundred dollars... and they even have more switches and features... and the Neuman hasn't changed for the last 30 years... its way behind the times... right?

Within all things that you mention that seem most important to you that all the other products share with each other... it is interesting to note that the one thing that you don't talk about is audio quality... one big thing they all share in common, in my observation, is the digital grittiness, edginess, lack of definition, and collapsed stereo field and overall haze that masks the final audio results that are constantly being complained about since digital arrived. Obviously audio integrity is not important to you... the bells and whistles are what's important.

My design goals with SAWStudio and SAC have focused on audio integrity and work flow performance... not bells and whistles. The end results that the SAW engine can achieve are simply quite different than the others... and there are thousands of SAW enthusiasts that can discern that difference and seem to think it is a very important factor when making choices of which DAW to use... in fact many think it is the most important factor and still care deeply about the final audio quality they put out to their customers... yes... even in a world where most audio playback now takes place with mp3s on ipods and cell phones... go figure. There is a snappy and tight feel to the entire SAW experience that the enthusiasts have noticed that creates quite a different ride than the other choices... yes... the interface is quite different than the others... and yes... when learned and mastered can allow you to get things done in a much faster and smoother manner... it doesn't copy the other methods for good reasons... more efficiency... more performance... better results... many feel that is important... and think it simply just feels better... like the master violinist who can certainly appreciate the subtle tones and perfection he gets when playing his Stradivarius... like the magic experience the Ferrari owner feels when driving to the grocery store, that the Pinto owner never experiences.

There is and never will be an answer that can satisfy a question like yours... it is simply a useless question to ask... in fact... if you have to ask the question... and don't immediately feel the difference and hear the difference without seeking quantification of a list of reasons... then most likely you are not ready to appreciate SAW for what it brings to the table... and you would be happier with something else... if you pick up and play a $200 violin and then play a $100,000 Stradivarius and cannot notice any significant difference... then you should be content to purchase the $200 product and move on.

There is no need to knock the Stradivarius because you think the price is outrageous for an outdated product that you can't justify... simply move on and purchase the product you resonate with... there are many others that would surely appreciate the Stradivarius.

Many have jumped ship and sold their SAW licenses to others and then purchased one of the other DAWs because it had some feature or plugin they were convinced they needed to be compatible with the rest of the industry... many of those people are back here months or even years later and some have even repurchased their SAW licenses 3 or 4 times or more... getting caught up in the same game of "keep up with the Joneses" over and over... until finally... here they are again... perhaps industry compatibility is over rated... It may take you some time to finally appreciate the SAW experience... or you may never find SAW of any value for you... either way... there is no useful purpose in this type of discussion... it will not lead to a definitive reason why you should use SAW or some other product... in fact... the smart carpenter will have many tools in his toolbox and will know which tool to use for each situation he comes up against...

You need to decide for yourself... and always remember... those that follow the herd... generally find themselves stepping in a lot of sh*t.

Bob L

My Response:

Bob, respectfully, you are being extremely arrogant, or ignorant to the needs of the industry as a whole.

We are not driving cars, we are not playing violins. Tests (BLIND tests) have shown over, and over, and over and over that modern DAW engines null. When they don't it is usually down to pan law or the margin is so small, it's not worth talking about. When there have been blind tests, Saw has never won. Nuendo won the last round I am aware of (British Producers Guild). Digital Grittiness as a result of over limiting, over compression and MP3 data compression have nothing to do with the quality of the DAW. You may be speaking to the general genre of music Saw users are involved with vs. other daws. Saw clearly has a higher brow user base; this is not to say Saw itself is "higher brow". I think the nature of the interface simply appeals to these types of users. Users who don't do a lot of commercial Hip Hop, Pop, Rock etc.

Any difference in sound comes from the skill of the engineer and their comfort level and workflow with the interface they are using. I am not disputing the elegance of some facets of SAW.

This is not Mackie vs. SSL/Neve/API. We are not talking about physical components, we are talking about code, that works or not. The code has a user interface, and the audio between Reaper, Pro Tools, Nuendo, Samp/Seq, Logic, Digital Performer, Pyramix, Sadie (I could go on) is intrinsically the same quality. As soon as we start adding plugins, we start adding degradation in many cases, and if anything, Saw users may use less plugins due to your solid channel strips. This clearly has an effect on the final audio.

If you bring up 1 or 100 channels in Saw vs. other major DAWs, there is no difference. Period. Perhaps I am not qualified, however in a BLIND listening test, I, nor anybody I know in this industry can tell me which DAW is being played back, when calibrated with identical pan law, gain etc. There just isn't a difference, and if there is.

The facets of working with digital audio that you have deemed significant, you have done an astonishingly good job of addressing, however music has gone in a direction that requires very heavy use of VSTi, very, very heavy use of third party plugins and MIDI editing, recording and manipulation is as much a part of composing and recording, as raw audio. This is a fact.
Are you accusing the top mixing and mastering engineers in the world of having subpar audio, on account of using DAW hosts that aren't SAW Studio ? CLA, TLA, AW, BC, Bob Ludwig ? How about film soundtracks ? Would these really all sound noticeably better is SAW ?


Quality Violins improve with age, this involves wood (a physical material). There is no software on earth that was better 15 years ago, than a current offering. If there is, I am not aware of it. CAD evolves, Photoshop evolves, Final Cut evolves.

Innovation was likely at the heart of why you made SAW in the first place, why is it not important now ?

Look, if your goal is to simply make a product that is for you, and people who work exactly like you, and work on projects exactly like you-- then you have made the best possible software.

The problem is, unless you change, the software won't. It is tied to what you do. The industry is changing, new engineers are coming up, but you aren't changing.

I am not a particularly special engineer, I am not the best mixer, not the best at editing, not the best at tracking. I am though, a professional and have, and continue to work as a professional in sales (live production), FOH , engineer and mix engineer. I represent what a lot of the users that need quality software represent. That is, dynamic use of software for a wide variety of needs.

Once again, I don't expect anything out of this, other than an open dialogue on the future of your product. That is because I am interested to know, and love your product, your style and your past work. I just want to know what lays down the road. And from what I gather, more of exactly the same, with SAC becoming your flagship product (earner).

User forums constantly have criticism of their own products, and companies (even Avid) taylor their programs to the users who, as a majority, have a need or want for the way they work. Reaper has a formal feature request system that is voted on by the user base. The developer directly actions the future of the product based on these requests.

Lastly, price.

Why can Avid, Steinberg, Magix, MOTU and countless others make a profit off a product that costs less, with massively higher overhead ? Volume. How do you sell more ? Make something people want.
Addressing potential customers with "Oh, you'll be back, they all come crawling back" is arrogant and telling. Are you really that much smarter than us ? You know better than we do what WE want ? Please have a hard think on that topic.

Sorry for the upset, I was simply interested to know what is happening, as it seems SAW is dying a slow death and I think it's a shame. "
Old 21st December 2011
  #2
Lives for gear
 

Blimey, that must be some super-special, high-end product that you're talking about. In fact, it's so high-end that it's the first time I've even heard of it. Although, to be fair, I'm just a tired old keyboard player who records some stuff at home and who has only had a passing interest in music and recording technology since, oh, 1975 or thereabouts. Presumably, not being any kind of pro, it isn't really surprising that I should never have heard of this thing, much less been allowed to see or touch it.

Mind you, with an attitude like the one shown in that guy's message, I don't think I'd buy and use his product even if I was the biggest pro in the world and had dollar bills, diamonds and gold nuggets falling out of all my orifices. Jeez.
Old 21st December 2011
  #3
[QUOTE=adrianww;7354202]Blimey, that must be some super-special, high-end product that you're talking about. In fact, it's so high-end that it's the first time I've even heard of it. Although, to be fair, I'm just a tired old keyboard player who records some stuff at home and who has only had a passing interest in music and recording technology since, oh, 1975 or thereabouts. Presumably, not being any kind of pro, it isn't really surprising that I should never have heard of this thing, much less been allowed to see or touch it.

