I’d recommend providing a lot more screenshots and information about how the core DAW functionality works in comparison to other DAWs. As is I can’t see enough about what this would feel like to spend my time downloading and trying it
Some video recordings would be extra nice also, that shows the software in use on an example audio project. Including showcasing of how you work with the revision history and branches, and how it enables collaboration.
I cannot imagine anyone who works with audio regularly would realistically consider replacing Ableton/Logic/ProTools/Reaper/etc with whatever recording experience this provides (no screenshots doesn't help your pitch).
The versioning idea is interesting and something many musicians have to contend with as they work on songs. Personally, I wouldn't want the complexity of take-level versioning, but pinning audio and mix automation to a given mixdown could be useful for tracking the history of a song. It might be more effective to approach this as version tracking / collaboration layer around existing DAW formats rather than a full replacement.
I think what parent commenter is asking is, does it do the things one would expect a DAW to do?
I’m not expecting a whole Ableton replacement, but things like hosting plugins and working with MIDI is IMO fair to expect from any piece of software that wants to call itself a DAW.
I'm a voice actor, and I live in Reaper -- it's my "IDE" as it were. I like the idea of the git branching metaphor. Would you say that your DAW is primarily for musicians, or for more general purpose recording (i.e. a voice actors workflow)
You can already use git with REAPER right now, plain and simple.
REAPER’s project files are all very git friendly.
Simple add/commit/push, etc. Of course, if you’re going to be sharing a REAPER project in a repo, you should enable LFS, and have a smart project structure for your works. If collaboration through a repo, with tagging and branching, is part of your setups workflow, this already works quite well with REAPER projects.
However, I have to say that since REAPER allows full control over literally years of recording sessions, the whole concept of having the ability to go back and forth through different versions of the art—form being recorded (music, vocals, etc.) is already well provided in REAPERS sample-accurate ‘reflog’.
I have built it because I'm a musician. That being said I am interested in serving my customers / community and am open to what features would be needed / what user experience would be desired.
If you haven't already seen it, see if you can find some screenshots of the UX for what Splice.com looked like before it pivoted to just being a sample / instrument selling site. It was kind of a git + dropbox type interface for actual DAW projects (Ableton and Fruity were supported IIRC). This was really cool and something that someone should bring back.
Is it really a problem that needs solving? Or more of a solution in search for a problem.
DAWs allow “track alternatives” which I use more than project versions.
But I can’t imagine what would be unsatisfactory about project versions to the point of changing to another DAW.
Was working on this same idea (*working = ideating over). Was really dissapointed to see after downloading the app does nothing without an account. This seems totally non-required for local "free" projects with this tool.
It is hard to take this software seriously without one-button algorithmic equalization and brickwall limiting to maximize loudness. Those are what professionals would need to really make their track ”pop”.
