Mixcraft vs Garageband: my view

I've been using recording software continuously since 1995 and spent countless hours playing with different DAWs over the years. Lately though I came to realization that two qualities that matter to me most when it comes to recording software are simplicity and intuitive design. Now I'm not saying that functionality and features are not important, however, the market offers a vast variety of DAWs these days and most of them provide enough functionality (give or take) to do what musicians do: record, edit and mix. That's what it ultimately comes down to - well, to me anyway. Record, Edit and Mix. I understand that being able to being able to publish your podcast directly on the net may present a valid benefit for someone who does lots of podcasts but it is not a necessity to me. Which is why I am going to look at these two lovely little packages from my standpoint.

Firstly, why Mixcraft (MC) and Garageband (GB)? In my opinion, these two are the most lightweight and most popular nephews out of the entire DAW family, representing both sides of the clan - Mac and PC. Sure, there are heavyweights like ProTools and Logic - both of which boast some fancy and advanced features - but frankly I rarely use either one and only when I face a specific challenge outside of my normal recording activities (like fix timing on a track with Time-stretching). Browsing through intricate webs of elaborated and undoubtedly useful features hidden deep in the jungle of ProTools 7.4 settings and menus, as well as having to memorize wicked key combinations to perform a simple split is not my idea of fun.

What is my idea of fun? Being able to follow my creative flow as soon as it hits me without having to read the manual. To do what? Well, again, Record, Edit and Mix! :)

A well designed DAW - from my standpoint - is the one that is one step ahead of you. It expects what you are going to do next! With 20 years of software development background I know full well that this is what sets apart applications written from developer's perspective from those written with user in mind.

So let's start...

Look and feel

GB is cool! No question about it. I like the slick look of that famous Apple interface. I love that you can pick an instrument flavour from the library and it will assign appropriate effects to the track automatically! Way too cool! It's pretty easy to use when it comes to basic operations: recording, moving regions, resizing them, etc.

However, no right-click menus!! Give me a break! How do you expect a PC guy who spent last 20 year preaching right-click menu as a good example of user-friendliness to simply give it up? When I position the cursor exactly where I want my region split I wanna be able to do that without putting away the mouse or looking at the keyboard or going to another menu! I'm in the zone, remember? Command-T? Sure, but it will mean taking the focus off the screen and using both hands (well, you can use one, of course, but that wouldn't be my first thought when I'm in the zone), which inevitably interrupts the flow. And, frankly, I don't want to have to memorize all those key strokes to do the basics, either. I'm a mouse user and I want to be able to ride this little thing as much as I can.

MC scores a big point here, in my opinion. Most basic operations can be accessed through the mouse (maybe with added CTRL or Shift, which is no big deal). Speaking of coolness, I think MC is pretty cool too (MC 5 looks even cooler than my current MC4). Everything is so intuitive that it almost hurts! I do believe that is probably the most intuitive application on the market!

GB has a great ducking option when you do voiceovers or podcasts, which MC doesn't, but then again I don't use it that much.

Loop libraries are similar and using them is fairly easy in both apps.

There're several things where MC rules over GB. First, it's crossfades. It is a breeze in MC! It's especially useful when you overlap regions. When two regions overlap it automatically creates a crossfade - very intelligently and seamlessly! You can change the shape of crossfade later, if you have to. Anyone who ever had to connect two regions so that there's no click between them knows what I'm talking about. GB doesn't allow overlaps - and the only way to do it is to use two tracks instead of one which can be a hassle because you have to watch volume levels as well as keep same effects and identical settings on both tracks. Major flaw, in my opinion.

Secondly, MC can handle volume separately on each region! This is a major point right there! I was recording vocals in GB and of course I ended up with a few sections recorded at different times. Everyone knows that when you do that your regions may turn out to be at different volume levels. The only way to do it in GB is by using Automation, that is to manually add automation points for the track. Ok, that works! But later on I needed to slide the region over to the next verse. Oops! Automation points stayed put so I had to manually delete old ones and create new curve at a new spot. Quite a nuissance, I must tell you! GB uses track automation whereas MC allows full volume control for each individual region. So when you move a region - the volume moves with it. Plus you can still adjust overall volume for the entire track!

Third point will have to go to MC for their TimeFlex feature. Very powerful and at the same time easy to use! Time stretching was never easier. GB doesn't have it. They do have auto-adjust feature that may stretch the region if the tempo changes, but so does MC.

One other thing that annoys me in GB (much like in many other Apple apps) is a necessity to name and save a project when you want a brand new one. I don't understand why they do it. I don't like the fact that you are forced to create a project - even if it's a bogus one - and name it too before you can touch a record button! When it's created the only way to get rid of it is to go to File Finder and delete it. Because few people do it you end up creating a new project pretty much every time you open GB so after awhile you wonder: what the heck are all those files - which of course you wouldn't know because you have to open them to know what they are. Then of course you have to close them first, then go to File Finder and delete. Also why do they always force you to choose a pre-canned type of the project??

There's one thing in GB that MC doesn't have: virtual keyboard to enter software instruments. Now that is useful! Especially when you don't have a keyboard hooked up to your computer. Or when you're on the road. A point for GB. (Note: after I wrote it I discovered that Virtual keyboard is available in a new MC ver.5)

Another point goes to GB for virtual guitar amps. Great feature that MC lacks! Adding a stomp box to a virtual amp is as easy as clicking on a 3d image of the item and there's a few to choose from! To get that functionality in MC I had to pay almost $200 for an Amplitube plug-in! And this one has it all built-in! Great feature! (Apparently some of the effects are being added in MC ver.5 as well.)

Another thing GB has is instrument lessons (piano and guitar). This is very cool and the way lessons are built and presented on screen is absolutely fantastic, in my opinion. This is a perfect example of well thought through multimedia project! The video shows the instructor as well as the neck of the guitar diagram that shows exact fingering synchronized with the video! You can slow it down, add metronome, rewind over and over again. Just awesome if you are learning how to play! However I'll only give GB half a point for this feature as it is of no use to you unless you are a beginner.

Overall I have to say that as neat as GB is I don't think it quite matches MC when it comes to R.E.M (Record, Edit and Mix), which has more power and at the same time is extremely easy to use.