Mind you, with an attitude like the one shown in that guy's message, I don't think I'd buy and use his product even if I was the biggest pro in the world and had dollar bills, diamonds and gold nuggets falling out of all my orifices. Jeez.[/QUOTE

I have NEVER seen some arrogance from an owner, and I worked for some pretty amazingly ignorant and arrogant people in this industry.

I actually like his product, but think it needs to come forward on many fronts. It is obscure, but he does have some very cool concepts.... just not $2500 worth.

Needless to say, I will never, ever, ever buy it again or tell anybody to use it.

But I am only a lowly engineer, who can't hear the difference in a blind test between daws.
Old 21st December 2011
  #4
[QUOTE=NewfoundlandRec;7354323]
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrianww View Post
Blimey, that must be some super-special, high-end product that you're talking about. In fact, it's so high-end that it's the first time I've even heard of it. Although, to be fair, I'm just a tired old keyboard player who records some stuff at home and who has only had a passing interest in music and recording technology since, oh, 1975 or thereabouts. Presumably, not being any kind of pro, it isn't really surprising that I should never have heard of this thing, much less been allowed to see or touch it.

Mind you, with an attitude like the one shown in that guy's message, I don't think I'd buy and use his product even if I was the biggest pro in the world and had dollar bills, diamonds and gold nuggets falling out of all my orifices. Jeez.[/QUOTE

I have NEVER seen some arrogance from an owner, and I worked for some pretty amazingly ignorant and arrogant people in this industry.

I actually like his product, but think it needs to come forward on many fronts. It is obscure, but he does have some very cool concepts.... just not $2500 worth.

Needless to say, I will never, ever, ever buy it again or tell anybody to use it.

But I am only a lowly engineer, who can't hear the difference in a blind test between daws.

.... and the Developer, Bob Lentini just deleted my thread. Awesome.

This guy is a piece of work.
Old 21st December 2011
  #5
Lives for gear
 

I read the - now deleted - thread today...

I don't like the fact, that Bod deleted your thread and I can't follow the analogy with the Stradivarius and the Ferrari but imho calling him "extremely arrogant, or ignorant" is not helpful (at least).

Compered to Nuendo, Pro Tools or Reaper I miss some useful features too (e.g. built in metrome, better handling of some VST plugins like lexicon PCM, scalable track/channels count, seamless looping in the multitrack view, a nicer GUI).

Non the less I like SAW very much and think the price for the "lite" version (on christmas sale now) is worth it. I especially like the "sound" (or the lack of "sound") very much. I just compared the multitrack drum recordings from the Tube Tech site in Reaper, Pro Tools 10 HD and SAW (all faders set to zero) via my Forssell converters, Geithain MO-2 speakers and Beyer DT880 headphones. To my ears SAW "sounds" more precice on transients and more "punchy". I like the stero image of the room and OH mics better too (but maybe the pan law is differnt in SAW?). A friend of mine hears this differences too (he studied violin and has very good and "educated" ears). But try for yourself...

Oliver
Old 21st December 2011
  #6
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzjoe View Post
I read the - now deleted - thread today...

I don't like the fact, that Bod deleted your thread and I can't follow the analogy with the Stradivarius and the Ferrari but imho calling him "extremely arrogant, or ignorant" is not helpful (at least).

Compered to Nuendo, Pro Tools or Reaper I miss some useful features too (e.g. built in metrome, better handling of some VST plugins like lexicon PCM, scalable track/channels count, seamless looping in the multitrack view, a nicer GUI).

Non the less I like SAW very much and think the price for the "lite" version (on christmas sale now) is worth it. I especially like the "sound" (or the lack of "sound") very much. I just compared the multitrack drum recordings from the Tube Tech site in Reaper, Pro Tools 10 HD and SAW (all faders set to zero) via my Forssell converters, Geithain MO-2 speakers and Beyer DT880 headphones. To my ears SAW "sounds" more precice on transients and more "punchy". I like the stero image of the room and OH mics better too (but maybe the pan law is differnt in SAW?). A friend of mine hears this differences too (he studied violin and has very good and "educated" ears). But try for yourself...

Oliver
Ok, firstly, if it bothers you that Bob deleted my thread, why not post about it on the saw page ? It would be appreciated, because I am not stirring the pot again, nobody on there actually cares about what I had to say.

Secondly, Bob really is arrogant, did your read what he wrote ? If this isnt' clear elitism, what is ? Ferraris, Stradivarius.... seriously ?

I feel because he is the sole creator, everybody views him as god, and to question him, is a sin!

Lastly, I have done DAW shootouts between PT, Nuendo, Saw Studio and Samp/Seq with some friends a couple of years ago. At that time, in a blind situation, none of us were able to determine which DAW was which and nobody could pick the same one more than 50% of the time as being best.

This follows what has been documented in most other tests.

When I have SAW open, Reaper open or using PT, Nuendo etc at formal studio, I hear small changes. This is likely due to the fact the visual elements evoke different responses from us.

When i can't see it, I don't hear it either.

Mind you, I didn't study Violin. I do have several thousand hours of listening to music critically, however.

John
Old 21st December 2011
  #7
Lives for gear
 
santibanks's Avatar
just a question, why aren't you using something else instead? Avid, Steinberg, Apple, Motu are cheaper and offer more functionality. As you already point out, we are talking about code here. Not some exotic kind of wood and a 200 year old brand nameโ€ฆ
Old 21st December 2011
  #8
Gear Addict
 

What was the discussion about?
All that's provided here are responses, but responses to what?
Old 21st December 2011
  #9
Quote:
Originally Posted by santibanks View Post
just a question, why aren't you using something else instead? Avid, Steinberg, Apple, Motu are cheaper and offer more functionality. As you already point out, we are talking about code here. Not some exotic kind of wood and a 200 year old brand nameโ€ฆ
I am, actually I use Reaper and am picking up PT10 as I am sick of importing files when most of the people I work with use it anyway.

However, I was interested to see if SAW might be moving into this decade feature wise, because i like the things it does, it just doesn't do a lot more.
Old 21st December 2011
  #10
Quote:
Originally Posted by original_min View Post
What was the discussion about?
All that's provided here are responses, but responses to what?
I would post it all, but he deleted it.

I simply posted stating I was a past customer, currently using Reaper, and I am wondering what the vision is for the development of SAW Studio as it has barely changed in the five years sine I first purchased it.

I aske if there were plans for integration of things like actual MIDI integration, proper grid lines for the Midi Add One he does have, expanded routing, VCA (DCA), mp3 bouncing, expanded file type handling, windows 7 stability, making the GUI post 1995. and a price less than $2500.

He didn't like it and posted the first response you see from him, and my response to him. He then got really upset, but I can't post it since it's gone.

I then got a PM from another forum member there saying that whenever anybody calls him out or questions him, the thread is deleted. Status Quo.

I though people may want this information as I see there is still some interest in this product.

The things I learned were:

1. This software is not changing.
2. The developer doesn't care what the users need
3. He is basically only selling it as an add on to his SAC (Live FOH Software)
4. SAW sounds better than other DAWs, but only those with the most elite and finely tuned ears can hear it. If you can't hear it, you aren't good enough to use the product
5. People don't want anybody questioning their $2500 purchases
Old 21st December 2011
  #11
Lives for gear
 

Posting only his response and not your original post to begin with, is EXTREMELY suspect.

Why you also posted here before it was deleted is in question. Again suspect. Smells like a smear campaign.
Old 21st December 2011
  #12
Lives for gear
 

I was a SAW user for a very very long time. I'm one of the guys who (not that long ago) sold his SAW license, because I needed features that Bob was never going to implement.

You don't post your original post to him, but from the response I can see why you got the reply that you did. You are not the first person to challenge him on the cost of his product, and he is right, the discussions go a certain way, make a lot of useless noise on his forum, and have no useful end. You might have not intended it to go that way, but they always do. After 10 years or so of the same argument being trolled into his forums by non-users, I can understand his frustration. Right or wrong, it's his forum, he can run it as he sees fit. (Just as this forum is run.... and posts disappear from here, too.)

