Skip to main content

Whats a good software for mixing,multitracking and recording

I use Adobe Audition 2.0.

My Computer is:

Pentium 4 3.2
512 Ram
Windows Xp SP2

Recording Interface:
PreSonus Firepod
Shure SM57

I'm looking for a good program (not audicy or sound forge)

Something that would work on for everything.

I have Cubase sx3 but i havent planned on using it.



hueseph Mon, 05/07/2007 - 12:57

Who invests $600+ on software and doesn't plan on using it? Cubase is great software. So is Samplitude from what I can tell. Sonar, ditto.

Regardless of the software, it is an investment (for those of us who pay) and once you commit, you have to spend the time to learn it. No shortcuts. None necessarily better than the other.(Samplitude users may disagree) It just becomes a matter of preferrence.

JesterMasque Thu, 09/06/2007 - 21:56

I have used almost all of these sequencing programs that people are mentioning. However I am still very partial to my SX3 because it so easy to configure and set-up presets for things. Especially when it comes to the Firepod. Presonus and Steinberg shook hands a lot when they created the Firepod. Connectivity and compatibility is a snap.

Stick with your SX3. No other software can provide you with more tools that you will ever use at this point, nor in the near future.

bwmac Sun, 09/09/2007 - 09:11

Looks like you are looking for a multi-tracking program.
I use sonar-6 now but have used, home studio2004, cubase le, acid pro 5, and frutiloops.

Sonar-6 is by far the bigest and best, IMHO
cubase would be my second choice for profesional sound,
acid is the easyest to use over all and is the best looper, IMO.

not sure what all you are looking fo, but if its cheep, then acid would be the way to go.

bwmac Sun, 09/09/2007 - 16:00

Link555 wrote: How does Sonar 6 Sums sound in comparisons to Cubase? I use Nuendo 3.0 right now, and I am curious if sonar sounds better?

I am not sure what you are asking.
The sound is not in the program but dependent on
your external connections, pre amps, the mic
or the mix
the sound card and the monitors.
Your program should not add color to the recording.

Maybe I missunderstood.


Link555 Sun, 09/09/2007 - 17:39

Hey Brad! Long time no type, actually what I meant was... the digital sum (or mix down) of Cubase versus Sonar. Any DAW will sound the same if you just load a pre recorded file in it, however the minute you add EQ, VST or even edit the wave form you can potentially introduce that DAWS sound, because the DAW has now done some form of math to the digital data. Each DAW handles the digital data differently, some truncate, some round, etc... We are talking about very subtle things here, but if you build up 24+ tracks all with the same math rule sets and do a mass sum (or mixdown), the DAWs sound might be more noticeable. Anyway just curious if you noticed any subtle differences.

JesterMasque Sun, 09/09/2007 - 18:28

MediaMurder wrote: Sonar 6 producers edition...
I have it. It's awesome.
Make sure you understand that crap in equals crap out. Make sure you have good pre amps and mics and all that junk too, since all a DAW does is record what you tell it to.

That is not so true... As previously stated the engine of your DAW DOES color your sound a bit due to the difference in algorithms used. For instance: Pro Tools is a bit louder than Cubase/Nuendo which is cleaner sounding than that of Sonar, Adobe Audition, etc. Also, let us remember that Acid was built as a sample/loop station oringally, not necessarily for tracking/mixing/production. Cubase & Sonar, on the other hand, were built primarily for those specific reasons and thus are built and engineered accordingly.

But as I stated before, if you already have Cubase SX3 then stick with it because of the compatibility between Steinberg and Presonus. You can not beat the fact of knowing your ASIO driver will randomly reset itself during tracking because Sonar and the Firepod had a break in the speaking to each other (a common problem that has many people knocking the QUALITY of the Firepod simply because it does not work well with their DAW).

bwmac Mon, 09/10/2007 - 05:06

I understand what you were asking now Link555,
BTW, Thanks for the welcome back. I would have to agree with what JesterMasque
wrote other then I can not verify the cleaner sound of cubase over sonar 6 PE. cubase was cleaner then the home studio ver.
I am in the revamping stage (AGAIN) with my new MOTU 828 sound card, and a new mixer.
off to work now

anonymous Mon, 09/10/2007 - 09:46

thats cool

I stick what what I believe until I hear someone produce a better recording than me, when this occurs I will be open to upgrade suggestions. Why dont we compare mix's from all the DAWs and well see who has the better sound? Any engineer will tell you it takes a good ear to get a good mix.

Software is not the answer.

Link555 Mon, 09/10/2007 - 11:53

Flavour, flavour, flavour. IMHO understanding what your software does to your sound is very usefull information.

So to do this test we have to isolate the daw functions. We could look at just the pure sum to start. Take 20 tracks or so and simply sum them in different DAWs.

That means no other changes, no EQ, no level changes, no VST just a straight sum. I would happy to do the test and post the final mix in Nuendo 3.0, would any of you like to add your your mixdowns from Sonar, cubase, etc....?

Does anyone have any tracks there are willing to share? or Maybe could just download them from the same source, like

Borrow his raw tracks, make no changes and sum them. Then post the different DAWs results and compare.

What do you guys think?

hueseph Mon, 09/10/2007 - 17:44

JesterMasque wrote: Hold on there MM...
I say to download the raw tracks to use. When you record something there are WAY too many variables including... well, we all know them. Take the same piece and then go from there. There must be a control in this experiment.

Agreed. It would have to be the same x number of tracks. To be totally fair it would need to be done in ONE studio using the top software in question. Sonar, Nuendo, ProTools, Audition, Logic and Acid Pro. You could throw Samplitude and Digital Performer in there as well. Personally I think it's a pretty big Project to bear for any minor studio.

bwmac Mon, 09/10/2007 - 20:17

ROTFLMAO, this is to funny

Do any of you realize that my name is brad, ha, LOL.

Sorry I just thought that it was coincidental that I answered you Link555
and then you posted the Brad suks Link, LOL.

ok I am not sure what we are to do but Link said something about, any of us adding our mix downs from sonar. I have some originals on my site, if you guys want some mixes to butcher.

this onw was done in sonar

and the top one on this page (Mean And Clean)

Now you guys can really say Brad Sucks, LOL

Link555 Wed, 09/12/2007 - 11:50

LOL sorry Brad, I was not saying you suck, honest;)

hueseph: That example did not use the same tracks, so its harder to hear what the DAW does.

I say we should use the same tracks, and in your different DAWS simply do the following:

1) Import the tracks.
2) Create a 2 track mixdown.

Do not alter the imported tracks in any way, no fader moves, or panning or effects. We are not trying to mix the music, or even make it sound good. We just want to hear the differences in the various digital sums of each DAW. Does that make sense?

Cucco Wed, 09/12/2007 - 12:03

Once we decide which ones to sum, let me know. I'll feed it through Sequoia.

I think we should also (later) try panning one hard right and one hard left then trying the same.

There's no way to introduce plug ins into the mix since there'd be no way to be sure if they're being added exactly the same way.

Link555 Wed, 09/12/2007 - 12:08

Yes Panning exactly the same way makes a lot of sense too. But first how does everyone feel about using:
the song "Making Me Nervous source"

He has the files all zipped up. If we all agree on this I can email him to let him know what we are doing, and make sure he is ok with it.

bwmac Wed, 09/12/2007 - 20:14

Ya Cool, Now I get ya Link555.
So all I would do is
the song "Making Me Nervous source"
2-import to my Daw sonar (at what? 16x44100) :D
and export to? (a wave? would be to large?) well not if I use my FTP and upload it and give you the link, I guess?? :)

The we compair 8) 8)