stigc56
Senior Member
What would the result be?
2024: Which DAWs / apps do you prefer for work with orchestral libraries, *and why*?
- Thread starter Vik
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 2024 daw orchestral poll
Which part is slower? After having created large templates in Logic, Studio One, Cubase, and Pro Tools, and working heavily in all of them for a while I much prefer the reliability and workflow with VEP in Pro Tools over those others. Without VEP, I think Logic probably is winner here however.
Certainly with HDX I don't need to worry about the buffer and generally keep it at 256 through an entire project, but in general I find similar buffer settings provide similar native performance across all the DAWS (maybe Logic is a little more efficient, although the single core spiking issue persists).
iMovieShout
(aka jpb007.uk) I have a dream 🎬
It's like we just started 2023 on repeat ...again!!!!
ALittleNightMusic
Professional Amateur
Cubase, Logic, DP, Pro Tools, Sibelius, Dorico. Probably in that order (though the first two might be swapped).
OP
OP
Vik
Vi-k
Not that it really matters but – no, it isn't.
This isn't a DAW only poll – and it's limited to one specific kind or work; work with orchestral libraries.There was a poll in 2023 with only 10 entries – which, for some reason listed Nuendo and Cubase as one combined vote option. It didn't include Dorico, Finale or Sibelius – and didn't specify any focus on how well they were dealing with orchestral libraries. Also, you could't vote for more than one DAW.
Btw, here's the link to the 2023 poll for those interested: 2023 Poll: What DAW are you using
Circa 25% of the votes in the current poll have been given to DAWs/apps which aren't listed in the 2023 poll.
Last edited:
vibrationisreality
Active Member
It's Groundhog Day.
musicmakerbird
Member
Studio One is really good. I like the new Cubase GUI personally. Side note Steinberg/Yamaha have some projects coming out.
Kamikaze
New Member
Studio One, Cubase and Ableton Live for me.
I used to make music in live and I still think it's underrated because of the simplicity and ease of use it provides but ultimately I switched to Studio One. My main reasons is the ability to disable tracks, better performance, score view and sound variations.
Then there's Cubase which has some advantages over Studio One. For example the midi editor simply feels smoother. I also love the browser where I can just type in 'house snare loop' and it will give me all the files in house folder, inside the snare folder, inside the drum loops folder. In other DAWs I'd have to go to these folders manually or rename all of the samples. But other things just feel old and unnecessary like no local undo or the lack of busses merged with folder tracks. There are also other things that Studio One simply does better: articulation maps, automation, macros, adding and removing FX etc.
But if I had to compose in any other DAW, I'd probably go back to Live. I'm aware of it's limitations but the freedom it gives in the first stages of production is unmached. Still, Ableton's target audience is not really orchestral composers so I'm gonna stay with Studio One which I'm starting to love even more.
I used to make music in live and I still think it's underrated because of the simplicity and ease of use it provides but ultimately I switched to Studio One. My main reasons is the ability to disable tracks, better performance, score view and sound variations.
Then there's Cubase which has some advantages over Studio One. For example the midi editor simply feels smoother. I also love the browser where I can just type in 'house snare loop' and it will give me all the files in house folder, inside the snare folder, inside the drum loops folder. In other DAWs I'd have to go to these folders manually or rename all of the samples. But other things just feel old and unnecessary like no local undo or the lack of busses merged with folder tracks. There are also other things that Studio One simply does better: articulation maps, automation, macros, adding and removing FX etc.
But if I had to compose in any other DAW, I'd probably go back to Live. I'm aware of it's limitations but the freedom it gives in the first stages of production is unmached. Still, Ableton's target audience is not really orchestral composers so I'm gonna stay with Studio One which I'm starting to love even more.
MusicalMatcha
New Member
I have both Logic and Studio One. I got frustrated with Studio One recently because I have an older version (V5) and there are some bugs in there which I find annoying to deal with. I wasn't sure whether I wanted to pay for an upgrade to V6 and since I already had Logic installed I thought I'd give it a go. I'm liking it so far but I'm starting to realise that maybe all DAWs can be a bit clunky from time to time and it isn't just exclusively a Studio One issue.