Also, anyone who knows Bob knows that if you are going to use SAW or SAC, you have to be" on the bus". He builds software to do what he needs software to do. He runs live shows in Vegas, builds the stuff for himself, and offers it for sale. If you need to do something else, you need to go somewhere else. He's kind of a genius, but he has no time for pissing around or trying to make nice. That pisses people off. They want to argue with him, he doesn't want to argue. He is also very loyal and helpful, IF you are "on the bus". Back in the day there were times when he would send out two or three revisions on SAW a day, as new ideas hit him and he coded them into the product. At times he will add a feature that people want, but usually he won't. The result is a tighter non-bloated code that is small and doesn't crash.

In any case, a product should be judged upon it's merits. What it does NOT do is superfluous, because if it does not do something that you need to do, then it is not the product for you. What it does, it does exceedingly well. It does it well enough that a small group of loyal users are willing to pay for it. You can't really compare SAW to the usual crop of PC DAW programs, because it is a fixed point product. (If I remember correctly, it is fixed in some areas, floating in some areas, and fixed again in the mix bus. But it's been a while since I paid any attention to that stuff.)

Anyway, it is probably the most solid, rock solid DAW that I've ever used, and I've used most of them at one time or another. I have no complaints about the sound, the work flow or the cost, because it does everything that it says it does. Wish other DAW softwares did that. If it had the key features that I needed, I'd still be using it and I would never have discovered the joys and advantages of the program I use now. I don't see myself going back, but if my needs changed and I did, it would not be a hardship.
Old 21st December 2011
  #13
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrides View Post
Posting only his response and not your original post to begin with, is EXTREMELY suspect.

Why you also posted here before it was deleted is in question. Again suspect. Smells like a smear campaign.
I am just sharing this, take it for what it is worth. If you don't use SAW, or plan to.

Sorry if this is suspect.
Old 21st December 2011
  #14
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
I was a SAW user for a very very long time. I'm one of the guys who (not that long ago) sold his SAW license, because I needed features that Bob was never going to implement.

You don't post your original post to him, but from the response I can see why you got the reply that you did. You are not the first person to challenge him on the cost of his product, and he is right, the discussions go a certain way, make a lot of useless noise on his forum, and have no useful end. You might have not intended it to go that way, but they always do. After 10 years or so of the same argument being trolled into his forums by non-users, I can understand his frustration. Right or wrong, it's his forum, he can run it as he sees fit. (Just as this forum is run.... and posts disappear from here, too.)

Also, anyone who knows Bob knows that if you are going to use SAW or SAC, you have to be" on the bus". He builds software to do what he needs software to do. He runs live shows in Vegas, builds the stuff for himself, and offers it for sale. If you need to do something else, you need to go somewhere else. He's kind of a genius, but he has no time for pissing around or trying to make nice. That pisses people off. They want to argue with him, he doesn't want to argue. He is also very loyal and helpful, IF you are "on the bus". Back in the day there were times when he would send out two or three revisions on SAW a day, as new ideas hit him and he coded them into the product. At times he will add a feature that people want, but usually he won't. The result is a tighter non-bloated code that is small and doesn't crash.

In any case, a product should be judged upon it's merits. What it does NOT do is superfluous, because if it does not do something that you need to do, then it is not the product for you. What it does, it does exceedingly well. It does it well enough that a small group of loyal users are willing to pay for it. You can't really compare SAW to the usual crop of PC DAW programs, because it is a fixed point product. (If I remember correctly, it is fixed in some areas, floating in some areas, and fixed again in the mix bus. But it's been a while since I paid any attention to that stuff.)

Anyway, it is probably the most solid, rock solid DAW that I've ever used, and I've used most of them at one time or another. I have no complaints about the sound, the work flow or the cost, because it does everything that it says it does. Wish other DAW softwares did that. If it had the key features that I needed, I'd still be using it and I would never have discovered the joys and advantages of the program I use now. I don't see myself going back, but if my needs changed and I did, it would not be a hardship.
Hey Bill

Thanks for your comments.

I actually did use SAW (I bought SS Basic in 06 to test drive it), I loved what it did and with time, as projects drifted further and further and further away from being strictly audio, I chose to go in other directions.

