Interesting question. Is anyone actually asking for one anywhere, for employment or something? Wondering where the need to be certified with Studio One originates from.

I can see the need if it involved the integration with the hardware and mixers.

If one was setting up a studio with presonus hardware exclusively they could get their personel or themselves certified by a factory approved certification program.

As far as Studio One don't know if it is really necessary myself but others may feel the need to further their own ability and knowledge with it.

To the original OP I would probably say not. It is something obviously very much like the the whole Pro Tools thing I guess. They have managed to create the Avid PT certification thing because of their standing in the industry as a whole. After all they do seem to have a fairly foot in the door in terms of our industry. Most other DAW's don't have the same amount of clout within the industry as a whole so it may not be viable.

There is one good thing about it though. I was teaching at a TAFE for many years (Sound Production) and they put all the staff through the Avid training course. Avid sent a very good trainer out and they locked us in a lab for days and we all went through this very deep course. I passed of course and now I am certified PT trainer myself. What was really good about it is you get to learn everything about the program and I mean every little nook and cranny. None of this finding out over time what it can do, it is a much more intensive deep instruction into the program. They leave nothing out.

I was so impressed with the program I nearly switched but in the end I did not. I was already on Studio One at the time and still preferred it. Also the whole Avid thing with Tools is just not great in terms of the continual outlay they make you get into in order to just keep using it. That part of it is not I would wish for Studio One. That might be the compromise if they decide to so something similar.

I am teaching in a school that has an old discontinued 192 interface they bought years ago. A new computer was built but the interface refused to work. We found out that it needed a licence in order to work. Yes, you have to keep paying Avid (every year) just to use an old piece of hardware that you may have bought and owned many years ago. That is a bit off as far as I am concerned. Maybe they have to do things like that just to keep surviving. (and maybe to pay for all the Certification stuff because it would be a serious expense for a company) Do we want Presonus to go down the same route?

CTStump wroteI can see the need if it involved the integration with the hardware and mixers.

If one was setting up a studio with presonus hardware exclusively they could get their personel or themselves certified by a factory approved certification program.

As far as Studio One don't know if it is really necessary myself but others may feel the need to further their own ability and knowledge with it.

I think I saw a vid or picture on Facebook where they were doing that with the new digial consoles, for somebody, some group, No idea about the software though, unless Hollywood or someone is asking for certified Studio One operators.

I suppose Johnny would find a way do that if people would actually pay good money for it. In the current market I doubt if the "diploma" would be worth very much. PT had it because it was ubiquitous, there was a legitimate reason, that large studios hiring people didn't want to waste time training them how to use it.

Thanks for your replies!
First of all, it would be very interesting seeing how Presonus itself would teach the software, catching some details and little tricks. What I'm looking for is not a shallow 2-days class but a deep insight of the DAW. I would like to know everything my software can do and maybe be able to teach music production and mixing techniques using Studio One. Obviously you need some sort of certification for that.
Plus, I don't agree with the fact that only Avid gives certification. I see people with Logic certification, Steinberg certification, Ableton certification... I believe during the last years Studio One earned a place among this other great DAWs, I don't feel like I am using an amateur program. So why can't I show my clients that I am "a certified expert" of a software I've been loyal to for the last 4 years?
Many music schools become partners with Avid, Steinberg or Ableton, they get discounted licenses and teach their students music production on PT, Cubase, Live or Logic...it would be great if Presonus entered the game, it would help expand the community of S1 users.
What do you think?

In the real world of clients they don't care a fig if you have certification or not for the program that you are using. They won't even know know what software you are using most of the time. They only want to know that you can deliver what they are paying for. You need to get that back into perspective.

I have taught sound production in many schools and colleges and they also don't care either if you have certification or not. They are interested in other aspects of your qualifications and teaching skills but certification is not one of them either. The TAFE college I was working for only put us through the Avid course as a gesture just to give us some deeper knowledge.

It was deep too. Not just a shallow look at it either but everything that program can do. From that point of view it is good but you can also learn it slower and just as thoroughly by doing the things we are basically doing now.

luminal33 wrotePlus, I don't agree with the fact that only Avid gives certification. I see people with Logic certification, Steinberg certification, Ableton certification...

For sure.

I didn't intend to suggest that only AVID did that or that other people only did that for PT. I was more suggesting that Pro Tools was the only workstation that was literally everywhere, all over the planet, in every professional context from small project studios to megabuck multi-room facilities to major sound stages. It replaced 2" tape in most of those industries so it's certification programs seemed to have much more of a logical or practical context due to it's ubiquity.

Honestly, as much as I love Studio One, I'm not sure at version 3 it's even deep or complex enough yet to even require a major training course to learn it or be proficient at it. It seems more that some modern consumers use and own so many different daws now that some maybe never really fully learn any of them.

Lawrence wroteHonestly, as much as I love Studio One, I'm not sure at version 3 it's even deep or complex enough yet to even require a major training course to learn it or be proficient at it. It seems more that some modern consumers use and own so many different daws now that some maybe never really fully learn any of them.

Not a more wise and insightful statement can be made but there will be others who may disagree and may chime in.

Studio One is intuitive to a great extent if it was the only DAW one is using. When you throw in other platforms and workflows you are bound to be confused somewhat. Is a certification worthwhile? Don't know but there will be those who feel more competent being backed by some sort of paper as a resume stuffer or a wall ornament.

I kinda lean toward your first reply, is anyone asking for Certification as a job requirement and if that's the case is there a real need. This seems more beneficial to training institutions and college's to get tuition than to supply a real demand.

As to an individual need that would be area left to whomever feels that it necessary.

I think I can comment as I have done the Avid course and also know Studio One pretty well.

After owning and getting a lot of use from viewing all the Studio One videos in the Groove 3 tutorials area alone plus all the other large amount of training on it elsewhere I would say Studio One is worthy of a certification qualification. It is deep now and capable of doing a lot.

It is hard to remember all the Pro Tools stuff too if you are not using it much which is where I am at right now. I found there are some really horrible things about it. Like the power claw. Holding down three modifier fingers before hitting a fourth to get an action. Really! It is clumsy in some areas and powerful in others. Studio One is more like lacking in areas but just as powerful in all the others. And they adding the missing elements all the time which is only making it better.

If an employer is wanting to hire some with a very specific skill like this then I guess it is one way at least of ensuring a new employee will be immediately up to speed. Which may be a requirement. But one could also apply for a job that required Logic knowledge and get up to speed on it quickly and convince an employer of that too.

People may own many DAW's but the best DAW for any individual is the one they know. (Hans Zimmer quote and I so agree) You will never know all of them as well as you know one. Personally I think its best to only have the one and know it too. But working with two DAW's with deep knowledge can be possible for me as long as they are different enough, not the same. e.g. Studio One and Mixbus is an excellent combination.

We can and are creating our own deep learning around Studio One. There are some amazing people around here for a start. There are some good books on it too. What would be nice would be a really well written and deep manual or almost training course on it. But it does take someone to do it. I found the order in which I learned things in the Avid course really excellent.

I think S1 is very intuitive but if you want to unleash all its power a certified training would not be a bad idea. At least that's what I imagine, since even the guys at Studio One Expert are discovering cool little features everyday.

And you have to admit that the S1 community is a lot smaller compared to PT, Live, Cubase, Logic (I still get that look when I say I work in S1, like I am using Audacity or Audition..). So even if many of you are helping with troubleshooting or creating tutorials and giving tips, an official training would be nice. Not to mention it would be a big time-saver, because you would learn advanced features at a faster pace.

Plus, it's true that I have my projects which speak for me and my proficiency, but I don't agree with the fact that papers are useless when you're working. I can assure you that here in Italy people are still counting (sometimes witlessly) on titles and certifications you put in your CV.
Between someone with a solid portfolio and another guy with a solid portfolio AND some sort of certification, they would probably choose the latter, just because certifications make you feel kind of safer, you know what I mean.

To be clear, I don't work as a mixer/producer in the music industry, I mainly work for web/tv ads so you are always dealing with people who don't know anything about audio and don't really care about it. And I saw clients reacting positively to someone who was less prepared than me and had a lot less experience, but was certified in Logic...

I agree with many things you said, but what's wrong with having another possibility to learn or to reassure your clients, showing your guaranteed level of knowledge?

A couple of observations...

1) Did PT offer training to industry professionals because they were the industry standard or did PT become the industry standard (in part) because they offered training and thereby a legion of industry professionals. It was a powerful marketing tool for system sales.

2) In addition to learning the commands of PT you were also (almost by necessity) learning a standardized workflow that produced consistent results that met the next link in the chain (mixer, mastering, etc.) These days people seems to prefer a roll your own style that blurs the traditional separate role practices and there are many "on-man-band" type of productions where consistency doesn't matter.

3) @jenmusic. We referred with great reverence to that key command configuration as the three-finger-salute

dgkenney wrote1) Did PT offer training to industry professionals because they were the industry standard or did PT become the industry standard (in part) because they offered training and thereby a legion of industry professionals. It was a powerful marketing tool for system sales.

In reference to the title of the post, I would just like to add that there's a lot of certified users who visit this forum.

Always here to help.