Kamikaze
New Member
I'd love to try Logic but unfortunately I'm on windows. AFAIK Studio One is the most similar one.
Out of curiosity, what bugs did you experience?
Per Boysen
Active Member
Cubase 13 at the moment. I enjoy the efficiency of starting every new project with a template already set up for delivering stems in a way that the sum of them always equals the FULL MIX version. A heavy threshold was to set up the expression maps the way I like them (16 quick buttons on some physical controller and the rest to be picked in the key editor). But now when it is done Cubase is a powerful tool. I worked mainly in Logic from versions 2.00 to 10.00 and must say that I am still working on getting up to the same workflow speed in Cubase, especially when tweaking automation. My Macs are too old for Logic now and I'm working in Windows on an AMD Ryzen 9 7950X 16-Core Processor 4.50 GHz with 96 GB RAM. A local VEPro server, on the same machine, holds all the orchestral libraries, set up with MIR3d . The DAW receives 7 stems back from the VEPro server. This opens up for strapping different DAWs in front of VEPro and I keep moving between Bitwig, Studio One, and Cubase. Working with DivisiMate is also smooth in Cubase.
Hi,
i think the underlying hardware plays an important role in the efficiency and stability of one’s setup.
I use RME Audio hardware and built my own computers for music production.
RME Hardware has a built in mature mixer Called Total mix which allows me to route any channel to any location I need to without using the computers operating system. I can also use loopback routing audio between all my music applications without taxing the CPU. The drivers are rock solid and one is not locked into these crazy expensive subscription schemes forcing you to pay for expensive upgrades at regular intervals.
RME hardware also holds its resale value well if one compares prices on EBay and reverb.
Last but not least RME audio drivers still support their hardware way back to early 2000’s.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Vik
Vi-k
Here are some (questionable?) assumptions and pseudo-conclusions based on the results so far:
Logic would, if it still had been developed for Windows, been the most used DAW. There are still more Windows users than Mac users, so the chances that Logic would have more than twice as many users as they have now is quite likely if a Windows version was still available.
Dorico isn't only crushing Finale and Sibelius in this poll, but with 15% of the votes right now, Dorico may also threaten some of the DAWs out there – if they continue to make D. easier to use and add functions that only full fledged DAWs used to have,
It's surprising Pro Tools (2.3%) and Performer (5.5%) haven't received more votes than they have – both are well established veterans in the DAW market.
Studio One is doing surprisingly well, being a newcomer (compared with oldies like DP, Pro Tools, Logic and Cubase). This reminds me that the poll question 'Which DAWs / other apps do you prefer for work with orchestral libraries, and why?' is kind of misleading, since very few of us have tried all these DAWs – meaning that many of the answers may be more or less based on assumptions.
Btw, are there any of the major DAWs out there which don't offer notation/score editing?
Logic would, if it still had been developed for Windows, been the most used DAW. There are still more Windows users than Mac users, so the chances that Logic would have more than twice as many users as they have now is quite likely if a Windows version was still available.
Dorico isn't only crushing Finale and Sibelius in this poll, but with 15% of the votes right now, Dorico may also threaten some of the DAWs out there – if they continue to make D. easier to use and add functions that only full fledged DAWs used to have,
It's surprising Pro Tools (2.3%) and Performer (5.5%) haven't received more votes than they have – both are well established veterans in the DAW market.
Studio One is doing surprisingly well, being a newcomer (compared with oldies like DP, Pro Tools, Logic and Cubase). This reminds me that the poll question 'Which DAWs / other apps do you prefer for work with orchestral libraries, and why?' is kind of misleading, since very few of us have tried all these DAWs – meaning that many of the answers may be more or less based on assumptions.
Btw, are there any of the major DAWs out there which don't offer notation/score editing?
Nebulon Ranger
New Member
Kamikaze
New Member
I'm one of those people that have to try every single DAW that exists and I decided to settle on Studio One. My first choice was Ableton Live only because I didn't know about some of the QoL functions that other programs had like articulation maps or disabling tracks. Then I dabbled for a bit in Cubase LE but compared to Ableton it was sometimes painfully inconsistent and unintuitive. Studio One, while being a little illogical at first, now is my favourite DAW and I love working in it. It might not be as powerful as Cubase but the most basic ones are way more accessible which simply makes it more enjoyable.