I kept missing the core features of SAW, but couldn't justify the expense when I could only use it on 10% of projects (Straight Audio Projects).

Today I wanted to see where the program was heading, and just started a useful discussion about why SAW isn't moving ahead.

I am not a troll, I have been registered on there for five years. Bob has been very helpful when I first needed assistance with his brilliant, yet very counter intuitive product (initially).

I think it's a shame SS will die, and had hope Bob would bring it ahead of the pack again. He did it before, why not again ?

From what you say, this has played out many times before, though I have never seen it on the forum. Likely because he zapped them before I could read them.

At any rate, I won't be giving him my money again and won't be bothering to post there.

I am not ok with a product that demands blind allegiance. I am a customer, not an employee of his corporation.

Thanks for your comments, good to hear from somebody that was a long time user.

Last edited by NewfoundlandRec; 21st December 2011 at 11:21 PM.. Reason: Edited for brutalizing the english language.
Old 21st December 2011
  #15
Lives for gear
I could never stand to look at SAW Studio, the interface really does need work. I would really love to hear the audio quality difference with an A/B test, until then, its hard to believe. I can guarantee you that the most amazing sounding recordings you have heard were likely mixed in another DAW, I dont know of any big name mixing engineers that use SAW.

With 64 bit internal audio engines in most DAWs now, I cant imagine what SAW has to offer in terms of audio fidelity.
Old 21st December 2011
  #16
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by soundpalace View Post
I would really love to hear the audio quality difference with an A/B test, until then, its hard to believe.
Get a screenshot of SAW from Google and flip between it and your DAW while listening to a piece of music in iTunes.
Old 21st December 2011
  #17
Quote:
Originally Posted by timlloyd View Post
Get a screenshot of SAW from Google and flip between it and your DAW while listening to a piece of music in iTunes.
Hey Tim, Southpaw from Reaper forum here. Glad to see you around here.
Old 21st December 2011
  #18
Quote:
Originally Posted by timlloyd View Post
Get a screenshot of SAW from Google and flip between it and your DAW while listening to a piece of music in iTunes.
p.s Tim, that is exactly right!
Old 22nd December 2011
  #19
Gear Addict
 

I'm definitely not "on the bus" when it comes to Saw and SAC. I like the idea of the SAC, but I would not want my reputation to ride on the back of Behringer pres, windows XP, and a mouse. The SAC could be great if Bob weren't so arrogant. There is no hope for SAW, it's decades old.

And what's with comparing a Ferrari to a Pinto? Does anyone under 40 even know what a Pinto is?

If Bob were living in this century he would realize that 2011 Ford focus would run circles around a 70s Ferrari in more comfort and with better gas mileage. Granted, the Ferrari would still be more magical

In Bob's defense, it's his company, and if he makes a good living, then he really owes the world nothing. He's just kind enough to share his hobby, or should I say let his customers support and take part in his hobby.

I'll never be a Saw user for the same reason I'll likely never be a Pro Tools user - neither of them do what I need them to do for my job. Avid's Pro Tools is getting significantly closer to what I need with each release. Maybe Avid listens to suggestions?

~Jay
Old 22nd December 2011
  #20
Lives for gear
 

I'm gonna have to side with Bob Lentini on this one .. and I'll tell you why.

He's not making a product to compete with the crowd. And somehow, he's been successfully doing that in his own personal vision for longer than Protools has been around. Or thereabouts.

Buy his product for what it is. Or don't buy it for what it is.

But treat the guy's responses for what they are ... one single guy... who developed the program and works it forward according to his artistic vision. Not to "your" vision. He believes in what he does and is proud of his work. Get in that mindset, and you can at least appreciate where he's coming from.

I don't use Saw. I did buy the original version way way way back when it was the first daw available to me on old 386 machines (remember those in the early 90s?).

I've talked with Lentini a few times. He's a cool guy. Mostly because he follows his beliefs. Not a bunch of "consumers".

Appreciate that.... that type of independence is lacking in the world. Even if you don't like his stuff.

