Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

2024: Which DAWs / apps do you prefer for work with orchestral libraries, *and why*?

Your preferred app(s) for work with orchestral libraries in 2024??

  • Ableton Live

    Votes: 18 5.6%

  • Acoustica Mixcraft

    Votes: 1 0.3%

  • Adobe Audition

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Apple Logic Pro

    Votes: 66 20.7%

  • Ardour

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Avid Pro Tools

    Votes: 6 1.9%

  • Avid Sibelius

    Votes: 6 1.9%

  • Bitwig Studio

    Votes: 7 2.2%

  • Cakewalk Sonar

    Votes: 11 3.4%

  • Cockos Reaper

    Votes: 59 18.5%

  • Finale

    Votes: 1 0.3%

  • Image Line FL Studio

    Votes: 9 2.8%

  • LMMS

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Magix Acid

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Magix Samplitude

    Votes: 1 0.3%

  • Magix Sequoia

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Magix Sound Forge

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Merging Pyramix

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Motu Digital Performer

    Votes: 19 6.0%

  • Notion

    Votes: 3 0.9%

  • PreSonus Studio One

    Votes: 59 18.5%

  • Prism Media Sadie

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Reason Studios Reason

    Votes: 3 0.9%

  • Sonic Score Overture

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • SSL SoundScape

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • StaffPad

    Votes: 10 3.1%

  • Steinberg Cubase (or Cubasis)

    Votes: 101 31.7%

  • Apple GarageBand

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Steinberg Dorico

    Votes: 45 14.1%

  • Steinberg Nuendo

    Votes: 24 7.5%

  • Steinberg WaveLab

    Votes: 3 0.9%

  • Tracktion Waveform

    Votes: 1 0.3%

  • Sagan Technology Metro

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Sonic Score Overture

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Other - please specify!

    Votes: 4 1.3%
  • Total voters
    319
  • This poll will close: .
Vik

Vik

Vi-k
Not necessarily focusing on what you currently use – but: which DAW or other program do you believe is best for work with orchestral sample libraries in 2024? I'm thinking of all kinds of work here, like composing, arranging/orchestration, handling sampler libraries (eg CC automation and articulation control) and so on.

Many use a dedicated score program for making the final score and also for composing and work with VIs. The intention with this poll is to figure out what your viewpoints are in terms of working with sample libraries – including the composing, arranging, orchestration (etc) process.

Votes can be changed later if you want, but each voter can select max. three of the response options.
Click to read more...
 
Last edited:
Lukas said:
But why not just refer to the 500,000 threads on this very topic in 2023, 2022, and 2021?
Click to expand...
Hi, AFAIK/IIRR there have only been two polls about best apps for orchestral libraries, the last one was created more than 5 years ago – but I'll gladly delete this poll if you wish.... I'm leaving this forum soon anyway, and I'm not even really sure why I started a new poll – I guess it mostly was because I was wondering if Cubase still is used a lot more than Logic for this kind of work. Also, several of these apps have gotten some important changes, since the 5 year old poll. This could potentially be worth discussing, and could also cause some surprises in the poll results.

Not that the Cubase/Logic balance matters for me personally, I'll stay with Logic and probably start to use Dorico in addition to Logic after Dorico has had an update or two.
 
Last edited:
Logic has won me back after an extended period using Dorico (which is still great as well)😉. Wanted to use templates that weren’t available for Dorico. Logic’s score editor is slower to use but good enough for my very modest purposes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Vik
Upgraded from Cubase to Nuendo last year. It's perfect for me right now. I have been trying other DAWs (Studio One and Reaper mainly) that all have some very clever tricks up their sleeve that Cubase/Nuendo don't do but the sheer feature set and specialist tools inside Nuendo (Mediabay/Pool Window/Marker workflow/integration with Halion/Backbone/Groove Agent/Track Versions, Wavelab and Spectralayers and on and on and on) means that I do not want to leave that ecosystem.

Now, only thing left is those goddamn expression maps. Please Steinberg, for heaven's sake update those!
 
I'd love to select Cubase, but it's Studio One for me in the end. It's just so much more streamlined and intuitive then Cubase. Cubase has great functionality, but the workflow is just clunky and slow for me. And my god, the bugs and the half-baked implementation of many of it's features drives me insane.

For example, expression maps (I think no explanation needed), but also new Cubase 13 features, like the multi-part editing - which in itself works great - but isn't useable with the score editor. I mean, why cut corners there?

I think it's in dire need of an overhaul, as they just build and build on a shaky foundation and it get's worse (at least for me) every update. While there is a functioning workaround in terms of the absolut massive amount of confirmed visual glitches, how is this still there 2 months after the release of version 13? It's a 579€ piece of software aimed at professional use.

In Studio One, workflow and useability is so much better with thought-out implementation of new features, where UX/UI don't feel like an afterthought.
 
Don't discount Pro Tools for this work... I know it has a reputation for less than ideal MIDI, but its strengths are that it is very streamlined and focused... and the audio editing is second to none. The midi editor is actually very powerful with some super useful workflow things for selection, velocity editing, and cc manipulation. It also works better with VEP than any other DAW in my opinion... and I've used them all. That is actually the key--using VEP and also some sort of automation/remote app like Soundflow, Keyboard Maestro, or patchboard. The downside is it's expensive, but if you're a pro who likes to work in audio as well as MIDI, it serves as the best overall workflow IMO. I love not having to think about audio buffers with HDX. Even with a screaming brand new Mac Pro, 64 sample audio buffer is still not a reality from start to finish on a fully fleshed out VI production with core audio DAWs like Logic. Worth mentioning (especially in this forum!) that template creation in PT is so fast! things like sophisticated batch renaming functions, multiple do-to-all type functions and cascading routing etc make Pro Tools VERY fast for building templates.

While logic offers some fun tools, I've scored features and full seasons of TV with both PT and Logic separately that involved orch work, and I prefer the overall reliability and general workflows of PT.
 
Last edited:
studioj said:
Even with a screaming brand new Mac Pro, 64 sample audio buffer is still not a reality from start to finish on a fully fleshed out VI production with core audio DAWs like Logic.
Click to expand...
Don't forget that the best M3 MacBook Pros have better single- and multicore performance than the best Mac Pros – but expecting really low latency in a native system isn't reality the way it is on a HDX-system. Also, while using a 64 buffer on an Intel iMac results in a 4,4 ms roundtrip, using a 64 buffer on an M3 Mac results in a 7,2 ms roundtrip at least on my system. Back when I used Pro Tools hardware, the best roundtrip numbers I got where around 2 ms, and they are better now. I guess Avid's main problem is that the number of users who know they want m that kind of latency are relatively few.
 
Last edited:
Vik said:
Don't forget that the best M3 MacBook Pros have better single- and multicore performance than the best Mac Pros – but expecting really low latency in a native system isn't reality the way it is on a HDX-system. Also, while using a 64 buffer on an Intel iMac results in a 4,4 ms roundtrip, using a 64 buffer on an M3 Mac results in a 7,2 ms roundtrip at least on my system. Back when I used Pro Tools hardware, the best roundtrip numbers I got where around 2 ms, and they are better now. I guess Avid's main problem is that the number of users who must have that kind of latency are relatively few.
Click to expand...
that tracks… while the 64 setting seems fine for recording instruments on the 2023 Mac Pro, it feels latent for vocals… and so I choose direct monitoring solutions when tracking with Logic. Not the case with HDX of course… and why it will stay the hardware of choice in most large tracking studios. Not sure that is a problem for Avid, they can’t keep the MTRX studio interfaces on the shelves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vik
studioj said:
Don't discount Pro Tools for this work... I know it has a reputation for less than ideal MIDI, but its strengths are that it is very streamlined and focused... and the audio editing is second to none. The midi editor is actually very powerful with some super useful workflow things for selection, velocity editing, and cc manipulation. It also works better with VEP than any other DAW in my opinion... and I've used them all. That is actually the key--using VEP and also some sort of automation/remote app like Soundflow, Keyboard Maestro, or patchboard. The downside is it's expensive, but if you're a pro who likes to work in audio as well as MIDI, it serves as the best overall workflow IMO. I love not having to think about audio buffers with HDX. Even with a screaming brand new Mac Pro, 64 sample audio buffer is still not a reality from start to finish on a fully fleshed out VI production with core audio DAWs like Logic. Worth mentioning (especially in this forum!) that template creation in PT is so fast! things like sophisticated batch renaming functions, multiple do-to-all type functions and cascading routing etc make Pro Tools VERY fast for building templates.

