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

[Sascha Franck]

Originally Posted by Roger Starr

On this one I fully agree. Logic has also some nice groove templates out of the box, I miss this in Cubase.

You know, I'm currently thinking about going back to Windows for my sequencing duties (the recent Logic development is just utterly dissapointing), but what I will miss the most is the freaking excellent (extended) parameter box we have in Logic. For me it's not so much about using groove templates (which is a totally easy process in Logic as well) but more about using my own swing/quantize percentages. I really wonder why no other sequencer maker is sort of "stealing" that feature from Logic. It's really just as good as it gets.

- Sascha

[George Necola]

back to topic please.

[Sascha Franck]

Originally Posted by George Necola

back to topic please.

Personally, I think this thread was pretty much on topic so far. Really, I find the implementation of various quantizing scenarios to be absolutely important when talking about whatever sequencers, so it shouldn't be rated OT in a Cubase thread (and comparisons should be valid, too - I mean, so far nobody's been saying that Cubase sucks or anything).

Cheers
Sascha

[YUGA]

Originally Posted by Roger Starr

On this one I fully agree. Logic has also some nice groove templates out of the box, I miss this in Cubase.

Roger

If you miss Logic's groove templates so much, import this midi file and use the Part to Groove function and then save them as groove templates in the Quantize Setup dialog box.

Anyone know in which folder Cubase groove templates are stored?

[Phaidon]

Originally Posted by Sascha Franck

but what I will miss the most is the freaking excellent (extended) parameter box we have in Logic.
- Sascha

This is it! One of the Logic things I can't part with,no matter how hard I try.
Maybe with the upcoming Presonus Studio One...

[dark blue man]

I'm finding this thread of interest. Had my C5 on order since Sunday night so expecting it to arrive some time in the next 2/3 days. Pretty exited about it actually, still using an old version of SX.

But found some useful info in this thread. Moving the prefs folder before firing up C5 for the first time and what not....

Good stuff, cheers

[Beneficial]

Originally Posted by Phaidon

This is it! One of the Logic things I can't part with,no matter how hard I try.
Maybe with the upcoming Presonus Studio One...

What exactly is the extended parameter box in Logic?

[Phaidon]

Originally Posted by Beneficial

What exactly is the extended parameter box in Logic?

It's the box to the very left where you can change values for parameters such as swing,velocity,gate time,delay,transpos. etc. for every track.
It's like second skin when you are doing stuff in the midi domain.

[Sascha Franck]

Originally Posted by Beneficial

What exactly is the extended parameter box in Logic?

As some pictures are worth more than 1000 words, here we go.

This is the extended parameter box:

As you can see, it displays all the quantization done to a specific part (plus quite some other things, such as region delays and the likes).
Now, while this is pretty similar to what you can see in the region information line on top of Cubases project window, the main difference is that it displays the quantize options you've applied to a region. Look here:

As you can see, the parameter box displays the way I quantized the snare region.
Now, when I select the kick region, it shows this:

As you can easily see, both regions are quantized differently.

This is nothing *any* other sequencer is doing. To find out how you quantized something in Cubase (especially once you used "iterative" quantizing), you need to open the piano roll (or another editor) and try to compare the notes with the selected grid. In Logic you just know about your quantize settings instantly by selecting a region and looking at the extended parameter box. IMO that's just excellent.
As every so often, there's a downside coming along with this, though. In, say, Cubase, you can just record (and merge) multiple recordings into one track and still apply different quantize values to the individual takes. This is not as easy in Logic - pretty much the reason why I usually tend to create a duplicated track and continue recording there. And fwiw, that duplicated track isn't a duplicated instrument instance, it's really the same track as before, just that it appears twice in my arrange. Quite another reason to love Logic, at least IMO (this is only partially possible in Cubase for virtual instruments but not at all for audio tracks, pretty much where Logics way of dealing with things shows its full potential).

Now, I'm not blaming Cubase (or any sequencer for the matter) at all, but I think someone should finally "steal" the idea of the extended parameter box (and probably some other nice features, too).

Cheers
Sascha

[Sascha Franck]

Originally Posted by Phaidon

It's the box to the very left where you can change values for parameters such as swing,velocity,gate time,delay,transpos. etc. for every track.
It's like second skin when you are doing stuff in the midi domain.

It's not for every track but for every region - quite something more, IMO.

- Sascha

[Roger Starr]

Originally Posted by YUGA

If you miss Logic's groove templates so much, import this midi file and use the Part to Groove function and then save them as groove templates in the Quantize Setup dialog box.

Anyone know in which folder Cubase groove templates are stored?

Hey, that's cool. Thanx!

Actually, what I miss most in Cubase compared to Logic is the fine collection of instruments. For the rest it is all the way Cubase for me.

Regards,

Roger

[Sascha Franck]

Originally Posted by Roger Starr

Actually, what I miss most in Cubase compared to Logic is the fine collection of instruments. For the rest it is all the way Cubase for me.

A little similar here. Unfortunately, quite some of my projects are based on what comes with Logic since ages. On the positive side of things, Kontakt does at least read the mapping of my EXS patches more or less fine (some tweaking is required, though), so I may just go through the effort of converting them before I may somewhen switch platforms.

- Sascha

[Phaidon]

Originally Posted by Sascha Franck

Now, I'm not blaming Cubase (or any sequencer for the matter) at all, but I think someone should finally "steal" the idea of the extended parameter box (and probably some other nice features, too).

It won't happen anytime soon I think...
It seems that most DAWs lean towards more audio oriented features, leaving midi stuff behind.

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by Sascha Franck

And fwiw, that duplicated track isn't a duplicated instrument instance, it's really the same track as before, just that it appears twice in my arrange. Quite another reason to love Logic, at least IMO (this is only partially possible in Cubase for virtual instruments but not at all for audio tracks, pretty much where Logics way of dealing with things shows its full potential).

Cheers
Sascha

I really enjoyed your graphic explanation of how Logic displays those parameters, pretty cool.

Although... you lost me on the last part of that as it relates to vsti's and audio tracks. ? The part in blue above.

[Sascha Franck]

Originally Posted by Lawrence

Although... you lost me on the last part of that as it relates to vsti's and audio tracks. ? The part in blue above.

Well, Logic and Cubase handle audio and virtual instrument tracks different - and Cubase even makes a disctinction between the two again.
Again, here's a little screenshot to demonstrate what it works like in Logic:


As you can see, there's two audio tracks in the arrange window but just one common mixer "object" that both run through (of course, with audio, only the newest regions would be playing back, so to compare alternate takes you better mute the regions you don't want).
The same is possible with virtual instrument tracks (and, as always with MIDI, in that case you can obviously have multiple regions playing through one "object" at once).

In Cubase, this is only partially possible for virtual instruments, when you use the "old" rack approach (in that case you can route any amount of MIDI tracks to any instrument), for audio tracks it's not possible at all.
Now, of course one could use folder tracks in Cubase, but I never found it as elegant as Logics approach.
On the downside, and partially also caused by this different basic track/object paradigm, dealing with multitimbral instruments in Logic is a true PITA.

I really wish that some other sequencer makers would learn/steal some of these little things that are responsible for Logic still being absolutely elegant in the handling department.

Sorry if this is going too far OT.

Cheers
Sascha

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by Sascha Franck

As you can see, there's two audio tracks in the arrange window but just one common mixer "object" that both run through (of course, with audio, only the newest regions would be playing back, so to compare alternate takes you better mute the regions you don't want).
The same is possible with virtual instrument tracks (and, as always with MIDI, in that case you can obviously have multiple regions playing through one "object" at once).

In Cubase, this is only partially possible for virtual instruments, when you use the "old" rack approach (in that case you can route any amount of MIDI tracks to any instrument), for audio tracks it's not possible at all.
Cheers
Sascha

Ok, I get it I think.

Is that mixer object channel not behaving like a summing bus? If it is (besides the obviously cleaner mixer ) how is that different from Cubase group channels?

Logic is cool.

[stag]

how are multi out VSTi, namely samplers, handled in Logic?
In Cubase for stereo VI there is the Instrument track approach doe.

[YUGA]

Originally Posted by Lawrence

Ok, I get it I think.

Is that mixer object channel not behaving like a summing bus? If it is (besides the obviously cleaner mixer ) how is that different from Cubase group channels?

Logic is cool.

It's not like that.
In the arrange window of Logic, you can create any number of audio (or virtual instrument) tracks that shares the same single channel in the mixer. They are similar to Cubase's lanes created in Stacked Recording Mode but have their own tracks in the arrange window. In other words, real duplicated tracks, if you duplicate a track in Cubase, Cubase actually creates a new different track that has its own channel in the mixer window.

