Login

Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Tips & tricks, working results, technical support

Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby davidgary73 » Sat Mar 12, 2016 3:12 am

Since there's a thread discussing about 'sound" in a DAW, i would like to know which DAW is most efficient to work with Acqua and Nebula.

Would be great to get some users experience on this :)

Users votes for most efficient DAW:

Reaper : 5 votes
- Great Freeze function, good multithreading

Studio One
- More demanding on CPU

Ableton Live
- Better than Studio One

Cheers
Last edited by davidgary73 on Sun Mar 13, 2016 2:20 am, edited 3 times in total.
MacPro 2 x 2.4 Ghz 6 Core Intel Xeon • 28GB Ram •
Logic Pro X 10.2.4 • OSX 10.11.6 • VEP 6 •
Magenta 3 • Green 3 • Navy • Pink • Sand • Lime • Nebula3 Server Ultimate •
http://www.purevolume.com/DavidGary
User avatar
davidgary73
Member
Member
 
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 9:08 am

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby jfjer379@gmail.com » Sat Mar 12, 2016 3:39 am

My answer for Mac

Reaper
If you mean efficient as with more instanses
and a great freeze function you are going to love and is a godsend for us that dont have exactly the newest CPU's this will give you much more headrom when you mix
The freeze is not just awesome its also the fastest i have tried , and after freezing your track you can still continue mixing on it, it does not get locked like most other DAW,s after freeze
you can even freeze buses with it :)

I only spent a couple of days with it before i liked it

Its all about starting out learning the routing, setting up folders not unlike track stacks in logic, and configure the mixer more like logic if thats what you like,

This is wery easy to find on youtube

After this do some mixes to get familiar with it

Then go record someting

But you use midi a lot so you could produse in logic and do the mixing in Reaper as an option

I do not have any trouble using midi in Reaper and for me its totally usable
but logic is probably the most powerful with midi

My status says im an expert here on AA now so no one knows this better then me hehe :lol:

Cheers
i7 5820k • RME • Reaper64 • Win7 64 Pro • Amethyst • Coral • Emerald • Honey • Ivory • LIME • Navy • Pearl • Pink • Pink Comp Bundle • Sand • White2 • Nebula3 Server
User avatar
jfjer379@gmail.com
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:22 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby namooz » Sat Mar 12, 2016 10:07 am

Agreed, wonderful, regardless of its low price-actually free for a few months with most if not all the paid features ($60+). I moved in from PT9 and was able to get many more instances of Nebula/Aqua at 64bit. And now, in the final analysis, I like it much better. Best of luck to you. Many of the folks on this forum use it. You can change skins if you want in Reaper, let alone Nebula. It will take time to make the transition, but it was well worth it for me (no affiliation).

Chuck Baker
namooz
User Level VI
User Level VI
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 3:07 am

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby aatigre » Sat Mar 12, 2016 10:32 am

jfjer379@gmail.com wrote:If you mean efficient as with more instanses

In that sense, REAPER is by far the most efficient Daw i have tried. I'm compairing it to Protools, Samplitude, Sequoia, Pyramix, Digital Performance and Logic.
I heard that Studio One is very CPU friendly, but i havent tryed that one.
aatigre
User Level II
User Level II
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2012 2:16 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby robschroeder » Sat Mar 12, 2016 1:30 pm

Can't really confirm this. I find from my comparisons between Studio One and Ableton Live, that Studio One is more demanding on CPU regarding 3rd party VST Plugins. Same Session with same plugins is demanding less on Ableton Live 9.6 Suite.
Freelance Composer & Producer
Nebula 3 Pro | MFC | 4KC | SP79 | Sum 100a | CAL DL1656 | Silk EQ 259b | 37J Tape | Cadpan | Raybon & Wyte Filters | VNXTe140 | Orange | Green | Pink | Lime
User avatar
robschroeder
User Level IX
User Level IX
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 11:02 am
Location: Crailsheim, Germany

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby davidgary73 » Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:20 pm

Thanks everyone for chipping in. I will update my first post so that anyone who is in search for a good efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula can refer the votes.
MacPro 2 x 2.4 Ghz 6 Core Intel Xeon • 28GB Ram •
Logic Pro X 10.2.4 • OSX 10.11.6 • VEP 6 •
Magenta 3 • Green 3 • Navy • Pink • Sand • Lime • Nebula3 Server Ultimate •
http://www.purevolume.com/DavidGary
User avatar
davidgary73
Member
Member
 
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 9:08 am

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby darren » Sat Mar 12, 2016 5:34 pm

I'm a reaper user as well. But do beware that, by default, reaper does not report it's CPU usage in the same way other DAWs do.

I was once of the opinion that Reaper was by far the most economical daw for plugin instances, but once I had figured out that it was not accurately providing clear CPU usage stats, I made proper comparisons with other DAWs and it turned out to be pretty much exactly the same.

If you want to do the same, check out the modes inside of the performance meter in Reaper.

I found that reaper was no more efficient than Live, Studio One or Fruity Loops.
User avatar
darren
User Level X
User Level X
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 6:46 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby botus99 » Sat Mar 12, 2016 5:55 pm

darren wrote:I'm a reaper user as well. But do beware that, by default, reaper does not report it's CPU usage in the same way other DAWs do.

I was once of the opinion that Reaper was by far the most economical daw for plugin instances, but once I had figured out that it was not accurately providing clear CPU usage stats, I made proper comparisons with other DAWs and it turned out to be pretty much exactly the same.

If you want to do the same, check out the modes inside of the performance meter in Reaper.

I found that reaper was no more efficient than Live, Studio One or Fruity Loops.


Gotta say that this is my experience as well. Granted I've only tried testing between an old version of Cubase vs Reaper. Seeing that Reaper comes with way more options/customizations and proprietary plugins, it won my vote for favorite DAW.
Win10 Pro 64 / i7 6700K / 16gb RAM / Reaper | Allen&Heath ZED-R16 / Echo AudiofirePre8
Nebula Ultimate - Ochre, Red, Charly, Tan, Orange, Blue, Navy, Purple, Amethyst, Lime, Sand, Pink, 2412, 7236, Titanium, Aquamarine, Coral
User avatar
botus99
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 7:59 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby Avgatzeblouz » Sat Mar 12, 2016 6:08 pm

jfjer379@gmail.com wrote:after freezing your track you can still continue mixing on it, it does not get locked like most other DAW,s after freeze
you can even freeze buses with it :)

Cheers


Samplitude does this as well, it is called "edit track freeze". The limitation is that you can't edit the frozen track while listening to the other stuff at the same time. I freeze my vocal, and then want to change it, it opens another tab with just the vocal track, and all the previously frozen plugins. You make your change, and then it gets frozen again, and back to your session. So you really have to know what you want to do.
That being said, the most powerful thing about Samplitude are the objects : they are a region in other DAWs, and you can apply anything you want to it, which will be calculated in real time, or you can freeze the objects as well. So you have two ways of applying the VSTs you use, which can greatly improve the cpu cost. Plus you can change the buffer size for the objects independantly from the session buffer.

Plus, you can choose different engines for better performances vs latencies and real-time calculation. Here is a screen capture of the different modes : http://s396.photobucket.com/user/ImHink ... 3.jpg.html
Avgatzeblouz
Vip Member
Vip Member
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 4:13 pm

Re: Efficient DAW to work with Acqua and Nebula

Postby basaristudios@gmail.com » Sat Mar 12, 2016 7:15 pm

Sometimes it makes me look and question everything in amazement.
What do we really want and how much do we really want???
Ok, Freeze Track...its just Freeze Track...what else do you want?
Isn't freeze exactly that that you can not edited? Then it goes on...
then we want to be able to edit them...then we want to be able
to open 1 million instances of Nebula but all to freeze and also
all to be able to edit...and then other things...and then...
Actually there is something like this. Its called ,,Rendering''!
You render the track and you are done. If you wanna edit it then
unfreeze it...i mean, what other features a Freeze can have then A Freeze?
I don't mean to turn this thread ALA KVR style but still.
And yes...we all have the right to request and want things
and also we all have the right to rebuke those.
Prime Total, Nebula Server 3, Scarlett 3, Amethyst 2, Aquamarine 3, Titanium, Magenta 3, Navy, Sand, Pink, Pink Compressors.
User avatar
basaristudios@gmail.com
Vip Member
Vip Member
 
Posts: 463
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:09 am
Location: New York City

Next

Return to Working with Nebula

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests