On D’fence: AUM vs ApeMatrix

BM3 is frustrating me at the moment so I’m open to trying new workflows.

Was all set to download AUM when ApeM exploded onto the scene with a new spin on AU hosting, a sexy intro price almost half of AUM, and a Ui that allows for full transparency.

On the other hand, AUM looks pretty familiar to traditional mixers so perhaps easier for those with traditional experience. Also, appears better suited to export stems into other DAWs for further tweaking.

I would imagine the Apes will include this shortly as it’s kinda a no brainer as are more buses.

So, what say the community users with experience with both AUM and ApeM?

AUM or APE
  1. If you could only have one...which would it be?43 votes
    1. AUM
      86.05%
    2. APE
      13.95%
«13

Comments

  • 90 Comments sorted by Date Votes
  • Both. Sorry. It’s always both.

  • Yeah, no choice here.

    I had my own studio many moons ago and I would have been nut not to have all the different audio and midi mixers and interfaces I had to make it all work together.

    To me it’s definitely not AUM or ApeMatrix or AudioBus 3. It’s all three and as many other hosts as I can get my hands on - then I choose the right tool for the job at hand!

  • I havent pulled the trigger on ape yet, if we look at features what does it have that aum dont ? Except for the built in lfo’s, will probably get it

  • Both.

    AUM is so often the right tool for the job, and gets so much right, it is an essential tool.

    apeMatrix, as new kid in town, offers another way, which is well worth investing in.

  • Both great, I don’t need to choose luckily. They work well together and if you like one you’ll probably like the other :)

  • I feel like AUM is a must, and apeMatrix is still getting its legs. Neither is a full replacement for the other, but they compliment each other extremely well.

  • Both, but I see myself spending the majority of time in apeMatrix in the future.

  • @ALB said:
    Both. Sorry. It’s always both.

    righty right - ApeMatrix is a very efficient solution to control/mix multiple apps, while AUM provides single outs, including (multi-channel) hardware ports.
    It's also indispensible if you want to track raw and processed signals simultanously.

  • I’m finding AUM + BM3 quite a handy combination. I.e. do the midi in AUM to trigger BM3 (it’s possible to drive multiple banks simultaneously this way - I.e. not using the pad / learn thing). Then recording the midi in BM3. Probably achieve the same thing using apeMatrix.

  • Greatly appreciate the feedback folks. Both would certainly be overkill for my needs so not an option.

    Special thanks to @Daveypoo for what I take as a definitive vote for AUM. Also enjoy your vids by the way. Cheers!

    I realize how difficult it can be for we the community of appaholics but choices must be made.lol

    This ones certainly a harder one than most as they are sooo similar as to what they do. Deleting Gadget to focus on BM3 was the last great pain for me. No AU in Gadget finally caught up and made the impossible possible for me and off the device Gadget went. Still miss how easy and quickly I got grooves going but haven’t gone back.

    I guess I could get both AUM and ApeM, use em and just keep the one I like most considering I buy so many apps and rarely ever request refunds but something about that seems shitty to me.

    Again appreciate all but even greater appreciation to those who definitively contrast what works better for them about these apps.

  • @Zen210507 said:

    AUM is so often the right tool for the job, and gets so much right, it is an essential tool.

    I’m gonna take “essential” to be a +1 AUM also.

  • @mAxjUlien said:

    @Zen210507 said:

    AUM is so often the right tool for the job, and gets so much right, it is an essential tool.

    I’m gonna take “essential” to be a +1 AUM also.

    >

    It’s really not an either or choice. In the not too distant, apeMatrix May also be considered an essential. There are already advantages to using it, depending on how you prefer to work. :)

  • @d4d0ug said:
    I’m finding AUM + BM3 quite a handy combination. I.e. do the midi in AUM to trigger BM3 (it’s possible to drive multiple banks simultaneously this way - I.e. not using the pad / learn thing). Then recording the midi in BM3. Probably achieve the same thing using apeMatrix.

    Hmmm. Interesting. How goes ApeM with this config or have you tried? The whole grid on one page thing turns me on about ApeM...something about seeing it all at once is compelling.

    But @Telefunky mentions the single outs which i believe reinforces my assumption that AUM allows more depth and...the ability to track out much more efficiently to DAWs which is essential to my workflow.

  • edited June 12 Vote Up0

    Damn...the poll seems overwhelming. I thought the price of ApeM would have a larger affect but hasn’t even been mention which speaks to the value of AUM...

  • If I had to be forced to choose, I would choose ApeMatrix. Why? Because I find it easier to control the apps I’m using on it with the three matrix slides. However, AUM has the wonderful record per channel and more outputs!

    I personally think you need both long term as they both do things the other one can’t do. They both are most likely pretty high up on many people’s ‘must have’ apps once they have used them. Choosing on opinions is going to be really difficult. Even videos don’t really show how these would both work for you.

    Here’s my list of what I like and like less about each one:

    AUM:
    Mixer style is visually nice and feels comfortable.
    Having record and loop playback for each channel
    Works well with AudioBus and AudioShare

    Can take longer to set some things up than ApeMatrix
    The built in keyboard is limited IMO
    Can be easy to lose track of complex signal flows as it doesn’t all fit onscreen.

    ApeMatrix:
    The three matrix pages give easy slide to control AUs
    Easier to set up complex routing and often quicker
    Built in keyboard is more useful with resizing and other options.
    Great to have all those LFOs so easily accessible.

    Has limited audio outputs
    Has limited recording options
    Slightly higher initial learning curve than AUM IMO.

  • @Fruitbat1919 said:
    If I had to be forced to choose, I would choose ApeMatrix. Why? Because I find it easier to control the apps I’m using on it with the three matrix slides. However, AUM has the wonderful record per channel and more outputs!

