All of the DAW's listed above are great for scoring to picture, which is something Audacity doesn't do. But it's an excellent standalone audio editor, which is a vital tool in any studio. It's very easy to transfer the clip, make the changes, and import it back into your session.
Cubase was our choice based on the cost of the software as well as an easy to user interface, this coupled with the low hardware requirements meant that roll out was easy and cost effective.
We have used Pro Tools in the past and found that training staff to use this software …
While Pro Tools is the industry standard when it comes to recording and audio mixing, I've found Cubase to be superior when it comes to writing with MIDI. Also, it comes with a lot of features (MP3 exporting, time code) that Pro Tools charges you extra for. They're both about …
For just a quick down and dirty audio recording from computer source, Audacity is a no-frills solution that any user can get up and running with quickly without the intimidating functions seen in most standard DAWs. This would be a great tool to start with to record church services, or basic live performances where someone wouldn't want to use a full DAW like Ableton Live or Studio One.
I have been a longtime fan of Cubase and would recommend it to anyone, whether they are just starting in recording or a seasoned professional. I find that it is really strong in the pre-production and production phases of a song. Tools like the arranger track, track versions, and the chord track make writing and experimenting very easy. I have used these tools on almost every song that I have started from the writing phase. I am able to experiment with different variations of a song, different channel settings, and even completely different arrangements all with just a few clicks. My writing process and speed have improved so much over the last few versions of Cubase. We have also enjoyed working with the mixing process. The mixers in Cubase are laid out much like a regular console. So for an old timer like me, the learning curve is very low. Cubase did a very good job with layout and labeling. Things are labeled what you would expect them to be and laid out in an order that makes sense. The other part of the mixer that makes it great is the ability to color code and organize tracks. My mix time has drastically decreased since using Cubase.
Although the UI is very simple, it's not great to look at. Making the program more exciting visually would be a great plus.
The functionality has never been lacking for what it is, but has also not seen major additions in a long time.
The support base of the community is truly impressive, but is also very intimidating to wade through. Having better standardized help avenues would be a benefit to new users.
With no subscription fees unlike other products on the market, I am very confident I will continue using Audacity for my simple audio editing needs. I'm not an expert in audio editing, I'm sure what works for me as a more general user in a public institution would not suit someone more experienced, but I'm very happy with the quality of work I'm able to produce.
Audacity is decently user friendly, while any questions generally have to be answered by externally searching for tutorials or other users encountering the same issue, it is still straightforward, simple, and easily resolved. It's installable on any type of computer, compact, and easy to install. Beginners may have a harder time, but once you know what you're doing, it's very easy to use.
Audacity is great for this, it doesn't require a network connection once downloaded, and previous versions of the software are still functional in my experience. I have never experienced the program crashing, lost work, corrupted files, anything of the sort.
I have never had issues with speed in Audacity, I don't integrate it with other software but the program runs smoothly even with larger jobs. I haven't measured the CPU while using Audacity, but I imagine it's not high compared to other, more professional or specialized programs in the same category.
We have not used direct support for Audacity, other than using the information available on their website, which resolved the issues we were experiencing so we had a good experience in that regard. As this is Open Source FREE software, I don't believe there is direct support available. In saying that, it has the following great support options:
Online documentation and FAQ
Online tutorials covering all functions
Online user forums where questions are asked and answered by other users
Online wiki with more information
With these options most issues should be able to be resolved to get full use from Audacity.
Any time I've had to reach out to customer support, they've been fast to respond and answered my questions to the best of their ability. Authorization of the software is easy, and the company is great about emailing you promptly. Overall, they do a great job.
Again I found it helpful to write up a step-by-step tutorial for coworkers based on our institution's standard practices. This combined with support from coworkers to answer questions is very effective for simple everyday use of Audacity. The support in-program is minimal but troubleshooting in the internet age is straightforward.
All of the DAW's listed above are great for scoring to picture, which is something Audacity doesn't do. But it's an excellent standalone audio editor, which is a vital tool in any studio. It's very easy to transfer the clip, make the changes, and import it back into your session.
We chose Cubase in the beginning due to price differences between Pro Tools and Cubase. As we learned to use Cubase, we realized the flexibility between MIDI and audio was far more advanced than any other product on the market. We still feel like the MIDI implementation in Cubase is beyond any other product on the market. We have also found that the audio engine alone is on par with all of the industry standard software. During the 18 years we have used Cubase, we have noticed more and more high-end mixing, mastering and production studios using Cubase in their workflows.
I feel that Audacity is useful, simple, and suited both to casual users and more advanced use cases. There are options for expanding functionality in complex situations, but the option to not mess with it as a beginner is perfectly fine and suited to most everyday uses in my institution.
Using Cubase over something like Protools means that new users are more likely to be successful during training and due to this, decrease training time.
More trained staff means that we are able to complete more projects faster instead of waiting for a more skilled staff member to become available.
Implementation on-site for on-site recording has been very reliable and has decreased the amount of failed recordings during events.
