Mac DAW comparison

Audio, MIDI and other software, not including effects or instruments
Post Reply
biomuse
Posts: 156
Joined: 24 Aug 2006, 10:03
Location: San Francisco

Mac DAW comparison

Post by biomuse » 06 Aug 2009, 11:22

I primarily use DP 6, and my typical sessions are saturated with fx and VI plugins.

I always have pre-rendering enabled, because it is essentially invisible to the user, and as such there's no reason to disable it unless there is a specific plugin with which it is incompatible (and those are very few; none of my varied and numerous fx or VIs are incompatible).

It's a ton of performance gain with no pain. I'll indulge in a moment of DP chauvinism, agreeing with Viper that you will be seeing copycat pre-rendering type CPU allocation schemes in other DAWs when their developers get around to it. MOTU: slightly annoying, but out in front of the pack, yet again.

michael
Site Supporter
Posts: 2007
Joined: 28 Sep 2002, 00:59
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Mac DAW cpu efficiency comparison. Read first post.

Post by michael » 06 Aug 2009, 20:19

biomuse wrote: MOTU: slightly annoying, but out in front of the pack, yet again.
Right like in 2007 finally getting the ability to record audio in other formats besides SDII, or being the only DAW that doesn't do any sort of object oriented visual representation in it's arrangement windows, just an arbitrary slice at measures in the Tracks Overview.

Just yanking your chain, they all have some annoying left out common feature, DP doesn't have a 'render all tracks as audio files' feature, and is probably the last major DAW on OSX that can't. Logic has a crappy arpeggiator compared, and Live has no scissor tool for MIDI...
DP7, Live 8 Suite

biomuse
Posts: 156
Joined: 24 Aug 2006, 10:03
Location: San Francisco

Re: Mac DAW cpu efficiency comparison. Read first post.

Post by biomuse » 07 Aug 2009, 00:14

michael wrote:
biomuse wrote: MOTU: slightly annoying, but out in front of the pack, yet again.
Right like in 2007 finally getting the ability to record audio in other formats besides SDII, or being the only DAW that doesn't do any sort of object oriented visual representation in it's arrangement windows, just an arbitrary slice at measures in the Tracks Overview.
Yank away, but i'm not sure it's my chain you're yanking there... :hehe:

DP has been able to export in most standard formats since i can remember. I understand the excitement over the inclusion of native support of time-stamped Broadcast Wav if you're working in multiple DAWs or to picture, but other than that, i never saw it as an issue, even before 2007. You just batch-exported what you needed. But anyway, that was 2007, and we don't live there anymore.

As for the object oriented visual representation, stuff: What, exactly, is the utility of that? Seriously, this is a complaint i've never been able to understand. I find DPs representation of midi data to be as informative as i could ever need, and the grouping of phrases into draggable objects (which DP does do, btw) doesn't really help or hinder. I look at the overview, and I can easily discern where i am in the piece. If you have loops going, there are loop markers in DP. Other than that, division by measures isn't exactly "arbitrary" - it's how we meaningfully subdivide musical pieces, i thought. (Especially if you're working midi.)
michael wrote: Just yanking your chain, they all have some annoying left out common feature, DP doesn't have a 'render all tracks as audio files' feature, and is probably the last major DAW on OSX that can't.
But that's just incorrect. It's not named "render all tracks as audio files" in DP, but that's the only meaningful difference. It's named "Freeze Selected Tracks" in DP, and it produces the exact same thing, with effects and automation rendered to as many files as you select, over the full region you select. They're right there in the Soundbites folder after rendering, ready to drag into another DAW or wherever. And unlike analogous commands in some other DAWs, you can specify only a certain time region to render if you like.


EDIT: Were you referring one-click rendering of mutiple VI/midi tracks to multiple audio tracks? True, that's not fully automated in DP, but it's pretty close; it's easy to just assign audio track outputs to your VIs and freeze those audio tracks (or just multi-record them in one pass).

michael
Site Supporter
Posts: 2007
Joined: 28 Sep 2002, 00:59
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Mac DAW cpu efficiency comparison. Read first post.

Post by michael » 07 Aug 2009, 08:57

biomuse wrote: DP has been able to export in most standard formats since i can remember.
I understand the excitement over the inclusion of native support of time-stamped Broadcast Wav if you're working in multiple DAWs or to picture, but other than that, i never saw it as an issue, even before 2007. You just batch-exported what you needed. But anyway, that was 2007, and we don't live there anymore.
The difference is DP could only write in SDII, even after Pro Tools started using WAV as a standard.... plus if I remember right, DP would convert files to SDII, so projects would get big if there was importing to be done.
As for the object oriented visual representation, stuff: What, exactly, is the utility of that? Seriously, this is a complaint i've never been able to understand.
Say DP allowed the user to group MIDI data by a musical phrase instead of by bars, then looking at a song in the Track overview, you could quickly move phrases around without going down to the beat level.
I had a quarter note rest with no music in a song in DP, and that really showed the one obvious weakness of displaying MIDI as one long file, moving or selecting data on that old track was tedious at best because of that. Now I eventually added markers etc. but the point is that writing verse, chorus, verse, break, chorus, verse type music in DP can be frustrating compared to Logic or Live. You can use Chunks to implement this a little better, but add a new part to the song, and you ruin the 'folder' aspect of Chunks..
Compare all that to simply selecting the track objects/clips in Logic or Live and moving them. Song rearrangement in DP is possible, but if you rewrite parts or add parts during that process then your Clippings or Chunks will not rewrite. None of that would be an issue IMO if DP simply allowed you the user to choose between measure splits and your own splits of MIDI data in the Track Overview. Old timers that don't see the point could use measures (which always overlap graphically onto the next measure a bit, never got why MOTU did that?), and people who would like the industry standard model for the Track Overview.
I find DPs representation of midi data to be as informative as i could ever need, and the grouping of phrases into draggable objects (which DP does do, btw) doesn't really help or hinder. I look at the overview, and I can easily discern where i am in the piece. If you have loops going, there are loop markers in DP. Other than that, division by measures isn't exactly "arbitrary" - it's how we meaningfully subdivide musical pieces, i thought. (Especially if you're working midi.)
That's a personal choice of course like all of this really, but DP has a tiny market share compared to other OSX DAWs, and IMO it's due to what I think are really just standard concepts like object oriented data representation not being a feature of DP at all.

But that's just incorrect. It's not named "render all tracks as audio files" in DP, but that's the only meaningful difference. It's named "Freeze Selected Tracks" in DP, and it produces the exact same thing, with effects and automation rendered to as many files as you select, over the full region you select. They're right there in the Soundbites folder after rendering, ready to drag into another DAW or wherever. And unlike analogous commands in some other DAWs, you can specify only a certain time region to render if you like.
That's a work around. Live and Logic both have freeze tracks, and render all tracks as audio, so not only do they do parts of a song by freezing etc. they allow instant exporting. It's a simple feature, and allows for instance you to export the files as 24 bit while freezing at 32 bit, since some DAWs cannot import 32 bit files.
EDIT: Were you referring one-click rendering of mutiple VI/midi tracks to multiple audio tracks? True, that's not fully automated in DP, but it's pretty close; it's easy to just assign audio track outputs to your VIs and freeze those audio tracks (or just multi-record them in one pass).
Yes, every other DAW allows you to export all data as audio tracks with no hoops to jump through.

