New here

[Doriengray]

Hey everyone,

I'm new to the discoussion board as stated! Just wondering if anyone else has Protools digi002r in their setup.
I used to use Sawpro,and dug it,but have since gone down the protools road. I;m just wondering if anyone would suggest purchasing Sawstudio lite to replace my DAC of Protools. I currently bypass all the hardware of protools(via RME and TC Goldchannel converters),and have heard that as a mix station,Sawstudio has a much better 'sound' than the protools engine.....

any thoughts?
thanks guys,
Dorien

[studio-c]

Can't answer the ProTools question, but I just wanted to say hello and welcome. You'll get some good answers very soon...

[Veit Kenner]

and have heard that as a mix station,Sawstudio has a much better 'sound' than the protools engine.....
Hi Dorien,

welcome to the board.

I can't compare to the Digi hardware since I'm using RME for a long time myself - and I'm quite happy.

I highly recommend to try out the SAWStudio demo version. This will be the only way to make up your own mind in your own surrounding. There had been many reports on this board about an audible difference in soundquality.

You can download the demo at http://www.sawstudio.com/Downloads.htm

Best regards,

Veit

[Jay Q]

I;m just wondering if anyone would suggest purchasing Sawstudio lite to replace my DAC of Protools.Is that a rhetorical question? ;) Certainly some on this board would suggest that, but if engineering is your bread and butter, makes sense to keep Protools around, too, dontcha think? But like Veit said, just check out the SAW demo. Compare a real-world mix of at least 10 tracks in both apps. I bet you'll like what you hear in SAW.

Jay

[Bill Park]

Hey everyone,

....have heard that as a mix station,Sawstudio has a much better 'sound' than the protools engine.....

any thoughts?
thanks guys,
Dorien

If you go to 3daudioinc.com you'll find the DAW SUM CD. In it, you'll find 30 different platforms, each performing the same tasts in the same measured way. You can listen to these 30 setups for yourself, and pick the one that sounds best to you, then get the key and see which setup you liked best. Buy that one.

Bill

[Bob L]

Welcome to the board... glad you are looking into the SAWStudio environment.

Take some time... watch the demo videos online... download the demo and start experimenting with the program... there is much that you will find different in the world of SAWStudio... many claim an audio difference in the mix engine... but there is much more about the SAWStudio method that contributes to an enhanced audio recording and mixing experience for many.

Learn the interface enough to get a feel for how quickly you can move around... experiment with the F-Key Views... this is one of the most powerful features in the design.

Any specific questions we can answer for you here, we are all happy to do so.

Good Luck,

Bob L

[Mark Stebbeds]

I'm new to the discoussion board as stated! Just wondering if anyone else has Protools digi002r in their setup.
I used to use Sawpro,and dug it,but have since gone down the protools road. I;m just wondering if anyone would suggest purchasing Sawstudio lite to replace my DAC of Protools. I currently bypass all the hardware of protools(via RME and TC Goldchannel converters),and have heard that as a mix station,Sawstudio has a much better 'sound' than the protools engine.....


I am SawPro user who went down the Pro Tools HD road, mostly for business and compatibilty issues.

Your question is a bit confusing because you are referring to replacing your Digi converters by purchasing SS, which doesn't make sense, since you have already bypassed them.

Regarding the quality of the SawStudio engine vs. Pro Tools....A few people on this forum swear that they can hear a quality difference using SS, and others think that any difference is negligable. If you go to the Digi User Conference, you will find a link to a "white paper" expainng how their 48 bit mix reigns supreme, but others disagree.

I happen to believe that if there is a difference, it is far less important than anything else in the chain, such as the converters, the speakers and amps, the furniture in the room or how much coffee you had that morning, and most importantly, the work flow. If you can work more creatively, that increases the sound quality of your work.

I have several audio apps I use for different reasons, and to import/export back and forth between them to meet the needs of my clients.

Like others have said, download the demo, and decide for yourself.

Mark

[Sam C]

Welcome!

[mghtx]

I happen to believe that if there is a difference, it is far less important than anything else in the chain, such as the converters, the speakers and amps, the furniture in the room or how much coffee you had that morning, and most importantly, the work flow. If you can work more creatively, that increases the sound quality of your work.

Agreed. But * I * do hear a difference with * my * setup when using SAW as compared to other software. Other software can sound REALLY good, but there is a depth in the sound I get from SAW that I haven't heard from anything else I've used.

Also the stability and speed of SAW is incredible. I always tell people to check out the "orientation" video and pay CLOSE attention to what is going on. The number of tracks, plug-ins, etc. And then realize that it's happening on a 1 Ghz laptop with 512 mb of ram. :eek:

[Mark Stebbeds]

Agreed. But * I * do hear a difference with * my * setup when using SAW as compared to other software.

What other software you are comparing it to on your system, using the same converters, etc.? When this question has arisen in the past, it frequently lead to conversation about certain plug-ins sounding better.


Also the stability and speed of SAW is incredible.

I concur that SS may be more stable than other apps I've used on the PC platform, but how is it "faster", other than being familiar with it?

Mark

[Ian Alexander]

Mark,

This is purely anecdotal, but I visit quite a few other studios using software other than SS. Many times, I'll watch them do a quick edit or a rough mix and it seems to take a lot longer than I think it would take me in SS. Often, in commercial VO, timing a take is needed. With SS, B at the beginning and E at the end and read the time. PT seems to require that you drag over the entire section being timed, unless these guys just don't know the interface.

OTOH, if they were watching me, perhaps they'd have exactly the same feeling. It may be that time slows down when one is watching rather than doing.

[Bill Park]

So often it is a matter of the operator. I've been using a different program at home, and SS resides at the studio. I've always loved the speed at which things get done in SS. I remember waiting and waiting for other softwares to do things that, under SAW, I never had to deal with... I could just keep on working.


And as a user of other softwares, I still say that nothing is as stable as SS.

Sound? That is a tricky one. People claim that this app or that app sounds "better", while I'm thinking that I don't want my app to sound like anything.

But it is true that, even back in the old SAW Classic days, I could open the same file in Saw and in Sound Forge 3, and they did sound different. It was apparent even in those limited converter quality 16 bit days. I have no doubt that there is a difference today, I just don't care or think about it at all.

I believe that the best way to pick a software is to pick the one that helps you to get done what you need to do, with the least headaches and heartaches.

Bill

[mghtx]

What other software you are comparing it to on your system, using the same converters, etc.? When this question has arisen in the past, it frequently lead to conversation about certain plug-ins sounding better.

It may just be one of those placebo type of things but I can take a wav file and run it thru SAW, Sonar, or Cubase and SAW sounds the best to me. Sure, the others sound really good too (with Sonar a little better than Cubase) but SAW does it better. No plug-ins used with this example.


I concur that SS may be more stable than other apps I've used on the PC platform, but how is it "faster", other than being familiar with it?

When I "tell" SAW to do something it does it immediately without the usual hiccup that I sometimes get with other software. I wasn't really talking about just being familiar with the app.

[Veit Kenner]

but how is it "faster", other than being familiar with it?
I agree. IMHO "faster" depends much more on how well you can handle a software than actually how fast screen redraws, number of clicks et all work.

Admittedly SS has a lot to offer for a speedy workflow :-)

Veit

[trock]

I wade in here a much more informed and experienced user than i once was.

So let me start by saying this.

SAW, for me, has made my recording/mixing of songs i write a very pleasurable experience. much more so than the other platforms i have worked on.

I still have Cubase SX 3 on a top of the line G5 (not so top any more i guess, it is a year or so old) and the reason i didn;t like SX 3 was i happened to time my purchase of SX 2 when OS X came out and there were HUGE compatability issues between the 2. so my experience with Cubase was frustrating at best

I also had a Roland VS2480, which i loved, and made great music on. however the ability to edit, or do backups, or do alot of the things that software based DAW's allow you to do was difficult or took ALOT of time (backing up 10 songs coule take 3-4 hours!)

I made the mistake here of saying i thought SAW gave me a better overall sound than the other platforms. i have since tested it agaist cubase at least, same RME, SAme peulso, same guitar, same room, same song, same strings, just not the same cup of coffee.

and

they really are about the same. i do agree that there seems to be more depth in the SAW one, BUT it is very very close and i could be wrong and probably am.

however this is what i love about SAW, in a nutshell, as a basic, relatively dumb, home based, non professional user.

1) the layout and the way i have set it up to work, the F key views make my recording experience immensley enjoyable. stable, fast, interesting etc

2) the stability of SAW on a PC is wonderful, the cubase crashes i think are mostly gone now but i still had an awful experience with is and that tainted my opinion. the roland was rock solid too, no complaints there.

3) almost as important as the other 2, actually more so, is the wonderful support and knowledge on this forum.to be able to speak to bob directly and get answers is the best experience i have ever had, the other memebers here are always helpful and very smart (many many other s, of course on other platforms are too). i also like the size of the group, you get answer very quickly. you will not get better support anywhere.

4) the free upgrades that happen so often.

5) etc - meaning the little things i have discovered that will probably be different than yours.

so i hope this was helpful and not boastful.

i have never used NUendo, Pro Tools, Sonar, etc etc so i cannot speak to them. i do know that everyone has a fav and i have even spoken to some very TOP people in the industry who run their studio's with Pro Tools and the Neve analog stuff etc etc and they LOVE their pro tools. and thats cool. but for the price point of SAW vs the HD stuff and for what i need (key) this has been by far the best recording setup i have ever had.

i also agree that quality of front end gear is importnat, room treatment is HUGE, your own ability and experience level and on an on

i have API gear in my front end, a peluso mic, and RNC comp and i LOVE my vocals and acoustic guitar. i still suffer from gear lust and would love to have some Pendulum, UA, Gefell stuff etc but that is a whole other discussion

good luck on your decision. if it is SAW you will not be dissapointed

[Mark Stebbeds]

When I "tell" SAW to do something it does it immediately without the usual hiccup that I sometimes get with other software.

If you are having "hiccups" with audio apps I suspect it is a system problem, or buffer settings, etc.

A few years ago, there were popular audio apps that responded slower in regard to screen redraws than SAW, but I think it's a level playing field now. I use several audio apps on a daily basis, both on Mac and PC, and everything seems to respond instantaneously.

Mark

[Mark Stebbeds]

<snip>

Often, in commercial VO, timing a take is needed. With SS, B at the beginning and E at the end and read the time. PT seems to require that you drag over the entire section being timed, unless these guys just don't know the interface.

OTOH, if they were watching me, perhaps they'd have exactly the same feeling. It may be that time slows down when one is watching rather than doing.

Very good point about B & E, particularly when "E" is off the screen, and scrolling or zooming out is required. There is a shortcut in PT other than click and drag to select an area, but it escapes me at the moment, and isn't commonly used.

OTOH, I find the inabilty to click and drag on a waveform in SS a hinderance to fast editing and intuitive work flow. This is a feature in virtually every other audio app, as well as word processors, speadsheets, graphics programs, etc. Something I have been asking for in a update for years.

Point and click and/or to select was a building block of GUI, and is extremely intuitive.

Mark

[mghtx]

If you are having "hiccups" with audio apps I suspect it is a system problem, or buffer settings, etc.

(Sigh....) Could be. I did say "sometimes". But I'm pretty certain it's not that. What I DO KNOW is that I've not had any trouble with SAW. Lucky me I quess.

[UpTilDawn]

OTOH, I find the inabilty to click and drag on a waveform in SS a hinderance to fast editing and intuitive work flow.
Mark

Although it's not exactly like dragging on the waveform itself, dragging in the timeline selects an area the same as B & E, without the precision.

DanT

[Mark Stebbeds]

Although it's not exactly like dragging on the waveform itself, dragging in the timeline selects an area the same as B & E, without the precision.

DanT

Right, but it makes more sense to click and drag on the track itself, wouldn't you agree?

Mark

[Shawn]

I like that is is difficult, maybe even impossible in SAW to accidentially move/edit/select a region in normal operating mode, grabbing the cursor with the mouse and dragging it wherever I want, used in conjunction with the hot track solo is a great "simple" feature for me, in Sonar 2 XL and CEP 2 as well as Samplitude 6, placing/moving the cursor without selecting anything was a "drag".. ;) adding in the nice touch of simply right clicking the mouse to start stop playback just makes it a much more fluid way to move around inside of the MT for me.

:)

[UpTilDawn]

Right, but it makes more sense to click and drag on the track itself, wouldn't you agree?

Mark

I don't know that it makes more sense, but probably because of the programs I've used that do it that way (ie. Sound Forge), I've been known to inadvertently grab the cursor and drag it over the region with that expectation.

I'm perfectly comfortable with the way it works in both programs.
In fact, there are so many things about the way that Saw works that I like, I find myself wishing other programs would work that way instead of the other way around.....

just me, I suppose

DanT

[Bob L]

Mark,

I personally do not like the way the other apps did the drag on the waveform... In those apps, I find myself inadvertently moving regions and marking areas when all I wanted to do was place my cursor at a precise edit point... this is why I chose to keep the waveform area free from interaction when just moving and dragging the cursor within the waveform areas... personal preference... but heh... it is my design after all. :)

Bob L

[jeromee]

Mark,

I find myself inadvertently moving regions and marking areas when all I wanted to do was place my cursor at a precise edit point...
Bob L

I recently had to turn the mouse over to my friend at a session because of my being used to Saw. I kept moving regions in the Cubase project:D

[Dave Labrecque]

Right, but it makes more sense to click and drag on the track itself, wouldn't you agree?

Mark

Mark,

What are you trying to do, here? Drag in the MT to get a time readout, or drag in the MT to select regions? SAW can do both.

[Mark Stebbeds]

What are you trying to do, here? Drag in the MT to get a time readout, or drag in the MT to select regions?

Neither, I wish to drag in the track itself.

Mark

[Dave Labrecque]

Neither, I wish to drag in the track itself.

Mark

Yeah, yeah... for what purpose?

[Mark Stebbeds]

Yeah, yeah... for what purpose?

For the purpose of selecting an area of audio, for any number of endless reasons, such as copy, duplicate, seperate, capture a region, cut, process the area, etc., etc. Why else would I want to highlight audio?

But since nothing appears in the drop down edit or multi track menu after an area of audio is selected in the multi track, there doesn't appear to be much you can do with it in SS anyhow, other than open the soundfile window, so it's probably a moot point.

Yeah, yeah, I know.

Mark

[Mark Stebbeds]

In those apps, I find myself inadvertently moving regions and marking areas when all I wanted to do was place my cursor at a precise edit point...

Bob L

It's odd that you had a a problem with this. There are typically different modes for moving or marking, so it's hard to make that mistake. And if a region is inadvertantly nudged, there is plenty of indication that you are doing that, as well as other safety nets if you need one.

Judging by this thread, accidently moving a region in another app seems to be a concern for SS users, who are accustomed to holding down different modifier keys, or combinations of keys, to adjust a boundry or nudge a region. The mod key safety net doesn't work elsewhere.

I certainly understand and respect your intent to prevent an accident, but it really isn't a problem in reality, and most people seem to prefer point and click.

Mark

[Dave Labrecque]

For the purpose of selecting an area of audio, for any number of endless reasons, such as copy, duplicate, seperate, capture a region, cut, process the area, etc., etc. Why else would I want to highlight audio?

But since nothing appears in the drop down edit or multi track menu after an area of audio is selected in the multi track, there doesn't appear to be much you can do with it in SS anyhow, other than open the soundfile window, so it's probably a moot point.

Yeah, yeah, I know.

Mark

Okay, well you can drag in the MT window to

1) check the duration of any part of a session
2) select region entries (while in Select mode)

I take it you want to be able to do more than that by dragging over a track(s)? Sorry, that's all I got for ya.