The CUBASE 5 thread.. pros and cons. stay on topic!

[steveschizoid]

Originally Posted by steveschizoid

Are any of you using the External Effects much? I typically will mix with between 2 and 6 channels making the round trip. I am hoping Steinberg will add a preset menu that will assign your routing for you; in Cubase 4 you have to keep going back and assigning every channel - sometimes even when you haven't done anything to warrant it. For example say you just rendered a file and closed cubase, then decided to go right back to the same project. Sometimes the External fX will then have lost their return connections. I will soon be adding the new Aurora Audio 8 channel eQ, so I'll be sending 12 channels out at a time, and i'm wondering how the system as a whole will fare. Does anyone have any idea which system resources this taxes?

Is there really no one else who finds this irritating? Why isn't the routing saved with the project? I understand objecting (on principle) to the evident misrepresentation of "unlimited tracks," but this routing issue I would think would actually have a real impact upon more of us.

Anyone?

[kdm]

Originally Posted by steveschizoid

Is there really no one else who finds this irritating? Why isn't the routing saved with the project? I understand objecting (on principle) to the evident misrepresentation of "unlimited tracks," but this routing issue I would think would actually have a real impact upon more of us.

Anyone?

I use templates for each new project (my external routing is fairly constant) and routing is saved there, but at least having a preset system would be a huge benefit.

As far as routing disappearing when reopening a saved project, I haven't seen that yet, and hope I don't. My guess is it might be tied to audio device channel order either changing, or being misread as Nuendo opens the driver.

[captain caveman]

Originally Posted by Fredo

Please don't quote me the wrong way. There is a difference between wanting to use +200 midi tracks and needing +200 midi tracks.

I still refuse to understand that anyone would need a few hundreds midi tracks to make a good composition, just like I refuse to understand that anyone would need a few hundred of audio tracks to make a good sounding Music recording. I never said that it can't be easy, handy or that it allows you to be more productive ...

Fredo

Here's a video to help you understand....

YouTube - Orchestral Film Scoring Template with Bidule and DP

But you are right in saying that nobody absolutely needs to have a workflow setup that is advanced enough to cope with over 200 MIDI tracks. It is also equally correct to say that nobody absolutely needs to have Nuendo or Cubase because the same results can be accomplished with more/less work in any other application.

[Lawrence]

Now that's the first time I've seen a visual example where loading hundreds of midi tracks actually makes sense. A composer who has such a huge library of orchestral sounds doesn't want to be distracted by constantly loading sounds to audition, he would want them always ready to play.

So... in theory it seems that both sides of the debate were right. Nobody *needs* 2-300 tracks to make a composition but boy - as shown in that video - it sure comes in handy in that situation to keep things moving along. Thanks Caveman.

I don't have enough system memory to pull that off anyway so it's moot to me. : I wonder how many GB of instrument samples he has loaded there?

Now, where's the video where a guy has 500-999 audio tracks (or more) in one daw scoring a movie?

BTW, Is this Hans Zimmer scoring The Dark Knight with Cubendo? YouTube - Hans Zimmer scoring The Dark Knight

[stag]

Awesome. I didn´t have that much fun in long time. I need to go out more
Seriously,. Zimmer in action is inspiring to say the list.


Incidentally, It seems Zimmer is a beta tester.

[Fredo]

Originally Posted by stag

Incidentally, It seems Zimmer is a beta tester.

He is.


Fredo

[kdm]

Originally Posted by Fredo

Secondly, while you can build a template of that many tracks, it is safe to say that you will bump into many other problems.

Not true at all. Nuendo has been far more reliable here running my template with my external slaves routed back in via the instrument inputs than running video in post projects. I have only a few VSTis loaded locally in my templates. Midi tracks take no time to load.

The only problem with the template concept I've ever encountered is exporting a standard midi file of a template - Nuendo requries a ridiculous amount of time to export an SMF, if it doesn't lock up. Track archiving of 100 audio tracks is faster than an SMF export of 50 midi tracks. Makes no sense.

