 |
|
|
|
 |
kitphillips
is actually a guy.
Registered: May 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
I wouldn't want to be doing much recording and editing in Ableton. It is great for loop based music, but not typical recording etc. Cubase and Sonar are far better, in this regard. |
Don't know why you'd say that... I think now they have crossfades it'll be the equal of anything. There are a few more thhing that'd help, but its pretty good.
___________________
New Mix: March 2010 Promo
Soundcloud|Facebook
|
|
May-09-2009 09:06
|
|
|
 |
 |
derail
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Feb 2007
Location: Canberra, Australia
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by Nightshift
You say this with no proof of anything.
As far as i know there really is no difference. If anything, whatever you record in Cubase or Sonar you'd be able to do at least 10x faster in Ableton with equivalent results. |
Could you please provide an explanation of why recording in Live is "at least 10x faster"? I use Cubase for recording my hardware synths, and it records them in realtime. Does Live run the MIDI sequences and audio recording at ten times the speed and end up with the same result?
I made the switch from Reason as my primary production tool to Live 5.0, intending to use Live as my primary production tool for a few years. I picked up a demo version of Cubase shortly afterwards, and to my ears it sounded better when recording my hardware synths - same recording interface, samplerate, bitrate. It could well be my mind playing tricks, but every synth seemed to sound much clearer and richer coming into Cubase. I didn't really want to pay for another DAW so soon after buying Live, but at that point Cubase sounded better. I still use Live rewired into Cubase, it's a very handy tool for certain aspects of production. And it may well sound a lot better these days (I'm still using version 5).
|
|
May-09-2009 12:39
|
|
|
 |
 |
kitphillips
is actually a guy.
Registered: May 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by derail
Could you please provide an explanation of why recording in Live is "at least 10x faster"? I use Cubase for recording my hardware synths, and it records them in realtime. Does Live run the MIDI sequences and audio recording at ten times the speed and end up with the same result?
I made the switch from Reason as my primary production tool to Live 5.0, intending to use Live as my primary production tool for a few years. I picked up a demo version of Cubase shortly afterwards, and to my ears it sounded better when recording my hardware synths - same recording interface, samplerate, bitrate. It could well be my mind playing tricks, but every synth seemed to sound much clearer and richer coming into Cubase. I didn't really want to pay for another DAW so soon after buying Live, but at that point Cubase sounded better. I still use Live rewired into Cubase, it's a very handy tool for certain aspects of production. And it may well sound a lot better these days (I'm still using version 5). |
I think they've made a couple of tweaks to the engine... But mainly I'd suggest that you buggered up the warping settings on the audio clips, leading to glitchy artifacts...
___________________
New Mix: March 2010 Promo
Soundcloud|Facebook
|
|
May-09-2009 13:28
|
|
|
 |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:30.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|