While logic offers some fun tools, I've scored features and full seasons of TV with both PT and Logic separately that involved orch work, and I prefer the overall reliability and general workflows of PT.
Click to expand...
If I chose to get a Mac strictly for music production, I would definitely go PT. Beyond tracking, which I do very little of, even after the MIDI programming is over and the audio is rendered, I'd much rather be mixing in PT than Cubase or Logic.
 
Semarus said:
If I chose to get a Mac strictly for music production, I would definitely go PT. Beyond tracking, which I do very little of, even after the MIDI programming is over and the audio is rendered, I'd much rather be mixing in PT than Cubase or Logic.
Click to expand...
Right, and also I failed to bring up that 100% of the finishing done on commercial projects in the states will be in PT and and maybe 99% in other places, and so moving to final mix is often simpler and way more flexible when you are composing in PT. and if you’re mixing yourself, I also think it’s a superior platform. They just did it all right the first time as was mentioned here previously. worth noting I used other daws well before PT.
 
studioj said:
Right, and also I failed to bring up that 100% of the finishing done on commercial projects in the states will be in PT and and maybe 99% in other places, and so moving to final mix is often simpler and way more flexible when you are composing in PT. and if you’re mixing yourself, I also think it’s a superior platform. They just did it all right the first time as was mentioned here previously. worth noting I used other daws well before PT.
Click to expand...
How is PT so reliable with VEP for you? I use MAC too and in my experience it works slower than for instance Cubase or Studio One when loading tons of samples in the same computer. My buffer is always higher than in these other DAWs. Do you think the key is using HDX?
 
Vik said:
So far, there seems to be one major difference between this and previous polls: A score app is #3 on the list right now – ahead of most of the well established DAWs:

1704761207817.png
Click to expand...
Just remember, this is more of a representation of the hobbyist landscape than what professionals are using day to day (as the large majority of Vi-C members are hobbyists).
 
ALittleNightMusic said:
Just remember, this is more of a representation of the hobbyist landscape than what professionals are using day to day (as the large majority of Vi-C members are hobbyists).
Click to expand...
These Dorico voters could be highly professional composers - but without any mixing skills (or any interest in going that route). Dorico is the most professional score app out there. And most pro orchestral composers will use real orchestras anyway… remember what the poll is about. I think it’s great news that Dorico has come to a level of “work with orchestral libraries” which has made it a fav. app for doing that kind of work. I’ve had my own frustrations with Dorico, and haven’t even tried the last version – but since notation after all is the alphabet of music, maybe this could inspire other DAW makers to beef up their DAWs notation and composing skills too.

Most likely, coming generations of composer will laugh about how many apps (and half baked libraries) we are using today.

Over at at Gearspace, which I used earlier, there were many accusations against those who didn’t use Pro Tools for not being professional, mainly from those with a main focus on sound engineering/recording studios. Some seemed to think that those with the largest Pro Tools rigs were the kings of the universe and that those without PT were only hobbyists/amateurs. But the music is, whether some may not like to look at it this way, centered around music and and not the industry around it.
 
Last edited:
I greatly prefer the UX of Logic and Studio One, but continue to stick with Cubase for how well it works with large templates. Part of me would love to switch someday, but I don't relish all the hassle that goes with such a move. You're usually trading one set of strengths and weaknesses with another.
 
Vik said:
These Dorico voters could be highly professional composers - but without any mixing skills (or any interest in going that route). Dorico is the most professional score app out there. And most pro orchestral composers will use real orchestras anyway… remember what the poll is about. I think it’s great news that Dorico has come to a level of “work with orchestral libraries” which has made it a fav. app for doing that kind of work. I’ve had my own frustrations with Dorico, and haven’t even tried the last version – but since notation after all is the alphabet of music, maybe this could inspire other DAW makers to beef up their DAWs notation and composing skills too.

Most likely, coming generations of composer will laugh about how many apps (and half baked libraries) we are using today.

Over at at Gearspace, which I used earlier, there were many accusations against those who didn’t use Pro Tools for not being professional, mainly from those with a main focus on sound engineering/recording studios. Some seemed to think that those with the largest Pro Tools rigs were the kings of the universe and that those without PT were only hobbyists/amateurs. But the music is, whether some may not like to look at it this way, centered around music and and not the industry around it.
Click to expand...
My point was if you polled working professionals in LA for example (that still use sample libraries because shows / projects often don't have budget for full orchestral studio sessions), you would get different results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom