Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Cubase users...your input please
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase users...your input please [message #67568 is a reply to message #67561] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 19:46   |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
DJ and Tyrone (and others), there may be more to this story of why
Nuendo/Cubase won't manage high VSTi counts at low latency. It may be a
Nuendo/Cubase 3.x issue (memory management problems I am guessing).
For example, I can run Samplitude 8.11 (demo) at about 1.5ms (doesn't use
ASIO buffers to increase latency) and run over twice the size orchestral
sample library as I can in Nuendo - that's a difference between splitting an
orchestral project into two or three separate projects with submixing in
Nuendo 3, and running at 6-12ms latency; or running everything I need, and
more, in Samplitude at 1.5ms without breaking a sweat. I need to test this
more to qualify it better, but at this point, I'm seriously considering
Sam/Sequoia for composing, even with the somewhat smaller feature set for
midi, composing and VSTi's. I love Nuendo's capabilities, but this is
becoming a serious limitation for me. I am sensing it's a limitation for
you also DJ.
Maybe it isn't our dual cores after all DJ. I was thinking the same as you
and was seriously disappointed with performance in Nuendo. RME drivers also
don't work well at low latency in Nuendo (e.g. One VSTi at 64 samples is all
I can run, vs. a full orchestral set, Stormdrum and probably a half dozen
soft synths in Samplitude). There are obvious differences in how the two
apps manage audio - I can't run nearly the plugin count in Samplitude as
Nuendo at high latency, but over twice that of Nuendo at low latency. For
large mixes running at 12-23ms, Nuendo wins hands down. At 3ms and lower,
Samplitude dusts Nuendo in both plugins and VSTi's.
Keep this to the forum for the moment. I want to sort out the reasons
before it gets out too far, so if anyone has ideas, or can confirm or deny,
please feel free to chime in.
Regards,
Dedric
On 5/2/06 4:53 PM, in article 4457e44d$1@linux, "DJ"
<animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> I like everything about it except that it is native and subject to all of
> the pitfalls of native systems when put under extreme duress. I built a PC
> over the Xmas holidays with an XP 4200 dualcore CPU thinking this would give
> me enough horsepower to negate buffer issues. Not a chance. Load this thing
> up with VSTi's and plugins at low-to moderate track counts and the buffers
> still need to be set higher than I'd like. My goal was to be able to keep
> latency at 1.5ms. I'll likely be relegating this DAW to other duties and
> building a dual/dualcore Opteron system if my needs begin to justify it.
> Check out the Opteron systems that are mentioned on the Nuendo forum. Those
> monsters are the minimum spec for achieving performance on par with a Paris
> system at 1.5ms latencies.
>
> Deej
>
> "Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:4457bc89$1@linux...
>>
>> Guys, along with my consideration of Logic 7.1 (Mac), I am also
> considering
>> the possibility of migrating to Cubase and staying on the PC side.
>>
>> I'd appreciated any input from Cubase users on what you like/dislike about
>> the app.
>>
>> Thanks!
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase users...your input please [message #67569 is a reply to message #67568] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 20:33 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dedric,
Does Samplitude have plugin delay compensation? I'm likeluy going back to
tracking and mixing in Paris. I'll be using my SX machine as a VSTi host for
tracking them as audio files directly to Paris (I do very little midi here
anyway) and I'll occasionally use the Cubase editor. Mostly I'll be using SX
as a standalone processor for UAD-1 plugins, sending and returning Paris
tracks through SX tracks with Drumagog and UAD-1 plugs in active monitor
mode. This uses less CPU resources than streaming the tracks and I've been
able to achieve adequate plugin counts at 1.5ms this way.
I was even beta testing Drumagog BFD for a while and this worked well when
sending/returning Paris tracks through SX channels with Drumagog inserted
while firing BFD drum samples. It also worked well in Cubase SX at 1.5ms
latency. It's an awesome thing. I wasn't asked to for and NDA so I doubt if
Rim would mind me discussing this here. I had to drop out because things got
too busy here so it's been a while since I checked in on this. When this app
is ready for prime time, it's going to be nothing short of amazing, and it
sounds amazing right now as long as you can operate at 1.5ms. Just having
all the kicks and snares in BFD available in Drumagog is a dream come true.