For orchestral music, I think it would be a close call between Logic and Cubase but I also think most composers would choose the former.
Ableton Live, Bitwig Studio, FL Studio
brunocoliveira
New Member
Being both a Logic and Cubase user I still think Cubase is the best for working with production and composition in 2024. That's because its feature save you a lot of time. Also, comparing to Logic, Cubase runs smoother (I verified) in handling many instruments. I cannot live without being able to have 2 CC lanes in the piano editor anymore, and being able to edit 2+ instruments on it helps me a lot. Also, the routing is simple to understand and the export functions are flawless. Logic mixer and routing, on the other hand is terrible to use, not flexible and the exporting of stems is a mess.
The things that Logic do better than Cubase are: 1- Learning curve, which is easier to grasp from a beginner; 2 - Original sounds, as Logic come with many great stock instruments that are easy to use; 3 - Price, as Logic don't charge for an update whereas Cubase does.
The things that Logic do better than Cubase are: 1- Learning curve, which is easier to grasp from a beginner; 2 - Original sounds, as Logic come with many great stock instruments that are easy to use; 3 - Price, as Logic don't charge for an update whereas Cubase does.
Dewdman42
Senior Member
LogicPro is the best value out there. In the long run perhaps even cheaper than Reaper! It also has arguably the simplest learning curve and plenty of power for a lot of use cases. I'm still a fan in certain ways for many things.
However, it has not kept up with Cubase/DP in terms of super powers. those two really are the king of DAW's IMHO, PT is for audio, mixing and post production perhaps..its a standard more than anything
but for the whole enchilada...midi and audio....its Cubase or DP really. They are the deepest daw's with high grades for usability, etc.. each with pros and cons. I personally prefer DP for specfic features, namely chunks. But Cubase has its own pros in comparison also. But these two DAW's truly have the most depth in their feature set (without becoming a swiss army knife cluser-f__ like reaper).
below that you have also great daw's like Logic, studioOne and some others...which aren't as deep..but in many cases are "deep enough" for many users and arguably simpler or streamlined in some way that is preferable for those use cases.
Really it will always come down to personal prefs, I don't know why these threads keep coming back a few times a year. they are kind of pointless anymore. There is no best DAW. People have their preferences, which are completely based on their own use cases. Everyone wants to shout for joy and share their love for the tool they use...ok..but the simple truth is this information is not very helpful for anyone as everyone has their own use cases and preferences and usually once people become expert at one of the DAW's it is also difficult to make an objective comparison because they are already quite efficient with one and used to thinting the way it thinks and using it that way, etc..it may have even influenced over time how they go about producing content to a degree where any other choice will be like trying to train a dolphin how to walk on land.
However, it has not kept up with Cubase/DP in terms of super powers. those two really are the king of DAW's IMHO, PT is for audio, mixing and post production perhaps..its a standard more than anything
but for the whole enchilada...midi and audio....its Cubase or DP really. They are the deepest daw's with high grades for usability, etc.. each with pros and cons. I personally prefer DP for specfic features, namely chunks. But Cubase has its own pros in comparison also. But these two DAW's truly have the most depth in their feature set (without becoming a swiss army knife cluser-f__ like reaper).
below that you have also great daw's like Logic, studioOne and some others...which aren't as deep..but in many cases are "deep enough" for many users and arguably simpler or streamlined in some way that is preferable for those use cases.
Really it will always come down to personal prefs, I don't know why these threads keep coming back a few times a year. they are kind of pointless anymore. There is no best DAW. People have their preferences, which are completely based on their own use cases. Everyone wants to shout for joy and share their love for the tool they use...ok..but the simple truth is this information is not very helpful for anyone as everyone has their own use cases and preferences and usually once people become expert at one of the DAW's it is also difficult to make an objective comparison because they are already quite efficient with one and used to thinting the way it thinks and using it that way, etc..it may have even influenced over time how they go about producing content to a degree where any other choice will be like trying to train a dolphin how to walk on land.
