Thinking of dipping my big toe into SAW...

[Tonehenge]

1st of all, I must identify myself as a basically happy Cubase SX user, who has learned to live with the idiosyncracies of that application. SAW looks interesting to me from the standpoint of live recording, where rock-solid stability is of paramount importance, and is not there with Cubase, although to be fair, that application has improved steadily in that regard.
Two engineers I know here in Vancouver are enthusiastic SAW advocates, and their work speaks volumes about their choices. Since I already own a pretty powerful Athlon 64 3500 based laptop with a Motu 828II and Behringer ADA8000 (surprisingly good sounding little piece of kit from such a goofy manufacturer), purchasing SawStudio Basic sems to be more economical than buying something like Alesis HD24 or Radar. Perhaps, if I am able to apprehend the Saw mixing and editing paradigm, upgrading to a more extravagant version would be possible. I don't have too much time to deal with a learning curve though, so tracking into SAW Basic, then continuing work in Cubase may be my present compromise. What say you all?:)

[AudioAstronomer]

I say you'll be up in running in no time. You have the forum here (which is full of helpful folks) the very detailed manual, audio tutorials, saw videos, (my phone number), and almost anything else you'd ever need.

Dive right in, there is a demo! :)

[Bob L]

Watch the demo videos to see SAWStudio in action... then download the demo and get started... it shouldn't take long if you jump in and enjoy the ride and the differences in the design concept. :)

Make sure to listen to the sound of the mix engine... if you find yourself agreeing with many others about hearing a difference... this could be the deciding factor to help enhance your learning cycle.

Good Luck,

Bob L

[UpTilDawn]

Tracking in Saw may be your ticket to understanding it quickly, but from my experience, editing was SO easy fo me to get a grip on that I wound up sending tracks over from my standalone recorder to edit in SAW for a month or more before I even began to explore tracking live sessions (whcih I do quite often these days).

There's a whole lot to like about the way Saw edits. I think you'll be surprised at how easy you get comfortable with it.

Good luck,

DanT

[Cary B. Cornett]

There's a whole lot to like about the way Saw edits. I think you'll be surprised at how easy you get comfortable with it.
DanT
As an "early adopter" of SAW (way before Studio was a gleam in Bob's eye), I have to agree. The ease and power of editing was the first thing that really excited me about using SAW.
I have also very seldom experienced any stability problems with SAW, and most of those turned out to be driver or hardware issues. Occasional bugs, once brought to Bob's attention, get fixed quickly. On occasion I have seen a bug fix out within hours of first notice.
If you learned on the "big iron", you will find Studio's internal mixer very easy to learn, because it is graphically laid out like an old-style console, although it includes signal routing options not available in many boards.
I must also say that I found the mix automation easier to learn and to use than either VCA (SSL) or moving fader (Necam) automation systems.
You will find a fair number of Bob's methods somewhat different from your past experience, but once you get it you will likely find that you can work faster than you did before for the same or better quality results.

[Kimbo]

Tonehenge I've only been using SAW for 6 months and it is easist program to automate and edit not to mention the it just sounds great. You won't be sorry!!!

[Tonehenge]

Reading the manual and looking at the tutorials has been helpful, but I think my biggest concern is the midi implementation. To be fair, companies like Steinberg, Cakewalk, and Emagic/Apple have a big head start in this regard, and they are highly evolved midi sequencers. Since my partner is the one who uses the midi component, I think he would balk at the SAW midi paradigm. Question...is there a way to lock another sequencer up to SAW, and use say a virtual midi cable or rewire to guide audio and or midi into SAW, so we can use virtual instruments?

[Oz Nimbus]

Since I already own a pretty powerful Athlon 64 3500 based laptop with a Motu 828II and Behringer ADA8000


Buckle your seatbelt. You won't believe how much speed you'll be able to get out of that rig with a DAW app written in assembler.

-0z-

[Bob L]

Tonehenge..

Midi is a recent add-on... the main focus of SAWStudio is audio... the reverse of the apps you mention... who tend to bring audio to that table as an add on.

Yes, you can have SAWStudio generate MTC or Smpte and drag along any hardware or software sequencer that chases either.

You can also do your midi compositions in your favorite sequencer and export a midi file which can then be imported in SAWStudio MWS.

Even though many fancy sequencer features have not yet been implemented, the one main item of focus that most other apps you mention are weak in is the absolute and tight sync between audio and midi in the SS design... the difference in sync and low jitter playback repeatably in the SS environment can more than make up for a few missing convenience features.

Bob L

[Tonehenge]

I do appreciate that perspective, and that SAW addresses the sensibilities of audio engineers 1st. I do have a recommendation though. Since midi sequencing is so important to many, why not develop a relationship with a 3rd party midi-centric company like PG Music (Band In A Box) to develop a midi sequencer for SAW. I don't see a conflict of interest, as these are two companies with highly defined visions. My partner does a lot of sequencing for them, and loves the little $50 sequencing app called Powertracks that they developed. It is notation-centric though, and that may alienate the pianoroll fans.

Your points are well taken though. Getting Cubase/Cakewalk/Acid et al to chase SAW is a routinely simple chore, and shouldn't really hamper workflow. I'm going to wander over to Perry Barrett's and just watch him work for a while....

[Bill O]

The title of your thread sounds painful. :eek:

[Tonehenge]

I didn't stop to think about that... :o

[ffarrell]

I almost joined a band call "The Toe Jam Band". :)

fvf



The title of your thread sounds painful. :eek:

[Oz Nimbus]

why not develop a relationship with a 3rd party midi-centric company like PG Music (Band In A Box) to develop a midi sequencer for SAW.



uhhh.... because SAW already has one? Midi Workshop.

[mako]

Ahhhh - good old Steinberg. I've had a relationship with them since about 1986, beginning with Pro 24 on the Atari 1040.

They did good midi stuff - they excelled. And so did C-Lab.

There was nothing around to touch them in midi land.

They both got into audio (on Atari's) and still went ( excellent for the hardware at the time) well.

They then went to PC's and, though I have no experience with Notator from then on - I sure do with Steinberg.

For me it was a most painful ride in PC world.

Some really basic stuff from the CAF 206 (Cubase Audio Falcon) days was never sorted out and bug-fixed.

For me - my Atari days were very productive - my PC days were full of anger and frustration.

I finally removed all that with a move to SAWStudio.

I am productive again - :) :) :)

-------------

I admit MWS is rather basic compared to Cubase midi - but if there's something I really want from Cubase, I go to it and get it, then put it back into MWS so I can use the absolute, rock solid, timing.

Hmmm - only ever got that previously from my Atari.

Just be careful when exporting midi's from SX (any version) that you don't have extremely long notes end up in your file. They're buggers to deal with.

------------

My Input - if you have a good/great keyboard player - then I suggest you have him/her play directly into MidiWorkShop.

If you need/like to build up things gradually, and you're comfortable with Cubase - then, best to go there. Then export midi file to MWS.

Best wishes for you

mako

[Bill O]

My Input - if you have a good/great keyboard player - then I suggest you have him/her play directly into MidiWorkshop.

Or, if you don't mind working up high without the net, record your VSTs directly to audio, making use of the layers for different takes. A multitrack without a room or mics. (A lot of disk space, though.)