My next project mix will be done this way.....mixing in Paris with hardware
and/or UAD-1 plugins inserted in both Paris and SX.
If Samplitude has good PDC, I might think about switching since 1.5ms
latency is a must. Right now, I'm even thinking about bumping up my CPU to a
dual core 4800 just for a power boost.
Deej
on "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message
news:C07D75B9.77C%dterry@keyofd.net...
> DJ and Tyrone (and others), there may be more to this story of why
> Nuendo/Cubase won't manage high VSTi counts at low latency. It may be a
> Nuendo/Cubase 3.x issue (memory management problems I am guessing).
>
> For example, I can run Samplitude 8.11 (demo) at about 1.5ms (doesn't use
> ASIO buffers to increase latency) and run over twice the size orchestral
> sample library as I can in Nuendo - that's a difference between splitting
an
> orchestral project into two or three separate projects with submixing in
> Nuendo 3, and running at 6-12ms latency; or running everything I need,
and
> more, in Samplitude at 1.5ms without breaking a sweat. I need to test
this
> more to qualify it better, but at this point, I'm seriously considering
> Sam/Sequoia for composing, even with the somewhat smaller feature set for
> midi, composing and VSTi's. I love Nuendo's capabilities, but this is
> becoming a serious limitation for me. I am sensing it's a limitation for
> you also DJ.
>
> Maybe it isn't our dual cores after all DJ. I was thinking the same as
you
> and was seriously disappointed with performance in Nuendo. RME drivers
also
> don't work well at low latency in Nuendo (e.g. One VSTi at 64 samples is
all
> I can run, vs. a full orchestral set, Stormdrum and probably a half dozen
> soft synths in Samplitude). There are obvious differences in how the two
> apps manage audio - I can't run nearly the plugin count in Samplitude as
> Nuendo at high latency, but over twice that of Nuendo at low latency. For
> large mixes running at 12-23ms, Nuendo wins hands down. At 3ms and lower,
> Samplitude dusts Nuendo in both plugins and VSTi's.
>
> Keep this to the forum for the moment. I want to sort out the reasons
> before it gets out too far, so if anyone has ideas, or can confirm or
deny,
> please feel free to chime in.
>
> Regards,
> Dedric
>
> On 5/2/06 4:53 PM, in article 4457e44d$1@linux, "DJ"
> <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>
> > I like everything about it except that it is native and subject to all
of
> > the pitfalls of native systems when put under extreme duress. I built a
PC
> > over the Xmas holidays with an XP 4200 dualcore CPU thinking this would
give
> > me enough horsepower to negate buffer issues. Not a chance. Load this
thing
> > up with VSTi's and plugins at low-to moderate track counts and the
buffers
> > still need to be set higher than I'd like. My goal was to be able to
keep
> > latency at 1.5ms. I'll likely be relegating this DAW to other duties and
> > building a dual/dualcore Opteron system if my needs begin to justify it.
> > Check out the Opteron systems that are mentioned on the Nuendo forum.
Those
> > monsters are the minimum spec for achieving performance on par with a
Paris
> > system at 1.5ms latencies.
> >
> > Deej
> >
> > "Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:4457bc89$1@linux...
> >>
> >> Guys, along with my consideration of Logic 7.1 (Mac), I am also
> > considering
> >> the possibility of migrating to Cubase and staying on the PC side.
> >>
> >> I'd appreciated any input from Cubase users on what you like/dislike
about
> >> the app.
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >
> >
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase users...your input please [message #67570 is a reply to message #67569] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 20:59 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
DJ,
Samplitude 8 does have PDC.
I have Sequoia 8 coming later this week or next and will run more thorough
tests with it. I want to find out why it seems to be limited to a marginal
bump in plugin counts (VST, not VSTi) even at higher latency/VIP buffer
settings (assuming I am interpreting their affect on resources, and
interaction with ASIO buffers correctly).
However, for what you are doing, Sam would probably be a 2X increase in
plugin counts at 1.5ms over SX 3.x, maybe more (assuming SX has the same
apparent limitation as Nuendo 3.x). I would suggest trying the Samplitude
8.11 demo to see if it will run I/O through plugins the way you do with SX.
Samplitude seems to be optimized with RME hardware, so it runs very well on
my system. It may not be as efficient with Lynx or others, but I would hope
that isn't the case.