Originally Posted by Fredo

The Memory thing for example. And if you re-read the thread where my quote comes from, then you will see that I suggested that building different sets of instruments and loading those sets through track archive import makes much more sense. For 99% of the jobs, you don't need the orchestral setup *and* the reggae setup *and* the Dance setup *and* the Chill setup in one project.
It adds to the memory, it slows down the project, it increases the load times, it taxes the system, etc .... So it's better to only use what you need and then import any additional sets.

Fredo

Perhaps you are thinking the template idea implies loading all samples/VSTis in Nuendo locally, but that isn't the case for many of us that use a slave PC/Mac system.

Having *all* styles/synths/samples available on demand isn't necessarily practical, but getting as close to that as possible to what you need for a given film, game, or show definitely speeds up the workflow and creativity. Sometimes, that's a very simple setup, and other times it's much more complex.

I just did a mix of orchestral and jazz band ensemble for a show and had to switch back and forth between setups - the problem came when I needed to merge the two styles and had to mix and match templates - that was time consuming. Mixing orchestral with other styles is quite common and that increases the size of the default template.

[George Necola]

ok..

calm down. can we talk about cubase?

thank you

==> another 30minutes of my life wasted for your bs-offtopic-fredo-bashing...

[George Necola]

Fredo bashing/Steinberg bashing/general need of talking about your life

[dcwave]

Originally Posted by George Necola

ok..

calm down. can we talk about cubase?

thank you

==> another 30minutes of my life wasted for your bs-offtopic-fredo-bashing...

Deleting KDM's post where he gives an example of how he uses templates should have been left. It was good information and I don't recall it having anything specifically negative about Fredo in it.

[TAFKAT]

George,

What was the point of deleting the posts and then starting a new thread specifically for so called "bashing" ?

Why not just move the relative posts into the thread that you created, that would have had exactly the same effect on this thread, instead you have simply become Steinbergs new censor , congratulations.

So its O.K for the Steinberg reps and shills to flood the forum with spin , as they already have free reign on their own spaces, but end users responding to the spin are censored/deleted . The points being made were specific to comments made by Fredo himself, in a public arena , and were directly related to his myopic view of Cubendo and /or the user base , if they ended up in so called bashing it was specifically an end results of of him being held accountable for the comments made.

Either way, do what you will with this post , I can see now that open discussion here is a thing of the past..

[Sascha Franck]

I'm afraid I gotta agree with TAFKAT on this one.

- Sascha

[George Necola]

the point is, that we are talking about the pros and cons of cubase 5.

if you read the thread, I was mailing Steinberg to find out what the problem with the mac version is.

I do not censor. the thread has went off topic.

I am sorry for deleting too much information. I will be more carefull next time.

cheers

Originally Posted by TAFKAT

George,

What was the point of deleting the posts and then starting a new thread specifically for so called "bashing" ?

Why not just move the relative posts into the thread that you created, that would have had exactly the same effect on this thread, instead you have simply become Steinbergs new censor , congratulations.

So its O.K for the Steinberg reps and shills to flood the forum with spin , as they already have free reign on their own spaces, but end users responding to the spin are censored/deleted . The points being made were specific to comments made by Fredo himself, in a public arena , and were directly related to his myopic view of Cubendo and /or the user base , if they ended up in so called bashing it was specifically an end results of of him being held accountable for the comments made.

Either way, do what you will with this post , I can see now that open discussion here is a thing of the past..

[kdm]

Originally Posted by George Necola

the point is, that we are talking about the pros and cons of cubase 5.

if you read the thread, I was mailing Steinberg to find out what the problem with the mac version is.

I do not censor. the thread has went off topic.

I am sorry for deleting too much information. I will be more carefull next time.

cheers

Well, obviously moderating isn't as easy as hitting the delete button. My response was directly on topic and others were as well. Water under the bridge - not going to have a go at you for it.

In a broader sense though, I think the responses here show one negative against Cubase 5 (on topic btw) - users are very frustrated with the defensiveness and heavy moderation on the existing forums. Phone support often refers users back to the forums, so it's a bit of an endless cycle of banging one's head against a brick wall.

