Just thought I'd add to this. I mix in Vegas, probably because it was the first program I ever used. Because it was the first I can work in it faster than I can with either Nuendo or Sonar. I also don't have problems with it bogging down when I have more than 20 tracks (I've used up to 56, why? I have no idea) like I do with Nuendo and Sonar. I do track in Sonar when I'm recording more than 2 channels at a time, because the Vegas doesn't link well with my layla and with sonar it is rock solid.

I whent from adats to cakewalk to sonar. I love mixing in the DAW inviorment. However I have tried out nuendo this past year and the difference in what I can do is very impressive. I now use nuendo on my 1.4 GHz PC and do not plan on making any changes. Just messing around I loaded 105 tracks and put 1 waves reverb, 1 nuendo reverb a few compressors and any thing I could think of that was ram intensive on all 8 FX sends, turnned it all the way up of course it sounded like crap but it played without a glittch. used my US428 jog wheel / just anything I could think of to cause a glitch and nothing. Rock solid. Since I have mixed and produced tracks ran sessions. Not 1 probplem. Nuendo has got me hooked I love DAW's in general but Cakewalk never spoild me like nuendo. just my 2 cents. Peace :s:

Yes, Nuendo sounds like the new winner in the PC world. I haven't tried it on a Mac.

Hi Guys,

A lurker steps forth !

Just to say I use Soundscape32 and IMO (even after being a huge PT fan) it is the best DAW I've worked with. It runs on PC, and has crashed once in 3 years !!! (touch wood, I've got a client in in 20 mins !)

Nick

I use Logic Audio 5.10 and I love it but I'm not sure if I'm gonna stick with it since they discontinued supporting PC platform. My next choice would be either Samplitude ( I used it in the past and it rocks but I know only basic operations) or Nuendo. Cubase is out of question for me becuase of it's terrible problems with automation (it never worked properly for me).

chris

Fats,

I've been using [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.ntrack.c…"]Ntrack studio[/]="http://www.ntrack.c…"]Ntrack studio[/] for a while now, runs about $30.00, accepts most third party plugins, and has a bunch of its own. I saw someone else mention it in a post earlier, but no one seemed to notice it. For the artist on a limited budget it's a pretty great deal. Maybe you could check out the demo version and run it through it's paces, see how it sizes up to the big boys. I'd love to hear what you have to say about it.

There's a lot of us with extremely limited resources looking to better our sound, and a lot of gifted software engineers writing freeware and cheapware that accomadates the majority of our needs. You talk about $1,000 - $5000 gear when we're lucky if we can afford $100 - $500. You should think about doing a column for the starving DIY. They're probably a large part of the visitors that don't stick around.

This site has already proved itself a wealth of information for me. I just thought you might want to widen the audience.

Thanks for all the tips and suggestions, you guys provide an invaluable resource.

dan.

^ Yup, I second Dan's vote.

I run a measly PII-450 and with N-Track I can work with over a dozen 24-bit tracks or up to 30 16-bit tracks. Runs VST and DirectX effects, automation and lots of other goodies.

I just started using Cool Edit Pro 2.0 for multitracking. I like 1.2 and just upgraded (and still getting into it).

For a stereo editor I have been using Sound Forge.

I also use Sonic Foundry - Acid for a number of projects.

I don't really do much withplug-ins

I tend to have a bad outlook on software. I can't seem to keep up with new versions and I don't care to run hacked versions. My biggest issue is the investment. No resale value. Granted my outboard gear is not always in high demand on the used market but I know that I can at least sell the stuff for a few dollars. Software is a very different story.

jason (who is on a tight budget)

"Which recording software program do you use and why do you use it? Do you like it? What software would you use if you could have anything you want?"

Hello all, new here so I thought I'd jump in on this thread!

I use Cubase SX on a dedicated Win2K PC. I used Logic for many years on Mac and PC and only upgraded to Cubase because of the announcement that they were dropping PC development.

I love Cubase SX, very intuitive and comparable if not better than Logic Plat. Full of features that I'll never use and hasn't let me down yet.

If I could have anything I want - Mackie DB8 with a Mackie HD unit. Hardware thats what I want!

Can Cool Edit Pro 2.0 be considered "recording software"? It seems to be able to multi-track/EQ/master with infinite tracks. What would I be missing if I were just to get CEP 2.0 as opposed to the other fine programs being mentioned on this thread? Will I be able to produce nice demo material with just CEP 2.0??? Is it possible, assuming I KNOW what I am doing, to get a great production out of JUST this software? In other words, If I were to purchase Cubase SX for my PC, would I have the ability to add FX to certain tracks and segments of tracks, and wave edit,trim silence like I am able to do with Cool Edit Pro's software? Inquiring minds want to know! Thanks so much in advance, ~~~~Lee

Lee, talent is talent. You can make it work, I know!

I get mixes sometimes Vox/Instu and paste and layer from a vibe to make it work without the board.

It is in the wrist action...and since I am divorced, I know about wrist action.

Since we both have Jewish blood, allow me to tell you what happened in the office yesterday...

We were sitting around in the executive suite and it was the pres, vice pres, comptroller, his assistant and me and we were telling Jewish jokes.

5 Jews having cocktails, go figure.

The best one was..

You know why Jews have big noses?

Air is free!

Hope you like it..and for the assholes out there..hey, it is just a friendly joke, get over it...

Bill,

That's not very nice. If I am offended by this it makes me an asshole? The one thing I have learned in this world is if I feel someone may be offended, I don't say it. I'm new here and a little suprised by the statement even though I was told this happends here. Just my .2 cents...

TJ

Hi all. Very first post!

I use Creamware's Scope Fusion platform.
The best recording (on the PC) I could ask for,
is done on my virtual ADAT(s). Nearly as good as the real thing. I use them for recording as well as bouncing. Only trouble is punching in and out whenever I want due to the mouse's slow-ish response. And... there's no drifting (for example like SoundForge's and Cubase's mysterious drifts!)

Some of you who have suffered the PAIN of trying to manage and mix 'drifted' bounces know what I mean!

Which recording software do you use?

Now I hope everyone doesn't start hitting me, but I've been very happy using the Cubase 3.7 I purchased as part of their Producer Pak. I'll probably get around to upgrading it one of these days. For mastering, I use Wavelab 3.0 and I actually use a shareware program called Goldwave for some things. When using Cubase I like to use TC Native Reverb as a plugin. And all of this is working very well with the new DAW I just built. :)

In noticed in the moderator's initial thread that this was to be limited to DAWs that are still on the market. The hardware development of Paris was discontinued by E-Mu and the system was dropped about a year ago. There have been no software updates in two years. However, the software developers are still stating that something is in the works and a group of end-users continues to develop plugins and drivers for the existing hardware. I hear that most of the old Ensoniq hardware has been reverse engineered. Some of the hardware code has been either purchased or deciphered by still others. I use this DAW as do many others. It has a distinctive *sound* and it's architecture is very similar to an analog mixer. Though limited to 48KHz at this time, the system still has one of the most open and pleasing sounds of anything I have ever heard, analog or digital. The onboard DSP along with a couple of UAD-1 DSP cards and the ability to easily patch external processors across the auxes or as inserts make this a dream to work with, IMO. Recently, one of the members who has been playing around with the Paris code that was acquired from E-Mu posted the following to the Paris user's group:

"There is saturation occuring in the ESP2, in hardware, at the instruction level. I'm not an expert in this by any means, and I may be a bit off in my explanation - but here's what I have figured out after careful reading of the ESP2 patent. I'm trying to put some of it in laymens terms below with a bit of background.

In general There a couple basic instructions / math operations that go on in a mix. I'll stick to two:

1. Mixing streams of audio together is ADDITION. The addition operators in the ESP2 are *saturating*

2. Changing gain is MULTIPLICATION. The multiplication operators in the ESP2 are *saturating* . What does this mean? Well it involves the oft quoted "52bit" accumulator line. Now for a bit about what this means

1. An accumulator is used to store the result of a series of operations such as additions or multiplications.
2. The actual accumulator in paris is a 48 bits word with 4 control bits for a total of 52.
3. The 4 extra bits provide 4 guard bits for use in *detecting overlow/underflow* in the result of any calculation.

There's the background - now here's what happens:

When a series of additions or multiplications occurs on the esp2 the "intermediate result" is stored in the accumulator. The accumulator is 48 bits for a reason. Two 24bit values, or a series of 24bit values added together may produce a value that is greater than can be held in 24 bits. If in the course of this "accumulation" a result greater than 24bits is produced an "overflow" occurs. These overflows are tracked by the 4 control bits.

When an overflow occurs the "final result" or output of the operation or series of operations is *saturated*. This is done by setting the output value to saturated to h7FFFFF,FFFFFF (the largest positive number that can be represented by a 48-bit word)

When an "underflow" occurs the output of the operation or series of operations is set to h800000,000000 (the largest negative number)

The final step to producing the real output value is to take the most significant 24bits of the accumulator (7FFFFF) and send them on their way.

Other keys to the paris sound lie in the way it handles panning, pre-eq gain (this is really interesting) and reserving enough headroom to sum all those submixes together :-) I can write more about those later as I get some kind of clue.

Anyway - here's a really concrete way for you to see how saturation at the instruction level affects the sound.

Open a project with 16 tracks or less. Drive the hell out of the mix, push it way into the red and make sure the submix clip lights come on occasionally. Don't use any paris eqs, directx or eds effects on this mix. Keep it dry and confined to faders and panning only. Make it SLAMMING. Now add another submix to the project. Take the submix with your slamming hot mix and switch it to a NATIVE submix. I'm sure you will be able to hear the difference in seconds. All kinds of gnarly nasty s**t going on."

This is the difference in this particular DSP based system and what happens when mixing hot in a native DAW. It works. *Actual* headroom in a digital mix bus. The Paris mix bus emulates the sound of an analog console/tape setup very closely and there are numerous gain staging options in the mixer GUI that can be employed which make use of the onboard DSP horsepower.

The fab where the esp2 chips were being made has discontinued manufacture, but I think there may be some alternatives in the works. This is the same chip that is used in the DP4 and the DP Pro.
The DP Pro effects are currently being ported to Paris.

I can only go by what my ears tell me and I have heard lots of different systems. At this point in the development of converters and software architecture, there are lots of great sounding DAWs, but no DAW has ever sounded like Paris. Though existing hardware is getting a little scarce, I don't believe it should be disqualfied from this discussion as systems can still be purchased.

Regards,

Doug Joyce
Animatrix Productions
Durango, CO

Doug, thanks for the info on Paris. I found it fascinating. I've heard nothing but good things about the audio quality in Paris. It's a real shame it was discontinued.

You're very welcome John,

Regards,

Doug

Wavelab all the time stays ready to record my ideas.Its convinient to work with different aplications using adat chanels.We use a lot ACID 4 for editing it's so simple and fast.
RME made very nice thing named Digicheck Totalizer very convinient for recording!

Donny

WOW, I can't believe I'm the first..... or is the DIGI001 taboo?
Well I think it's great. I work almost exclusively with audio (very little midi) and after looking at most of the options I found that the 001 the best value for money. It was very easy to learn and use after watching Digi's promotional/instruction video. I was literally installed and recording in 30 minutes!
The quality of the recording I find very good, I love the RTAS plug-in format (even though there aren't many to choose from), and it has been a very solid and stable system. (Maybe I'm one of the lucky ones :D

Mark

I've got a Digi 001 system too. I normally mix on another platform and I use it as a transfer medium to interface with my studio with studios that use the ProTools format. I really didn't expect too much from the 001 when I got it. I have used it for a few mixes and I was extremely and pleasantly surprised. I really like the Digi 001 and if I wasn't so comfortable with my current system, I would have no problem with calling it my DAW of choice. It has been extremely stable for me and to my ears, mixes sound much more clear and open on this system than they do when they are mixed internally on the Pro Tools TDM systems.

Regards,

Doug Joyce
Animatrix Studios
Durango, CO