I've also heard recently that Nuendo is faster under Win2K than WinXP, but
that was only one user's account, and no info on plugins, VSTi's, or actual
numbers. Something to try, or consider perhaps.
Regards,
Dedric
On 5/2/06 9:33 PM, in article 445825c7@linux, "DJ"
<animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> Dedric,
>
> Does Samplitude have plugin delay compensation? I'm likeluy going back to
> tracking and mixing in Paris. I'll be using my SX machine as a VSTi host for
> tracking them as audio files directly to Paris (I do very little midi here
> anyway) and I'll occasionally use the Cubase editor. Mostly I'll be using SX
> as a standalone processor for UAD-1 plugins, sending and returning Paris
> tracks through SX tracks with Drumagog and UAD-1 plugs in active monitor
> mode. This uses less CPU resources than streaming the tracks and I've been
> able to achieve adequate plugin counts at 1.5ms this way.
>
> I was even beta testing Drumagog BFD for a while and this worked well when
> sending/returning Paris tracks through SX channels with Drumagog inserted
> while firing BFD drum samples. It also worked well in Cubase SX at 1.5ms
> latency. It's an awesome thing. I wasn't asked to for and NDA so I doubt if
> Rim would mind me discussing this here. I had to drop out because things got
> too busy here so it's been a while since I checked in on this. When this app
> is ready for prime time, it's going to be nothing short of amazing, and it
> sounds amazing right now as long as you can operate at 1.5ms. Just having
> all the kicks and snares in BFD available in Drumagog is a dream come true.
> My next project mix will be done this way.....mixing in Paris with hardware
> and/or UAD-1 plugins inserted in both Paris and SX.
>
> If Samplitude has good PDC, I might think about switching since 1.5ms
> latency is a must. Right now, I'm even thinking about bumping up my CPU to a
> dual core 4800 just for a power boost.
>
> Deej
>
>
> on "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message
> news:C07D75B9.77C%dterry@keyofd.net...
>> DJ and Tyrone (and others), there may be more to this story of why
>> Nuendo/Cubase won't manage high VSTi counts at low latency. It may be a
>> Nuendo/Cubase 3.x issue (memory management problems I am guessing).
>>
>> For example, I can run Samplitude 8.11 (demo) at about 1.5ms (doesn't use
>> ASIO buffers to increase latency) and run over twice the size orchestral
>> sample library as I can in Nuendo - that's a difference between splitting
> an
>> orchestral project into two or three separate projects with submixing in
>> Nuendo 3, and running at 6-12ms latency; or running everything I need,
> and
>> more, in Samplitude at 1.5ms without breaking a sweat. I need to test
> this
>> more to qualify it better, but at this point, I'm seriously considering
>> Sam/Sequoia for composing, even with the somewhat smaller feature set for
>> midi, composing and VSTi's. I love Nuendo's capabilities, but this is
>> becoming a serious limitation for me. I am sensing it's a limitation for
>> you also DJ.
>>
>> Maybe it isn't our dual cores after all DJ. I was thinking the same as
> you
>> and was seriously disappointed with performance in Nuendo. RME drivers
> also
>> don't work well at low latency in Nuendo (e.g. One VSTi at 64 samples is
> all
>> I can run, vs. a full orchestral set, Stormdrum and probably a half dozen
>> soft synths in Samplitude). There are obvious differences in how the two
>> apps manage audio - I can't run nearly the plugin count in Samplitude as
>> Nuendo at high latency, but over twice that of Nuendo at low latency. For
>> large mixes running at 12-23ms, Nuendo wins hands down. At 3ms and lower,
>> Samplitude dusts Nuendo in both plugins and VSTi's.
>>
>> Keep this to the forum for the moment. I want to sort out the reasons
>> before it gets out too far, so if anyone has ideas, or can confirm or
> deny,
>> please feel free to chime in.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>> On 5/2/06 4:53 PM, in article 4457e44d$1@linux, "DJ"
>> <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I like everything about it except that it is native and subject to all
> of
>>> the pitfalls of native systems when put under extreme duress. I built a
> PC
>>> over the Xmas holidays with an XP 4200 dualcore CPU thinking this would
> give
>>> me enough horsepower to negate buffer issues. Not a chance. Load this
> thing
>>> up with VSTi's and plugins at low-to moderate track counts and the
> buffers
>>> still need to be set higher than I'd like. My goal was to be able to
> keep
>>> latency at 1.5ms. I'll likely be relegating this DAW to other duties and
>>> building a dual/dualcore Opteron system if my needs begin to justify it.
