Hello,
I'm interested in Luna for two reasons, 1. my main DAW is Ableton which is great for making everything 'in the box', 2. I tend to lose inspiration and motivation rather quick when seeing the same UI over and over again. A secondary DAW would solve the latter, but I like to be financially smart about it, hence my interest in Luna Free (and eventually Studio with it's very attractive 200 bucks pricetag).
Instead of critically thinking of just my personal wishes, I took into account why certain DAWs grow or still have major usage globally. I think we all know the high adoption and usage rates and reasons of Logic and Pro Tools for all genres of music, Cubase for orchestral composing, Ableton for electronic, and Reaper for game audio.
I like to pick out two of these, PT and Reaper, and pitch it against Luna.
Reaper is huge in game audio because unlike music, games require ten-thousands of little audio snippets, and batch modulation, batch processing, and batch rendering can all be automated with scripts. It's super lightweight, super stable, and highly customizable. Price? Free, or 60 bucks, or 225 bucks.
So why is it not adopted by major commercial music studios? These all need to survive financially like every other company right?
This is where PT comes in. They were early (no clue if they were first), and early adoption has its advantages. To this day PT is the de facto leader, the global standard. A PT producer/engineer, engineer, can work everywhere in the world where PT is available, and PT is available at pretty much every studio.
PT is not highly customizable. Reaper on the other hand, you can turn it into everything and anything you want, and it still works. But here is the thing ... I think this is exactly why PT is the standard, BECAUSE it isn't highly customizable, everyone with PT skills can work anywhere with any session since they don't have to decipher the program anymore. In contrast, a place with a highly customized Reaper setup, can't let guest engineers working there since they won't know that Reaper compared to their own Reaper.
When you look at how beginners start, they often buy one of the lower tiers, with technical limitations especially track count, then do upgrades towards the highest tier. Awesome! Financially, assuming you can upgrade by only paying the difference, this totals around 800 bucks. But Luna Free, only has very specific limitations such as hardware inserts and the number of plugins you get with it. The absolute essentials however, are all there such as unlimited tracks. And if you do like the highest tier, it's 200 bucks ... 25% of any other DAW.
So ... might Luna become the potential king of both worlds?
#1. Luna is free or 200 bucks, which is in line with Reaper's pricetags. Low barrier for new people, low barrier for semi and fulltime professionals.
#2. Luna is also not highly customizable like PT, enabling Luna users to instantly know what to do when being guest engineers or producer/engineers at other locations where Luna is running.
It also solves the barriers of starting small as a bedroom producer, but smoothly moving up and eventually connecting within the commercial studio system. Basically going from #1 to #2.
Yes software-technically an adolescent but growing nevertheless. Do you see Luna a candidate to become an industry stable? If so, how many years or versions would it take you reckon?
Love to hear your thoughts on this.