Sascha, if you need to have multiple different takes for one track, you can just set the lane display type to "Lanes Fixed" (bottom right icon in the track header, next to the lock/unlock icon). People typically use this feature to audition vocal takes but it's handy for virtual instrument tracks as well.

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by YUGA

It's not like that.
In the arrange window of Logic, you can create any number of audio (or virtual instrument) tracks that shares the same single channel in the mixer. They are similar to Cubase's lanes created in Stacked Recording Mode but have their own tracks in the arrange window. In other words, real duplicated tracks, if you duplicate a track in Cubase, Cubase actually creates a new different track that has its own channel in the mixer window.

Ah... I get it. Thanks.

Sascha, if you need to have multiple different takes for one track, you can just set the lane display type to "Lanes Fixed" (bottom right icon in the track header, next to the lock/unlock icon). People typically use this feature to audition vocal takes but it's handy for virtual instrument tracks as well.

Yes. It's really handy for instrument/midi tracks as they all play at the same time from the same track, unlike with audio. I often will have my midi drums in lanes on one track. This also allows you to send different notes to different VSTi's or midi hardware from the same track.

[Sascha Franck]

Originally Posted by Lawrence

Yes. It's really handy for instrument/midi tracks as they all play at the same time from the same track, unlike with audio. I often will have my midi drums in lanes on one track. This also allows you to send different notes to different VSTi's or midi hardware from the same track.

Ok, that's quite cool and I haven't exactly been aware of it. Will try to remember (as said, right now I won't be using Cubase much as the performance figures I'm getting are quite not too shiny on this Macbook).

stag, multiple out instruments are handled fine in Logic 8. Almost the same as in Cubase, probably even a little more comfortable sometimes, as not all indvidual outs are created automatically at once (I know, you can hide them in Cubase, but that's some step you can save yourself from in Logic). You click some "+" button and a new channel will be created. One of the better improvements of Logic 8.
Really, the main hassle is anything multitimbral. Regarding that, Cubase is at least 10x easier to deal with. Pretty much the reason why I'm never using, say, a multitimbral instance of Kontakt but open up a new instance instead.

Now, if only Cubase would perform a little better on my machine. I just fooled around a bit with the audio manipulating options, and it's just stunning how much Logic is behind in that area (alright, I knew it before, but it's another thing to experience it first hand...). Unfortunately, at 64 samples buffersize Cubase is nothing you want to deal with - might be kinda related to my audio hardware (usually an M-Audio FW-410), but in Logic I can run fullblown projects at that buffer setting without any issues.
Time to build a new Windows box, it seems. Well, not exactly now.

- Sascha

[stag]

In Cubase, since v4, we´re able to choose the number of outputs displayed. We can increase as it goes along.
I´m very impressed with Logic MIDI CS lay out. However cubase offer a nice set of options: MIDI modifiers, VST expression, The old MIDI plugs (quantizer, transformer eg.).

[Lawrence]

Yeah Stag.

When you start combining the midi plugs with midi sends you can accomplish some crazy things. The transformer is the swiss army knife of midi input.

[YUGA]

Originally Posted by Sascha Franck

stag, multiple out instruments are handled fine in Logic 8. Almost the same as in Cubase, probably even a little more comfortable sometimes, as not all indvidual outs are created automatically at once (I know, you can hide them in Cubase, but that's some step you can save yourself from in Logic). You click some "+" button and a new channel will be created. One of the better improvements of Logic 8.
Really, the main hassle is anything multitimbral. Regarding that, Cubase is at least 10x easier to deal with. Pretty much the reason why I'm never using, say, a multitimbral instance of Kontakt but open up a new instance instead.

That's not true. By default Cubase 5 doesn't automatically create all individual outs and only creates a stereo out. You can specify which outputs to be activated in the VST instruments window (a horizontal arrow icon next to the "e" button). So it's more or less the same as L8. Are you using SX?

And Logic still can't freeze multi-out instruments.

[norman]

deal breaker minus,
no undo of fader moves. why not? how hard could that be?

[Sascha Franck]

Originally Posted by YUGA

That's not true. By default Cubase 5 doesn't automatically create all individual outs and only creates a stereo out. You can specify which outputs to be activated in the VST instruments window (a horizontal arrow icon next to the "e" button). So it's more or less the same as L8. Are you using SX?

Well, the last time I've been using Cubase seriously was with SX3, so I wasn't aware of this to have changed with Cubase 5 (which is what I have installed now, at least for a testride, as it really doesn't work too well under OSX). Thanks for the information, this is a fine improvement.

And Logic still can't freeze multi-out instruments.

Let's better not talk about freezing in either Logic or Cubase, otherwise I may get a heart attack. Freezing should be done the way Samplitude does it - it's by far the most logical, clever and userfriendly way. Anything offered by Cubase and Logic sucks in comparison, big time even.

- Sascha

[Jovas]

Been using Cubase 4.5.2 (and 5(.0.1) for about a half year now:

+ Great warm, full, detailed and yet also transparant sound engine
+ Well thought out sequencer, arrange and mixer workflow
+ Stunning arsenal of plugins, instruments and MIDI processors
+ Very advanced audio and MIDI editing

- Lack of a cool and decent multi out softsampler
- I have encountered some bugs with the VSti`s not saving my settings
- Sometimes when I record a dj set for about 1 hour there is one point where there occures some strange tempo spin(like someone is giving my vinyl a spin)(Vista 64, Win 7 hasn't happened yet)

For the rest I'm still in the middle of mastering the program. I'm producing mainly electronic/techno and there is so much to discover yet, I'm really going steep on the learning curve as we speak.. You can do so much things to shape your sound, for example what Stag mentioned, those MIDI plug ins. and sends are just the beginning.. You haven't yet started to process the real sounds yet before they go out..

So yeah, it's a pretty cool DAW, can be frustrating from time to time though..

[Solar]

Hey fellas!

Lately, i've been working on a song that has Electric guitars and i want to save only the guitars to send to a friend of mine who is still in Nuendo 3.2 in XML format. What happened is very unusual cuz as soon as i saved the XML file by choosing COPY (instead of Reference) i sent the fXML project to my friend and he opened it. In the same folder i put a stereo starting point of the DRUMS seperately as a guide including the full song ) and when he opened the XML in his Nuendo, guitars tracks were not starting at the right measure, some where moved forward. Out of like 8 stereo guitar tracks, they were all not syncing with the Drums. And the drum track i bounced it from measure 0 to the end of the song!

Anyone experienced this in C5.0.1?

Thanx for any input!!

Cheers!

[Lawrence]

Hey Solar,

I suspect he has the tempo set wrong and/or musical mode is on and some time stretching is maybe going on. Same H:M:S start time but different measures and beats depending on the tempo setting. This is my only gripe with Steiny xml, that you can't open a new project with an xml file and grab the tempo from the file, or set the tempo from the file when importing into an existing (blank) project.

Anyway, when you share those archives put the tempo in the file name. My Song (101 bpm).xml

P.S. I've heard that Cubase 5 projects will open directly in Nuendo 3 (but not N4 which is odd). Can't verify it though.

[Solar]

Originally Posted by Lawrence

Hey Solar,

I suspect he has the tempo set wrong and/or musical mode is on and some time stretching is maybe going on. Same H:M:S start time but different measures and beats depending on the tempo setting. This is my only gripe with Steiny xml, that you can't open a new project with an xml file and grab the tempo from the file, or set the tempo from the file when importing into an existing (blank) project.

Anyway, when you share those archives put the tempo in the file name. My Song (101 bpm).xml

P.S. I've heard that Cubase 5 projects will open directly in Nuendo 3 (but not N4 which is odd). Can't verify it though.

Hey buddy! Always good to hear from you. I'll double check that tempo thing because i've opened the same project in S1 and it did the same syncing problem.

Regarding C5 project opening in Nuendo 3 it's true that it is possible. ONLY make sure you haven't update your C5 to C5.0.1, if you do, you're ****ed, you can't OPEN C5.0.1 project to Nuendo 3.2 anymore and that's just the beauty of Steiny/Yamama way of working backward or stupid way of doing this... we all know how they do things!! Voila my friend!

Will report back for XML thing, so you're saying that before importing the XML file, input the right TEMPO songs before doing so?

Cheers!

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by Solar

Will report back for XML thing, so you're saying that before importing the XML file, input the right TEMPO songs before doing so?

Cheers!

Yeah, I would set the tempo first just to be on the safe side.