>>> Check out the Opteron systems that are mentioned on the Nuendo forum.
> Those
>>> monsters are the minimum spec for achieving performance on par with a
> Paris
>>> system at 1.5ms latencies.
>>>
>>> Deej
>>>
>>> "Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:4457bc89$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> Guys, along with my consideration of Logic 7.1 (Mac), I am also
>>> considering
>>>> the possibility of migrating to Cubase and staying on the PC side.
>>>>
>>>> I'd appreciated any input from Cubase users on what you like/dislike
> about
>>>> the app.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase users...your input please [message #67572 is a reply to message #67570] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 21:31 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dedric,
I've got a buddy with a studio in Midland TX who is a Samp guru. I'll do
some investigation into it's capabilities. He's as much a Samp fanatic as I
am a Parisite. Don't Mark Wilson and Bill Lorentzen use Samp as well? I
thought I had seen posts about it from them.
Deej
"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message
news:C07D86DE.785%dterry@keyofd.net...
> DJ,
>
> Samplitude 8 does have PDC.
>
> I have Sequoia 8 coming later this week or next and will run more thorough
> tests with it. I want to find out why it seems to be limited to a
marginal
> bump in plugin counts (VST, not VSTi) even at higher latency/VIP buffer
> settings (assuming I am interpreting their affect on resources, and
> interaction with ASIO buffers correctly).
>
> However, for what you are doing, Sam would probably be a 2X increase in
> plugin counts at 1.5ms over SX 3.x, maybe more (assuming SX has the same
> apparent limitation as Nuendo 3.x). I would suggest trying the Samplitude
> 8.11 demo to see if it will run I/O through plugins the way you do with
SX.
> Samplitude seems to be optimized with RME hardware, so it runs very well
on
> my system. It may not be as efficient with Lynx or others, but I would
hope
> that isn't the case.
>
> I've also heard recently that Nuendo is faster under Win2K than WinXP, but
> that was only one user's account, and no info on plugins, VSTi's, or
actual
> numbers. Something to try, or consider perhaps.
>
> Regards,
> Dedric
>
> On 5/2/06 9:33 PM, in article 445825c7@linux, "DJ"
> <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>
> > Dedric,
> >
> > Does Samplitude have plugin delay compensation? I'm likeluy going back
to
> > tracking and mixing in Paris. I'll be using my SX machine as a VSTi host
for
> > tracking them as audio files directly to Paris (I do very little midi
here
> > anyway) and I'll occasionally use the Cubase editor. Mostly I'll be
using SX
> > as a standalone processor for UAD-1 plugins, sending and returning Paris
> > tracks through SX tracks with Drumagog and UAD-1 plugs in active monitor
> > mode. This uses less CPU resources than streaming the tracks and I've
been
> > able to achieve adequate plugin counts at 1.5ms this way.
> >
> > I was even beta testing Drumagog BFD for a while and this worked well
when
> > sending/returning Paris tracks through SX channels with Drumagog
inserted
> > while firing BFD drum samples. It also worked well in Cubase SX at 1.5ms
> > latency. It's an awesome thing. I wasn't asked to for and NDA so I doubt
if
> > Rim would mind me discussing this here. I had to drop out because things
got
> > too busy here so it's been a while since I checked in on this. When this
app
> > is ready for prime time, it's going to be nothing short of amazing, and
it
> > sounds amazing right now as long as you can operate at 1.5ms. Just
having
> > all the kicks and snares in BFD available in Drumagog is a dream come
true.
> > My next project mix will be done this way.....mixing in Paris with
hardware
> > and/or UAD-1 plugins inserted in both Paris and SX.
> >
> > If Samplitude has good PDC, I might think about switching since 1.5ms
> > latency is a must. Right now, I'm even thinking about bumping up my CPU
to a
> > dual core 4800 just for a power boost.
> >
> > Deej
> >
> >
> > on "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message
> > news:C07D75B9.77C%dterry@keyofd.net...
