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

[old_skul]

Originally Posted by muziksculp

Hi,

This might be a bit OT.

I have a Mac Pro 8 core (OSX Leopard), and Cubase 5. I was interested in knowing if there are any advantages of running C5 on Vista-64 via Bootcamp vs OSX ? or is the overall performance of C5 pretty much equal on both OSX and Windows Vista-64 ?

Any Mac Pro users done any testing with C5 running on Vista-64/Bootcamp ? Some feedback on this would be helpful.

Thanks.

I'm about to install C5/64 on a Core i7 Vista64 system. I'll post on how it works out.

Unfortunately, I'll be using a Presonus Firestudio interface, which has only beta drivers for 64bit systems. We'll see how it pans out.

[muziksculp]

I'm not sure, but, I guess you are referring to on a new i7 based 'Mac Pro', running Vista-64 via Bootcamp ? or are you referring to an actual PC ? Just wanted to double check.

Anyway, Thanks for your input, and I look forward to know how things work out for you.

Good Luck testing your new system with Cubase 5.

[Solar]

Hey fellas!

Got C5 running in my studio. Before i updated to C5.01 i was able to send my project to a fella of mine who is using Cuabse SX3. soemthing or nuendo 3.2 and he was able to open my C5 files, but since i updated to C5.01, forget it it doesn't work anymore. I thought that Steiny mentioned that now you can go back and forth as you wish weither you have latest version of C5 or earlier version of C5 that coiuld be SX3 etc...?

Anyone noticed this change?

[smoke]

I believe that "back and forth" thing refers to Cubase Studio 4+/SL vs. Cubase 5/SX license transfers. In the past, an upgrade from Studio to 'Pro' would overwrite the Studio license.

[Solar]

Originally Posted by smoke

I believe that "back and forth" thing refers to Cubase Studio 4+/SL vs. Cubase 5/SX license transfers. In the past, an upgrade from Studio to 'Pro' would overwrite the Studio license.

I hear but how i come with version C5 only we could open saved CPR C5 project into Sx3 or Nuendo 3.2 and Steiny if i',m not mistaking they were claiming that this time this is possible to go back and forth? mhhmhmhmhm kinda weird and the weird thing is that with C5 not upgraded it is possible?

Sometimes i just don't understand Steiny/Yamama way of working!!

Cheers!

[smoke]

Originally Posted by Solar

I hear but how i come with version C5 only we could open saved CPR C5 project into Sx3 or Nuendo 3.2 and Steiny if i',m not mistaking they were claiming that this time this is possible to go back and forth? mhhmhmhmhm kinda weird and the weird thing is that with C5 not upgraded it is possible?

Sometimes i just don't understand Steiny/Yamama way of working!!

Cheers!

I agree. Backward compatibility is generally a standard for most pro software. Should be an obvious priority for SB, especially knowing how many folx are even still sticking with SX.

In the graphic design world, if you take an ai CS4 file and open it in ai 8, you may lose some features, but it will still open in any case. Adobe prioritizes these things for their users. A part of the development is making sure even though the framework changes, there is still a path backwards. With SB, you either jump all the way in, or you stay behind. When you get caught in the middle, don't expect SB to listen. I'm well aware of the 'palm in the face' they are capable of.

[stag]

Originally Posted by smoke

I agree. Backward compatibility is generally a standard for most pro software. Should be an obvious priority for SB, especially knowing how many folx are even still sticking with SX.

In the graphic design world, if you take an ai CS4 file and open it in ai 8, you may lose some features, but it will still open in any case. Adobe prioritizes these things for their users. A part of the development is making sure even though the framework changes, there is still a path backwards. With SB, you either jump all the way in, or you stay behind. When you get caught in the middle, don't expect SB to listen. I'm well aware of the 'palm in the face' they are capable of.

Does any other sequencer offer backward compatibility?
Does Logic, Live, PT or any other do this?

[shanabit]

Originally Posted by Solar

Hey fellas!

Got C5 running in my studio. Before i updated to C5.01 i was able to send my project to a fella of mine who is using Cuabse SX3. soemthing or nuendo 3.2 and he was able to open my C5 files, but since i updated to C5.01, forget it it doesn't work anymore. I thought that Steiny mentioned that now you can go back and forth as you wish weither you have latest version of C5 or earlier version of C5 that coiuld be SX3 etc...?

Anyone noticed this change?

This is the PERFECT way for them to keep everyone upgrading
Guarantee upward only compatibility

[Solar]

Originally Posted by stag

Does any other sequencer offer backward compatibility?
Does Logic, Live, PT or any other do this?

Reaper allow this big time if i'm not mistaking, Sonar allows it as well if ain't mistaking...

I sometimes just hate Steinberg and love them at the same time, they got the touch to make the user angry like no other devs.

Anyhow, i'm gonna send this in their forum and see what will be the responses.

Cheeeeeeeeeeeers & thanx for all of u taking the time to respond here.

[StereoPari]

If I remember correctly, in SX 3 it was possible to open SX 1 projects. When Cubase 4 came out the backwards compatibility was not so good anymore, but at least they eventually offered a free license of SX 3 for C4 users, purely because of that.

It should be remembered that the first version of Reaper is only about as old as Cubase 4 is - I think Reaper 1 was released less than three years ago. And Cubase 5 IS backwards compatible with C4...

Don't know about the extent of Logic's or Sonar's backwards compatibility, but at least with ProTools I've had some very annoying experiences. Once I had done the full editing for a short film on a not-so-old PT version. Then, when we tried to export it into a (marginally) newer version of PT in a bigger studio, all the automation I had done was just missing...nice...

After that I've never trusted my work to the hands of backwards compatibility, and rely mostly on basic WAVs for transfer purposes.

(Sorry if my english feels a bit weird, I'm not a native speaker)

[civilization3]

I am reworking SX2.2 projects in C5. I'm sure the reverse is not possible.

I've had good luck with C5 as far as stability. A few crashes; if I do something such as try to save a/search for a preset in one of their VST3 plugs, that's an immediate crash. OSX.5.6, some really really slow redraws, dragging tracks. Not that frequent an occurrence, but a slight annoyance at times of heated battle.

I didn't actually expect a brand new version to be this stable.
Maybe less graphics sluggishness with 10.5.7.

[Solar]

Originally Posted by StereoPari

If I remember correctly, in SX 3 it was possible to open SX 1 projects. When Cubase 4 came out the backwards compatibility was not so good anymore, but at least they eventually offered a free license of SX 3 for C4 users, purely because of that.

It should be remembered that the first version of Reaper is only about as old as Cubase 4 is - I think Reaper 1 was released less than three years ago. And Cubase 5 IS backwards compatible with C4...

Don't know about the extent of Logic's or Sonar's backwards compatibility, but at least with ProTools I've had some very annoying experiences. Once I had done the full editing for a short film on a not-so-old PT version. Then, when we tried to export it into a (marginally) newer version of PT in a bigger studio, all the automation I had done was just missing...nice...

After that I've never trusted my work to the hands of backwards compatibility, and rely mostly on basic WAVs for transfer purposes.

(Sorry if my english feels a bit weird, I'm not a native speaker)

Why Steiny/Yamama are stubborn? They always sometimes make "stupid backward" decisions that do not make any sense but that's just Steiny. I guess they did stop the backward possibility in their latest update for "money" reasons, to get you update to their latest thats all! I don't see any other reason. If other companies are able to make it possible to backward, i don't see why Steinymama can't!!

Ohhh well!!!!

:(

[funkyant]

Great thread.

Been using Cubase forever (since first version on Atari), and have been very happy with SX3 - 'if it aint broke' and all that.

Skipped v4, but I'll be making the move to v5 very soon after reading this.

[George Necola]

Originally Posted by Solar

Why Steiny/Yamama are stubborn? They always sometimes make "stupid backward" decisions that do not make any sense but that's just Steiny. I guess they did stop the backward possibility in their latest update for "money" reasons, to get you update to their latest thats all! I don't see any other reason. If other companies are able to make it possible to backward, i don't see why Steinymama can't!!

Ohhh well!!!!

:(

I think it's more for support-reasons..

[Solar]

Originally Posted by George Necola

I think it's more for support-reasons..

I hear ya George!!

Just think it's a "cheap" way especially coming from a very well established CIE. But hey, thats all good!!

[Beneficial]

Con... C5 can't groove like a MPC or Atari ST from the 80's. No matter what you do regarding swing, groove templates, midi modifiers, or midi time shift. That slightly flawed yet locked in groove timing that you get from those old boxes just can't be done in sample accurate 100% perfect timing german stiffness. Sure wish it could though since I spent $500 on it and still have to use this massive mpc from 1988 to get it to groove right.

[Roger Starr]

Originally Posted by Beneficial

Con... C5 can't groove like a MPC or Atari ST from the 80's. No matter what you do regarding swing, groove templates, midi modifiers, or midi time shift. That slightly flawed yet locked in groove timing that you get from those old boxes just can't be done in sample accurate 100% perfect timing german stiffness. Sure wish it could though since I spent $500 on it and still have to use this massive mpc from 1988 to get it to groove right.

Technical wise I can't comment. Only that if this counts for C5, it counts for all DAW's out there.

Regards,

Roger

[Beneficial]

Yeah, I haven't found a daw that can get that natural (very tight yet very slightly lazy) groove that the old sequencers manage to achieve with their slow cpus. A lot of people still use the MPC 60 and Atari 1040st because modern technology can't really replicate it yet... although it would probably just take a smart software engineer with a lot of time on his hands to analyze the grooves of this old gear and develop and algorithm for it.

[Roger Starr]

Originally Posted by Beneficial

Yeah, I haven't found a daw that can get that natural (very tight yet very slightly lazy) groove that the old sequencers manage to achieve with their slow cpus. A lot of people still use the MPC 60 and Atari 1040st because modern technology can't really replicate it yet... although it would probably just take a smart software engineer with a lot of time on his hands to analyze the grooves of this old gear and develop and algorithm for it.

So, you use a MPC linked to a sequencer or how do you work then?

Regards,

Roger

[Beneficial]

I just got this MPC 60 after about 10 years of making beats in the computer. It definitely has a much different feel, a lot better than Cubase. I'll be using it to control modules and vsts... I haven't sync'd it to Cubase yet but I will be trying that soon. In Cubase you can use the midi modifiers like random positioning, and midi time shift along with quantizing using swing settings and you can make it groove a little better but it takes a lot of work and still doesn't come close to the instant tight yet natural "real drummer" feel of the MPC for some reason. I think it's because when you use the midi modifier in Cubase to make the positions randomly late by a fracation of a millisecond (trying to emulate what the MPC does) it forces EVERY single midi note to be randomly late where in the MPC it's not every note that is late... you might have a few notes dead on and then one slightly late and the whole thing moves together like that.... every track does that so it sounds more like a real drummer.

[smoke]

I just move the drums around till they sound right. I don't know about all that quantizing stuff. If it's all about 'feel', then why do I need help? Sometimes, I can just use the keyboard to tap in the groove just right without needing to nudge anything.

[Lawrence]

The free iPhone/iPod remote for Cubase 5 is available on iTunes.



PC/Mac drivers here. Steinberg SKI Remote :: Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH :: www.steinberg.net

[58lespaul]

Originally Posted by Lawrence

The free iPhone/iPod remote for Cubase 5 is available on iTunes.



PC/Mac drivers here. Steinberg SKI Remote :: Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH :: www.steinberg.net

OMG! OMG!! OMG!!! Yay!!!! Well...looks like now I NEED to upgrade to Cubase 5... wonder how I'm going to explain this one to the GF... Getting new pick ups for my guitar, an AC4TV AND Cubase 5? Man I'm greedy...

[Yutaka]

Is there anyone here using C5 on G5 dual 2.0GHz? I'm still on SX3 and 10.4.11, and just wondering how Leopard+C5 would perform on my machine (especially the new IR reverb thingy).

Thanks!!

[Farrlinn]

The big issue I ran into was Hyper threading is non-existent!

I had to turn off multi processor support in C5 prefs to get stability and turn up my buffer to 512.

WARNING: UNCHECKING MULTI PROCESSOR SUPPORT WILL CUT YOUR CPU PERFORMANCE BY 20-30 PERCENT WHILE USING CUBASE 5!!!

FYI in Cubase 5 my asio says it is at 25%. When I check my cpu performance in Vista via Task Manager it says it is only using 3.7%. Unfortunately using reverence, menu moving, opening plugins, this is the only way to get rid of drop outs and crackling!

I love and hate Cubase for this reason.

They say they are working on fixing this. We will see. Until then I am only using 60-70% of my systems capabilities.

Specs: 32 bit Pentium 8 core i7 with 6 gigs of ram w/Vistadfegad

[BlackBackDrop]

Cubase 5 is awesome - Vari Audio, the Warping, the plugs sound amazing and the comp, you can make it swing! EQ is sweet, everything works, even adding lyrics to score is cool. the new verb is smooth, though I would like to be able to control the envelope more like in SIR.

No complaints here.....

[Sascha Franck]

I didn't want to open a new thread and so far I haven't gotten my details for Cubase.net back (I lost them years ago...), so I hope I can ask you guys this very simple question. Last time I used Cubase more or less regularly way on a PC, running SX3, now I'm on a Macbook with C5 (I intend to build a Windows machine at some point this year, so this is just a "test install" or so).

Anway, the problem shouldn't have anything to do with platforms. Here goes:
When I have a MIDI track (sending to a VSTi) selected, I can play the instrument just fine. Obviously. But now, as soon as I click the Edit button in the inspector (the one opening the audio channel of the plugin loaded, not the MIDI one or the GUI one), the track gets deselected, so I can't play the plugin anymore while adjusting, say, the channel EQ. Is there any way around it? I seem to remember some sort of preferences in SX3, allowing you to adjust some stuff regarding general window behaviour and the likes, but so far I haven't found anything which would actually adress this very problem.
Also, when I click back in the main project window, to re-select the track, the MIDI channel edit window will open and the audio channel one will be closed automatically. Can this be changed, too? I mean, after all, right now I am *not* able to simultaneously play a virtual instrument *and* look at its audio channel settings. IMO it'd be a massive hindsight if this behaviour couldn't be changed.

Thanks
Sascha

[Led]

Hey, any windows you want to keep open, just right click at the top section of the window and then left click on "Always on top".

[shanabit]

Originally Posted by Sascha Franck

I didn't want to open a new thread and so far I haven't gotten my details for Cubase.net back (I lost them years ago...), so I hope I can ask you guys this very simple question. Last time I used Cubase more or less regularly way on a PC, running SX3, now I'm on a Macbook with C5 (I intend to build a Windows machine at some point this year, so this is just a "test install" or so).

Anway, the problem shouldn't have anything to do with platforms. Here goes:
When I have a MIDI track (sending to a VSTi) selected, I can play the instrument just fine. Obviously. But now, as soon as I click the Edit button in the inspector (the one opening the audio channel of the plugin loaded, not the MIDI one or the GUI one), the track gets deselected, so I can't play the plugin anymore while adjusting, say, the channel EQ. Is there any way around it? I seem to remember some sort of preferences in SX3, allowing you to adjust some stuff regarding general window behaviour and the likes, but so far I haven't found anything which would actually adress this very problem.
Also, when I click back in the main project window, to re-select the track, the MIDI channel edit window will open and the audio channel one will be closed automatically. Can this be changed, too? I mean, after all, right now I am *not* able to simultaneously play a virtual instrument *and* look at its audio channel settings. IMO it'd be a massive hindsight if this behaviour couldn't be changed.

Thanks
Sascha

Check out workspaces as well in Cubase, real cool

[kruegger]

Originally Posted by civilization3

I am reworking SX2.2 projects in C5. I'm sure the reverse is not possible.

EGAD!!!! I was going to upgrade from SX2.2! There's no way in hell I'm reworking those projects. No thank you Steinberg! If I upgrade, its PTHD for me!!!