TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Pros and cons of cubase
Pros and cons of cubase
Im thinking about purchasing cubase to start mastering and working in on top of reason what are the pros and cons of it from yall that use it i know one big plus is the abality to use vsti's in it wich reason really lacks.
it's better with CPU power than any other sequencer I've previously used (Sonar, ACID, FL) which means you can run more VSTs
con.. hrrmm.. I can't figure out how to change the track's sample rate 
anyone know?
project / setup
but i wouldn't use it for (pre-)mastering. this could be better done in a sound-editor like soundforge, wavelab, audition, ...
| quote: |
| Originally posted by thecYrus but i wouldn't use it for (pre-)mastering. this could be better done in a sound-editor like soundforge, wavelab, audition, ... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by alanzo I can't figure out how to change the track's sample rate anyone know? --- that's the only con I can think of as well..its wave editor sucks.. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Cryogenic Its comedy-night again. A muppet that doesnt know how to change samplerate in Cubase should NOT be advising people in Cubase pro/con's. Imagine the vast amount of knowledge you do not have, and the misleading it creates all around. Scary. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by alanzo that's the only con I can think of as well.. its wave editor sucks.. thanks Pho Mo for the info |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Subtle uhm... no.. sorry... the Wave editor is great... the MIDI is even better |
Pro's of Cubase
- It's pretty easy to get to gripes with (some people will disagree, but if you think of it, if you are a little acquainted with how stuff works in a studio (like with hardware) it's laid out pretty logically).
- Steinberg are the makers of the VST technology. So it's support is very solid (most VST software will be tested on Steinberg hosts first).
- The engine has a well defined sound that a lot of people may like.
- Some well implemented features, like the Timewarp tool, which can come in handy for some people (that's always a plus, you never know when you'll need it).
- In my experience, pretty stable.
Cons
- the plugins that come with the package are pretty weak. Compared to the stuff you get with Sonar or Logic it's even mostly abominable. But I don't fool myself, most people will use third party plugins anyway.
- The bussing system should change, following a scheme like in Protools or Logic. No possible way to do sidechaining internally for example (you need dedicated plugins, and there are not very many of them who offer the option). They really should add the feature of free assignable internal busses. It is promised in VST 3.0 though, so SX 3 should have it.
- Some MIDI devices still drift, even though a lot has been solved with the last update.
- The sample editor is pretty basic, but that is the case with most sequencers. A sequencer is for sequencing, they got Wavelab for something (and if they would include a full featured audio editor, well they wouldn't sell as much of Wavelab, business is business).
It's a really good sequencer in total. Not necessarily worse than Logic, Sonar, Protools or Samplitude for that matter, but not better either. In that league it's more a matter of preference and a matter of which features you need.
On the other hand, I follow theCyrus here. Cubase is a sequencer, so aimed mainly at creating music. It has basic functionalities for premastering, but indeed this is better done in a fully fledged audio editor like Wavelab (which has VST support too). The only sequencer I'd personally recommend which is really capable in this area is Samplitude (it started as an audio editor, and got sequencer features added afterwards). Version 7 is already a beast, and version 8 is due out soon. If the evolution continues like it did with the previous versions, then I see Samplitude become a serious contender in the big league (well to be honest, it already is).
| quote: |
| Originally posted by alanzo obviously the MIDI is good.. but the wave editor is feble in the face of Sound Forge.. sound forge is good because you can process the wave and add FX and such in the program and then save the FX to the file itself which eliminates the CPU usage you would encounter if you were to put FX on the waveform in cubase.. yes, you can export the wavefile with the FX on it in cubase to eliminate CPU usage.. but it's easier to do it with Sound Forge.. plus in sound forge you get all the neat little tools to process the waveform.. such as normalizing and adjusting DC Offset using an external wave editor just makes it less complex |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJ Thy Version 7 is already a beast, and version 8 is due out soon. If the evolution continues like it did with the previous versions, then I see Samplitude become a serious contender in the big league (well to be honest, it already is). |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by alanzo obviously the MIDI is good.. but the wave editor is feble in the face of Sound Forge.. sound forge is good because you can process the wave and add FX and such in the program and then save the FX to the file itself which eliminates the CPU usage you would encounter if you were to put FX on the waveform in cubase.. yes, you can export the wavefile with the FX on it in cubase to eliminate CPU usage.. but it's easier to do it with Sound Forge.. plus in sound forge you get all the neat little tools to process the waveform.. such as normalizing and adjusting DC Offset using an external wave editor just makes it less complex |
You can process and change the audio file in whatever program u want, and immidietly see the changes happen in Cubase!!!
