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

[Bob800]

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.

Thanks for the answer. Too bad though. Well hopefully soon Steinberg can figure this out .

[captain caveman]

Originally Posted by StereoPari

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.

I don't think that you and I are that different in our objectives. I am in a third camp of Cubase users that you didn't describe there - someone who does see the upside of Cubase and recommends it to people because it is a great product.

It's a product that it so good that I think it is a crying shame that Steinberg allow their PR image to be tarnished by not having a bit of a re-shuffle.

Hats off to them for taking on board the slow update issue and implementing the new programming regime, that must take a lot of work and planning to do and I hope it works out for them. Weirdly though there is no planning and work involved in removing people from small internet roles where they do more harm than good from a PR perspective and probably lose more sales than they create.

I only speak out because I care. You seem to have embarked on a Cubase PR campaign since you joined Gearslutz for whatever reason, but you're better off dealing with the source of the fire IMO.

[LEX]

Originally Posted by captain caveman

I don't think that you and I are that different in our objectives. I am in a third camp of Cubase users that you didn't describe there - someone who does see the upside of Cubase and recommends it to people because it is a great product.

It's a product that it so good that I think it is a crying shame that Steinberg allow their PR image to be tarnished by not having a bit of a re-shuffle.

Hats off to them for taking on board the slow update issue and implementing the new programming regime, that must take a lot of work and planning to do and I hope it works out for them. Weirdly though there is no planning and work involved in removing people from small internet roles where they do more harm than good from a PR perspective and probably lose more sales than they create.

I only speak out because I care. You seem to have embarked on a Cubase PR campaign since you joined Gearslutz for whatever reason, but you're better off dealing with the source of the fire IMO.

Well said and very true.

The defenders until the very end often can't see beyond their own nose because it is too far up someones butt.

WE seek truth and honesty because we are tired of being told one thing, and given another.
In SB's attempt to quiet us through banning and calling us "troublemakers", has only made our voices LOUDER.
All in all, if it hadn't been for our loud vocal complaints, there are alot of things that would have been left.

LEX

[Lawrence]

I think it's time to let it go. I too get frustrated from companies that don't listen to what I think they should do. Eventually I just move on.

Steinberg is no different. If they banned me from their forums for something I thought was an over-reaction to a valid complaint I'd probably just stop using their products - or move in that direction slowly - and move on with my life.

Having a signature line that brings a personal disagreement with the mods from the Steiny forum to every post you make here is ... well... for what reason exactly?

No offense intended but ...

Banned From Nuendo.com for this:
And as Chris Beuermann mentioned, I'll quote,

Quote:
When somebody should have a problem with one of the mods then they can write it down on our forums.
I did and I got banned for it.

Seems a bit overboard to me, like you can't let it go. Or it seems like you are still looking for people to take sides on an old debate. How long ago did that happen anyway? Their forum is not a support site. They cannot ban you from real support for a product you paid for ... afaik. It's a forum...

I'm not taking sides so please don't call me a Steinberg lackey... I just happen to not care one way or another that you got banned from the Steinberg user forum.

No offense and I'm not seeking an argument. People that piss me off that much (as those mods apparently do you) don't get to use up that much of my energy. I prefer to erase them from memory and move on.

[TAFKAT]

Originally Posted by StereoPari

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.)

There was no OT mention of that individual in my responses, and from what I witnessed in the recent exchange , any comment from other members were directly to him and directly on topic to what he expressed..

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:

I find that a little hard to believe that the only public forum where you seem to want to interact with Cubendo users is here , and with a now very recognisable m.o.

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

Right,

Tell me how you are actually privy to most of the above when they are in areas only available to registered users ?

I'll skip the first 2 unless you are the individuals in question, so lets see about the rest..

Support - is known to be an absolute running joke globally, while there are pockets of good support personal , for the vast majority, support sux .

Low latency MP performance on Mac - does indeed suck, as confirmed by some of the most knowledgeable and respected cross platform end users in Steinbergs stable who have the honesty and integrity to state that publicly. This seems to be a bit of a bugbear of yours. I have seen you on numerous occasions here attempt to dismiss this as 90% bullshite or internet hearsay. I have the evidence, you are spinning the line for Steinberg , Why ? What possible benefit is it for the end users wanting an accurate assessment to what the state of play really is.

500 Audio Tracks - read the thread there again , oh thats right you don't have access to it unless you are registered. The main point that was made in regards to the 500 track limit was that it was in direct contradiction to what the product was marketed as having, not about the actual limit. The "who needs 500 track" commentary was fueled by you and your like as a now familiar attempt to shift the focus , not us - see I can place you in a collective as well.. ;-)

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)

- OMF - Correct it does, your point ?

- Solo / Mute - Nice attempt at dismissing it as irrelevant to most who don't have that specific workflow. Tell me this, if it was irrelevant, then why did Steinberg delay development of N5, and spent another 10 months recoding the seq 4 engine to address that issue if it was only effecting a small proportion of end users ?

Video Truncation- Again , trying to dismiss it as irrelevant to the majority , the above answer can be repeated again in relation to this bug.

BTW: You forgot to note all of the above is still in seq5 !

Ohh before I forget the absolute farce that was the so called new automation engine in C5, of course there is no need to go into detail, as it didn't effect you and the fix was simply returning the old behaviour back to the old C4 automation, with a now dummy shiny GUI.

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.

The forum is a collective of users from both camps, and the often negative signal to noise is a direct reflection of the frustration of the end users, that mirror the official forums for the most part. This is a direct result of Steinberg and their representatives continuing m.o. Captain Cavemans response could have been words right out of my mouth .. :-)

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

Glass Half Full / Half Empty..

Personally I look at as a good release overall, but with all of the above still swept under the carpet, now for you they are a non issue , for many they will remain on the agenda until they are fixed, which will in turn benefit all Cubendo end users.

What exactly are you offering to the greater good of the end users by continually trying to dimiss the issues as non event or internet hearsay , you do come across as a shill at times , and I am sorry, but I do not believe you would reserve your online contributions here.

[Ermz]

Wow, so much beef over a little DAW.

Honestly, I think when an application causes such widespread heartache it really isn't worth bothering oneself with. I've been a user since the SX2 days and eagerly await the arrival of Studio One so I can jump ship. The strides being made by PT and now even Logic, are simply not even being matched, much less superseded by Steinberg. It's time to let go and move on to tools that are less limiting to your workflow.

The way the last few pages read makes it feel like there's some guerrilla war being fought against the system. A little melodramatic..

[Trebor Flow]

C5 has to be the most stable first release of a DAW in the history of DAW's.

It's so stable it's a joke.

Amazing!



Treeb's

[StereoPari]

Originally Posted by TAFKAT

There was no OT mention of that individual in my responses, and from what I witnessed in the recent exchange , any comment from other members were directly to him and directly on topic to what he expressed..

You are right, it was Chris you were talking about at that time, not Fredo. So the OT mention was just directed to another person.

(Admittedly imo this is getting a little OT in general, however I will answer at least this once)

I find that a little hard to believe that the only public forum where you seem to want to interact with Cubendo users is here , and with a now very recognisable m.o.

Believe what you will, I'm speaking the truth. You might even find it hard to believe there are users who do not spend very much time on the web, but I know a lot of them.

Tell me how you are actually privy to most of the above when they are in areas only available to registered users ?

Pointless question. I already said I'm not a registered user.

Support - is known to be an absolute running joke globally, while there are pockets of good support personal , for the vast majority, support sux.

1. How can you even know what's the "global" support like? (Just asking, not trying to be a pri#k) According to whom?

2. Compared to...what? Logic support? (Same as above, just asking)

Low latency MP performance on Mac - does indeed suck, as confirmed by some of the most knowledgeable and respected cross platform end users in Steinbergs stable who have the honesty and integrity to state that publicly. This seems to be a bit of a bugbear of yours. I have seen you on numerous occasions here attempt to dismiss this as 90% bullshite or internet hearsay. I have the evidence, you are spinning the line for Steinberg , Why ? What possible benefit is it for the end users wanting an accurate assessment to what the state of play really is.

You're referring to a conversation we had a while ago, where I quite clearly expressed my thoughts on the matter. The context of my posts were back then related to the fact that many people do use Cubase professionally on a mac, regardless of your cross-platform benchmarks.

Why did I say so? Exactly because any sane end user needing an "accurate assessment" -that's really a paradox, since this is the internet where everything is about hysteria- would be better off with that information also included.

(If I remember correctly, the thread was started by a guy who asked what would be the best mac for C5. He got a reply which main content was "don't use Cubase on mac".)

500 Audio Tracks - read the thread there again , oh thats right you don't have access to it unless you are registered.

Your sarcastic comment is pointless. Not a registered user, I already said that.

The main point that was made in regards to the 500 track limit was that it was in direct contradiction to what the product was marketed as having, not about the actual limit. The "who needs 500 track" commentary was fueled by you and your like as a now familiar attempt to shift the focus , not us - see I can place you in a collective as well.. ;-)

You are totally wrong in your assumptions. Whatever this is about, it's not me or anyone I'd know. Please try to understand that I'm not the only one disagreeing with you. If you want to read my comments about the 500 track limit, they're on this thread. Someone here said "who needs 500", LEX started picking on him and making unclear claims, I asked for clarification, and reported what I know.

FWIW, yes:

1. Steiny Marketing is not accurate since they market it as unlimited and it's only 500
2. To you this is a LIE which must be addressed immediately
3. To me that's misleading advertising, yet a pretty mild example of misleading specification-related marketing the audio companies generally do (just look around you).
4. Yes, it's still not accurate.

- OMF - Correct it does, your point ?

I just said your topics seem to revolve around it. OMF -what it really is? An "open" standard which isn't really that open (it's practically an AVID/PT legacy), or not even a standard but rather a proprietary translator which sometimes causes situations where small changes in equipment can cause major incompatibility problems. That's why every decent picture editing facility has to know what is exactly needed for a smooth transition to a particular audio app. Ever heard of OMF cookbooks? Give detailed information about what kind of an OMF you need and you're usually 95% safe. I've exported dozens of OMFs succesfully into version 4/5 and only maybe twice there has been a problem. And even then it's been nothing which couldn't be fixed.

Again:

1. Not saying it couldn't be better, yet
2. Don't really think it's that logical to call it "broken", nor do I see any real relevance in uploading a youtube video which "demonstrates an OMF problem" in some random project. There are a million more useful and better ways to "pass on information from users to users", if that's what you're really, really after.
3. Repeat #1.

- Solo / Mute - Nice attempt at dismissing it as irrelevant to most who don't have that specific workflow. Tell me this, if it was irrelevant, then why did Steinberg delay development of N5, and spent another 10 months recoding the seq 4 engine to address that issue if it was only effecting a small proportion of end users ?

I did not dismiss it as irrelevant. But nice attempt at putting words in my mouth anyway. What I was talking about of course was that specific workflows really suffer from the bug. Yet there are some ways around it for those who really consider it as a total showstopper, and gathering that most of the users don't even seem to know about its existence, I'd say it's pretty truthful to state it as a bug which is really a problem only to those who work in a certain way -and whose numbers are really not that many in a larger context.

Again:
1. Not saying it isn't a bug -it is a bug and it must be addressed -I'm certainly not trying to dismiss it like you say

2. Some people like to dwell on it
3. It was/is deeply embedded into the program code. If they've spent 10 months fixing it, they're probably trying to fix it no matter how hard it is. So how long some small group of online activists really plan on agonizing over all the updates where it was not addressed, and bash some SB mods for that? You'd think they'd have long ago switched to something like PTHD for good, if they really have been suffering from the bug every day "for years". But there seems to be this small bunch of "online pros" who write the same hate-mails on every forum. "I'm a Nuendo user, f%& the support, f&% the mods, f&% the company, f%& the updates, alt forum 4ever".

If they're really using the program (and I think they are) and really feel that way, it seems like it must be still the coolest DAW for them -since none of that "shi%" they speak about on the forums seems to be enough for making that simple switch. I used ProTools for two years but eventually settled for Cubase, yet I still think PT is a good DAW.

4. Repeat #1.

Video Truncation- Again , trying to dismiss it as irrelevant to the majority , the above answer can be repeated again in relation to this bug.

Totally incorrect. I am not trying to dismiss it. Also, please understand there is a difference between saying "specific workflows" and "specific codecs". Workflows emphasize particular users, but specific codecs are, well, specific codecs. The post is getting so long I think it's wiser to give a short answer to this.

See my answer regarding OMF (change accordingly) -if you're really doing post-production, you're not trying to work blindly anyway, and just wait for "some video" from the picture department. Instead, you need to tell them what kind of a file you exactly need. That's the standard procedure in my area anyway. You know a codec which causes problems, you keep it off your transfer protocols. There are even a couple of pretty straighforward workarounds for it (e.g. tell the editor to add a few minutes of black to the end of file, etc) FWIW...

1. Not saying it isn't a bug -it is a bug and it must be addressed -I'm certainly not trying to dismiss it like you say.

2. Still, good planning and clear instructions...blah..blah..

3. See #1

Ohh before I forget the absolute farce that was the so called new automation engine in C5, of course there is no need to go into detail, as it didn't effect you and the fix was simply returning the old behaviour back to the old C4 automation, with a now dummy shiny GUI.

Oh yes. When they changed the automation behavior for version 5, a few activist naysayers expressed their disappointment for Cubase dropping its industry-standard automation. The new automation was now crippled, and not as good as in C4. And when the automation behavior gets changed back to the usual way, it's just a farce. It's a disaster. They can't get anything right.

The forum is a collective of users from both camps, and the often negative signal to noise is a direct reflection of the frustration of the end users, that mirror the official forums for the most part. This is a direct result of Steinberg and their representatives continuing m.o.

There are no "both camps" on the forum in such a matter. At least not in the way you're portraying. This is the "short" answer. You're basically overlooking the fact that the internet forums are usually the first place to be only for those people who are currently either 1. active online users 2. or, as the more common story is, just general users who are "lacking" something and thus seek some kind of advice. In a way, usually people only start searching when they have some kind of a problem regarding their setup. They do not know which mic should they buy, they don't know how to patch a cable in order to get "that sound", they get an error message with their DAW, they're searching for the best mix headphones, etc....so they want opinions, need help and ask advice on the forums.

It's all oriented towards problem-solving. Proportionally there's much, much more "problems" and help requests on the internet compared to what is happening in real life -since most people do not show up on the forums just to announce that everything is going good for them and that their gear fulfills everything they need. No. When people are in that state of mind, they are usually busy actually doing stuff.

(Ahh the computer forums..that's where almost all the people seem to have some kind of a problem. Why? Because when everything's working for you, you're not that interested in searching for "advice" about the current drivers, etc, etc...same goes for DAWs...same goes for almost ALL..)

Captain Cavemans response could have been words right out of my mouth .. :-)

I liked it too. So...

Glass Half Full / Half Empty..
Personally I look at as a good release overall, but with all of the above still swept under the carpet, now for you they are a non issue , for many they will remain on the agenda until they are fixed, which will in turn benefit all Cubendo end users. What exactly are you offering to the greater good of the end users by continually trying to dimiss the issues as non event or internet hearsay , you do come across as a shill at times , and I am sorry, but I do not believe you would reserve your online contributions here.

I did not say these things were non-issues. And I am glad we agree on Cubase 5 being a good release overall. In fact, I think we probably agree on the most part. But one thing we disagree about is the balance of conversation. You're the watchdog. I'm just a normal, happy C5 user on holiday. My point. Balance. Well, the post got very long -this is all I have to say.

[MartinHB]

Any chance of a Cubase user on mac joting down their thoughts, user experiences. Im aware it runs less good on Mac, but how less is what I would like to know. Im seriously considering buying it. I have a PC as well but my Euphonix controllers wont run on PC so it would have to be on the Mac. Logic 9 has just been released and it still has the same creaky old audio engine so Cubase has now just moved up the ladder on my shopping list.

Any opinions good or bad would be appreciated.

As for you guys with all your personal stuff.I understand emotions are high, but is there any chance this thread could get back on track about Cubase its self Be a man and ditch the nasties, thanks

[TheMarqueeYears]

Originally Posted by MartinHB

Any chance of a Cubase user on mac joting down their thoughts, user experiences. Im aware it runs less good on Mac, but how less is what I would like to know. Im seriously considering buying it. I have a PC as well but my Euphonix controllers wont run on PC so it would have to be on the Mac. Logic 9 has just been released and it still has the same creaky old audio engine so Cubase has now just moved up the ladder on my shopping list.

Any opinions good or bad would be appreciated.

As for you guys with all your personal stuff.I understand emotions are high, but is there any chance this thread could get back on track about Cubase its self Be a man and ditch the nasties, thanks

Yo Martin

Seems where on the same thought pattern .... I too was hoping Logic 9 would get a new audio engine/ re-code, the Logic fan boy club refuse to take off their rose tinted glasses and see all audio related problems/limitations in Logic are related to the "bolt" on audio objects from 1990's !

I bought Cubase 5 to track and mix with (I still use Logic LP8 to compose) and I can tell you it is fantastic for audio, as it has the Nuendo engine.

I built a PC to run it and it does run like a dream on a PC 101% rock solid and the audio sounds pristine and superb.

However - I also would like to buy a new Intel Mac so I am also interested how well Cubase 5 runs on a Mac.

TMY

[MartinHB]

Hey Marquee,

yah, never seen anything quite like it. I thought the Ableton fanboys were the biggest Kool aid drinkers you could find. But nah, the reek of Logic/Apple fanboysim is strong, practically Jedi Knight proportions. When I think of it now, the Abes actually had something to jump up and down about, quite a lot actually. I believe its the same for Cubase users, although you wouldnt think it from this thread. You know Marquee, I bought Logic only five weeks ago. I admit I didn't read much about it. But I genuinely thought Logic 8 would have all the elastic audio, a rewritten audio engine, smooth snappy operation etc. When i installed and started using it I was totally shocked and it absaloutely felt and is really old liek code from ten years ago. I knew an update would happen this year, and I absolutely without any shadow of a doubt thought the software would have been overhauled for version 9, an dthats the reason I was prepared to stick with it. Im absolutely flabbergasted at the P*** poor update. Absolutely nothing of interest to me because I've been using that stuff for years which I realise is a selfish kind of perspective, but I cant help that really, an dit makes me see this update for what ir really is. Their excited about audio quantise. I was using that on a pro tools rig I owned in 2001 via beat detective, then I started using Ableton Live in 2002. vari speed audio doesnt excite me in the slightest... I just wanted a modern audio engine becasue I know the difference now. But I may have to stay where I am, really not sure yet.

ATT CUbase users: Go check out Logic. Youll be running back to Cubase within a week after having to deal with 1999 style audio engine. The grass is definitely not greener elsewhere

I know Cubase will run ace on my PC, and I know the feature set will do me nicely and of course theres its modern audio engine. Not the most cutting edge but years ahead of Logic. I Just wouldn't be able to use my controllers :(. So, leaves me with a cliff edge decision to use Cubase on my Mac,and from what Ive read the prospect doesn't excite me. However, I am already toying with the idea of selling up the entire Mac/logic/euphonix system and going back to my PC which has served me very well. I just dont think I could face dealing with Logics archaic audio engine for the next two (maybe more) years, its to many steps back from what Im used to. SO perhaps a Cubase/mackie controller option might be something I should look at.

Decisions decisions.

How about a Cubase Mac user dishing the deal. Honesty would be greatly appreciated.

[TheMarqueeYears]

the reek of Logic/Apple fanboysim is strong, practically Jedi Knight proportions

LOL - I nearly spat my coffee out.

For me you are a breath of fresh air on this forum - you can see it as it is and your not afraid to say it - plus you refuse to be bullied. Good for you

I have lost a few nights sleep over this shit, I really wanted to go the Mac/Euphonix/ Logic route as it looks great on paper.


I have used Creator/Emagic for over 20 years ...!!

I just got to the point of watching my friends on Cubase 4 and seeing Logic was living on past glory.

I still use Logic to write music because I love the score and EXS24 and MIDI (the bit Logic has always been great at) and I can touch type music with Logic.

But for tracking, editing and mixing audio - well .... sheesh! I was recommended to try out Cubase 5 and WOW what a smooth, professional "modern" audio engine - you can toggle record in and out with 48 24/96 audio tracks armed and the things doesn't even blink!!

I have built a quadcore PC to run it - and it runs like a dream as it was coded originally for PC.

Best

TMY

[Fredo]

Originally Posted by MartinHB

I Just wouldn't be able to use my controllers :(.

If you have one MAC in your network, you will be able to use your all your Euphonix controllers on your PC.

In our studio's, we have 5 Nuendo workstations, all on PC, and we use the Euphonix Mix and Control on all of them. The one MAC in our network runs the Eucon application, and since all other workstations and controllers are on the same network, they work perfectly together.

Fredo

[redroom]

Originally Posted by TheMarqueeYears

LOL - I nearly spat my coffee out.

For me you are a breath of fresh air on this forum - you can see it as it is and your not afraid to say it - plus you refuse to be bullied. Good for you

I have lost a few nights sleep over this shit, I really wanted to go the Mac/Euphonix/ Logic route as it looks great on paper.


I have used Creator/Emagic for over 20 years ...!!

I just got to the point of watching my friends on Cubase 4 and seeing Logic was living on past glory.

I still use Logic to write music because I love the score and EXS24 and MIDI (the bit Logic has always been great at) and I can touch type music with Logic.

But for tracking, editing and mixing audio - well .... sheesh! I was recommended to try out Cubase 5 and WOW what a smooth, professional "modern" audio engine - you can toggle record in and out with 48 24/96 audio tracks armed and the things doesn't even blink!!

I have built a quadcore PC to run it - and it runs like a dream as it was coded originally for PC.

Best

TMY

Im with ya and everything you said except the bit about originally coded on Pc
that part is nothing more than rubbish.Yes Cubase in some areas performs better
on the Windows platform but this has nothing to do with Cubase being written for
Pc and then ported over to Mac.

