The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Long time Logic power users switched to Bitwig?
Old 10th April 2019
  #1
Gear Head
 

Long time Logic power users switched to Bitwig?

I've been using Logic for decades, but becoming increasingly disillusioned with direction Apple is going with hardware, and reconsidering overall direction for next time around.

I tend to have insanely complex routing (busses feeding busses feeding busses) with power hungry and latency inducing plugs at each stage. I've reached the point where I cripple Logic (MacPro 2018 with lots of ram and ssd's) on every project.

I tend to do dance music, so everything is on a grid, and I use LOTS of automation. I've got Nebula, and just don't use it any more as I have to choose between all my routing, or using such plugs.

Is bitwig more efficient, less crash prone under such use?

Any power users find that it is more or less useful for dance music production and/or heavy automation?

Any particular features such a user would find useful in bitwig, or miss coming from Logic?
Old 10th April 2019
  #2
Gear Head
 

It’s just different. If you are very invested in Logic’s routing then it will take a while to adjust to Bitwig, but certain types of routing are much, much easier in Bitwig than in Logic. My advice is just try the demo. My guess is you might not like it because it has different priorities than the classic DAWs like Logic and Cubase.

To answer your questions, Bitwig is similarly efficient but in some cases more efficient. Some people find it unstable (I don’t) but it handles plugin crashes better than all other DAWs because they are sandboxed.

I like it much, much better for dance than Logic. People miss comping and auto-tune support. The best features are the modulators which turn the entire DAW into a synth of sorts.
Old 10th April 2019
  #3
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brownerthanu View Post
It’s just different. If you are very invested in Logic’s routing then it will take a while to adjust to Bitwig, but certain types of routing are much, much easier in Bitwig than in Logic. My advice is just try the demo. My guess is you might not like it because it has different priorities than the classic DAWs like Logic and Cubase.

To answer your questions, Bitwig is similarly efficient but in some cases more efficient. Some people find it unstable (I don’t) but it handles plugin crashes better than all other DAWs because they are sandboxed.

I like it much, much better for dance than Logic. People miss comping and auto-tune support. The best features are the modulators which turn the entire DAW into a synth of sorts.
Don't care about auto-tune, but if it can't do a proper vocal comp, that's a dealbreaker. I do 50+ takes at a time, and often comp down to individual syllables.

The routing in Logic doesn't really bother me conceptually. I've finally gotten comfortable with MIDI environment, etc... but I just keep pushing it beyond it's limits in terms of latency compensation, nested busses.

Other than the modulators, do you have specific reasons for preferring it in dance music context?

The sandbox thing alone is worth noting. I crash Logic 5x a day, and have to wait 10 minutes for each reload.
Old 10th April 2019
  #4
Gear Head
 

The modulators are no small thing. They are an entire vocabulary of production techniques. I use them to solve problems in ways that aren’t even possible in other DAWs or would be a huge pain.

In general I think Bitwig has a very fast workflow. It’s hard to describe, sorry. I just get stuff done in Bitwig more than other DAWs.

Yeah comping has been a major complaint for many. However, audio editing in Bitwig clips is better than many other DAWs.
Old 12th April 2019
  #5
Gear Maniac
It’s different. In many ways cleaner and more efficient, but in some ways immature. It’s not nearly as feature complete, but for sound design, it’s killer. The KVR forum will enlighten you as to various unique features, and some unique head scratchers. For what you say you do, it might be a better fit. It might not. Sure looks nice.
Old 12th April 2019
  #6
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonljacobi View Post
It’s different. In many ways cleaner and more efficient, but in some ways immature. It’s not nearly as feature complete, but for sound design, it’s killer. The KVR forum will enlighten you as to various unique features, and some unique head scratchers. For what you say you do, it might be a better fit. It might not. Sure looks nice.
I've got time. I'll look into some of the unique features. I'm certainly curious about the modulator bit.

The comping is a huge issue, though. I do tons of comping, so I'd have to do all of that in a separate DAW or something like that.