DP was my first DAW, I still like it, and have 5.1.3 on my machine, I still use it sometimes. I just wish that MOTU would implement basic DAW standards. Like I said, maybe as options, but I'm certain teens are scared away from DP as every other DAW on the market has some sort of object oriented visual representation of musical phrases.
DP7, Live 8 Suite

biomuse
Posts: 156
Joined: 24 Aug 2006, 10:03
Location: San Francisco

Mac DAW comparison

Post by biomuse » 11 Aug 2009, 00:36

michael wrote:The difference is DP could only write in SDII, even after Pro Tools started using WAV as a standard.... plus if I remember right, DP would convert files to SDII, so projects would get big if there was importing to be done.
As discussed below in more detail, I would file this under "Things that anyone who isn't actively seeking tiny points of comparison wouldn't even notice, much less care about."

Practically speaking, I don't ever remember having any size issues with projects in DP, at least not given modern drive capacities (even way back in 2007 when this was relevant!) All importing/exporting in DP was/is batchable, so if I wanted anything exported to Wav or aiff (which i sometimes did), I just highlighted 'em and clicked the mouse button. Really, really easy.

But all of your critiques have this same thing in common: they are about 'feel' or style of working, not about actual capabilities of the program, nor even substantially about convenience.
michael wrote:Say DP allowed the user to group MIDI data by a musical phrase instead of by bars, then looking at a song in the Track overview, you could quickly move phrases around without going down to the beat level.
Well, you can (and could in past versions) do that already, simply by using the drop-down menu to set the selection grid to anything you want; beats, measures, 4 measures, etc. No, it's not the same as being able to highlight some notes and label it "riff1," but, if you're actually writing verse/chorus/verse/bridge/chorus type music, you are extremely likely to be conforming to: measures or beats, especially when you click and drag to rearrange. The difference between labeling notes "riff1" and being able to find that clearly represented riff in your labeled "chorus 1" in DP is a difference, sure, but one barely worth mentioning.
michael wrote:That's a personal choice of course like all of this really,
But it hardly even amounts to that. One can easily - efficiently and quickly - edit and rearrange in DP6, and it's a little silly to suggest otherwise. Particularly in a thread about cpu efficiency comparison...

michael wrote: but DP has a tiny market share compared to other OSX DAWs, and IMO it's due to what I think are really just standard concepts like object oriented data representation not being a feature of DP at all.
That's a huge stretch. I'm no old timer, but I have been around long enough to know that the main reason that DP has smaller market share than Logic is the same reason that people eat at McDonald's when they get off the highway - because it's there and it's familiar: Logic is Apple's baby and has the Apple imprimatur on it. As to the rest, DP is a Mac-only program with a smaller potential user base. That's about it.

michael wrote: That's a work around. Live and Logic both have freeze tracks, and render all tracks as audio, so not only do they do parts of a song by freezing etc. they allow instant exporting. It's a simple feature, and allows for instance you to export the files as 24 bit while freezing at 32 bit, since some DAWs cannot import 32 bit files.
No, it's not a work around. The express purpose of Freeze Tracks is to print tracks to audio with effects and VIs.

Let's say I have tracks that I've frozen at 32 bit, and I need to export them both at 32 and 24 bit. Here's what I do in DP6:

Open the Soundbites window (shift-B)
Highlight my newly generated soundbites (shift-click)
Menu: "Export selected soundbites," selecting my desired 32 bit format. Choose a destination folder.

Since my soundbites are already highlighted, I just "Export selected soundbites" again, this time selecting my desired 24 bit format.

So, the difference between this and the ability to export both formats "simultaneously" is what, two mouseclicks?

Let me put it this way: No one who uses DP6 regularly would agree with the statement, "There is no easy and convenient way to print and export audio from tracks with fx/VIs in DP6." That would be a ridiculous statement; because there is. And the difference between it and the one you describe is trivial. It seems like you don't like the way it happens in DP primarily because it's not exactly like Logic.