> >> DJ and Tyrone (and others), there may be more to this story of why
> >> Nuendo/Cubase won't manage high VSTi counts at low latency. It may be
a
> >> Nuendo/Cubase 3.x issue (memory management problems I am guessing).
> >>
> >> For example, I can run Samplitude 8.11 (demo) at about 1.5ms (doesn't
use
> >> ASIO buffers to increase latency) and run over twice the size
orchestral
> >> sample library as I can in Nuendo - that's a difference between
splitting
> > an
> >> orchestral project into two or three separate projects with submixing
in
> >> Nuendo 3, and running at 6-12ms latency; or running everything I need,
> > and
> >> more, in Samplitude at 1.5ms without breaking a sweat. I need to test
> > this
> >> more to qualify it better, but at this point, I'm seriously considering
> >> Sam/Sequoia for composing, even with the somewhat smaller feature set
for
> >> midi, composing and VSTi's. I love Nuendo's capabilities, but this is
> >> becoming a serious limitation for me. I am sensing it's a limitation
for
> >> you also DJ.
> >>
> >> Maybe it isn't our dual cores after all DJ. I was thinking the same as
> > you
> >> and was seriously disappointed with performance in Nuendo. RME drivers
> > also
> >> don't work well at low latency in Nuendo (e.g. One VSTi at 64 samples
is
> > all
> >> I can run, vs. a full orchestral set, Stormdrum and probably a half
dozen
> >> soft synths in Samplitude). There are obvious differences in how the
two
> >> apps manage audio - I can't run nearly the plugin count in Samplitude
as
> >> Nuendo at high latency, but over twice that of Nuendo at low latency.
For
> >> large mixes running at 12-23ms, Nuendo wins hands down. At 3ms and
lower,
> >> Samplitude dusts Nuendo in both plugins and VSTi's.
> >>
> >> Keep this to the forum for the moment. I want to sort out the reasons
> >> before it gets out too far, so if anyone has ideas, or can confirm or
> > deny,
> >> please feel free to chime in.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Dedric
> >>
> >> On 5/2/06 4:53 PM, in article 4457e44d$1@linux, "DJ"
> >> <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I like everything about it except that it is native and subject to all
> > of
> >>> the pitfalls of native systems when put under extreme duress. I built
a
> > PC
> >>> over the Xmas holidays with an XP 4200 dualcore CPU thinking this
would
> > give
> >>> me enough horsepower to negate buffer issues. Not a chance. Load this
> > thing
> >>> up with VSTi's and plugins at low-to moderate track counts and the
> > buffers
> >>> still need to be set higher than I'd like. My goal was to be able to
> > keep
> >>> latency at 1.5ms. I'll likely be relegating this DAW to other duties
and
> >>> building a dual/dualcore Opteron system if my needs begin to justify
it.
> >>> Check out the Opteron systems that are mentioned on the Nuendo forum.
> > Those
> >>> monsters are the minimum spec for achieving performance on par with a
> > Paris
> >>> system at 1.5ms latencies.
> >>>
> >>> Deej
> >>>
> >>> "Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:4457bc89$1@linux...
> >>>>
> >>>> Guys, along with my consideration of Logic 7.1 (Mac), I am also
> >>> considering
> >>>> the possibility of migrating to Cubase and staying on the PC side.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'd appreciated any input from Cubase users on what you like/dislike
> > about
> >>>> the app.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase users...your input please [message #67575 is a reply to message #67572] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 22:41 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I know Bill uses Samp at least. I believe Sakis uses Sequoia for mastering.
It doesn¹t have the midi bells and whistles, and 8.11 doesn't have the most
elegant handling of VSTi outputs and tracks, but I think 8.3 has changed
this with folder tracks, and hopefully a few other improvements.
Dedric
On 5/2/06 10:31 PM, in article 4458337b@linux, "DJ"
<animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> Dedric,
>
> I've got a buddy with a studio in Midland TX who is a Samp guru. I'll do
> some investigation into it's capabilities. He's as much a Samp fanatic as I
> am a Parisite. Don't Mark Wilson and Bill Lorentzen use Samp as well? I
> thought I had seen posts about it from them.
>
> Deej
>
>
>
> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message
> news:C07D86DE.785%dterry@keyofd.net...
>> DJ,
>>
>> Samplitude 8 does have PDC.