    I personally think you need both long term as they both do things the other one can’t do. They both are most likely pretty high up on many people’s ‘must have’ apps once they have used them. Choosing on opinions is going to be really difficult. Even videos don’t really show how these would both work for you.

    Here’s my list of what I like and like less about each one:

    AUM:
    Mixer style is visually nice and feels comfortable.
    Having record and loop playback for each channel
    Works well with AudioBus and AudioShare

    Can take longer to set some things up than ApeMatrix
    The built in keyboard is limited IMO
    Can be easy to lose track of complex signal flows as it doesn’t all fit onscreen.

    ApeMatrix:
    The three matrix pages give easy slide to control AUs
    Easier to set up complex routing and often quicker
    Built in keyboard is more useful with resizing and other options.
    Great to have all those LFOs so easily accessible.

    Has limited audio outputs
    Has limited recording options
    Slightly higher initial learning curve than AUM IMO.

    Thanks! This helps a ton @Fruitbat1919

  • edited June 12 Vote Up0

    Just so that I’m clear...with ApeM...I would have to mute tracks to isolate and track out each sound to another daw whereas in AUM I could just route to and record them into BM3, Auria, Cubasis, etc or export all stems at once?

  • You may consider that ApeMatrix is based on an AU specific feature and as such leaves out all IAA apps. They still exist... ;)

  • @mAxjUlien said:
    Just so that I’m clear...with ApeM...I would have to mute tracks to isolate and track out each sound to another daw whereas in AUM I could just record them into BM3, Auria, Cubasis, etc or export all stems at once?

    Yes, at this time (the dev might add additional outputs), you have the main out and two bus outs on ApeMatrix. AUM I believe has 8 ports out.

  • @Telefunky said:
    You may consider that ApeMatrix is based on an AU specific feature and as such leaves out all IAA apps. They still exist... ;)

    Thanks. That’s an interesting choice for them to make but not a dealbreaker as I haven’t been using anything but AU in BM3 since deleting gadget.

  • I think the multi-out recording makes me still side with AUM for now. I like the cut of apeMatrix's jib though and enjoy having both. But since both isn't an option for OP, AUM.

  • @mAxjUlien said:

    @Telefunky said:
    You may consider that ApeMatrix is based on an AU specific feature and as such leaves out all IAA apps. They still exist... ;)

    Thanks. That’s an interesting choice for them to make but not a dealbreaker as I haven’t been using anything but AU in BM3 since deleting gadget.

    That’s a tad unfair lol. ApeMatrix does include IAA, it just doesn’t do them well at this time, but the app has only just been released ;)

  • Neither !!

    Kidding...both of course :D

  • @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @mAxjUlien said:
    Just so that I’m clear...with ApeM...I would have to mute tracks to isolate and track out each sound to another daw whereas in AUM I could just record them into BM3, Auria, Cubasis, etc or export all stems at once?

    Yes, at this time (the dev might add additional outputs), you have the main out and two bus outs on ApeMatrix. AUM I believe has 8 ports out.

    I think this is what it may come down to right here for me @Fruitbat1919.

  • @mAxjUlien said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @mAxjUlien said:
    Just so that I’m clear...with ApeM...I would have to mute tracks to isolate and track out each sound to another daw whereas in AUM I could just record them into BM3, Auria, Cubasis, etc or export all stems at once?

    Yes, at this time (the dev might add additional outputs), you have the main out and two bus outs on ApeMatrix. AUM I believe has 8 ports out.

    I think this is what it may come down to right here for me @Fruitbat1919.

    A sensible option to choose on, if you need them extra ports :)

  • edited June 12 Vote Up1

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @mAxjUlien said:

    @Fruitbat1919 said:

    @mAxjUlien said:
    Just so that I’m clear...with ApeM...I would have to mute tracks to isolate and track out each sound to another daw whereas in AUM I could just record them into BM3, Auria, Cubasis, etc or export all stems at once?

    Yes, at this time (the dev might add additional outputs), you have the main out and two bus outs on ApeMatrix. AUM I believe has 8 ports out.

    I think this is what it may come down to right here for me @Fruitbat1919.

    A sensible option to choose on, if you need them extra ports :)

    I wished that someone would make little AU audio and midi recorders though - that would be cool for both apps! Plus simple AU loopers!

  • AUM is better for effects chain per track. ApeMatrix is better for global effects chains. One example: on AUM it is very easy to insert an EQ and a compressor on one track. It is a bit the mess in apeMatrix just to do that. On the other hand, complex routing is much more simple on apeMatrix. Verdict : buy both and let them play together the game that best fit each of them. The sum of both is more than...you know the story...

  • Ape at the moment. AUM will always have a place but at the moment Matrix is doing it for my workflow.

  • Interesting. Thanks for that specific example @cuscolima. It appears that adding effects to individual tracks was as simple as just adding a node where instrument track and said effect intersect. What makes it complex? That detail is very important as the only real major advantage to ApeM was the simplicity of routing and seeing all the connections. If in fact that isn’t as simple as it looks to me then AUM is def it for me. Leaning that way based on the outputs anyway tbh.

  • @mAxjUlien said:
    Interesting. Thanks for that specific example @cuscolima. It appears that adding effects to individual tracks was as simple as just adding a node where instrument track and said effect intersect. What makes it complex? That detail is very important as the only real major advantage to ApeM was the simplicity of routing and seeing all the connections. If in fact that isn’t as simple as it looks to me then AUM is def it for me. Leaning that way based on the outputs anyway tbh.

    simple things are much easier to do in AUM, if you go for complexity however, that‘s where Matrix begins to shine

Sign In or Register to comment.