But try running ~60 VI instances, or mixing 70 tracks in Logic on a quad core. You won't be able to do it, while in DP6, on the same computer, you will. That is a distinction with a difference, i.e., one that actually matters. Counting mouseclicks is just paltry in light of it.

michael wrote: DP was my first DAW, I still like it, and have 5.1.3 on my machine, I still use it sometimes.
I would highly suggest upgrading to DP6. It's a big upgrade. You will likely want to use it much more often than sometimes after that. Since you're unfamiliar with it, we're discussing, if not apples and oranges, then at least different kinds of apples.

michael wrote: I just wish that MOTU would implement basic DAW standards. Like I said, maybe as options, but I'm certain teens are scared away from DP as every other DAW on the market has some sort of object oriented visual representation of musical phrases.
Well, I tend to think better of most teens than that.

Look, I can agree with you that there are some nice ways to make midi editing feel a tiny bit quicker in other DAWs, and sure, it would be pleasant to see them appear in DP.

But if we're talking about comparing that to having integrated, on-grid pitch detection, editing and correction on every audio track included with the DAW, years before any other native DAW had it; or now, the ability to stack more VIs and tracks onto a cpu than any other DAW due to pregen mode, an innovative and elegant way of allocating cpu/disk resources that is unique among DAWs, then my reaction is: Are you kidding? That's a really easy choice, and I'm glad MOTU spent its time that way instead of on the small stuff.

Perhaps some teens are dissuaded from DP because MOTU spends more time producing pack-leading, substantial improvements in the capability of DAWs than it spends playing Same-Same with Logic and Live etc. But other people would be well-served by investigating DP6's capabilities and deciding for themselves whether they want to enjoy industry-leading perfomance regarding VI, fx and track count, plus a great workflow. All DAWs have their good points; on this one, DP6 is way out in front.

And no, I have no relationship with MOTU. I just get tired of seeing great tech overshadowed by occasional marketing nonsense and henpecking. This thread was about DAW cpu efficiency comparison.

michael
Site Supporter
Posts: 2007
Joined: 28 Sep 2002, 00:59
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Mac DAW comparison

Post by michael » 23 Aug 2009, 05:03

biomuse wrote: As discussed below in more detail, I would file this under "Things that anyone who isn't actively seeking tiny points of comparison wouldn't even notice, much less care about."

Practically speaking, I don't ever remember having any size issues with projects in DP, at least not given modern drive capacities (even way back in 2007 when this was relevant!) All importing/exporting in DP was/is batchable, so if I wanted anything exported to Wav or aiff (which i sometimes did), I just highlighted 'em and clicked the mouse button. Really, really easy.

But all of your critiques have this same thing in common: they are about 'feel' or style of working, not about actual capabilities of the program, nor even substantially about convenience.

No, this has to do with moving files from one DAW to another, and how in DP only SDII was supported for far longer than any other DAW maker. What this meant in practical terms was that if you imported audio from other sources, it would be doubled as SDII. A 2GB song is 4GB etc.


michael wrote:Say DP allowed the user to group MIDI data by a musical phrase instead of by bars, then looking at a song in the Track overview, you could quickly move phrases around without going down to the beat level.
Well, you can (and could in past versions) do that already, simply by using the drop-down menu to set the selection grid to anything you want; beats, measures, 4 measures, etc. No, it's not the same as being able to highlight some notes and label it "riff1," but, if you're actually writing verse/chorus/verse/bridge/chorus type music, you are extremely likely to be conforming to: measures or beats, especially when you click and drag to rearrange. The difference between labeling notes "riff1" and being able to find that clearly represented riff in your labeled "chorus 1" in DP is a difference, sure, but one barely worth mentioning.
This is a missed point here, in other DAWs the arrangement pages, (coverd by Track Overview and the Sequence Editor, why two instead of one is beyond me as well?), are not one long linear stream, sure you can add MIDI and audio via Chunks, but after that you're going to have to use markers, otherwise, it's searching through arbitrary cuts (bars beats etc.) to find the end of a riff. In every other DAW the arrange page shows regions of data as blocks, which can be color coded etc. wich can be very quickly selected and cut copy paste, moved into folders etc. MOTU has the ability to use both methods if they so choose, but they don't, I think mainly because old timers in DP have no clue as to how much just being able to use region based editing in the Track Overview would speed things up when you're at the end and you want to rearrange a song. Chunks and the Song Window cover it to a degree, but not after adding it all together and editing in a single sequence, (which is neccessary if you want to use Mackie Control etc.)