[kdm]

Originally Posted by MartinHB

However, I am already toying with the idea of selling up the entire Mac/logic/euphonix system and going back to my PC which has served me very well. I just dont think I could face dealing with Logics archaic audio engine for the next two (maybe more) years, its to many steps back from what Im used to. SO perhaps a Cubase/mackie controller option might be something I should look at.

I would consider Fredo's suggestion of running a Mac for Eucon, though if you don't already have a Mac, that's an added expense (a Mac Mini would do fine there).

I don't run Cubase/Nuendo on a Mac, so I can only offer what I've heard from some Nuendo/Mac users - performance isn't on par with a similar PC/WinXP system, but if you really want a Mac, I don't think you'll suffer noticeably for it. There are plenty of Nuendo/Cubase Mac users out there with few problems.

I still think it would be cheaper to get a low end Mac mini for Eucon and stick with the PC for Cubase, esp. since you seem to prefer staying with PC anyway.

I would research the MC Control/Mix reports from recent purchasers though. I know early runs had quality issues with faders, touch screen and jog wheel, but recent units may have improved significantly.

I hear you on Logic. I used to use Logic on the PC side, and audio was a pain then - hate to hear it hasn't improved that much; and I've heard the same from current Logic users (mainly midi guys that tolerate the audio side, or just use ProTools for audio).

That's one area Cubase has an advantage over the rest of the market (other issues aside) - both audio *and* midi are quite advanced. The lawn definitely isn't greener with any DAW vs. the others - just certain patches of grass are better or worse kept here and vs. other apps.

[George Necola]

this was and is a thread about Cubase 5 pros and cons.

not about logic or mac or pc...

get back to your favourite DAW and make/record/mix some music.

back to topic please.

[TheMarqueeYears]

Originally Posted by redroom

Im with ya and everything you said except the bit about originally coded on Pc
that part is nothing more than rubbish.Yes Cubase in some areas performs better
on the Windows platform but this has nothing to do with Cubase being written for
Pc and then ported over to Mac.

Oh OK never new that - and actually that's great news as I would like to run Cubase 5 on a new Intel Mac

Thanks
TMY

[kdm]

Originally Posted by George Necola

this was and is a thread about Cubase 5 pros and cons.

not about logic or mac or pc...

get back to your favourite DAW and make/record/mix some music.

back to topic please.

I think you missed the "how to use Eucon with Cubase", followed by "why cubase has advantages over Logic (i.e. "pros and cons") part of this conversation George.

Maybe this thread has burned itself out.

[TAFKAT]

Originally Posted by StereoPari

(Admittedly imo this is getting a little OT in general, however I will answer at least this once)

This is getting off topic again, so I'll try and be quick..

Believe what you will, I'm speaking the truth. You might even find it hard to believe there are users who do not spend very much time on the web, but I know a lot of them.

This is about you , not anyone else, and you spend a hell of a lot of time here expressing you views on Cubendo , while not bothering to participate with the community elsewhere , so you say, so yes I do find that hard to believe , but I couldn't care less either way.

Pointless question. I already said I'm not a registered user.

Not pointless at all. You have expressed an opinion on the content and vibe of the commentary on the forum that you have no access to , the point being that if you do not have access , how can you pose an opinion.., that is rhetorical btw.

1. How can you even know what's the "global" support like? (Just asking, not trying to be a pri#k) According to whom?

2. Compared to...what? Logic support? (Same as above, just asking)

Easy , by communicating and interacting with the cubendo community from around the globe on a daily basis, the internet is good for that.. :-)

BTW: This about Cubendo, the Logic thread is just above.

Your sarcastic comment is pointless. Not a registered user, I already said that.

Not pointless at all , see above !

I am going to skip most of the rest as we are simply going around in circles.., but this next one I do have to comment on.

Oh yes. When they changed the automation behavior for version 5, a few activist naysayers expressed their disappointment for Cubase dropping its industry-standard automation. The new automation was now crippled, and not as good as in C4. And when the automation behavior gets changed back to the usual way, it's just a farce. It's a disaster. They can't get anything right.

Save the spin..

When they changed the "behaviour " , they did cripple the automation, it was totally and utterly unusable , your lame attempt at dismissing the end users who brought it to the table as naysayers and activists is just typical of your ongoing m.o and a little tiring to be honest. Instead of actually implementing the needed fill modes to make the new automation workable and closer to the advanced automation in Nuendo that many were hoping for, Steinberg instead took the easy way and simply returned the old behaviour while keeping the GUI to give the impression that it was different to C4, Disaster no, farce yes.. !

And I am glad we agree on Cubase 5 being a good release overall. In fact, I think we probably agree on the most part. But one thing we disagree about is the balance of conversation.

I have no problem with balanced conversation, I'm just not feeling it here, nor do we agree on the most part, buts thats cool , at least we know where each other stand.

[captain caveman]

Originally Posted by Fredo

In our studio's, we have 5 Nuendo workstations,

Are you being serious that you or your studio don't get any Steinberg licenses whatsoever for moderating the Nuendo forum as you've said?

A lot of work for nothing if you're telling the truth, which you clearly aren't because every other moderator for other official forums get free licenses.

[StereoPari]

Originally Posted by TAFKAT

BTW: This about Cubendo, the Logic thread is just above.

Oh dear. I mentioned the word "Logic" once, in a long post, as I was asking "compared to what" the support is bad. Hey, you mentioned it too. (and you didn't answer, just dodged my question with this first grade BS).

I am going to skip most of the rest as we are simply going around in circles.., but this next one I do have to comment on.

Yeah, just skip my whole point and pick on some little detail. We might as well quit this, I agree.

Save the spin..

Save the rhetorics.

(Just don't seem to understand that not everyone who disagrees with you is some mindless fanboy or a victim of marketing hype? It's probably more accurate to say it's you who's the victim of "issues" here, considering the larger context.)

your lame attempt at dismissing the end users

It's unbelievable how bad your reading skills seem to be. We're using your native language. Search the word "dismiss" from my post, come back again with your totally false accusations. I specifically said..well, it don't matter -since you can't seem to read what I said about this.

I have no problem with balanced conversation

Wouldn't be so sure of that -since you're mostly about problems-, but have a nice day and see you around nonetheless.

Remember, it's all about...p r o b l e m s

[TAFKAT]

Originally Posted by StereoPari

Yeah, just skip my whole point and pick on some little detail. We might as well quit this, I agree.

You seem to be very selective in what points you choose to respond to yourself, so spare me the melodramatics !!

We have been going around in circles for weeks across multiple threads on some of the points raised again here, and its plainly obvious to me that we will never be on the same page. I simply refused to continue with another round of cyclic bullshite with you again. Feel free to continue throwing your anemic ad hominems, its the level I have come to expect.

It's unbelievable how bad your reading skills seem to be.

My reading skills are fine, perhaps you should sharpen your comprehension skills , that is what is leading us to the opposing ends.

.. but have a nice day and see you around nonetheless.

.. Have A Nice Day.. sure , likewise , and in future even if you do see me around, please do me the favor of ignoring me, as I will do likewise.

Ohh, before I forget ,

Oh dear. I mentioned the word "Logic" once, in a long post, as I was asking "compared to what" the support is bad. Hey, you mentioned it too. (and you didn't answer, just dodged my question with this first grade BS).

The Logic comment was a joke Mate, leading on from what George had posted earlier , obviously it went right over your head, as does a large portion of what I try and convey it seems. I did answer your support question in regards to Cubase, which you chose to ignore , while over reacting to me not responding to your attempt at shifting the focus, first grade B.S Indeed .. !

[nikki-k]

Hi!
I used PT for the past 10+ years. PARIS too. Now that I am solely doing my own music (eclectic prog rock, with a deposit of old metal), and need VI's for doing drums and keys, and also wanted to be able to score/TAB/lyric my stuff.. well, PT is better suited for other things, and/or for other people. Enter Cubase 5.

Cubase 5 works for me. Yes, it has bugs. Steinberg may be all that is claimed. Look at the politics with Digi/Avid. MS. Apple. Etc, etc, etc. So, I ignore. I also babble, and meander.. so I learned to avoid posting when I can. In this thread, I decided to post simply because I figure if even one person considering Cubase sees enough people posting that it can work.. well, there are posts stating that. So I guess I just felt like posting..lol.

I LOVE: Drum Editor. Arrange Track. VariAudio. User assignable key commands and Macros. Instrument rack AND Instrument Track- user picks which to use. Tempo, Meter, and Time rulers can be added. Loop record takes for audio and MIDI. Scoring includes TAB, and does extended range instruments. Lyrics in score, but no actual lyric tracks in Arrange window (no one has it? Would love this). With the Arrange Track, their implementation of Folder Tracks is good enough (could always be better? Hee). Probably could name a dozen other things.

Cons? Wish there was a demo so people could try it first to see if the pro's and con's apply to them. Customer support can always be better in some aspects, while others can be stellar. I use a Mac, and know about the low latency drawbacks firsthand. Easier to work around for me in Cubase 5 than in PT8 though. PT hardware is an added crutch for me.. with no "client base" though...

Just grabbed Logic 9 upgrade. Why? Biggest con for me with Cubase: Dongle. Due to my own work habits and disabilities, the dongle can be a bit of a PITA. Biggest Pro? Choices

[MartinHB]

Originally Posted by Fredo

If you have one MAC in your network, you will be able to use your all your Euphonix controllers on your PC.

In our studio's, we have 5 Nuendo workstations, all on PC, and we use the Euphonix Mix and Control on all of them. The one MAC in our network runs the Eucon application, and since all other workstations and controllers are on the same network, they work perfectly together.

Fredo

I would like to ask a couple of questions here but I will send you a PM.

[58lespaul]

I noticed that Logic 9 really flaunted their ability to write guitar tablature but after reading the Cubase 5 product information I noticed that you can also write guitar tabs in Cubase. As a guitarist this is big for me, can anyone that owns Cubase 5 talk about the guitar tablature function?

[Sascha Franck]

Originally Posted by 58lespaul

As a guitarist this is big for me, can anyone that owns Cubase 5 talk about the guitar tablature function?

Not exactly. But: Back when I had to write my diploma, I was using a MIDI guitar and Cubase VSTs (3.5 I think) tabulature features and it was already damn easy to get great looking results - so I can't imagine why this wouldn't be even better with C5.

- Sascha

[Fredo]

Originally Posted by captain caveman

Are you being serious that you or your studio don't get any Steinberg licenses whatsoever for moderating the Nuendo forum as you've said?

A lot of work for nothing if you're telling the truth, which you clearly aren't because every other moderator for other official forums get free licenses.

I get one (1) license for free because of the betatesting, just like every other productive betatester. So the other 4 Nuendo licenses, 5 Wavelab licenses and 2 Cubase licenses (and a bunch of Vsti's), have all been paid for.
Same goes for all of the Steinberg hardware I have, which was all purchased through our Belgian distributor.

I do not betatest or moderate for getting free licenses. It would be incorrect to build a business on -and with- "free" stuff.

Fredo

[StereoPari]

Originally Posted by TAFKAT

You seem to be very selective in what points you choose to respond to yourself, so spare me the melodramatics !!

We have been going around in circles for weeks

Of course I chose to be very selective -you got back what you gave to me. I agree this is going around in circles, no need to continue.

[nikki-k]

Originally Posted by 58lespaul

I noticed that Logic 9 really flaunted their ability to write guitar tablature but after reading the Cubase 5 product information I noticed that you can also write guitar tabs in Cubase. As a guitarist this is big for me, can anyone that owns Cubase 5 talk about the guitar tablature function?

This was a "wish I had" feature. Even more so, the ability to customize TAB for extended range instruments, which C5 allows (to a point). I work with 5- and 6-string bass, and 7-string guitar, which C5 does just fine with for me. I was using Sibelius and PT8 to do this, but being able to do my scores in C5 (lyrics, notation, TAB) so I can note how I play a piece as I record is much nicer. I use VariAudio to render vocal lines to MIDI, and then mock up lyrics.. nice to do harmonies, and coincident vocal lines with multiple lyrics per line and such. Very cool IMO!

BTW- L9 finally allows for 3-16 strings (vs 4-6 for L8), but chord grids remain 6 string (traditional).

[MartinHB]

Originally Posted by nikki-k

Hi!

Cons? Wish there was a demo so people could try it first to see if the pro's and con's apply to them. Customer support can always be better in some aspects, while others can be stellar. I use a Mac, and know about the low latency drawbacks firsthand. Easier to work around for me in Cubase 5 than in PT8 though. PT hardware is an added crutch for me.. with no "client base" though...

Just grabbed Logic 9 upgrade. Why? Biggest con for me with Cubase: Dongle. Due to my own work habits and disabilities, the dongle can be a bit of a PITA. Biggest Pro? Choices

Here here. I just ordered Cubase 5 today (and Logic 9 will be ordered next week). While neither can offer a demo its really is an awful situation. The moment I open and install the software I cant return either of them. But surelt there is a way Steinberg could offer a demo of their software

I do understadn why Steinberg had to do it. I heard (and have no idea whether this is true) that they would not have survived if they didnt implement some tough anti piracy measures. They may have a point because each of the 3 SX versions were cracked and it became difficult to find a user who actually bought it. They had the same with the Atari and VST32 versions. I dont like the dongle, but Im sympathetic to why they use one. I just wish they could find a way to offer a demo.