Otherwise, what are some key features MISSING from a professional workflow?
Old 12th April 2019
  #7
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brownerthanu View Post
The modulators are no small thing. They are an entire vocabulary of production techniques. I use them to solve problems in ways that aren’t even possible in other DAWs or would be a huge pain.

In general I think Bitwig has a very fast workflow. It’s hard to describe, sorry. I just get stuff done in Bitwig more than other DAWs.

Yeah comping has been a major complaint for many. However, audio editing in Bitwig clips is better than many other DAWs.
I'm not one to shy away from novel techniques. My entire mix/master workflow is significantly different than anyone's I've ever seen... tot the point where I had to create some of the key plugins to make it work. Got any specific examples of problems they solve that are difficult or impossible to address otherwise?
Old 12th April 2019
  #8
Gear Head
 

I’ll give two examples.

The first is sidechaining. You know how modern dance music uses a lot of sidechaining to change levels of certain signals in relation to others, like ducking a pad using a kick to give a pumping sound? In Bitwig you can sidechain any parameter or any combination. Say you want the frequency of the bass to FM modulate a pad but only in between kicks, no problem. You can make every audio source sidechain or modulate everything else in an infinitely interactive string of dependencies.

Another example is randomization. Say my hihat sample sounds a bit mechanical. I just throw a dice roll modulator on parameters that are naturally subtly random when a drummer plays. Attack, pitch, level, decay, filter cutoff, delay. It removes the robotic sound instantly. Or if I want something more periodic I can use a bunch of LFOs to change those parameters. It works on any synth sound, too. What makes it fun is applying the modulators takes just a few clicks so it’s enjoyable to explore.
Old 12th April 2019
  #9
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brownerthanu View Post
I’ll give two examples.

The first is sidechaining. You know how modern dance music uses a lot of sidechaining to change levels of certain signals in relation to others, like ducking a pad using a kick to give a pumping sound? In Bitwig you can sidechain any parameter or any combination. Say you want the frequency of the bass to FM modulate a pad but only in between kicks, no problem. You can make every audio source sidechain or modulate everything else in an infinitely interactive string of dependencies.

Another example is randomization. Say my hihat sample sounds a bit mechanical. I just throw a dice roll modulator on parameters that are naturally subtly random when a drummer plays. Attack, pitch, level, decay, filter cutoff, delay. It removes the robotic sound instantly. Or if I want something more periodic I can use a bunch of LFOs to change those parameters. It works on any synth sound, too. What makes it fun is applying the modulators takes just a few clicks so it’s enjoyable to explore.
Definitely sounds like the way I like to work. I try to make everything modular, and I sidechain like it's going out of style. Had to invent a plug for Logic and learn the MIDI environment because it requires four simultaneous MIDI sidechains from separate channels along with a negative offset.

It was doable in Logic, but not without some third party modular goodies. Personally, I see myself doing MORE sidechaining in the future, not less, and am drawn to synths and other plugs that allow any parameter to drive any other.

What are users doing for their comping? Recording in another DAW, and importing the comped track?
Old 18th April 2019
  #10
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apollo del Rio View Post
I've been using Logic for decades, but becoming increasingly disillusioned with direction Apple is going with hardware, and reconsidering overall direction for next time around.

I tend to have insanely complex routing (busses feeding busses feeding busses) with power hungry and latency inducing plugs at each stage. I've reached the point where I cripple Logic (MacPro 2018 with lots of ram and ssd's) on every project.

I tend to do dance music, so everything is on a grid, and I use LOTS of automation. I've got Nebula, and just don't use it any more as I have to choose between all my routing, or using such plugs.

Is bitwig more efficient, less crash prone under such use?

Any power users find that it is more or less useful for dance music production and/or heavy automation?

Any particular features such a user would find useful in bitwig, or miss coming from Logic?

Efficient? No. Logic's still performs better with heavy projects because of it's hybrid engine. Bitwig imo has pretty bad DSP efficiency even compared to something like Live which I think had bad DSP efficiency already. So if you are already bringing Logic to it's knees Bitwig won't even get halfway there.
Old 18th April 2019
  #11
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by apoclypse View Post
Efficient? No. Logic's still performs better with heavy projects because of it's hybrid engine. Bitwig imo has pretty bad DSP efficiency even compared to something like Live which I think had bad DSP efficiency already. So if you are already bringing Logic to it's knees Bitwig won't even get halfway there.
If I was to make the switch to Windows (not thrilled with the direction Mac hardware has taken), any particular DAW a good bet for handling complex routing, heavy sessions while maintaining stability, sample accurate automation, etc?
Old 23rd April 2019
  #12
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apollo del Rio View Post
If I was to make the switch to Windows (not thrilled with the direction Mac hardware has taken), any particular DAW a good bet for handling complex routing, heavy sessions while maintaining stability, sample accurate automation, etc?
Reaper, Studio One, Cubase. Those are the three I would recommend if you wanted the performance of Logic on a PC. There are others but those are fairly well known and have pretty decent communities if you do run into issues.

I personally use Studio One (on Mac) and its hybrid engine performs really well on my pretty heavy sessions (78+ tracks, plugins on every track, barely breaking a sweat on higher overload settings). The workflow imo is also comparable in some instances better than Logic in certain areas. Routing works just as well as Logic for the most part.

Almost every report of the software says it performs much better on Windows than it does on Mac. I've only ever used it on Mac, but do have an X99 8-core rig, though I primarily use that DCC stuff. I did install S1 on the machine to test my Focusrite Clarett 8Pre on a expansion Thunderbolt 2 card and it worked well. Mileage may vary depending on your machine, audio interface etc.

If you want pure performance Reaper is it, however workflow is not great imo though there are a lot of scripts and things that make things easier/cleaner UI wise. Personally I just can't get past the UI and I've really tried. I don't like looking at overloaded menus. Looking for a decent theme that only superficially covers up the Win3.1 interface gave me a headache. If you value functionality over aesthetics it's actually pretty powerful and routing is great.

S1 and Reaper have demos so check them out.
Old 23rd April 2019
  #13
Gear Maniac
 
shpongled's Avatar
How is Studio One with sysex? I'm looking for a logic replacement that is still able to record/pass sysex data for parameter control of old synths.

I'll get around to trying the demo at some point but won't bother if it doesn't have this functionality

Quote:
Originally Posted by apoclypse View Post
Reaper, Studio One, Cubase. Those are the three I would recommend if you wanted the performance of Logic on a PC. There are others but those are fairly well known and have pretty decent communities if you do run into issues.

I personally use Studio One (on Mac) and its hybrid engine performs really well on my pretty heavy sessions (78+ tracks, plugins on every track, barely breaking a sweat on higher overload settings). The workflow imo is also comparable in some instances better than Logic in certain areas. Routing works just as well as Logic for the most part.

Almost every report of the software says it performs much better on Windows than it does on Mac. I've only ever used it on Mac, but do have an X99 8-core rig, though I primarily use that DCC stuff. I did install S1 on the machine to test my Focusrite Clarett 8Pre on a expansion Thunderbolt 2 card and it worked well. Mileage may vary depending on your machine, audio interface etc.

If you want pure performance Reaper is it, however workflow is not great imo though there are a lot of scripts and things that make things easier/cleaner UI wise. Personally I just can't get past the UI and I've really tried. I don't like looking at overloaded menus. Looking for a decent theme that only superficially covers up the Win3.1 interface gave me a headache. If you value functionality over aesthetics it's actually pretty powerful and routing is great.

S1 and Reaper have demos so check them out.
Old 23rd April 2019
  #14
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by apoclypse View Post
Reaper, Studio One, Cubase. Those are the three I would recommend if you wanted the performance of Logic on a PC. There are others but those are fairly well known and have pretty decent communities if you do run into issues.

I personally use Studio One (on Mac) and its hybrid engine performs really well on my pretty heavy sessions (78+ tracks, plugins on every track, barely breaking a sweat on higher overload settings). The workflow imo is also comparable in some instances better than Logic in certain areas. Routing works just as well as Logic for the most part.

Almost every report of the software says it performs much better on Windows than it does on Mac. I've only ever used it on Mac, but do have an X99 8-core rig, though I primarily use that DCC stuff. I did install S1 on the machine to test my Focusrite Clarett 8Pre on a expansion Thunderbolt 2 card and it worked well. Mileage may vary depending on your machine, audio interface etc.

If you want pure performance Reaper is it, however workflow is not great imo though there are a lot of scripts and things that make things easier/cleaner UI wise. Personally I just can't get past the UI and I've really tried. I don't like looking at overloaded menus. Looking for a decent theme that only superficially covers up the Win3.1 interface gave me a headache. If you value functionality over aesthetics it's actually pretty powerful and routing is great.

S1 and Reaper have demos so check them out.

Food for thought.

I used Cubase for years before switching to mac, and have tooled around a bit in Reaper. I couldn't get on with it either.

Never checked out S1, though. Interesting that I could switch platforms with it if I decided to (mac/pc). Any particular examples of where it is bettter/worse than logic in terms of workflow/efficiency/stability?
Old 23rd April 2019
  #15
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apollo del Rio View Post
I used Cubase for years before switching to mac, and have tooled around a bit in Reaper. I couldn't get on with it either.
the easiest way I could determine for using Reaper, is to populate toolbars with buttons which trigger Actions. key commands in Logic speak. the developer of Reaper cites his experience with Logic as the origin of his own DAW development. obviously it wasn't the environment system he liked best. though for me it is my favorite part of Logic. in any case, if you were a Logic power user, you'll find Reaper can be more like a platform on which you can almost design your own DAW. though it will take some effort. I'm up to about 160 toolbar buttons, and that's really just for reproducing certain core behaviors. nothing fancy. the main thing I miss from Logic aside from the environment system, is Logics 'range' functions in the quantize system. e.g. being able to only bring towards the quantize criteria, those events which are outside the 'range' of the criteria. so it basically leaves those events which are inside the 'range' alone, and only brings the outside events towards. you could set the strength by which you did that too. Reaper doesn't seem to have this element.
Old 23rd April 2019
  #16
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muser View Post
the easiest way I could determine for using Reaper, is to populate toolbars with buttons which trigger Actions. key commands in Logic speak. the developer of Reaper cites his experience with Logic as the origin of his own DAW development. obviously it wasn't the environment system he liked best. though for me it is my favorite part of Logic. in any case, if you were a Logic power user, you'll find Reaper can be more like a platform on which you can almost design your own DAW. though it will take some effort. I'm up to about 160 toolbar buttons, and that's really just for reproducing certain core behaviors. nothing fancy. the main thing I miss from Logic aside from the environment system, is Logics 'range' functions in the quantize system. e.g. being able to only bring towards the quantize criteria, those events which are outside the 'range' of the criteria. so it basically leaves those events which are inside the 'range' alone, and only brings the outside events towards. you could set the strength by which you did that too. Reaper doesn't seem to have this element.
OK, thx.

I do some basic stuff in environment, but don't do a whole lot of massaging MIDI data.

Moreso, I tend to break systems doing nested audio routing, complex sidechaining, and just general overloading of fx chains into busses with more fx chains, etc.

I'd love to be able to do MORE sidechaining... like any parameter from any channel controlling any other from any other channel... or even take multiple sidechains into a single channel an mix/match midi/audio sidechains.

I've had to develop some custom plugs to do some of this in logic.
Old 23rd April 2019
  #17
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apollo del Rio View Post
OK, thx.

I do some basic stuff in environment, but don't do a whole lot of massaging MIDI data.

Moreso, I tend to break systems doing nested audio routing, complex sidechaining, and just general overloading of fx chains into busses with more fx chains, etc.

I'd love to be able to do MORE sidechaining... like any parameter from any channel controlling any other from any other channel... or even take multiple sidechains into a single channel an mix/match midi/audio sidechains.

I've had to develop some custom plugs to do some of this in logic.
yeah I have a nested folders and side chaining requirement as well. there's a JS plugin or script called FXRack which is similar to the way bluecats patchwork works. though bluecats patchwork is probably a better bet for that when all said and done. though you can still do a set of useful operations. you can also figure out how to put midi channels on different busses. so you can get a few instruments in one unit. again, I suspect bluecats patchwork might make handling the midi simpler. I haven't yet properly tested the kinds of cross feeding event sources you're probably talking about, but I'd probably like to do it in a contained environment such as those types.

the nesting of tracks within tracks seems to work ok, though it takes some figuring out. there are some behaviors I'm not sure about yet, or if I found some kind of issue there. you're basically setting up a bunch of sends and receives and the main thing I've run into is with a convolution impulse send for the snare, introducing a large latency hit on the whole nest. but that is to be expected. other than that, I can still easily put any track in the nest, into record monitor and get a response from the source I select for midi input. it generally seems to work as you'd expect something of this particular design to work.
Old 23rd April 2019
  #18
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muser View Post
yeah I have a nested folders and side chaining requirement as well. there's a JS plugin or script called FXRack which is similar to the way bluecats patchwork works. though bluecats patchwork is probably a better bet for that when all said and done. though you can still do a set of useful operations. you can also figure out how to put midi channels on different busses. so you can get a few instruments in one unit. again, I suspect bluecats patchwork might make handling the midi simpler. I haven't yet properly tested the kinds of cross feeding event sources you're probably talking about, but I'd probably like to do it in a contained environment such as those types.

the nesting of tracks within tracks seems to work ok, though it takes some figuring out. there are some behaviors I'm not sure about yet, or if I found some kind of issue there. you're basically setting up a bunch of sends and receives and the main thing I've run into is with a convolution impulse send for the snare, introducing a large latency hit on the whole nest. but that is to be expected. other than that, I can still easily put any track in the nest, into record monitor and get a response from the source I select for midi input. it generally seems to work as you'd expect something of this particular design to work.
One of the biggest issues I seem to run into with logic is in core balancing having to do with the fx chains on busses. (That and it seems to hit a wall sometimes in terms of the chained latency it can deal with). For instance, a bunch of plugs on individual tracks is ok, but when I then have a few going through percussion bus with fx into drum bus with fx into music bus with fx, etc, I end up with pegged cores. Any points of comparison there?
Old 23rd April 2019
  #19
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apollo del Rio View Post
One of the biggest issues I seem to run into with logic is in core balancing having to do with the fx chains on busses. (That and it seems to hit a wall sometimes in terms of the chained latency it can deal with). For instance, a bunch of plugs on individual tracks is ok, but when I then have a few going through percussion bus with fx into drum bus with fx into music bus with fx, etc, I end up with pegged cores. Any points of comparison there?
Reaper is famous for its ridiculous CPU efficiency. hows that ?
Old 24th April 2019
  #20
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apollo del Rio View Post
Food for thought.

I used Cubase for years before switching to mac, and have tooled around a bit in Reaper. I couldn't get on with it either.

Never checked out S1, though. Interesting that I could switch platforms with it if I decided to (mac/pc). Any particular examples of where it is bettter/worse than logic in terms of workflow/efficiency/stability?
Workflow is probably the best thing about S1. As a Logic user it may take you a few minutes to wrap you head around it. You'll think man I miss this or that feature from Logic, but once you start using S1 things just are so intuitive and it works like you expect it to work. Like drag and dropping plugins, effects, etc. It's a very efficient DAW in-terms of how you use it and it has hybrid engine so you can load it pretty heavy with plugins. Automation is way better/tighter than Logic. Easier to edit as well with great automation tools.

As for what it does better. Hmm. It has a lot of workflows from PT so things like comping and layering work very similarly and work very well in S1. Melodyne ARA integration is way better than that mess in Logic and they give you Essentials with the application so you get basic Melodyne pitch editing. If you own Melodyne already then you don't need to do anything. The sampler is not as powerful as ESX24 but it has more modern features like realtime timestretch etc. It has a drum editor like Cubase (more intuitive than the Step Editor/HyperDraw imo) and it has a pattern editor kind of like FLStudio or the editor in UltraBeat.

I can write a book about the differences but the best thing to do is grab the demo.
Old 24th April 2019
  #21
Gear Maniac
 
shpongled's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by apoclypse View Post
Workflow is probably the best thing about S1. As a Logic user it may take you a few minutes to wrap you head around it. You'll think man I miss this or that feature from Logic, but once you start using S1 things just are so intuitive and it works like you expect it to work. Like drag and dropping plugins, effects, etc. It's a very efficient DAW in-terms of how you use it and it has hybrid engine so you can load it pretty heavy with plugins. Automation is way better/tighter than Logic. Easier to edit as well with great automation tools.

As for what it does better. Hmm. It has a lot of workflows from PT so things like comping and layering work very similarly and work very well in S1. Melodyne ARA integration is way better than that mess in Logic and they give you Essentials with the application so you get basic Melodyne pitch editing. If you own Melodyne already then you don't need to do anything. The sampler is not as powerful as ESX24 but it has more modern features like realtime timestretch etc. It has a drum editor like Cubase (more intuitive than the Step Editor/HyperDraw imo) and it has a pattern editor kind of like FLStudio or the editor in UltraBeat.

I can write a book about the differences but the best thing to do is grab the demo.
studio one looks amazing except i've just found out it doesn't support sysex at all, which is a problem as i have an mks-50 which uses sysex messages instead of cc for parameter control :(
Old 25th April 2019
  #22
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by shpongled View Post
studio one looks amazing except i've just found out it doesn't support sysex at all, which is a problem as i have an mks-50 which uses sysex messages instead of cc for parameter control :(
Yeah things like Sysex etc are not S1's strong suit.
Old 26th April 2019
  #23
Gear Maniac
 
shpongled's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by apoclypse View Post
Yeah things like Sysex etc are not S1's strong suit.
while it doesn't deal with sysex itself, do you know if it would still pass sysex messages through?

e.g. if i was to use a vst controller plugin for my synth, would the sysex messages generated by that plugin make it to the synth?

do you (or does anyone else) know?

thanks!
Old 14th May 2019
  #24
Gear Maniac
The grass is always greener. They all have strengths, they all have weaknesses. Useless info, I know, but you’re going to have to try them yourself to really know. Demos aplenty. Logic is pretty darn good, so don’t expect miracles.
Old 15th May 2019
  #25
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonljacobi View Post
The grass is always greener. They all have strengths, they all have weaknesses. Useless info, I know, but you’re going to have to try them yourself to really know. Demos aplenty. Logic is pretty darn good, so don’t expect miracles.


Sure.... but my biggest issue and scarcest resource is always time... so knocking as many out of the running as possible beforehand is a must. I just like crowdsourcing in general, though. Even if my specific question never ultimately gets resolved, I usually learn some useful things in the process.

I think between all forums, real life, etc... I've probably asked an average of at least 5 questions a day about something I wanted to understand better for decades.

All that info you never would have known otherwise adds up...

... at least until you get to be my age at which point you forget it all even faster.
Old 17th May 2019
  #26
Logic's performance is fantastic as long as you don't use too many buses/live tracks/live instruments. Routing nested things to buses to other buses brings it to it's knees faster than other DAWs, which is probably where you're having problems. I found bitwig relies a lot more on the project buffer size for performance. It's fine at 64, but when things get heavy and i go to 128 it nearly doubles the performance. It's also (by a country mile) the tightest wrt PDC. It's always tight, there's never anything that's not exactly where you expect it. What you see on the screen is always what you hear. So rare in other DAWs and Logic with it's flakey automation has always been one of the worst offenders here.
The modulation options are unbelievable. Intimidating. Taking a vocal channel's signal to duck a relevant frequency on the eq of the reverb while the singer sings, and push back up when she's not for example. Two or three clicks, done. Anything you can think of (and tons that hasn't occurred to you yet) is usually do-able. I love it.
Having said all that, comping is not even a concept yet, Logic is still streets ahead for recording and compiling.
Old 17th May 2019
  #27
Lives for gear
 