michael wrote: but DP has a tiny market share compared to other OSX DAWs, and IMO it's due to what I think are really just standard concepts like object oriented data representation not being a feature of DP at all.
That's a huge stretch. I'm no old timer, but I have been around long enough to know that the main reason that DP has smaller market share than Logic is the same reason that people eat at McDonald's when they get off the highway - because it's there and it's familiar: Logic is Apple's baby and has the Apple imprimatur on it. As to the rest, DP is a Mac-only program with a smaller potential user base. That's about it.
Logic had a larger user base before Apple bought them as well. Though I think DP's slow move to OSX was a killer for them as much as Logics positioning.

michael wrote: No, it's not a work around. The express purpose of Freeze Tracks is to print tracks to audio with effects and VIs.
In all other DAWs it's to save CPU resources, most other DAWs allow you to render a song without rendering all VI's to audio.

Let's say I have tracks that I've frozen at 32 bit, and I need to export them both at 32 and 24 bit. Here's what I do in DP6:

Open the Soundbites window (shift-B)
Highlight my newly generated soundbites (shift-click)
Menu: "Export selected soundbites," selecting my desired 32 bit format. Choose a destination folder.

Since my soundbites are already highlighted, I just "Export selected soundbites" again, this time selecting my desired 24 bit format.

So, the difference between this and the ability to export both formats "simultaneously" is what, two mouseclicks?

Let me put it this way: No one who uses DP6 regularly would agree with the statement, "There is no easy and convenient way to print and export audio from tracks with fx/VIs in DP6." That would be a ridiculous statement; because there is. And the difference between it and the one you describe is trivial. It seems like you don't like the way it happens in DP primarily because it's not exactly like Logic.
No, because it's far more cumbersom than Logic, or Live. It's really only a simple single mouseclick, no freezing tracks, then searching audio pools etc. Can you freeze more than one track at atime in DP6?
But try running ~60 VI instances, or mixing 70 tracks in Logic on a quad core. You won't be able to do it, while in DP6, on the same computer, you will. That is a distinction with a difference, i.e., one that actually matters. Counting mouseclicks is just paltry in light of it.
Not really convinced that all of this translates as nicely to what you describe. I know that DP5 VS Logic 7 for instance, well that was pretty rough on DP, a consistant 75-80% drop in performance to Logic. Previous to this, Logic had consistantly been the CPU king, and DP was the audio track king. I'm thrilled if they have really got it together though.

michael wrote: DP was my first DAW, I still like it, and have 5.1.3 on my machine, I still use it sometimes.
I would highly suggest upgrading to DP6. It's a big upgrade. You will likely want to use it much more often than sometimes after that. Since you're unfamiliar with it, we're discussing, if not apples and oranges, then at least different kinds of apples.

michael wrote: I just wish that MOTU would implement basic DAW standards. Like I said, maybe as options, but I'm certain teens are scared away from DP as every other DAW on the market has some sort of object oriented visual representation of musical phrases.
Well, I tend to think better of most teens than that.

Look, I can agree with you that there are some nice ways to make midi editing feel a tiny bit quicker in other DAWs, and sure, it would be pleasant to see them appear in DP.
[/quote]
Look I'm not a teen, and honestly DP has a ton to offer, but banging my head against DP's lack of clear visual stimuli for MIDI phrases is not my favorite part of working in DP. I will and do take CPU hits, zany audio editing, and a lessor MIDI editing suite, all just for a friendly UI in Live. I use DP and Logic when I have to for the more surgical MIDI editing, but we'll see. I'm waiting to see how MOTU react to Snow Leopard before upgrading to 6, as MOTU are pretty cool in that they don't charge you extra for not incramentally upgrading DP.
DP7, Live 8 Suite

User avatar
G
Owner/Admin
Posts: 2048
Joined: 05 May 2003, 18:11
Twitter: glenngutierrez
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Contact:

Re: Mac DAW cpu efficiency comparison. Read first post.

Post by G » 23 Aug 2009, 12:00

Let's keep this on-topic regarding the efficiency comparison tests. If you guys would like, I can split off the DP versus Logic comparison posts into a new topic and you can continue there. I'm not against the conversation while it stays civil. It has simply expanded far beyond this topic and the right pov to have a non-defensive look at efficiency numbers.
MacBook Pro 15" (2016) . UA Apollo x6 + Quad . macOS Catalina . Logic Pro X . TwistedWave . FCPX . PS CC . Affinity Suite . Get Info

michael
Site Supporter
Posts: 2007
Joined: 28 Sep 2002, 00:59
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Mac DAW cpu efficiency comparison. Read first post.

Post by michael » 23 Aug 2009, 21:05

G wrote:Let's keep this on-topic regarding the efficiency comparison tests. If you guys would like, I can split off the DP versus Logic comparison posts into a new topic and you can continue there. I'm not against the conversation while it stays civil. It has simply expanded far beyond this topic and the right pov to have a non-defensive look at efficiency numbers.
That's fine. I like talking DAWs, and if some new light is shed, great, if the conversation dies, then it dies. I'm not sure all around CPU efficiency / track count, and workflow, GUI etc. debates are ever fully going to be separate conversations in comparison tests between DAWs though??

Every time these tests come up someone boasts, then the workflow, and feature conversation starts. ROTFL
DP7, Live 8 Suite

biomuse
Posts: 156
Joined: 24 Aug 2006, 10:03
Location: San Francisco

Re: Mac DAW cpu efficiency comparison. Read first post.

Post by biomuse » 01 Sep 2009, 17:28

michael wrote:No, this has to do with moving files from one DAW to another, and how in DP only SDII was supported for far longer than any other DAW maker. What this meant in practical terms was that if you imported audio from other sources, it would be doubled as SDII. A 2GB song is 4GB etc.
Nope, this is just wrong as far as I know. I'm guessing that you were tripped up by the fact that SDII didn't support interleaved stereo files. But it absolutely suported true mono, and if you dragged a mono file into the tracks window, it stayed mono (i.e. half the size of a stereo file). I did this many times myself with wav session imports; size of the session never increased substantially, and certainly never doubled, or anything like that. Uncompressed audio has the same size footprint per minute whether it's wav, aiff, bwav, SDII or whatever.

michael wrote:This is a missed point here, in other DAWs the arrangement pages, (coverd by Track Overview and the Sequence Editor, why two instead of one is beyond me as well?), are not one long linear stream,
Because it allows you to be zoomed in down to the beat or sample level in the editor, while still being able to locate yourself in the piece at a glance. ProTools has this as well. It's a great system, and makes things like turning your sequence into a rainbow feel much less needed.

michael wrote: sure you can add MIDI and audio via Chunks, but after that you're going to have to use markers, otherwise, it's searching through arbitrary cuts (bars beats etc.) to find the end of a riff. In every other DAW the arrange page shows regions of data as blocks, which can be color coded etc. wich can be very quickly selected and cut copy paste, moved into folders etc.
OK now i get why you keep mentioning Chunks. Chunks is not the tool I use to do this kind of stuff in DP; It's the Clippings window. Clippings is a very powerful feature of DP and i'm not aware of whether or not other DAWs have something comparable.

It's like a souped up multi-clipboard, into which you can paste anything at all from DP, including midi riffs, down to single click resolution, which you can name "riff1, riff2chorus1," or anything you like, and have them all there in a floating window to freely drag and drop to any location, at any resolution.

