#Wavelab vs dsp quattro full version
#Wavelab vs dsp quattro upgrade
#Wavelab vs dsp quattro full

That was many thousands of dollars, mega watts of electricity, hundreds of late-night cpu crashes, and an angry spouse ago. The system generated SMPTE so a 16 tk tape deck could sync with the sequencer. In 1988 that Atari, with the help of lots of MIDI breakout boxes, triggered up to 16 rack-mounted polyphonic MIDI modules (think hardware virtual instruments). So for $100 you 'only get' 32 tks audio + 48 tks MIDI + 16 tks Virtual Instruments.

#Wavelab vs dsp quattro full

Cubase LE is $100 and 'crippled' compared to the full Cubase. Even though Reaper is cool, when I watched the 'this is Cubase LE' video, I felt immediately at home. But I've been on and off Steinberg - OMG when I think about it - since late 1988 doing MIDI on Atari ST.

Reaper seems amazingly capable, and fast when you learn it. I like the story behind Reaper - you know - 'the Winamp guy does it again'. It is always an adventure when stepping outside a comfort zone. Well, it is Sunday night and I'm done checking out DAW SW. But I completely understand the money thing. I personally would suggest you go with what you are most comfortable with if you are planning to teach others. There are a few versions of Cubase, each with different limitations from the full version.

#Wavelab vs dsp quattro full version

It is the full version of the software even before paid. Then if you are satisfied with the DAW then you do the right thing and pay for it. With Reaper, it is basically free to try and use initially.

#Wavelab vs dsp quattro upgrade

I do believe there is a discount for upgrade if you do purchase an interface with Cubase included. I am not aware of an accurate comparison chart of what is missing in the LE or AI versions of Cubase related to the full version. If your 'students' are going to need an interface, one of the units that includes Cubase AI would be one free way to get the software-as long as the limitations of AI or LE are not an issue. Reaper seems to be one of the easiest to get working with. Thoughts? And especially if you've used the SW I know - Cubase/Nuendo/PT/Wavelab.Ĭubase (as you know) has a unique way of setting up input bus's that seems to throw new users off.

Over time I expect to purchase several copies of the software so I want to be on a platform that is easy-enuff for a beginner, cheap enuff in the stripped-down version to not break the bank with multiple copies, and beefy-enuff that someone with some real chops won't get bored! And it has to be written for Win & Mac and be 10inch tablet friendly.Īt first blush the Cubase 'basic' pkg at $100 or so and Reaper at $60 or so looks promising. Winamp' is behind Reaper.Īlso - and here's the other half of the question - I'm setting up a team of reporters/editors - mostly newbies - and will be teaching them basic recording and editing and maybe even full audio production skills for podcasting. However, Reaper keeps coming up in my searches. I figured I'd upgrade to 64bit Nuendo & Wavelab, but probably move to Cubase b/c not I'm doing 5.1. I love it but someday it will die & I need to be ready. It's time to upgrade my 2006 Nuendo/Wavelab/RME/UAD on XP setup. Or who have used Reaper and now use Nuendo, Cubase, Wavelab or PT instead. I'm looking for feedback from ppl who have used Nuendo or Cubase or Wavealb or ProTools for 'audio production' - ie, for voice recording & editing, library & sfx editing and then mixing for radio, TV & podcast and who now use Reaper instead.