NEW DAW BY UA FOR MAC : LUNA

[Busta US]

I came across this new DAW by Universal Audio! Looks promising

[Yonatan]

Interesting. And imagine if NI also went into DAW market. Change is in the air. Good that RS brought the rack plugin.

[Alkua]

They say that Luna uses UAD Plugins and Audio Unit Plugins. Let see how Reason Plugin works in Luna

[aeox]

Mac only?

[aeox]

Take notes Reason Studios

nonlinearities, "neve" summing, tape on each channnel..

[Boombastix]

I think Protools should be worried, Reason not so much at this point. Maschine 3.0 might be more of a DAW than current version, but nobody knows yet. My take from NAMM was that this is targeting live recording first and foremost, but I might be wrong.
I think it would be cool if Reason could come up with some plugin that would allow you to use an extra PC to run additional VSTs/REs on, just to offload the main CPU. The UAD/Waves external HW is price wise out of range for most home users, but I suppose many have an extra computer available.

[aeox]

I think Protools should be worried, Reason not so much at this point. Maschine 3.0 might be more of a DAW than current version, but nobody knows yet. My take from NAMM was that this is targeting live recording first and foremost, but I might be wrong.
I think it would be cool if Reason could come up with some plugin that would allow you to use an extra PC to run additional VSTs/REs on, just to offload the main CPU. The UAD/Waves external HW is price wise out of range for most home users, but I suppose many have an extra computer available.

Was thinking the same thing about Protools. There is still nothing in direct "competition" with Reason, so I'm not worried about that personally. Though, some of the console style features Luna has is something Reason should have done LONG ago. My only guess is that UA is able to do this because of their units.

By the way, they did show the ELK hardware a while ago.. I'm really curious about all that.

[Yonatan]

ProTools and Harrison mixbus must be worried.

[selig]

In the past, the recording industry is slow to change so I would expect the same today. The first SSL was introduced in 1976, and it wasn't until around 10 years later that the console finally became a contender in the studio world. Pro Tools was introduced in 1991 and it took almost 10 years for it to take a place beside the multitrack machines of the day.

I've been hearing the "Pro Tools Killer" being predicted for almost 15 years now, and PT is still "king". So even WHEN the next big thing is introduced it will still likely be many years more until it can actually take hold. So I doubt anyone is actually worried - yet…

[guitfnky]

do very many home studios/producers use Protools? I know it’s the industry standard (I remember when we got it at the studio I used to intern at, way back when, and it was a big deal), but other than seeing the odd Youtube vid, or an actual professional studio, I’ve literally never seen anyone use it. ever.

sorry, I know this is horribly off-topic—it’s just confusing to me that Protools is still a “thing” in polite-home-studio-company.

[joeyluck]

do very many home studios/producers use Protools? I know it’s the industry standard (I remember when we got it at the studio I used to intern at, way back when, and it was a big deal), but other than seeing the odd Youtube vid, or an actual professional studio, I’ve literally never seen anyone use it. ever.

sorry, I know this is horribly off-topic—it’s just confusing to me that Protools is still a “thing” in polite-home-studio-company.

The interface certainly hasn't changed. I gave Pro Tools First (free version) a shot, and it looks very much the same as it did it the 90's. I know some people will make jokes about Reason looking the same, and I'm glad the rack looks much the same, but Reason's sequencer has certainly improved. I found Pro Tools difficult to look at for very long.

[Yonatan]

My impression with ProTools (pro version) is that it is (very) good when working with video and also with audio editing. Some more pro features that are still lacking in a couple of other DAWs. But for many home studios, other things are often more needed and wanted, and so another DAW may be more suitable. I think all DAWs I have looked on, has it´s better and worse sides. Probably true also with this Luna. But it is free, so no worries (but UA plugs cost a fortune!).
Are we moving more towards a multi-DAW thinking? Ableton for this, Reason for that, ProTools for...etc.

[Busta US]

Interesting. And imagine if NI also went into DAW market. Change is in the air. Good that RS brought the rack plugin.

Very good point (NI making a DAW would be such a groundbreaking moment in the DAW market imo..would be awesome )

[Busta US]

They say that Luna uses UAD Plugins and Audio Unit Plugins. Let see how Reason Plugin works in Luna

Don't quote me on that. But it seems Luna will not support VST in version 1. My source only comes from a comment on GearSlutz. But could be true.

[Busta US]

Mac only?

Yes but I asked UA during their live stream and they said they are planning to release a Windows version later on (v2 perhaps, they didn't mention which version just guessing)

[Busta US]

Take notes Reason Studios

nonlinearities, "neve" summing, tape on each channnel..

Haha, It looks so clean and straight-forward.

[guitfnky]

do very many home studios/producers use Protools? I know it’s the industry standard (I remember when we got it at the studio I used to intern at, way back when, and it was a big deal), but other than seeing the odd Youtube vid, or an actual professional studio, I’ve literally never seen anyone use it. ever.

sorry, I know this is horribly off-topic—it’s just confusing to me that Protools is still a “thing” in polite-home-studio-company.

The interface certainly hasn't changed. I gave Pro Tools First (free version) a shot, and it looks very much the same as it did it the 90's. I know some people will make jokes about Reason looking the same, and I'm glad the rack looks much the same, but Reason's sequencer has certainly improved. I found Pro Tools difficult to look at for very long.

I’m with you. I remember thinking how ugly Protools was back when it first came out. I was starting to think it was just me who thought it still looks terrible, all these years later. I wouldn’t mind trying it, because obviously the results are what matter most (and for those of us who do music production for love instead of strictly for a paycheck—the experience/enjoyment of it), but damn it doesn’t make me want to use it.

Reason is great, IMO, in that regard. everything is immediate, and it’s not necessarily pretty, but it’s not ugly either. upgrade the engine to allow 4k, and make the mixer strips more distinct, so you’re not accidentally tweaking a knob on the wrong channel, and you’ve got a great UI, as far as I’m concerned.

[chimp_spanner]

TBH designing a UI for a DAW must be incredibly hard work. Sometimes in Cubase I feel like I'm in a piece of office software. And don't even get me started on FL Studio. Tried that for the first time the other day and it gave me a damn migraine. It's like someone took everything in a feature suggestion box, loaded it into a shotgun and blasted it at the program. Reason is still incredibly clear/easy to use for me, although admittedly larger projects do start to get difficult to manage. And this is where I do something entirely predictable, and ask for folders

Luna looks interesting though - if I have a 2017 MBP will I be able to use their hardware?

[Ermitage]

- Only works with UA hardware
- OSX only
- "Free", except that the Studer tape, Neve summing and Minimoog extensions that are 300$ each (....)
- No multi-out (
- No track folders
- In-depth information replaced by buzzwords and hype (how many effects can an Apollo handle before the Sharc shits itself?)

So... lack of real innovation and features that appear to be unique. I mean, Studio One already has native summing with Mix Engine FX, and then there are plugins like Waves NLS or TMT stuff by PA that model dozens of console channels, not to mention that there are also tons of tape emulations available.

This isn't 2010 anymore, yet UA seem to think it is.

[Alkua]

They say that Luna uses UAD Plugins and Audio Unit Plugins. Let see how Reason Plugin works in Luna

Don't quote me on that. But it seems Luna will not support VST in version 1. My source only comes from a comment on GearSlutz. But could be true.

But Reason Studio Rack has an AU version to run in Logic Pro X. That should work on Luna.

[Yonatan]

- Only tworks with UA hardware
- OSX only
- "Free", except that the Studer tape, Neve summing and Minimoog extensions that are 300$ each (....)
- No multi-out (
- No track folders
- In-depth information replaced by buzzwords and hype (how many effects can an Apollo handle before the Sharc shits itself?)

So... lack of real innovation and features that appear to be unique. I mean, Studio One already has native summing with Mix Engine FX, and then there are plugins like Waves NLS or TMT stuff by PA that model dozens of console channels, not to mention that there are also tons of tape emulations available.

This isn't 2010 anymore, yet UA seem to think it is.

Oh, thanks for more details. Does not sound as it will be more than used by UA investors!

[Busta US]

Don't quote me on that. But it seems Luna will not support VST in version 1. My source only comes from a comment on GearSlutz. But could be true.

But Reason Studio Rack has an AU version to run in Logic Pro X. That should work on Luna.

I understood what you meant after I have posted my reply to you. My bad . You are right. Very curious to see how it works as well

[Busta US]

- Only works with UA hardware
- OSX only
- "Free", except that the Studer tape, Neve summing and Minimoog extensions that are 300$ each (....)
- No multi-out (
- No track folders
- In-depth information replaced by buzzwords and hype (how many effects can an Apollo handle before the Sharc shits itself?)

So... lack of real innovation and features that appear to be unique. I mean, Studio One already has native summing with Mix Engine FX, and then there are plugins like Waves NLS or TMT stuff by PA that model dozens of console channels, not to mention that there are also tons of tape emulations available.

This isn't 2010 anymore, yet UA seem to think it is.

Oh man...bummer Also being only compatible on Mac (I don't mind since I'm on mac ) does seem like it's 2010 all over again.

I will demo it when it's out and will give you guys my 2 cents on this DAW

[Kalm]

This is just another S1 beginning to me. Probably won't intentionally try to be a full-fledged DAW, just a system where those who want to integrate everything they do in a UA brand can. S1 just so happened to take off and does the summing effect, Hardware -software integration, and recording inserts as well. I'm glad LUNA is a recipient of this coding cause it means they actually paid attention before writing fresh code. They have a suite of plugins behind them so people can take the option to NOT waste money on a DAW after buying UA hardware-software. That along will make new users not look into buying a Pro Tools system that they don't need.

do very many home studios/producers use Protools? I know it’s the industry standard (I remember when we got it at the studio I used to intern at, way back when, and it was a big deal), but other than seeing the odd Youtube vid, or an actual professional studio, I’ve literally never seen anyone use it. ever.

sorry, I know this is horribly off-topic—it’s just confusing to me that Protools is still a “thing” in polite-home-studio-company.

No one uses Pro Tools besides large console owners and long time PT HD users due to the tech they had. Besides that there is absolutely NO reason to invest. in Pro Tools besides the fact of liking it. Most music is sent to an engineer to mix and with the rise of electronic music these days, audio has to be rendered. If you look at any born individual after the year 2000, chances are they aren't using Pro Tools and it's going to continue to rise that way because AVIDs market is based on video professionals mainly and lingering studio owners.

- Only works with UA hardware
- OSX only
- "Free", except that the Studer tape, Neve summing and Minimoog extensions that are 300$ each (....)
- No multi-out (
- No track folders
- In-depth information replaced by buzzwords and hype (how many effects can an Apollo handle before the Sharc shits itself?)

So... lack of real innovation and features that appear to be unique. I mean, Studio One already has native summing with Mix Engine FX, and then there are plugins like Waves NLS or TMT stuff by PA that model dozens of console channels, not to mention that there are also tons of tape emulations available.

This isn't 2010 anymore, yet UA seem to think it is.

UAD doesn't think its 2010, but they're not going to roll out every dispensable feature immediately. Not a single DAW company ever has done that. . . . nor was that their aim.

[ast3rix]

It reminds me of how pro tools began, hardware dependent software with a heavy price tag. I love my uad interface but the plugin prices are seriously over priced, even the sales events are not really sales.. I was hoping that they would finally fix the industry wide latency issues that has existed since the start of pc recording. PCs have come a long way and we are still chasing the same issues as we did in the beginning. It has improved over the years but having a singular interface and not have to do some exotic things like analog summing to have no latency has not happened yet. I was hoping they would do it with the interface and not create another daw we don’t need. I’m hoping Ableton will innovate and fix it.