I suggest sending him an email and apologizing for calling him arrogant or ignorant. That was uncalled for and out of line.
Old 22nd December 2011
  #21
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenoodle View Post
I'm gonna have to side with Bob Lentini on this one .. and I'll tell you why.

He's not making a product to compete with the crowd. And somehow, he's been successfully doing that in his own personal vision for longer than Protools has been around. Or thereabouts.

Buy his product for what it is. Or don't buy it for what it is.

But treat the guy's responses for what they are ... one single guy... who developed the program and works it forward according to his artistic vision. Not to "your" vision. He believes in what he does and is proud of his work. Get in that mindset, and you can at least appreciate where he's coming from.

I don't use Saw. I did buy the original version way way way back when it was the first daw available to me on old 386 machines (remember those in the early 90s?).

I've talked with Lentini a few times. He's a cool guy. Mostly because he follows his beliefs. Not a bunch of "consumers".

Appreciate that.... that type of independence is lacking in the world. Even if you don't like his stuff.

I suggest sending him an email and apologizing for calling him arrogant or ignorant. That was uncalled for and out of line.
I disagree, that I was out of line.

Bob is a nice guy, when you are talking about what he did well. If you want to discuss what he didn't, not so much.

He was being ignorant and arrogant and that was evidenced by further posts he made before he deleted the thread.

There will be no apology today. As a customer, I don't think I need to apologize, but I said nothing that wasn't true. If he wants to call me an asshole, he is welcome to.
Old 22nd December 2011
  #22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay M View Post
I'm definitely not "on the bus" when it comes to Saw and SAC. I like the idea of the SAC, but I would not want my reputation to ride on the back of Behringer pres, windows XP, and a mouse. The SAC could be great if Bob weren't so arrogant. There is no hope for SAW, it's decades old.

And what's with comparing a Ferrari to a Pinto? Does anyone under 40 even know what a Pinto is?

If Bob were living in this century he would realize that 2011 Ford focus would run circles around a 70s Ferrari in more comfort and with better gas mileage. Granted, the Ferrari would still be more magical

In Bob's defense, it's his company, and if he makes a good living, then he really owes the world nothing. He's just kind enough to share his hobby, or should I say let his customers support and take part in his hobby.

I'll never be a Saw user for the same reason I'll likely never be a Pro Tools user - neither of them do what I need them to do for my job. Avid's Pro Tools is getting significantly closer to what I need with each release. Maybe Avid listens to suggestions?

~Jay
Nail on the head!

I think the last time I knew someone with a Pinto, I was a kid and it was 1982.
Old 22nd December 2011
  #23
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by timlloyd View Post
Get a screenshot of SAW from Google and flip between it and your DAW while listening to a piece of music in iTunes.
Exactly!

Quote:
Originally Posted by NewfoundlandRec View Post
I disagree, that I was out of line.

Bob is a nice guy, when you are talking about what he did well. If you want to discuss what he didn't, not so much.

He was being ignorant and arrogant and that was evidenced by further posts he made before he deleted the thread.

There will be no apology today. As a customer, I don't think I need to apologize, but I said nothing that wasn't true. If he wants to call me an asshole, he is welcome to.
As customers, we should have the right to shape the future of an application, for without our business, these companies (or individuals) would be out of business. After the loyal fans of SAW retire or stop using it (as you have), there won't be any users left. Anyone new to recording now won't choose SAW over Studio One, Cubase, Logic, Live, ProTools .etc which keep adapting to the times and needs of users at the fraction of the cost, let alone the fact that they are accepted as industry standard and available in most commercial studios (unlike SAW).

If you ran over his cat, it may be worth apologising ... but not after providing constructive criticism about the application you have paid money for.
Old 22nd December 2011
  #24
Quote:
Originally Posted by soundpalace View Post
Exactly!



As customers, we should have the right to shape the future of an application, for without our business, these companies (or individuals) would be out of business. After the loyal fans of SAW retire or stop using it (as you have), there won't be any users left. Anyone new to recording now won't choose SAW over Studio One, Cubase, Logic, Live, ProTools .etc which keep adapting to the times and needs of users at the fraction of the cost, let alone the fact that they are accepted as industry standard and available in most commercial studios (unlike SAW).