(You can even drop complete FX/VI racks into the Clippings window; so for instance if you get a killer sound with a VI and a series of fx inserts that you like following it, you can grab them all and make a Clipping which can then be dropped into any session.)

michael wrote:MOTU has the ability to use both methods if they so choose, but they don't, I think mainly because old timers in DP have no clue as to how much just being able to use region based editing in the Track Overview would speed things up when you're at the end and you want to rearrange a song.
I tend to think it's because they've been spending time doing things like incorporating what is essentially Melodyne functionality as a built-in feature of the DAW years before anyone else did it, and developing a new cpu/disk management scheme which allows higher fx/VI/track counts on all machines, before anyone else did it.

I would say the importance of riff coloring relative to those is highly debatable, especially since there are other ways to do nearly the same things just as efficiently in DP. Again, I'm not saying there are no differences, I'm just saying they're chickenfeed, relatively speaking.

The "old timer" thing: I can only speak for myself, but i'm 34 yrs old, am current and familiar with most VI and fx plugins on the market, am up on advanced mixing techniques enabled by DAWs, roll my own Reaktor ensembles, etc etc. It's not lack of knowledge that makes the things you're talking about less important in DP; it's that there are other ways of doing the same thing as efficiently. When you upgrade to DP6 and get more hours using it, you'll see the light.

michael wrote:Logic had a larger user base before Apple bought them as well.


Logic was a cross-platform app before Apple bought it and for some time thereafter. Anything with PC compatibility will likely have a larger user base than a Mac-only app such as DP.

michael wrote: no freezing tracks, then searching audio pools etc.
Freezing tracks in DP is a one-mouseclick affair. And there's no "searching" of audio pools necessary at all. The drag&droppable Soundbites window in DP behaves like a Mac Finder window, and can be sorted by name, date, time of creation etc. I usually leave it to sort on time of creation, and so the stuff I just froze is sitting there at the top. Shift-click on them, and export. Done.

michael wrote:Can you freeze more than one track at atime in DP6?
If you don't know the answer to that question, you're seriously not using DP enough to consider yourself familiar with it.

Of course, you can freeze as many tracks as you like with one command.

michael wrote:
But try running ~60 VI instances, or mixing 70 tracks in Logic on a quad core. You won't be able to do it, while in DP6, on the same computer, you will. That is a distinction with a difference, i.e., one that actually matters. Counting mouseclicks is just paltry in light of it.
Not really convinced that all of this translates as nicely to what you describe. I know that DP5 VS Logic 7 for instance, well that was pretty rough on DP, a consistant 75-80% drop in performance to Logic. Previous to this, Logic had consistantly been the CPU king, and DP was the audio track king. I'm thrilled if they have really got it together though.
CSEye's experiement is well-designed. There is no rational reason to be unsure of his results that I can see.

No, in that comparison you're referring to, DP5 had 75-80% OF the performance of Logic. There's no possible way that Logic could have been CPU kind and DP audio track king with the kind of difference in performance you're talking about.

michael wrote:Look I'm not a teen, and honestly DP has a ton to offer, but banging my head against DP's lack of clear visual stimuli for MIDI phrases is not my favorite part of working in DP. I will and do take CPU hits, zany audio editing, and a lessor MIDI editing suite, all just for a friendly UI in Live. I use DP and Logic when I have to for the more surgical MIDI editing, but we'll see. I'm waiting to see how MOTU react to Snow Leopard before upgrading to 6, as MOTU are pretty cool in that they don't charge you extra for not incramentally upgrading DP.
You basically have just said above that you go to DP for real (i.e. powerful) midi editing, but you go to Live for loop/riff-based rapid pattern editing stuff. Which is just stating the obvious, since that's what Live was made for.

DP and Snow Leopard - MOTU speaks:

http://www.motu.com/newsitems/are-you-r ... ow-leopard


Upgrade to DP6 dude. You'll thank me later.

Post Reply