Long time, no see...everything has changed...

[mr_es335]

Micro,

Because its easier to use SAC as a front end to SAW for recording than using SAW alone, particularly for somebody that isn't familiar with SAW Studio.

...Plus 1 on this one for sure!!

[UpTilDawn]

Micro,

...Plus 1 on this one for sure!!

Plus 2 -

SAC w/SAW doesn't load down the pc as much as SAW by itself for live work and that, I like!

[mr_es335]

UpTilDawn,

SAC w/SAW doesn't load down the pc as much as SAW by itself for live work and that, I like!

...Good to know. Thanks for the tip.

[Microstudio]

Because its easier to use SAC as a front end to SAW for recording than using SAW alone, particularly for somebody that isn't familiar with SAW Studio.

SAC provides all the low latency input setup allowing for simple live monitoring of the input channels or even a nice mix while allowing SAW Studio to record in the background without having to do any additional input/output patching.

Bob used SAW in the demonstration video and I have used saw to record not sure why you would need SAC as it's purpose is live mixing and SAW's is live recording. Sense the OP would just be recording all monitoring should be coming from the live console, SAW would just be recording. I am just going by what the OP said he wants to do.... record.

[Ian Alexander]

Bob used SAW in the demonstration video and I have used saw to record not sure why you would need SAC as it's purpose is live mixing and SAW's is live recording. Sense the OP would just be recording all monitoring should be coming from the live console, SAW would just be recording. I am just going by what the OP said he wants to do.... record.

All that's true, Micro, but as explained, the OP is much more familiar with the SAC interface. Apparently, using SAC + SAW will get him where he needs to be with the least amount of additional training and no appreciable downside. It's not wrong, it's just different. And if it takes less time and inspires more confidence, it's measurably better.

[Microstudio]

All that's true, Micro, but as explained, the OP is much more familiar with the SAC interface. Apparently, using SAC + SAW will get him where he needs to be with the least amount of additional training and no appreciable downside. It's not wrong, it's just different. And if it takes less time and inspires more confidence, it's measurably better.

Sorry but totally disagree that it will be easy for anyone to use SAC+SAW just to record. Better to just take a little time to learn how to use SAW to record, in the tutorial Bob shows how easy it is and that's all you have to do. Anyway I hope the OP gets a good recording.

[UpTilDawn]

Sorry but totally disagree that it will be easy for anyone to use SAC+SAW just to record. Better to just take a little time to learn how to use SAW to record, in the tutorial Bob shows how easy it is and that's all you have to do. Anyway I hope the OP gets a good recording.

It's really not a question of taking the time to learn how to use SAW in this way.
It's about saving pc resources and making monitoring the recording much simpler.

[Angie]

I agree with Micro. SAC is not needed if you are just multitracking a show. No need to make it more complicated. There are times when using SAC at the front end makes monitoring easier. But this instance probably isn't it. It is just as easy to monitor what's going in thru SAW when doing live tracking.

However, if that's how you want to do it, then fine. It works either way. Just more complicated.

[Dave Labrecque]

I think the point that was being made is that since he knows SAC and doesn't know SAW, it might be simpler to just hook SAC to SAW and record that way (not having to learn much about SAW).

True that to someone who knows both programs, or neither, or only SAW, SAW alone would be the simplest. Alas, these are not the case, here.

[cgrafx]

I agree with Micro. SAC is not needed if you are just multitracking a show. No need to make it more complicated. There are times when using SAC at the front end makes monitoring easier. But this instance probably isn't it. It is just as easy to monitor what's going in thru SAW when doing live tracking.

However, if that's how you want to do it, then fine. It works either way. Just more complicated.

I use both programs and started on SAW Studio.

For me I just found it a lot easier to work with SAC running as live low-latency console and using SAW Studio just as the multi-track recorder.

There are enough differences in the console operation particularly for somebody that doesn't work with SAW Studio regularly, that for my money its easier to work with the two connected programs.

Of coarse your mileage may vary.