| quote: |
| Originally posted by alanzo that's the only con I can think of as well.. its wave editor sucks.. thanks Pho Mo for the info |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Subtle Yeah, but those Magix people sure knows how to make it as ugly as possible... seriously.. it looks pretty bad |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Dj Thy Seriously... Looks are the last thing I look for when going for audio progs. You haven't seen Protools then. Very rudimentary, but the interface has proven it's value. I'm always amazed people put so much importance to looks. You get a DAW prog to make good sound for god's sake, if you want looks, buy one of those "funky" music maker progs on Playstation... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Subtle I have seen Pro-Tools.. ands it looks clean, as for the "funky music maker" progs on Playstation.. I have used them for over 4 years Samplitude looks messy and roughly and no money invested in the look of the interface.. it is indeed more comfortable too looks at a neat and clean interface when making music.. anyways.. that is just MY opinion..! |
hi, I must say it looks damn much better
Samplitude, what kind of program is it? (i know its a Audio/MIDI sequencer) but what is its strenght? I have never seen it mentioned in magazines like Computer Music or anything.. the shit is expensive too.. and got some really complicated options..
Well, Samplitude really began as an audio editor. And a very good one at that, because it had several very powerful and intuitive tools. The crossfade editor is one of the best I know. I'm pretty comfortable editing in most software, but Samplitude is still one of those I use most.
Later on it went audio multitracking, and again the audio engine was and still is rock solid. Live input, good routing, decent included effects, solid file format support. And it could do everything in one package. Recording, editing, mixing and even a fully fledged cd burning scheme (not the basic stuff you get with most progs, like burn track per track etc, but ability to do continuous cd's, set indices and subindices, edit ISRC codes,...).
There are also different user interface schemes for the different kind of works you'll be doing (recording, mastering, mixing).
With the later versions, they included MIDI (like I said, presumably by ex Emagic guys, if you know MIDI quality in Logic...). Included effects got even better (one of the first very good convolution reverbs). The FFT analyzer/eq is superb. Object oriented automation above general track automation.
And with the next version, it only gets better. MIDI got developped even further (it was still basic as it was an addition to an audio editor, but now I think their going for the full package), more extensive surround capabilities, features for DVD-A authoring, Rewire support, Elastic Audio (so it will have features like Ableton Live), etc...
Samplitude is a big name in the broadcast industry for some time.
Sequoia has always been the big brother of Samplitude, intended for mastering suites, it has all the features of Samplitude and then some (more extensive surround options, more powerful crossfade editors, possibility to use different file formats without conversion in the same project, editing of P and Q codes for CD mastering etc...). But it is indeed very expensive. But for that price you get a package that can really compete with Sonic Solutions and Sadie.
And that's mostly a reason why I don't read computer music. This magazine is mostly aimed to the home studio (and might I say, usually to the amateur home studio). Which is perfectly fine, such magazines are cool for such people. But there is more to audio and computer audio in particular than that home studio world. They deliberately choose to exclude most of the pro "expensive" stuff. Which I must agree is usually a pretty closed world (if you exclude mediawolves Digidesign). It's not a magazine where you'll find extensive reviews and tutorials about Sadie, Augan, Pyramix and consorts.
If you only stick by what is written/reviewed in such magazines, you'll miss out a lot, I guarantee you.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.