When comparing EnergyXT vs Sequel 3, the Slant community recommends Sequel 3 for most people. In the question“What are the best DAWs? ” Sequel 3 is ranked 24th while EnergyXT is ranked 46th. The most important reason people chose Sequel 3 is:
Sequel 3 was made by the folks behind Cubase, and it is meant to be lighter and easier to learn. This program's focus on loops and computer generated drum patterns makes the process easier for people with no music knowledge.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Very quick to start and to put together a track
Pro Low system requirements
This program requires only 512MB RAM and 1.4GHz processing speed.
Pro Multi-track recording
Audio can be recorded to multiple tracks at the same time.
Pro Very easy and efficient to use
Most tasks are very simple and straightforward.
Very clean and intuitive interface. You can do almost anything.
Pro Designed to be easy to learn
Sequel 3 was made by the folks behind Cubase, and it is meant to be lighter and easier to learn. This program's focus on loops and computer generated drum patterns makes the process easier for people with no music knowledge.
Pro Dedicated beat page
There is a page exclusively meant for generating drum patterns.
Cons
Con Outdated
Con No auto-save
While there's no autosave, you can still try to recover your work if EnergyXT crashes from a file named temp_file_name.xt.
Con Vague purpose
EnergyXT is marketed as a DAW, ultra portable studio, DAW extension, and a VST. While the variety of uses is nice, it's hard to understand the best function of this program.
Con No GNU/Linux
Does not run on GNU/Linux
Con 32-bit only
While Sequel 3 supports VST3, it oddly (imo) doesn't have a 64-bit installer, meaning you can't load any 64-bit VST3s either. Not sure how it was even possible for that to have ever happened.
Con Outdated
Con Complicated to download