But the real reason behind it all is, imo, company communication and bug fixes - 18-24 months waiting for a fix that Reaper would have fixed in a week or two is crazy. I've adapted my workflow to bypass or drop problematic features (an ever growing list it seems); or use other apps where necessary, etc.

Overall, Nuendo and Cubase have enviable capabilities, but rather disappointing bug fix cycles, forums, and direct company support.

Ymmv, but that's been my steadily declining experience since moving from Logic/Paris to Cubase and Nuendo 7 years ago.

[TAFKAT]

Originally Posted by George Necola

the point is, that we are talking about the pros and cons of cubase 5.

if you read the thread, I was mailing Steinberg to find out what the problem with the mac version is.

I do not censor. the thread has went off topic.

I am sorry for deleting too much information. I will be more carefull next time.

cheers

Hey George ,

Cool.. :-)

BTW: What problems with the Mac version are you specifically referring to , if you are referring to the comparative performance between the MAC and PC version, there is another thread here this week directly related to that where I posted a link to a stack of information about the finer detail.. Here

You won't get anything from Steinberg past spin Mate.. :-(

[h4nc0]

Originally Posted by kdm

But the real reason behind it all is, imo, company communication and bug fixes - 18-24 months waiting for a fix that Reaper would have fixed in a week or two is crazy.

Exactly my point as well. I wasn't bashing Fredo at all as I think he's just stuck in the middle getting all the blames. What I've heard was that Steinberg did hire more programmers to shorten the update cycle, but that obviously ain't happening so far. Let's face it. The app is bloated and buggy.

[Jovas]

Well the window skipping madness is a big CON for me in Cubase 5, that's for sure!

I'm currently working on a project with BeatDesigner, and i just can't edit it anymore cause it is out of screen. I can't resize it anymore cause those parts are out of screen. Beatdesigner can't be always on top.

It doesn't matter if I start a new project, it will be displayed the same way. The only reason why I'm still working in Cubase is because it sounds so damn smooth. If these kind of rediculous problems still exist in the next update, I will most likely get a new dongle, sell the programs and find a better solution.

Also, entering specific automation values in the info bar for third party plugin's is in alot of cases not possible. Sure most of You guys work around, but these kind of facts are too essential for me. It makes it almost impossible to finish a decent project within a decent timeframe.

[George Necola]

Originally Posted by h4nc0

Exactly my point as well. I wasn't bashing Fredo at all as I think he's just stuck in the middle getting all the blames. What I've heard was that Steinberg did hire more programmers to shorten the update cycle, but that obviously ain't happening so far. Let's face it. The app is bloated and buggy.

with the big chance that you guys think i sold my soul to steinberg, i have to say that i use cubase 5 a lot ( i mixed and recorded 3 demos and 2 major releases on cubase 5). I dont use post features or 500 midi tracks. I use 3rd party and expierenced problems with waves, melodyne (content was playing too late) and psp84.

I had other problems with samplitude 9.

I saw nice bugs in pt hd 7.x.x

and logic was super damned buggy at the beginning.

Update cycle should be shorter.

I dont protect steinberg, i just put down my personal experiences with cubase 5.

[captain caveman]

Originally Posted by George Necola

ok..

calm down. can we talk about cubase?

thank you

==> another 30minutes of my life wasted for your bs-offtopic-fredo-bashing...

Ok, no problem. I do think that at least from your personal time management perspective you'd be better off banning Fredo though.

From a logical point of view too, the conversation about Cubase 5 should include the customer support angle which is intertwined with the forums of both Nuendo and Cubase, seeing as they share the same code base. Effective moderation and communication of issues therefore affects the overall picture and speed of fixes.

So if Fredo says something worth bashing then either his post should get deleted or he's going to get bashed, he is one of the public faces of Steinberg, official or otherwise, after all.

Anyway, peace George you do have a tough role here as long as Fredo's account stays open.

[captain caveman]

Originally Posted by h4nc0

I wasn't bashing Fredo at all as I think he's just stuck in the middle getting all the blames. What I've heard was that Steinberg did hire more programmers to shorten the update cycle, but that obviously ain't happening so far.

Yup, Steinberg have adopted the SCRUM programming technique which should mean faster updates once it is fully adopted.

