quote:

Originally posted by Diginerd I really can't help myself, I really tried to restrain myself.. The failure in logic (Bad pun) in the above is outstanding, and is coupled with a demonstrable lack of actual experience, as opposed to Secondhand "I heard it on teh internetz" attitude. 1. Cubase is not the one, original & best. If you want to go back in Steinberg history it was Pro 16 on the C64, or Pro24 on the ST. Notator / Creator have been around as long as cubase and morphed into Logic. Logic used to be cross platform, but with the purchase of Emagic by Apple, Logic on the PC stopped at Version 5. It's still a DAMN SOLID SEQUENCER at version 5 on the PC. I have a collection of friends who still do just that, run Logic 5 on a PC and make solid tracks. I mean the kind that are actually released on Vinyl. Sequencer choice is very personal, and it's more about your ability to conceptulaize than to be tied to any one platform. I've heard great stuff from FruityLoops (Much as I personally hate it), and a whole pile of crap from Logic, Cubase & *Insert name of Sequencer here* It's your musical talent, and technical talent not the platform that makes a great track. 2. Cubase, at least the latest version 4 is buggy as fuck. It blows chunks, sucks golfballs through hosepipes and any other metaphor you care to think of. Why? Because of the bugs and poor design considerations it really impeeds my WORKFLOW. Don't get me wrong, I've be a LICENCED user of cubase since version 1 on my old Atari 1024FM. Versions that I have sat around:- Cubase 1, 2 3 (Atari) Cubase 2, 3, 3XT (Only ever Cubase to use TDm Pro Tools hardware) Cubase VST32 and it's spawn through to VST 5 Cubase SX 1, 2 & 3 Now Cubase 4. Frankly I'm seriously considering geting an Atari TT and running cubase 3 on it. Stable, fast and solid Midi. I'd sync up my monster system to it via timecode to run audio tracks and Virtual Instruments. Something that is sorely lacking in the current versions. The only reason I'm on Version 4 is it's universal Binary (Yes I run a Mac in the studio) I have used logic a fair bit, and whilst I like it I couldn't justify forking out for two mainstream sequencer platforms and all the associated upgrades. That said unless Cubase sorts its crap out I might just break away with it after all this time. Yes I'm pissed. 3. Logic is an Apple program now, and there hasn't been a material upgrade for quite some time. By the rumor mill spinning Logic 8 (Which it prolly won't be called) is going to rewrite the rules. I personally am interested in seeing that, audio editing akin to Pro Tools, Midi as strong as ever. 4. Macs are most certainly not overpriced & underpowered these days. That's the most asinine statement I've heard for some time. If you look at the parts list and look at an equivalent PC you'll see how competitive they really are. Sure an 8 way machine is going to cost you north of $4500, but guess what, it is a Monster, not a toy for some warez kiddie to play on. If you want to play then if you pick your pc hardware carefully you can get a hacked OSX to run on it. Prolly won't do you much good as there are hardly any UB warez, but if it's quality tools you are after then I guess you just have to go and pay for them. Two sequencers that don't get much press are Digital Performer on the Mac, and Sonar on the PC. I've heard very great things from users of both, but I don't have much hands on experience with either, but I may start looking at them as options if Cubase doesn't get it's act together. As for audio editing and as a mixing environment, I'm sorry but Pro Tools does rule the roost. And with the modern systems, it is by far and away better sounding than Cubase. Although some of that is down to the fact that there are a collection of very serious high end plugins that are only available on that platform. The way I run my sessions is to have cuase & Pro Tools running at the same time synched with timecode and pipe the midi from cubase into VSTis / RTAS instruments in Pro Tools. So I don't really have any audio mixing going on in cubase. I tried doing i all in cubase but it never gelled properly for me. I tried sequencing in Pro Tools and it never gelled either. The near perfect Audio workflow that Pro Tools has doesn't translate well to MIDI, it works, but it's just slow and fiddly for composing. Hence by running both I get the best of both worlds. To sum up, pick a tool, work with it until you hit it's limitations (And you are sure they're not YOUR limitations) and then don't be afraid to switch should you need to.

well for one fruity loops isnt a sequencer, yes it has a sequencer but in essence it is a virtual studio, similarly cubase can be a virtual studio but in essence it is a sequencer. when i said cubase was the original and best sorry i forgot to mention pro16 and pro24 which are both in my opinion cubase with differant names and not relevent to this debate. when saying original and best i was generally reffering to steinberg flagship synthersizers as a whole. i.e the cubase range(and dont even think about going `oh but theres nuendo...yes i know) sorry i forgot to backtrack to the 1980's and sorry i forgot to mention the fart and the cup of coffee I had last week in my 1 paragraph post. what i meant was steinberg invented the 'Cube' or events display we take for granted in sequencers today. you know the two axis system, tracks and time. I agree Logic 5 is still a solid program but is no substitute for the latest version of Cubase. and dunno why you are getting on your high horse I wasnt ripping logic.
I stand by my opinion about macs tho I have seen various documentries and websites showing high end PC's whooping high end macs hands down, my brother owns a mac also and my pentium 4 pisses on it.
If you wanna believe the hype about macs your welcome too its your money your wasting not mine. mac's are ugly anyway tat old white star treck look is so outdated.
Wonder why squaresoft did final fantasy the spirits within on a sony Viao when Mac's are so well designed for graphics, of course a company like square couldnt begin to afford a high end mac to do it on i bet, or maybe they just know a thing or too about computers.
wonder why apple sacked IBM when the failed to provide them with a 3 gig processor, now they use intel hmmm well i guess macs just are PC's nowadays realy, in a rather ugly white box and have been messed around by apple who are so behind the times and have their head stuck so far up their asses the can't understand why noone wants to pay to download all the tunes they already got for free off their dumb ITunes site.

And why do you use cubase for MIDI and not pro tools, because you know deep down inside , in places you dont like to talk about at parties, that Cubase is the finest sequencer available, always has always will. you may feel the audio is slightly better in logic or PT but is it really worth all the messing about using a multitude of programs.

and another thing reading your quite pathetic kiddies post im suprised youve been round long enough to remember pro16 on the C64, you probly dont even remember paperboy. well, i have used the majority of sequencers you talk about even the ones that arent sequencers at some time or another, so im not tied to one platform, I havent just 'heard about them from friends' like you, so dont jump down my throat and say i have no experience just because i dont have supreme tranceaddict next to my name.
And when you said all about Emagic and how Logic didnt used to be single platform guess what I ALREADY KNEW. so did anyone else with half a brain. I thought the posters question was about current sequencers, not versions so old you can pick up a copy for £5.99 with a free microphone.
you go on and keep using pro tools and your copy of logic five (which is really what you use not cubase 4 i bet, and these friends are a cover story). If it works for you fine, but im entitled to my opinion and it is that cubase is the one.
Cubase all day long!

Wow.. Hit a nerve I think.. :-)

Where to begin...

Knocking things back on track..

Let's start with sequencer's are personal choice, and each to their own. Cubase can be good, but it blows in it's current incarnation, and personally I haven't been a great fan of it for some time even though I use it extensively. Faults that immediately spring to mind: If you are running with external wordclock looping between LR Markers doesn't work at all well. Things drop out on the loop boundary, or the timing of the down beat back at the L marker is scrogged... CPU is excessively consumed if you crank up the number of Live Audio I/Os you use. Neither of these would be deal breakers for many, but for me it's a major PITA.

Why do I use it though? Because it gets the job done, but as I said I only really use it for MIDI as I find the audio side doesn't work the way I PERSONALLY like. I also dislike the results when I use its audio features, I get more rapid and much better sounding results when I use Pro Tools for audio work. Again this is MY PERSONAL opinion, not secondhand internetz echo.

To address one of your weaker shots, I am using Cubase 4, as it's the only version that will run on an Intel based OSX machine. More on this point later...

Trashing one platform (Sequencer, OS, Hardware, Kitchen blender)or another without factual evidence is childish and pointless, no matter what your age or experience, though with both I'd hope comes the wisdom to not arbitarily shoot your mouth off.

As I said I think I'm tempted go right the way back to Cubases roots running on an old Atari, as that will get what I (again personally) need done, but again that's just me. That said I love my screens, and the integrated environments between the apps I run, but boy is it annoying that cubase doesn't work right..

So to address some more of your baseless rants and suspicions about me & this topic..

1. Cubase is fine, and gets the job done for many people including myself, but even though I've been using it for many years I wouldn't be so bold to say it's better than anythinging else for sequencing, or for audio work, or for that matter any other purpose.

It either works for a user, or it doesn't. Logic rocks, and is actually much more powerful on the MIDI front, I've seen tricks done very rapidly in it that would take forever, or even not feasable with Cubase. Touch tracks is awesome when done right, as is the sysex implementation.

This is MIDI + Real Synths we're talking here, not VSTi's / AUs.

That said Logic can be overly complex and counter intuitive.

Orbital did much of their best work with a bunch of hardware Alesis sequencers, early Prodigy was all W30. Each to their own.

"Modern" strong Midi platforms worth looking at I feel are:-

PC: Cubase, Sonar, Fruity, Live.
Mac: Logic, Cubase, Digital Performer, Live.

I really wouldn't reccoment Pro Tools for MIDI as that's not where its heart lives. I would be so bold as to say that for pure audio you're going to struggle to find something better at practically any price (Barring a serious high end studio).

Which sequencer / DAW you choose depends on your working methodology and budget. Again a personal choice.

2. The Logic comment I made was about a very respected friend of mine who I'm not going to call out here, but you will certainly have heard his stuff if you've been around as long as you imply you have.. ;-) I certainly don't use Logic on a PC at present.

3. I hate to tell you this but not everyone on this board is in their 20s.. Or even early 30s. Some of us have actually had a long career doing this professionally. I did so for a while but due to starting a family and moving country I dropped back to "Serious Hobby" level, though I still produce & release tracks...

4. Speaking of which, to gain credability on a forum takes time. Showing up and trolling isn't going to do it. Sorry mate. Go search some of my posts on here, I like to try and be both informative & helpful, though I do take troll bait. That's one of my weaknesses. I also have the confidence to state when it's me personally doing something or if it's not.

5. I personally work on an 8 core dual clovertown machine that I built back in September. Yes it runs OSX, runs windows too, and actually even does both at the same time. I do this so I can have the choice of what ever tools I want to have to hand. Yes it's a luxury, so what.. :->

To see where I currently work check out this thread:

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=348799

I'm not mucking about, and I certainly havn't got time to come onto forums and lie in a vain attempt to boost my ego. Actually I'm regretting having taken this troll bait, but once again I can resist anything but temptation.

6. If you have the computational power and the budget I highly reccoment syncing Pro Tools to a MIDI sequencer of choice to handle your audio. The results are night and day for me, also once you've finished with the MIDI you can bounce it all in as audio into Pro Tools and Mix from there, or even take it to a "Big Room" to finish off or have someone else work on the mix with you.

So to summarize, if you can you don't have to limit yourself to one tool or another, it's very possible to use two systems syncced together and gain something that id better than the sum of its parts.

With that I bid you goodnight.

quote:

Originally posted by Diginerd Wow.. Hit a nerve I think.. :-) Where to begin... Knocking things back on track.. Let's start with sequencer's are personal choice, and each to their own. Cubase can be good, but it blows in it's current incarnation, and personally I haven't been a great fan of it for some time even though I use it extensively. Faults that immediately spring to mind: If you are running with external wordclock looping between LR Markers doesn't work at all well. Things drop out on the loop boundary, or the timing of the down beat back at the L marker is scrogged... CPU is excessively consumed if you crank up the number of Live Audio I/Os you use. Neither of these would be deal breakers for many, but for me it's a major PITA. Why do I use it though? Because it gets the job done, but as I said I only really use it for MIDI as I find the audio side doesn't work the way I PERSONALLY like. I also dislike the results when I use its audio features, I get more rapid and much better sounding results when I use Pro Tools for audio work. Again this is MY PERSONAL opinion, not secondhand internetz echo. To address one of your weaker shots, I am using Cubase 4, as it's the only version that will run on an Intel based OSX machine. More on this point later... Trashing one platform (Sequencer, OS, Hardware, Kitchen blender)or another without factual evidence is childish and pointless, no matter what your age or experience, though with both I'd hope comes the wisdom to not arbitarily shoot your mouth off. As I said I think I'm tempted go right the way back to Cubases roots running on an old Atari, as that will get what I (again personally) need done, but again that's just me. That said I love my screens, and the integrated environments between the apps I run, but boy is it annoying that cubase doesn't work right.. So to address some more of your baseless rants and suspicions about me & this topic.. 1. Cubase is fine, and gets the job done for many people including myself, but even though I've been using it for many years I wouldn't be so bold to say it's better than anythinging else for sequencing, or for audio work, or for that matter any other purpose. It either works for a user, or it doesn't. Logic rocks, and is actually much more powerful on the MIDI front, I've seen tricks done very rapidly in it that would take forever, or even not feasable with Cubase. Touch tracks is awesome when done right, as is the sysex implementation. This is MIDI + Real Synths we're talking here, not VSTi's / AUs. That said Logic can be overly complex and counter intuitive. Orbital did much of their best work with a bunch of hardware Alesis sequencers, early Prodigy was all W30. Each to their own. "Modern" strong Midi platforms worth looking at I feel are:- PC: Cubase, Sonar, Fruity, Live. Mac: Logic, Cubase, Digital Performer, Live. I really wouldn't reccoment Pro Tools for MIDI as that's not where its heart lives. I would be so bold as to say that for pure audio you're going to struggle to find something better at practically any price (Barring a serious high end studio). Which sequencer / DAW you choose depends on your working methodology and budget. Again a personal choice. 2. The Logic comment I made was about a very respected friend of mine who I'm not going to call out here, but you will certainly have heard his stuff if you've been around as long as you imply you have.. ;-) I certainly don't use Logic on a PC at present. 3. I hate to tell you this but not everyone on this board is in their 20s.. Or even early 30s. Some of us have actually had a long career doing this professionally. I did so for a while but due to starting a family and moving country I dropped back to "Serious Hobby" level, though I still produce & release tracks... 4. Speaking of which, to gain credability on a forum takes time. Showing up and trolling isn't going to do it. Sorry mate. Go search some of my posts on here, I like to try and be both informative & helpful, though I do take troll bait. That's one of my weaknesses. I also have the confidence to state when it's me personally doing something or if it's not. 5. I personally work on an 8 core dual clovertown machine that I built back in September. Yes it runs OSX, runs windows too, and actually even does both at the same time. I do this so I can have the choice of what ever tools I want to have to hand. Yes it's a luxury, so what.. :-> To see where I currently work check out this thread: http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=348799 I'm not mucking about, and I certainly havn't got time to come onto forums and lie in a vain attempt to boost my ego. Actually I'm regretting having taken this troll bait, but once again I can resist anything but temptation. 6. If you have the computational power and the budget I highly reccoment syncing Pro Tools to a MIDI sequencer of choice to handle your audio. The results are night and day for me, also once you've finished with the MIDI you can bounce it all in as audio into Pro Tools and Mix from there, or even take it to a "Big Room" to finish off or have someone else work on the mix with you. So to summarize, if you can you don't have to limit yourself to one tool or another, it's very possible to use two systems syncced together and gain something that id better than the sum of its parts. With that I bid you goodnight.

So you have a nice set up, so what. the fact you feel the need to put it up on the net is some kind of ego trip in itself. It wasnt troll bait as you call it, i was giving my opinion and im sure alot of people would have agreed with it, as an equal number would agree with yours. What im sick of is you regs or whatever the hell you call yourselves jumping down peoples throats at the first opertunity, trying to kick some knowledge in a condecending way. so you think your set up is the only set up that works and anyone who says differant is troll bait, thats bull man. you shoulda stayed away from my post in the first place and just given your own opinion about which was the best sequencer not try to give me the answers to a load of questions i either knew already or didnt need to discuss at this moment. people are allowed to give their opinions and i think even the most hardiest tech head would be forced to admit cubase is ARGUABLY the best sequencer, that is it is a member of a small number of sequencers which could be considered the best sequencer. Thats the point of forums, people post their opinions, not like i said EJay was the best sequencer was it.

quote:

Originally posted by Diginerd To see where I currently work check out this thread: http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=348799

Very interesting read and nice setup you have there.

Once/if I ever stop travelling, get married, settled down and buy a house etc etc then I'll be doing that kind of project myself....

One day... maybe tomorrow.

ok so all this "knowledge" and wonderful studios how about Diginerd and
Roberttodd post their best work for us to judge???

quote:

Originally posted by xenpro ok so all this "knowledge" and wonderful studios how about Diginerd and Roberttodd post their best work for us to judge???

Dude if you're gonna call somebody out on their shit, you gotta do it in a new thread. That way everyone see's it.

quote:

Originally posted by Roberttodd Not like i said EJay was the best sequencer was it.

Don't you dare touch eJay!


Many opinions, many (different) answers. However, the topicstarter got the help he needed I think. *Pad on the back for everyone*, now come along and we'll all do the badger dance once more, even though it's oldschool.

___________________

Storyteller Website | Storyteller @ Facebook | Storyteller @ Beatport | Storyteller @ Soundcloud | Stephen J. Kroos - Europa (Storyteller Remix)
Anthony Mea - Get It On (Storyteller Remix)

quote:

If less is more think about how much more more would be. -Frasier

Nuendo & Modern Cubase are very very closely related. They share the same audio engine & MIDI Engine. For Trance production you can consider them to be practically the same from a featureset point of view (Nuendo has a superset of features to Cubase, most / all of which are pracically useless to our cause IMO). Nuendo wins out for Audio & Video Post Production though.

Nuendo wins in one very important and far less documented area though.. It's QA Process appears to be significantly better than Cubases.. ie it's more reliable.

If you're buying and wish to go the steinberg route, Cubase should be more than enough for your needs, save the extra cash you'd spend on nuendo and go buy some decent plugins.

On a finaly troll response. That studio buildout thread was only created after I asked in a poll if anyone was interested in such a thing. I didn't just randomly post about "Look at me I'm buildiong a studio", it's something many people consider and it really is a lot of work.

Final final troll response. Go see the Promotion forum.

aight so digi posted something, now it's roberts turn...

step up if you wanna get hurt

Again, any sample productions Diginerd or Roberttodd???? maybe you both like hiding behind 800 word assays