>>
>> I have Sequoia 8 coming later this week or next and will run more thorough
>> tests with it. I want to find out why it seems to be limited to a
> marginal
>> bump in plugin counts (VST, not VSTi) even at higher latency/VIP buffer
>> settings (assuming I am interpreting their affect on resources, and
>> interaction with ASIO buffers correctly).
>>
>> However, for what you are doing, Sam would probably be a 2X increase in
>> plugin counts at 1.5ms over SX 3.x, maybe more (assuming SX has the same
>> apparent limitation as Nuendo 3.x). I would suggest trying the Samplitude
>> 8.11 demo to see if it will run I/O through plugins the way you do with
> SX.
>> Samplitude seems to be optimized with RME hardware, so it runs very well
> on
>> my system. It may not be as efficient with Lynx or others, but I would
> hope
>> that isn't the case.
>>
>> I've also heard recently that Nuendo is faster under Win2K than WinXP, but
>> that was only one user's account, and no info on plugins, VSTi's, or
> actual
>> numbers. Something to try, or consider perhaps.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase users...your input please [message #67683 is a reply to message #67552] |
Thu, 04 May 2006 14:09 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Good
Excellent editing directly in the project window. Widest range of plug-in
and sound card support since the Steinies wrote the spec everyone uses. Higher
degree of customization possible than most people realize (keyboard shortcuts,
screen sets, etc.). Excellent ReWire support. Vastly improved automation
tools, both capturing mix moves and drawing things manually. The ability
to selectively undo processes on audio clips is fantastic.
Not so good
Company has been getting bounced around for a few years and the app has largely
stood still (see 3.0 upgrade that I couldn't tell from 2.x). Bundled plug-ins
vary from good to totally useless and none is a real home run. MIDI editing
is still done almost exclusively in its own set of windows that haven't changed
much since 1995, which isn't so bad since it was really good back then and
MIDI hasn't changed much. Tempo mapping is still a huge PITA.
Deej and Dedric posted elsewhere about performance stuff that I haven't run
into. In general I like SX a lot, largely becasue I know it very well. I
also use, endorse, adore, am blown away by, and increasingly use nothing
but . . . Live from Ableton.
TCB
"Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>Guys, along with my consideration of Logic 7.1 (Mac), I am also considering
>the possibility of migrating to Cubase and staying on the PC side.
>
>I'd appreciated any input from Cubase users on what you like/dislike about
>the app.
>
>Thanks!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cubase users...your input please [message #67695 is a reply to message #67683] |
Thu, 04 May 2006 19:50 |
Tyrone Corbett
Messages: 253
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey gang, thanks for the detailed responses. This is such a tough decision.
I am now leaning towards staying with Logic and upgrading as I spent some
time last night with a colleague who is running 7.2. I like the fact that
I was able to navigate through the software quite easily despite not upgrading
in four years...this keeps the learning curve to a quiet roar.
Thanks again!
Tyrone
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>Good
>
>Excellent editing directly in the project window. Widest range of plug-in
>and sound card support since the Steinies wrote the spec everyone uses.
Higher
>degree of customization possible than most people realize (keyboard shortcuts,
>screen sets, etc.). Excellent ReWire support. Vastly improved automation
>tools, both capturing mix moves and drawing things manually. The ability
>to selectively undo processes on audio clips is fantastic.
>
>Not so good
>
>Company has been getting bounced around for a few years and the app has
largely
>stood still (see 3.0 upgrade that I couldn't tell from 2.x). Bundled plug-ins
>vary from good to totally useless and none is a real home run. MIDI editing
>is still done almost exclusively in its own set of windows that haven't
changed
>much since 1995, which isn't so bad since it was really good back then and
>
>Deej and Dedric posted elsewhere about performance stuff that I haven't
run
>into. In general I like SX a lot, largely becasue I know it very well. I
>also use, endorse, adore, am blown away by, and increasingly use nothing
>but . . . Live from Ableton.
>
>TCB
>
>"Tyrone Corbett" <tyronecorbett@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>Guys, along with my consideration of Logic 7.1 (Mac), I am also considering
>>the possibility of migrating to Cubase and staying on the PC side.
>>
>>I'd appreciated any input from Cubase users on what you like/dislike about
>>the app.
>>
>>Thanks!
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Nov 23 19:25:46 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01463 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