As far as updates are concerned, there is a Reaper user who used a lot more MIDI outputs than Reaper could handle (and the vast majority of people use) when he first purchased it. When he highlighted this, instead of months of defensive twaddle on the Reaper forums telling him he shouldn't be using that amount of MIDI outputs they just fixed it and increased the number.

Fitting analogy and customer service at it's best. If certain moderators had filtered out this request then he wouldn't be a happy Reaper user posting everywhere about how fantastic Reaper is.

Users posting about Reaper btw is the major marketing outlet of Cockos and they have gained some great ground doing this alone - although now they are bundling Reaper with stuff too. It's an avenue that can easily be ruined though by the wrong guy in the wrong place saying the wrong things to the right people..... but it's clearly effective and creates both interest and sales when this PR outlet is managed well.

"Any port in a storm" and all that.

[Bob800]

Can Cubase 5 take advantage yet of Mac Pro´s all 8-cores?

[Chrisbeuermann]

Hello bob800,

The current status is this Information about using Cubase 4 and Nuendo 4 with 8-core systems :: Knowledge Base :: Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH

Things will hopefully change in the near future regarding this. Please notice that Hypertreading with the new I7 CPU's is also something were we are working on. Hopefully we can combine this all together with an update.

Cheers,

Chris

[TAFKAT]

Originally Posted by Bob800

Can Cubase 5 take advantage yet of Mac Pro´s all 8-cores?

Hey Bob800,

The information posted at the Steinberg site is inaccurate if not misleading in regards to the real state of play of cross platform scalability, and their information regarding Hyperthreading on the i7's is entirely incorrect.

There have been many reports from end users and DAW builders in regards to the performance gains attributed to Hyperthreading on the new generation chips, all conveniently ignored by Steinberg , who have not provided one quantifiable or qualified reason why they maintain that stance.

Check out the threads at the Cubendo Forum Here and Here and Here lots of information directly related to the performance on the new Mac Pro's on both OSX and Vista 64 , i7's, Dual Xeon Nehalems, etc..

[Chrisbeuermann]

Hello Bob800,

We can you only give the official news/status regarding our products. Please notice that we only release news about new technoligies and our products when we have tested it by our selves. All other reports are not official and not supported by us.

Cheers,

Chris

[muziksculp]

The Steinberg knowledge base article refers to 8-core systems with Cubase 4, Nuendo 4, and I'm guessing this also applies to Cubase 5. I'm also guessing it is referring to 8-core systems on both Mac and PC O.Systems.

Hopefully this will be fixed in the 'Near Future'. It all depends what 'Near Future' means, another month, or, six months, maybe another year, or two ?

It's very sad to see blazing fast HW, yet poor software support for it !

[TAFKAT]

Originally Posted by Chrisbeuermann

Hello Bob800,

We can you only give the official news/status regarding our products. Please notice that we only release news about new technoligies and our products when we have tested it by our selves. All other reports are not official and not supported by us.

Cheers,

Chris

What is there left to test ?

I have had working i7 Hyperthreading systems since November last year, I dare say Steinberg should have been privy to the technology even beforehand , so what exactly are you testing ?

The true situation in regards to cross platform x-scaling has been in the public domain for over 18 months, and you can't even acknowledge the good, that it is working incredibly well on XP/Vista.

You are right about one thing tho, all of the information is unsupported by you , thank God, it is supported by those of us who can provide honest , accurate and quantifiable information to the Cubendo end users , while you on the other hand cannot seem to offer anything past spin.

[Sascha Franck]

Originally Posted by Chrisbeuermann

Hello bob800,

The current status is this[...]

The short (and correct) answer would've been "no". As easy as that. It's simply something you corproate folks need to learn about. And yes, I'm serious.

[StereoPari]

Originally Posted by TAFKAT

You are right about one thing tho, all of the information is unsupported by you , thank God, it is supported by those of us who can provide honest , accurate and quantifiable information to the Cubendo end users , while you on the other hand cannot seem to offer anything past spin.

It's exactly this type of "anti-spin" and OT rhetoric which keeps me thinking there is actually a reason for some of you guys getting your posts regularly deleted --on BOTH here at Gearslutz and the SB forums.

I mean, some people can really focus on bashing the moderators, support and bugzzz if they want...And I'm all for opinions from fellow users, but...usually they're not moderating or marketing an "alternative site", nor are they using "SteinBan" as their avatar.

Are you guys actually using Cubase 5? It's probably the most stable first release ever.

(Yes, I know about the automation bug in version 5.0.1)

[TAFKAT]

Right,

So tell me StereoPari , is it ?

Why do you consider this OT ?

The information is detailed information in regards to cross platform performance of Cubendo 4 /5

Someone asked about the state of play in regards to C5 performance on MacPro's, I linked to quantifiable , qualified information in regards to that query that is far more detailed and easily qualified by anyone who actually uses Cubase 5 , the information is posted at a user run and moderated forum that has combined the end users of Cubase and Nuendo, which are essentially the same application, instead of being segregated by the parent company as are the official forums.

My response to the rep was in direct response to his attempt to dismiss the information , as expected.

I am not marketing anything here Mate, do you see a link in my signature - unlike plenty of others here , I am simply giving Cubase end users an alternative information source to the spin , do with it what you will..

So because I am a moderator at another forum , and actually use the same recognisable login and do not hide behind an alternate cyber alias on this forum , in your opinion my opinion has no right to be expressed here.. ?

I'll let George or any of the other mods decide that.

Do we actually use Cubase 5 ?

What kind of a question is that, read the information , point to where Cubase 5 is cast in a negative light , save the spin for the reps please .. ;-)

BTW: I could ask you the same question, as I have never seen you post anywhere but here , so I would expect that if you were someone who was actively using the application and contributing to the online Cubase community that you would be participating at forums focussed on that community, yet you are not registered at any of the official Steinberg forums under that name.

So who are you at the other forums out of interest , and if you are registered at Cubendo as well under another name , then please, don't be shy..

[StereoPari]

Originally Posted by TAFKAT

Right,

So tell me StereoPari , is it ?

Why do you consider this OT ?

The information is detailed information in regards to cross platform performance of Cubendo 4 /5

As I said, the bash itself is OT. But there is usually also an on topic portion included, so it's a mixture of the two. There was a reason why I quoted only the end part of your post.

Also, not everything was directly related to your posts. Yours seem to be sincerely more oriented towards discussion than bashing. Yet I decided to quote the post in question, since it was one of the newest containing OT remarks about Fredo.
(another reason being that I'm not yet aware of how to quote multiple posts.)

In the post I referred to "you guys", and while that expression may seem a bit vague, I'm quite sure the writers themselves also know who I'm talking about. Even you know that.

I don't yet have an account on SB forums, nor do I ever plan on registering in your "rebellious" Cubendo site, main reason being that most of your discussions there seem to somehow revolve around the following topics:

- Fredo sux
- Chris sux
- Support sux
- Low-latency multicore sux on Mac
- 500 audio tracks sux

Also the following things might suck:

- OMF, compared to an AVID / PT or FCP system
- Solo / Mute in version 4 (relates to a specific workflow)
- Video truncation in version 4 (relates to specific codecs)

So...you guys always say "you're just helping fellow users". Well, in a way you are. After all, you're providing information. Only all of the information you provide seems to be of purely negative nature, and is always somehow unneededly reactionary against the SB forum or its moderators.

And like lots of other online DAW activists, you have your own youtube channel with a couple of "helpful tutorials". Only these "tutorials" aren't really oriented towards giving any helpful tips or useful tricks you could incorporate into your workflow.
Rather, all of the videos are named as "bug....bug...bug" and focus purely on demonstrating some kind of A PROBLEM.

No Cubase 5 review, no Cubase 5 tips or anything like that you would expect from a "user site"...no, only a video demonstrating one Cubase 5 BUG.

So I guess it's a fine line between a couple of angry ex-Nuendo users who pop up here with some kind of an "argument" or vendetta against SB and a bunch of current users who are just not so interested in seeing the bright side of their current DAW.

You can think of C5 being a release containing an automation bug, or you can think of C5 as being probably the most stable first release ever. Any way you want to look at it.