SSBasic vs SSL or SS(Full)

[Fletch]

This is more of a curiosity question now that Trock has sold his SSF....but I was wondering if there are any who started with SS Basic and upgraded to SSL or SSF who could say what their experience was pre/post upgrading.

I didn't jump on Trock's sale, just because I haven't recorded ANYTHING in SSBasic yet...still reading posts here and hoping to start on the manual soon (and hoping to get Matt's videos working on my desktop too).

But from the product descriptions, if I get used to SAW -- the extra track layers and video would be very important to me (unless I track everyting in Nuendo/Cubase land first and bounce tracks down and work with video there or Vegas, etc.).

I have bought a lot of stuff too early in the past, so I decided to wait this time...but I would like to know for my own education what others think.

Thx. -- Fletch


.

[Fletch]

I think a lot depends on your reason for using SAW Studio. ...The price has a bit to do with it also, but look at your 'wants'. Look at the three systems, and see which fits where 'you' want to be in five years, then go for it.
Stashu, your points are exactly the ones I have been trying to weigh. The thing that makes it harder is trying to figure out "hope" vs "likely" when it comes to the "be in five years" part. I seriously considered buying Trock's SS, when he first posted the ad -- however, since I entered the SAW world by buying Neal Starrett's SSBasic, I found out there could be no upgrade path (other than a private sale)...and I figured there weren't too many occassions where people were selling SSF at an attractive price. But since I have NO experience with SAW yet other than a couple of crashes with the demo and now a couple with BASIC, I was skiddish. The posts I've read here plus SAWRadio and the video demos have convinced me that the problem is likely something I am doing wrong or some configuration/limitation with my PC.

Besides my limited experience with SAW -- I really am jumping into the whole creative/recording/composing realm rather late in the game. So, my creative and technical experience is also rather limited. If I hadn't prematurely bought things in error in the past, I would have likely gone for Trock's setup, because I definitely hope to pursue video/scoring work and see how layers and the add'l libraries and layers could become quite helpful. I know Nuendo has a lot of functionality...but I have been hesitent to invest a lot of time into learning/mastering it now that I've seen the SAW workflow in the demo videos.

Anyhow it is all a bit academic now...but I thought it would be good to ask just for the value of other pespectives.

[Cary B. Cornett]

As a Lite user, I have been very impressed with both the feature set and the operational convenience and efficiency of SSL. Oh, did I mention quality? I have yet to run out of tracks for anything I have done so far, but I have definitely, both for number of input channels, and number of tracks, exceeded the limits that Basic would have imposed. I find the layers very useful for comping from different takes of a track, and I have also used layers for helping me put together the best from different performances of live shows.

As for the cost, although you can't do the "upgrade", you can usually get a fairly decent discount price from one of the VIP affiliates that participates here.

A while back I worked on mixes in Nuendo at a client's studio, and I found myself really wishing I could have just pulled the tracks into SAW instead. Even though Nuendo supposedly has no limit on the number of tracks, between it and SSL, SAW is definitely, IMO, the better value. With SAW there is no dongle to worry about, and you will NEVER get the kind of customer support from Steinberg that Bob gives us here!

If Basic is still doing everything you need, you could keep working with it until you feel the need to upgrade, and you will be able to migrate any work in progress from Basic to Lite or Full with no trouble and no work lost.

[Fletch]

As a Lite user...I have definitely, both for number of input channels, and number of tracks, exceeded the limits that Basic would have imposed. ... Even though Nuendo supposedly has no limit on the number of tracks, between it and SSL, SAW is definitely, IMO, the better value. Thanks for the feedback, Cary.

I realize any disgruntled end users out there are probably not hanging out here...unless they are trying to get some problem resolved. So, I expect comments to tip on the positive side of the scales. Regardless, I appreciate hearing that you've been happy with SAW.

I also realize tastes/needs change. Sounds like from reading Trock's previous posts -- Reaper and physical faders may be what he's after...so I didn't automatically read a negative into him selling or for that matter, Neal selling (who had nothing but good things to say about SAW). And fwiw, I was impressed how Bob and everyone else have been gracious with people when they aren't happy with SAW.

At the moment, upgrading to SSL or SSF is not a huge concern...but saving money is...so I just wanted to have the thing reasoned out in my head in case another discounted SSF becomes available (assuming my own experience with SAW backs up what commendations I've read here.)

-Fletch

[UpTilDawn]

Hearing that you've had some crashes with Saw Basic leads me to believe that there are some things you need to work out with your system. I certainly wouldn't expect that getting one of the heavier load versions would help that problem get resolved and maybe even lead you to believe that Saw just couldn't work for you, which might be eroneous thinking.

But, what I would suggest is that you download all three versions, play around with them to get aquainted on a personal level with the featureset differences. That will at least give you a much better idea of what level of Saw is required for you to work well.

No matter which version you find that you need, your topmost priority will then be to figure out how to tweak your system to get the best performance from it. And as you already know, there is a great support team of users of all three versions here that are more than willing to help scope out your needs.

DanT

[trock]

Hi

I thought i would pop in here if may.

i started with saw basic, went to lite and then full. as an ex user (weird to say that) here is my eval. i am just a home based guy, also so no big bands or drums sets or really songs with more than 40 tracks (and only one of those)

saw basic was great and met basically all of my needs. obviously you know the stability and great support and sound of the product so i won't bore you there. what i found was i ran into a decent amount of songs needing more than 24 tracks, say 30 or so and going to lite, especially with layers was a natural track for me to take. loved more tracks and layers. however, and this is purely superficial, i saw the other windows full had! and fell in love with them. so moving to full from lite was purely wanting the new windows it offered, there was also the 8 layers that i used quite often for solo takes and things like that but it really came down to that for me. obviously there is alot more functionality that comes with full so take that with a grain of salt.

i think as you grow in saw and in your recording you will decide whats best for you and go from there, gea lust can be a scary thing so take your time. of all the gear i have had SAW full was one of the best purchases i made, it inspired me, and gave me all the room to grow i would have ever needed, and hell it looked cool!

all that being said, i guess if anyone was wondering, i agonized over the physical fader/old style way of doing things and bob's future for saw. believe me i went back and forth and back and forth over and over. SAW is the better DAW compared to what i have now, Sonar and Reaper. it really and truly is. however they allow me to work how i love to work, whether thats what others think or not its really just a personal thing. so in the end i went this direction and i will never have anything but good things to say about SAW. anyone ever asks i tell him the same thing, great product, great programmer, great support, great forum etc.

and yes bob is very gracious, very nice and truly always the gentleman. i think he has been around the block so many times with this stuff that its good he is not swayed by every want and need.

so there you have it, just thought i would chime in.

[mikebuzz]

Fletch I have SSL at times I would like more physical outputs BUT that is anly because I recently went to a console based mix system ( SSL has 24 outs ) This was a decision I made for MY style of workflow and preferences !!.
I used SSL for a year + with NO console but for ME when it came time to really mix I found it easier/better to work on a console and almost turn OFF the monitor !!! , ( made me use my ears NOT my eyes )

SSL has been extremely Stable for most users here ONCE your system is tweeked to max performance , ANY DAW needs to refined and tweeked to get max performance ( I tried Reaper and it had glitch's and dropouts with the same track count and FX as used in SSL , also the Automation in Reaper is infantile in comparison so ??? this is MY assessment so take it with a grain of salt )

Anyhow SAW has been a good choice for me ( because of the console like layout )

LAter
Buzz

[Microstudio]

Here is my 2 cents.

A lot can be done just with Basic... A LOT! I think a lot of people including myself jump into a DAW firstly because of the way it looks or this feature or that feature and in the end we never really learn how to use the DAW to its potential.

There are so many DAW's and you can record with all of them so why choose any of them if you already have a mixer and tape machine. Well... that’s just it. The DAW you choose should be the one that you know how to use the best.... they all record, edit..ect

Out of all the DAW's I have and have used I know SAWStudio the best and I bought SAWStudio because I wanted lots of layers... it comes in handy for me.

Choose the DAW you need then get it... Learn it and it will become transparent to you in your recording process.:cool:

[Fletch]

Hearing that you've had some crashes with Saw Basic leads me to believe that there are some things you need to work out with your system. ...No matter which version you find that you need, your topmost priority will then be to figure out how to tweak your system to get the best performance from it. DanT Thanks everyone for the comments -- truly appreciated. I should have clarified that as far as the crashes go...I'm sure it is my setup in this case (and/or something I configured wrong) -- because I happened to download SSB on my laptop (which is actually quite stable, just prob underpowered RAM/CPU, though not terribly)..which is a mere shadow of my primary desktop for my DAW. The last time it crashed, I wasn't even running any tracks...just tried to install a shade and MWS. So, my point was not, "hmmm I think SAW may be a lousy product." I already knew it wasn't. It was just that I haven't had any practical experience tracking/mixing/pre-mastering with it yet, so I couldn't comfortably say I was "home" yet or just test driving.

At any rate, I'm sure when I get more time and actually run it on my desktop and hopefully get Matt's video working too and go thru it, I'm sure there will be plenty to feel good about.

Trock, I'm glad you weighed it -- fwiw, I already guessed that is where you were coming from -- and I understand the desire for faders. I bought a Tascam 1884 (again tooooooo early) because I really dreaded trying to tweak little screen knobs on the fly on a screen. But the TASCAM turned out to have all sorts of issues itself (at least until a firmware update and an elusive right size firewire cable). The most disappointing thing about it was the scant documentation. And given my poor GIGA experience, I am not really thrilled with TASCAM, in general. At any rate, I think with automation and seeing how Bob works in the videos...the 1884 is probably headed to eB soon. Tranzport or Alpha fader may be viable alternatives, but we'll see.

To be fair, as everyone can tell, I'm a total newb ...but I just didn't want to start on "rinky dink" stuff (I don't mean SSB, but just gear/apps, in general) and then realize I didn't like it and then re-learn everything later on the system I wished I would have gone with in the first place. So that is why (plus a VERY good crossgrade offer) I ended up with Cubase/Nuendo. If that makes any sense.

I think budget and time and the school of hard knocks have done a lot to tame the flame of gearlust. I guess the best way I can put it is: I don't want to buy a Yugo, can't afford a Viper (nor practically need it), would prefer to avoid Edsels, am content with a comfortable minivan, but if for the same investment of time and money could have a ?, I dunno, an Escalade with free gas, I would go for it...hopefully that translates ok.

At the end of the day I just want to compose and play and hit record and have something satisfying come out...and maybe turn that into something the can one day pay for the next project. Until then I am grateful for all I have and once I get everything streamlined, pared-down, tweaked and configured, will be happy to create.

Ciao!

[Neal Starrett]

Fletch, PM me with your phone # and I'll help you out.
Neal

[Fletch]

Fletch, PM me with your phone # and I'll help you out.
Neal

Thanks, Neal -- when I get things more settled I let you know if I'm still having configuration probs.

[Fletch]

Sorry to be the devil's advocate here, but in my opinion, you have no reason to buy SS Full or lite. Apparently, you haven't yet had a reason to use SS Basic...Mark
FWIW, I essentially agree with you Mark. That is exactly why I decided to pass this time round.

But that is not to say, I wouldn't benefit from the additional features of Lite or Full just because I haven't HAD to use Basic -- that just means I am still getting things setup and there is wisdom in waiting until I'm more sure of what I want. To extend an earlier analogy: if I bought a Chevy Geo (w/full accessories) for half-price used, but haven't gotten it tuned-up yet (but can still drive my other car for now) doesn't mean I'd be foolish to buy an Acura for half-price and sell the Geo. The Geo may get me around town fine, but that doesn't mean the Acura is overkill....just more comfortable and higher performance for add'l $.

The issue came down to potential savings and opportunity cost. I could have saved a major amount of money by buying Trock's SSFull w/plugs (way more than even VIP pricing), keeping MWS, and reselling my Basic and Reverb. That was why the question ever came up at this point in time. If, in the long-run, I opt to base everything in SS, it would have amounted to $1K savings. But there is a significant opportunity cost. That money would have been tied up in SSFull, which is still an unknown quantity for me. In the meantime, I could use those $'s toward getting a better mic-pre, MOTIF, or some real estate (pref in Tahiti).

But this is also how I've been bit in the past, anticipating a need, buying something at an "attractive" price -- only to have my needs/wants change or finding a better fit after the fact.

At any rate, not arguing just trying to explain my rationale. And there is no doubt, I have a LOT I can learn (and need to) with what I already have.

[mako]

I use the Wide Mixer view exclusively and would seriously miss this in Basic and SS lite.

Layers are also important for me.

cheers

mako

[studio-c]

I couldn't do without the Wide Mixer,
and the Z Mixer, when you drag it out to show several channel strips in detail, makes it feel like a console.
http://www.noisepipe.com/sawstudio/ssfull.jpg
I owned Lite for about 2 days, but upgraded on the Good Faith Agreement plan. (Hundred bucks a month... that's beer money!) These two views let me work about 10 times as fast, and with them I have never missed the big iron consoles for even a day.

But start with what makes sense for you. If you need a multitrack environment, this is a solid one with a lot of flexibility on the hardware side. And it's the hardware that's more apt to cost you big bucks as it goes obsolete or is no longer supported. If you upgrade to Full, you'll have the learning curve behind you, just more room to roam, and you'll love it.

Cheers,
Scott

[studio-c]

Oops! :D

[Ian Alexander]

Oops! :D
Unless it makes you enough to buy more or better beer.:cool:

[Jay Q]

(Hundred bucks a month... that's beer money!)
But it's a year's worth of bear money! :eek:

[studio-c]

I'm not minimizing the idea of a hundred bucks, but it really is a very cool thing, getting an interest free loan. You can most likely bill $100 per month biz using SS, even as a hobbyist with a simple home setup. An hour a week at $25 per hour working with a local songwriter or something? A craigslist ad should get you that kind of booking easily. And at that rate nobody's expecting you to have all the killer hardware. If they can have fun and get their acoustic guitar/vocal songwriter demo laid down and made into an mp3 for their Myspace, I think you'll find a loyal group of musicians with a few bucks to support your habit.

Cheers,
Scott

[studio-c]

True. Pick a couple of tools and learn the hell out of them.

My point was that, since I chose SS as my main multitrack, it was comforting that it LOOKED like a console with several Zoomed Mixer strips visible at once. So it was valuable since I'd made the commitment. Strangely enough I don't even have the Full Mixer appearing in any of my views. I just like the big view, and the wide view if I don't want to scroll up and down. Everyone works differently. If you weren't used to the console, it might not be important. Everyone got here from a different background, so it's cool that it's customizable.

The other tool I keep up with is SoundForge, which we've agreed is pretty much the audio Swiss Army Knife. Between the two, you can get through pretty much any predicament. Maybe adding a special purpose plugin here and there. I mess about with Acid and some other things, but since I'm not doing music usually, it's mainly the production tools, not the music tools, that I'm working with.

But yeah, definitely pick one and marry it.

Cheers,
Scott