draig's Avatar
 

I find Logic and Bitwig make an excellent combo!
Old 18th May 2019
  #28
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloofin View Post
Logic's performance is fantastic as long as you don't use too many buses/live tracks/live instruments. Routing nested things to buses to other buses brings it to it's knees faster than other DAWs, which is probably where you're having problems. I found bitwig relies a lot more on the project buffer size for performance. It's fine at 64, but when things get heavy and i go to 128 it nearly doubles the performance. It's also (by a country mile) the tightest wrt PDC. It's always tight, there's never anything that's not exactly where you expect it. What you see on the screen is always what you hear. So rare in other DAWs and Logic with it's flakey automation has always been one of the worst offenders here.
The modulation options are unbelievable. Intimidating. Taking a vocal channel's signal to duck a relevant frequency on the eq of the reverb while the singer sings, and push back up when she's not for example. Two or three clicks, done. Anything you can think of (and tons that hasn't occurred to you yet) is usually do-able. I love it.
Having said all that, comping is not even a concept yet, Logic is still streets ahead for recording and compiling.
All sounds great... right up to the comping bit.

"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Old 4th June 2019
  #29
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by brownerthanu View Post
I’ll give two examples.

The first is sidechaining. You know how modern dance music uses a lot of sidechaining to change levels of certain signals in relation to others, like ducking a pad using a kick to give a pumping sound? In Bitwig you can sidechain any parameter or any combination. Say you want the frequency of the bass to FM modulate a pad but only in between kicks, no problem. You can make every audio source sidechain or modulate everything else in an infinitely interactive string of dependencies.

Another example is randomization. Say my hihat sample sounds a bit mechanical. I just throw a dice roll modulator on parameters that are naturally subtly random when a drummer plays. Attack, pitch, level, decay, filter cutoff, delay. It removes the robotic sound instantly. Or if I want something more periodic I can use a bunch of LFOs to change those parameters. It works on any synth sound, too. What makes it fun is applying the modulators takes just a few clicks so it’s enjoyable to explore.
Great post I haven’t even tried dice roll automation, just lfos.
Old 19th June 2019
  #30
Gear Maniac
Hey @OP - I am with you, I got stung TWICE by Logic. Once back in the early 2000s, when I saved up for Logic Pro 5 (eMagic), only to find out months later they sold out to Apple and there would be NO MORE PC VERSION (I was on PC then). Then I got STUNG again on Logic Pro 9, because at that point I was pretty invested in my Power Mac (after switching from PC earlier in that year), and thought, yep, I need to bite the bullet and buy Logic! $950 out the door of Guitar Center, and BOOM, what do they do - Logic Pro 10 for $200 or whatever it started at on the App Store! No grace period for someone like me who had just dropped a G! No resale value at all.

Anyway, I know you said you didn't get along with it, and I didn't like how stuck I would get in configuring it, but version 10 TRULY IS A GAMECHANGEER. Your only choice for what you describe is Cubase 10. Grab it while it's 50% off, trust me, they almost never give such a good sale on the new licenses like that! 30% at most if I remember correctly. They have finally improved so many little things, and made the whole program much more approachable. It is so simple to use now knowing nothing about it, whereas before you really had to know how to set up the connections, it was very convoluted to get the metronome to even make a sound, etc. Lots of stuff buried in menus that is now contextual. Interface is simplified and easy to apprehend.

Studio One 4 is cool too. I just don't love the mixer, feels like an afterthought to me. I know a lot of people mix seriously with it of course! It's just little things like not showing the max dB level for each track, whereas Cubase will always hold and show that value until you click to reset (I don't know about others, but if a track is averaging -15 dB but hit a peak of -1 dB, I WOULD like to know that just from glancing at the track!). It's possible Studio One 4 added that in version 4.5, haven't checked it out yet.

But yeah if you want comping, and an excellent mixer, Cubase 10 all the way. Don't forget they just added mix snapshots, a feature I've been cursing to myself as to why no one had it for years now! And now they have it, and it works very well. Pick up the CC121 controller, and you've got a very high grade interface for the EQ and one excellent moving fader plus jog wheel and other buttons.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump