Skip to main content

I'm downloading the new version of Samplitude Pro X Suite now. There is a free 30 day demo for both Pro X and Pro X Suite :

Overview > Samplitude > Music Production > MAGIX Pro

There are many new features but the Independence Sampling Workstation has me all fired up:

Independence is the ultimate sampling workstation for professional music production in the studio and for live productions - Independence Pro and Independence Basic also available now. Independence's Audio Engine has been redeveloped and improved, it now contains the Time-Stretching & Pitch-Shifting options. Using the innovative Multi Core support you can specify the number of kernels on your computer should be reserved for Independence. This ensures that Independence has the highest amount of CPU resources at its disposal, causing problems for other processes. plugins/independence.579.html

And upgrades are here:


DonnyThompson Sat, 05/09/2015 - 05:09

@audiokid @DigitaLWizarD @TimDolbear

My first impression - upon first opening the program - was much more of a "Good Gawd what have I gotten myself into?" impression ... LOL ... than it was "inviting".

But, it didn't take me long to begin to realize just how powerful the program was. Once I buckled down and decided I was going to crack the complexity of it, I found that it wasn't nearly as tough as I initially thought it might be.

Consequent viewing of video tutorials (by subject and my need to know certain things at certain times) from people like Tim Dolbear and Kraznet on Youtube, along with Chris's assistance - who was kind enough to pass along his knowledge to me as he learned - really made a difference in leveling out the learning curve, which appeared to me - at first glance - to be pretty daunting.

The other thing that helped me out a lot, was watching one of Kraznet's YouTube vids, where he instructed how to revert the layout of ProX back to Samplitude 11, which to me, at least t the time, seemed much easier to grasp, because of the way it was laid out. It also made watching his tutorial videos much easier, because the majority of his vids were done while using the layout for Samp 11. I've now gotten so used to this layout that I continue to use it. My version is still Pro X Suite, I just changed the menu and program layout to be from Samp 11. Personally, I think that menu version is easier to use,

although - this brings up what may be a good question that I just now thought of - that hopefully one of you guys can answer:

Am I missing any features, or should I say, are there any features from Pro X Suite that may be "hiding" from me, by me using the menu from version 11 instead of the default menu/layout for Pro X Suite?

DigitaLWizarD Sat, 05/09/2015 - 05:27

NO! I use menu style from Samp 11, too, in my Pro X2 Suite. This style makes more sense and it's much more intuitive.

Unlike your question, the menu version 11 brings out very hidden features in current standard style. I feel as if there had been a "downgrade" on the menu. Style 11 is the best and nothing was lost, quite the contrary.

DonnyThompson Sat, 05/09/2015 - 05:37

Thanks DW, I appreciate your response. ;)

as a followup...

I just happened to be lucky enough to catch Kraznet online at the Samplitude User's Forum a few minutes ag0, and I asked him the question I presented here.

He is saying exactly what you are saying, that there are no features from Pro X Suite that are "hiding" from me, by me using version 11's menu layout.

I also find 11 to be much more intuitive, and easier to navigate. And, you are not the only one who has mentioned that they prefer 11 as well. I've talked to many other Pro X users who prefer to use 11's layout...even Kraznet prefers 11 over the newer default menu. So, that being said, if so many Pro X users prefer to use 11's menu, doesn't that kinda beg the question as to why Magix decided to change the layout to begin with?

DigitaLWizarD Sat, 05/09/2015 - 19:53

[=""]Kraznet Montpellier[/]="http://www.clearblu…"]Kraznet Montpellier[/] is the largest reference about Samplitude you can find on the internet. [[url=http://="http://www.timdolbe…"]Tim Dolbear[/]="http://www.timdolbe…"]Tim Dolbear[/] is another excellent standard we have on the subject. And that's all!

They don't know me and maybe will never know. We live in distant worlds, but it would be a great happiness to know them personally. I have much to thank them! But, unfortunately, this really will be difficult to happen.

The same way the Magix the discussion forum never encourage a fruitful debate on their platforms. There is interest in releasing ear to a user mass of their programs. That's why children's problems happen in updates!

All we (Samp/Sequoia users) have, the best material for consultation, comes from selfless Kraznet and major producer Tim Dolbear. Is not directly from Magix, much less his pauper official discussion forum -> which is a shame!

The feeling I have is that our devotion to the program is relegated exclusively to our own luck. The official support is very poor.

Should be the formade act of the company: "I guarantee me" or: "We do not care about what you think about the default program menu. That's good for us, then so it will be."

There is not a real good official forum for Samplitude and Sequoia. RECORDING.ORG is the best (only) I found!

Thanks a lot for this place...

p.s.: sorry for my (VERY) limited English...

DonnyThompson Sun, 05/10/2015 - 00:55

Yeah, I was a part of that thread. (On the Samp forum I'm Donnyair@hotmail).

If someone was on the fence about it, and asked me why I chose Samplitude, I would tell them this:

There will always be differing opinions in regard to how a DAW "sounds". One person will say that they heard an immediate difference, others will say they heard none at all, and that all DAW's sound exactly the same.

For me, all that matters is what it sounds like to me. I've done my own A/B comparisons, and through those comparisons, I've heard differences that were NOT subtle. Were my comparisons scientifically based? Hardly. They were based solely on how raw audio sounded ( to me) when loaded into four programs: PT, Sonar, Studio One, and Samp. Sonar was the worst offender, smearing the audio, hiding some frequencies and heavily accentuating others, and adding phase anomalies to instruments like vocals, acoustic guitars and cymbals. All tracks tested were mono. All tracks were recorded using the exact same mics, same pre, same converters, at the exact same Sampling Rate and Bit Resolution.

Samplitude played back with accuracy and transparency. PT was okay, until I started adding things like EQ and GR. I also don't feel that PT has the same flexibility as Samp does, nor do I feel that the stock processors are nearly as good as those included with Samp.

**I think that it's important to note here, that I pretty much went into Samplitude kicking and screaming...
It took Chris ( @audiokid ) several weeks of continually bashing me on my ignorant and stubborn skull with a half-dead rainbow trout to get me to finally try it.

So, it's not as if I was some kind of "fanboy" going into the experience. If anything, I was quietly hoping to dispel the notion that one DAW could sound better than another.
As it turned out, I couldn't do that, because Samp did sound better to me.

I'm not trying to "sell" anyone on Samplitude; I don't work for Magix, I don't benefit in any way, either way. Use what you want. It makes no difference to me. ;)

I use what I use because it works better for me, and sounds better to me, than any other DAW platform I've used, and while I can't say that I've used them all, I can say that I've used many, and within those, were what most users would consider to be popular choices: PT, Sonar and Studio One. (Out of those three, the one that sounds the next-best to me, and which seems to be the most user-friendly, is Studio One).

At that point, it's the features that come into play, and I think that Samp offers the best feature set with the most flexibility.

Here's the bottom line... at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what I think. I've got no gold records or grammies on my shelf. Like most people here, I'm a project-level recording and mix engineer, and I occasionally act as a producer for clients who need that kind of help. So, again, what I think doesn't really matter, and it shouldn't matter to you, either. What matters is what you think is right for you. Everyone is either slightly or dramatically different in their work styles, methods, and flows. People need to use what they feel is best for them.

Do your own tests and find out for yourself. Or, don't, if you are happy with your current platform. But it's not as if it costs you any money to try it. Time? Yes. It will cost you some time. But, there's time involved with the learning curve of any production platform. And if the time spent on it allows you to do better work, then isn't taking the time worth it? The very worst that could happen is that you find out and confirm that your current DAW platform is still your best choice.

IMHO of course.


DigitaLWizarD Mon, 05/18/2015 - 18:16

We can read in a LOT os sites that doesn't exist "the best DAW', and I agree: taste is very subjective.

For many years I used Sound Forge. I thought it was the best in audio mastering.

Then, in a very happy day I read about the Samplitude [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.soundons…"]here[/]="http://www.soundons…"]here[/], and as I have said before and I never tire of repeating: in the first minutes of use, I was awarded the feeling that the MAGIX created their platforms exclusively for me!

Samplitude/Sequoia fit into my life as my body in my soul.

I simply do not play with audio anymore, if I'm not in front of one of them. :love:

So, in a more realistic sense, no matter what is the best program; the important thing is to be happy with the one you like!

Topic Tags