

In my own humble opinion the flex engine in S1 sounds way far better than Logic's. They are both good, just give it a try and use whatever suits you better. So I'm kind of hesitate about which way to go next, but I guess I will shuffle for another bit before making a whole shift. Logic also comes with Alchemy and is the only platform you can use it. In Studio One you will need Melodyne to edit pitch, though it integrates quite handly. So Logic is quite a well all-rounder if you'd like to do all the works related to audio in one platform. What Logic provides better than Studio One is a huge pack of good virtual instruments, time/pitch flex functions and better community support (the users are more than other DAWs I think). I'd say I feel less constrained in Studio One compared to Logic, but please keep in mind that I've been a Studio One user for roughly 3-4 years, and have been a Logic user for just 1 year so I may be biased. Studio One has a second rewind to play start button (mine is '0') if you'd like to replay the same session for another time, without the need to activate loop. Also, the marker/section tracks in Logic will need to run back to back between markers/sections, wherein Studio One you can simply draw anywhere you'd like to mark. Another function I missed in Logic is the chord tracks where I can simply log the chords I used for the clips, making it easier to revise later on.

Logic can do most works Studio One can do, but sometimes with slightly slower workflow, for example inserting plug-in, and changing clip gains. Automation wise both are pretty similar, both efficient. In general, I prefer doing mixing/mastering in Studio One, mainly for quicker clip editing, plug-in selection (the search function is quite nice and handy), and more flexible marker/section tracks. After a few projects done in Logic, I would say both are quite similar but with strength and weakness like you just mentioned. I've been using Studio One for a few years and recently started using Logic for collaboration and songwriting.