If you ran over his cat, it may be worth apologising ... but not after providing constructive criticism about the application you have paid money for.
Precisely, I didn't $%#! his mother, or kill his dog, I asked what the vision for his company was and why his product wasn't making any attempt to keep up and why a lagging product should cost 2-3 times more. That is literally all I did.

He responded in a condescending, passive-aggresive manner and tried to make it sound like I wasn't of the ilk that can appreciate his product.

I responded with the above.

what I meant to say was...... G. F........
Old 22nd December 2011
  #25
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewfoundlandRec View Post
Precisely, I didn't $%#! his mother, or kill his dog, I asked what the vision for his company was and why his product wasn't making any attempt to keep up and why a lagging product should cost 2-3 times more. That is literally all I did.

He responded in a condescending, passive-aggresive manner and tried to make it sound like I wasn't of the ilk that can appreciate his product.

I responded with the above.

what I meant to say was...... G. F........
You were giving him attitude, and he didn't want to kiss your butt.
Right or wrong, I respect someone who takes pride in his product and defends it.
No need to try and win empathy votes with a smear campaign...let it go.
Old 22nd December 2011
  #26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yetti View Post
You were giving him attitude, and he didn't want to kiss your butt.
Right or wrong, I respect someone who takes pride in his product and defends it.
No need to try and win empathy votes with a smear campaign...let it go.
Attitude, it sure didn't start that way. I was asking where the product was headed, and I got torches and angry mob, right off the bat.

I didn't accept his assertion that his product sounds better and is better than anything else on earth and that it doesn't need improvement, and he gave me attitude. I returned the favour.

Last edited by NewfoundlandRec; 22nd December 2011 at 01:59 PM.. Reason: typos
Old 22nd December 2011
  #27
Lives for gear
 

SAW has always looked like someone vomited over the page in technicolor.
But the product has a flawless reputation for stability and this aspect alone is fundamentally important to many professional DAW users. Lentini works in assembler, building raw machine code. He's a purist, known for being stubborn about his views on float vs fixed point, dither vs truncation. You may disagree with some of his conclusions and his development policies, but his commitment and diligence is beyond reproach.

Respect.

If his software doesnt do what you need, use something else. Reaper isnt expensive.

Sean
Old 22nd December 2011
  #28
Quote:
My design goals with SAWStudio and SAC have focused on audio integrity and work flow performance... not bells and whistles.
This is what Bob should have stuck with. It is how he works, and pretty well expresses the unwritten fact that you buy a software license "as is", with no guarantee for any updates, paid or free.

The rest of his answer is a mismatched and confusing attempt to justify his motivation to work on SAW, IMO.
Old 22nd December 2011
  #29
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by diggo View Post
SAW has always looked like someone vomited over the page in technicolor.
But the product has a flawless reputation for stability and this aspect alone is fundamentally important to many professional DAW users. Lentini works in assembler, building raw machine code. He's a purist, known for being stubborn about his views on float vs fixed point, dither vs truncation. You may disagree with some of his conclusions and his development policies, but his commitment and diligence is beyond reproach.

Respect.

If his software doesnt do what you need, use something else. Reaper isnt expensive.

Sean
Maybe he is a purist, a purist behaving like a brat. Is he 16 or what? Avid has suffered more bashing in the DUC (about Delay Compensation and Offline bounce" than this old brat, and I've never read a response like this in the DUC. He's the Axl Rose of the CEOs. In fact, Axl Rose would have kicked him from the Guns N' Roses for having so much ego.
Old 22nd December 2011
  #30
Gear Addict
 
The Hydrilla's Avatar
 

i am both horrified and unsurprised at that response. Two and a half THOUSAND dollars for a DAW!? ............ you signed up for that insanity.
๐Ÿ“ Reply
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
๐Ÿ–จ๏ธ Show Printable Version
โœ‰๏ธ Email this Page
๐Ÿ” Search thread
๐ŸŽ™๏ธ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump