# Cubase Pro 10.5 or Studio One Pro 5



## Trancer (Oct 1, 2020)

After your opinions on Live 10 and Cubase Pro 10.5, I would like to have your opinions and feedback on Studio One Pro 5.

Here, it is not a question of instability of not knowing and asking a lot of questions for a dozen Daw, but just knowing the most ergonomic, reliable, efficient, having the most useful functions without rocking in the gas plant .

Having a certain resemblance, but apparently better point for Studio One Pro 5, better ergonomics, which one to choose between Cubase Pro 10.5 and Studio One Pro 5?

Here beyond trying it, I would like to hear from those who know each of the two daw or even those who have used both and compare the pros and cons.

I really like Live 10 it is true, but the possibilities of Cubase (perhaps too gas-powered) and Studio One Pro 5 (easier to handle compared to Cubase), make me say that more complete than Live, even if not the same operating philosophy.

It s true not launching clips, but editor of drums and patterns which are not bad and which are a bit like the drum rack in Live 10.

Then for Studio One Pro 5, there is the Atom SQ controller which looks pretty fucked up.

For Studio One Pro 5 there is also the Faderport 16, which also gives it an advantage, a complete system from the same company, therefore, compatibility and stability should be ensured.

Quite a few questions, but it's to target my future purchase.

Thank you in advance for your answers


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Oct 1, 2020)

Cubase. You’ll quickly run into limitations in S1 for orchestral mock-ups. And I like S1 in general.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 1, 2020)

Thank you for your reply.

Can you explain to me why limitation in the orchestral, what do you mean to yourself?

But your preference is still Studio One understood so well?


----------



## jbuhler (Oct 1, 2020)

The more tracks you have, especially VIs, and the longer the composition the more likely you are to encounter issues with S1. For me S1 works really well up to about 30 tracks of VIs and a 10 minute long song. Above 60 tracks and it gets unwieldy for me. (Others report working with 100 tracks without issue so it might have something to do with my workflow.) when the song gets longer than ten minutes I have had issues with file corruption, especially if I’ve used the scratch pad extensively. In any case these days I tend to use S1 for short small projects. It has a lot of things I prefer to Logic.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 1, 2020)

Thank you for this very interesting feedback, but a little worrying all the same as maybe limited in the number of tracks.

Apparently there is no problem with Cubase Pro 10.5.


----------



## jbuhler (Oct 1, 2020)

Trancer said:


> Thank you for this very interesting feedback, but a little worrying all the same as maybe limited in the number of tracks.
> 
> Apparently there is no problem with Cubase Pro 10.5.


I mean Cubase has its own issues, so there's that, but it seems the preferred solution for working with large templates (though other DAWs can work with large templates too). Most people seem to prefer its midi implementation. There are also quite a lot more Cubase users, I think, so it's somewhat easier to get help when you run into difficulty.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 1, 2020)

For my use only of vst, the only hardware part it will perhaps be for a Vermona drm mk3 and a sequencer.

Really a shame in any case the limitation for Studio One Pro 5.

Cubase used a lot, even in electronic music, not as much as Live, but quite present anyway.


----------



## jonathanwright (Oct 1, 2020)

I personally haven't had any issues with Studio One and large projects (Mac).

Cubase has become unstable and clunky for me in recent releases, so for longer video projects I’ll, use Logic.

Its worth downloading the demo to see how your system copes.


----------



## khollister (Oct 2, 2020)

First some background - I have been a Logic user for a very long time with a short Cubase/PC off ramp in between my MP 5.1 and the announcement/release of the iMac Pro (my current machine). I was never comfortable with several aspects of Cubase, notably the exploding windows UI and the sheer complexity and non-intuitive way of doing certain things. There is no doubt it probably wins the feature/capability checklist, but I never really enjoyed using it.

Fast forward to now and once again, there is a bit of uncertainty in the roadmap of high-end Apple machines going forward, to say nothing of the shocking price of even the current Mac Pro. While I prefer to stay on MacOS even at a price premium, it is not clear how the ARM thing will shake out. So I was again shopping for a cross platform DAW.

To jump to the punchline, I took advantage of the recent PluginAlliance deal for the S1 Pro competitive upgrade for $200 and installed it on both my 2016 MBP and 2017 iMP. THe iMP rig has an Apollo X6, 2 TB satellites and a ton of plugins (both instruments and effects). Both machines are running the latest version of Catalina.

So far (early days), I'm really happy with S1. THe GUI is very responsive and snappy, the workflow and ease of use is great, I have had zero issues so far with either installation and I have experiemnted quite a bit on the iMP with many VST's and my UAD effects. No sign of the Kontakt issues some have reported and my initial tests on CPU efficiency have been encouraging (very close to LPX @ 128 buffer/48K). I did disable AU and am using just VST based on numerous reports that VST works better than AU with S1.

The caveat is I do not use templates (maybe I'm an idiot), so it is highly unlikely I will achieve crazy track counts like many here do. So far I'm very pleased with S1 ver 5.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 2, 2020)

Thanks for your feedback.

Ah good so unstable that that, not very reassuring.

I am not sure about Mac, I will be sure about a pc platform.

So, logic unless error on my part not compatible on pc.

It is true that Studio One Pro 5 seems much easier to access.

What scares me a little is that I'm only going to use vsts and effects plug ins that are virtual except maybe for the drums part.

If there is in some configurations a problem with about thirty tracks that is not reassuring.

Because my future projects will be much greater than around thirty vst tracks / virtual plugins / samples and most certainly a Vermona drm mk3.

So I need a daw that can handle compositions with a very large number of tracks without any problems.


----------



## khollister (Oct 2, 2020)

I need to retract my enthusiasm for S1. While it appeared to be as CPU efficient as Logic while playing 4 to 6 parts on a 4 part multi (Kontakt, Diva x 2, Repro-5), when I laid in some MIDI, added a NADA track and then duplicated everything 3 times, I was unable to play it back at 128 - and it wasn't close.

When I did the same thing on Cubase 10.5 (which I recently updated to from 9.5), I can play 4 copies of all the tracks and still have CPU headroom. I also see that 10/10.5 has greatly improved the exploding windows GUI. This is all on a 10 core iMac Pro BTW.

My advice based on my limited experimenting, go Cubase. I imagine it runs even better on Windows 10.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 2, 2020)

thank you for your reply

Just apparently catastrophic on Windows 10, instability, crash, slowness, high cpu load.

Since Cubase version 10, there would be a lot of instability, which at first glance is not the case with Pro 9.5 version.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 2, 2020)

a stable, reliable, efficient daw that can accept very large sessions and apparently neither Studio One Pro 5 nor Cubase Pro 10.5 can offer this stability, reliability and an acceptance of large projects, this last point more a concern for Studio One Pro 5.

It's still surprising to have this kind of worry, constraint.


----------



## Film Sounds (Oct 2, 2020)

S1 has tabbed CC lanes AND multiple if you want. Cubase is a screen real-estate hog
S1 notation is great and fast to work in, fits any # of notes into a tuplet/run
S1 had track data import before Cubase, they just didn't sell it as a big update item.
S1 has a transform tool similar to the velocity compression handles in Cubase.
S1 navigation and workflow is vastly superior over all. It's not even a contest.
S1 is far better at doing a daytime theme if you use a glossy laptop outside (Surface Book here)
S1 has no dongle. As a Surface user, I hardly ever get out my key anymore. Why bother?
S1 has better humanize and mass note editing options by far, easier to access by default, etc.
S1 has vastly superior vst CPU monitoring. Clipping warnings on export and bouncing.
S1 has a -200MB installer, easy for mobile or quick re-up time. Cubase installers can be clunky.
S1 has user-voted features. Dev takes time, but they're building a reputation for a reason.
S1 was started by a former Steinberg dev manager & the author of VST3, plus they hired Logic and Pro Tools developers to switch companies. Cut-throat, but smart for dev too. Not AVID, at least. 

Cubase has the transform feature that is a clearly more agile.
Cubase is a bit more stable. S1 + VEP is stable for me, but... I avoid dongles, so Cubase wins here. (They've had an unstable history. All devs have periods. So IMHO, I'd wait either one out here)
Cubase expression maps are more flexible, but take vastly more work than StaffPad to use. Vastly.
Cubase video track is great. Not perfect, but S1's video player isn't as agile.
Both have curve editing, but Cubase did a really nice job with theirs for mouse drawing.
Cubase has Dorico integration on the way. Dorico looks beautiful, shiny, and beautiful.
Cubase crashes if I detach my Surface Screen (dongle), instead of temporarily freezing. 
Cubase velocity compression handles are faster to access than the transform tool. Not big, but faster.

I prefer Studio One. It has hiccups, but after using both for years, and going back and forth for various projects, I've become used to both and can comfortably use either back and forth now. S1 just clearly wins in so many small polished ways that it makes life easier. Not completely, but mostly for me. Steinberg is slower to think about UX. If they catch-up, S1 is in trouble. But if S1 adds better film features & works out stability, Steinberg is in trouble. All companies have instable periods. Depends on the build. They're fairly equal, just different.

Sorry for the novel (and some opinions), but hopefully it helps.


----------



## Øivind (Oct 2, 2020)

Unfortunately, no one can be told what the correct DAW is. You have to try them for yourself.


----------



## Lukas (Oct 2, 2020)

I exclusively use Studio One so I can't say anything about current Cubase versions.

On my system and with my plug-ins (Kontakt, SINE Player, ENGINE, Omnisphere, Keyscape, Zebra, Sound Toys, Fabfilter, Valhalla and so on) Studio One 5 is perfectly stable and snappy. No problems with larger projects and many tracks. It's very important to know that up to date OS and plug-in versions are essential for working with Studio One, especially on Mac. I hardly use it on Mac (only for testing purposes) but currently the GUI still feels a bit smoother on Windows (although graphics / smooth scrolling etc. has improved a LOT with V5 since it supports the MacOS Metal and Skia frameworks and it will be ). There are problems with older versions of Waves and Slate plug-ins and/or older MacOS versions but updating them to the latest version should fix these issues.

And it's true that VST should be preferred over AU when using Studio One. AU is still "the" Logic/MainStage format so many plug-in developers test their plug-ins only in Logic. For example, Waves does not test the AU versions of their plug-ins in Studio One... so apart from some exceptions, make sure to use VST 3 (or VST 2 if there's no VST 3 version).

What I love about V5 is that many composer and scoring features have been added for example MPE and Note Controllers, keyswitch management, improved external instrument handling, improved note/controller MIDI editing and an integrated score editor. And I know that some exciting features are planned for the nearer future.

And what I love about Studio One in general is that you can build your own macros and organize them in custom toolbars. I'm planning to share some of my custom Note / MIDI Editing macro toolbars at some point because I think many people don't know about certain MIDI editing commands at all (for example the different Quantize or Time commands or the legato tool for adjusting legato phrases).



> For my use only of vst, the only hardware part it will perhaps be for a Vermona drm mk3 and a sequencer.
> 
> Really a shame in any case the limitation for Studio One Pro 5.


Why? Studio One works great with both VST instrument and external instruments (using AUX channels).



Trancer said:


> Because my future projects will be much greater than around thirty vst tracks / virtual plugins / samples and most certainly a Vermona drm mk3.
> 
> So I need a daw that can handle compositions with a very large number of tracks without any problems.


As I said: No problems with large numbers of tracks on my system (and I'm running a pretty old i7 from 2011!!!)



ALittleNightMusic said:


> Cubase. You’ll quickly run into limitations in S1 for orchestral mock-ups. And I like S1 in general.


Which limitations do you mean? I've been making orchestral mock-ups with Studio One for 8 years. And I agree that there were BIG limitations in terms of MIDI editing and template work in version 2 or still in version 3. But I don't notice any limitation anymore... all my bigger long-term feature wishes have been added in version 4 and finally in version 5.



khollister said:


> I need to retract my enthusiasm for S1. While it appeared to be as CPU efficient as Logic while playing 4 to 6 parts on a 4 part multi (Kontakt, Diva x 2, Repro-5), when I laid in some MIDI, added a NADA track and then duplicated everything 3 times, I was unable to play it back at 128 - and it wasn't close.


I'm also using Kontakt, Diva and NADA (I wrote one of the demo songs for it) and never experienced such issues - on Windows 10 though. Do you run Catalina? And which audio interface do you have?



Trancer said:


> a stable, reliable, efficient daw that can accept very large sessions and apparently neither Studio One Pro 5 nor Cubase Pro 10.5 can offer this stability, reliability and an acceptance of large projects, this last point more a concern for Studio One Pro 5.


Well, nobody here can promise that it will run fine on your system. All I can say is that the Studio One 5 demo version (which is actually the same installation as the full version) is < 200 MB and you can test it for 30 days without restrictions. So why not just try it out, load some KONTAKT instances, duplicate them, create a test template and see how it works for you?



oivind_rosvold said:


> Unfortunately, no one can be told what the correct DAW is. You have to try them for yourself.



+1


----------



## Trancer (Oct 2, 2020)

Thank you for your very precise answers and opinions.

For the moment I have not bought anything yet, I am just taking information before purchasing, in order to take what is most suitable for my use.

So, if I understand correctly, Studio One Pro 5 has no particular concerns, you just have to make sure you have all the updates in order for the different devices and instead use vsts.

What scared me a little was the response back to the limitation of Studio one pro, but, which is not a recurring problem but rather functional in some special cases.

So Studio One Pro is quite possibly a choice to be taken into account more than Cubase as I understand it.


----------



## khollister (Oct 2, 2020)

Lukas said:


> I'm also using Kontakt, Diva and NADA (I wrote one of the demo songs for it) and never experienced such issues - on Windows 10 though. Do you run Catalina? And which audio interface do you have?



Yes, I'm on 10.15.6 and I use an Apollo X6, latest UAD driver.

So what process buffer setting do you use? - Low or Medium?


----------



## EgM (Oct 2, 2020)

I use all DAWs except the EDM ones like Ableton/Bitwig/etc, they're all capable of the very same thing.

But on the question of Cubase vs Studio One, both are just as stable as the other and I do use MANY tracks/instruments with no issues. Of the very small issues I've had in the past, most were caused by poor disk speed/latency, I changed to an NVMe and I couldn't be happier.

Seeing as Cubase and SO5 can do the same tasks for me here's some of my pro/cons:

Cubase:
+ Comprehensive MIDI features
+ Stable
+ Long time in the industry, has probably every feature available.
- Isn't updated often, and sometimes critical bugs are fixed in the next .5 or .0 version so you have to pay again to upgrade for a bug fix. Yeah, you do have to pay for .5 and .0 upgrades
- Audio tools and manipulation are not anything special
- Super dated user interface, floating windows everywhere, needs a new UX/UI specialist in the team quickly.
- Horrible mixer (to me), with sends hidden from main view with a button unless you like running your mixer in fullscreen on a dedicated screen.
- Mediabay needs to disappear! There are a LOT of other ways to manage presets in a more effective way.
- Mouse scroll is too Faaassssst!
- Dongle, meh if you have a laptop it does suck. I use a desktop so I don't care. Only valid for one dongle at a time.


SO5:
- Moderate MIDI features, but it's getting there! Missing assign midi channel to specific note then I'd be happy. It's perfectly good for anything, just have to use a workaround.
+ Stable
+ New to the game, has implemented pretty much the bread and butter needed by musicians, updates very frequently. Paid versions used to be every ~3years (v3 to v4), v4 to v5 was 2 years, and you just pay for the .0 upgrade (for 6.0 for instance).
+ Working with audio is a charm in this one, everything is in there, melodyne essential comes included
+ Clean User Interface, no 'big frames' windows, and every window is at the same level as the main app, so one won't just disappear in the back for fun
+ Mixer is my favorite from all DAWs I've seen, everything is there!! You can even see your VST parameters directly on the mixer (i.e. limiter reduced amount), EQ curve, etc)
+ Preset management is perfect for me, beats having to make project templates, just drag your prepared instrument from the folder to the track and it's set up.
+ Mouse scroll is at normal speed.
+ No dongle, just C/R serial key with presonus user/password, you can activate up to 5 machines at once. On the MyPresonus site, you can manage your activations in case one of your PCs died and you want to deactivate it.

So yeah,but stability-wise they're the same to me. Do you a favor and buy both like I did haha :D

Have a good evening!


----------



## Lukas (Oct 2, 2020)

khollister said:


> Yes, I'm on 10.15.6 and I use an Apollo X6, latest UAD driver.
> 
> So what process buffer setting do you use? - Low or Medium?


I'm currently on 256 samples and my S1 Dropout Protection is set to maximum (that all tracks / instruments / plug-ins are running on the maximum buffer size and only the "active" track which is armed for recording uses 256 samples). If I need to record piano tracks or fast synth solos, I switch to 128. My jazz/funk/fusion arrangements are usually more lightweight and for my orchestral projects don't need the lowest available latency. I use an RME HDSP 3296.



EgM said:


> - Moderate MIDI features, but it's getting there!


Which features are you missing...?  I suppose "assign MIDI channels to specific notes" refers to switching articulations when working with a multitimbral VSTi like Kontakt / SINE Player / PLAY with different articulations on different MIDI channels? It's true, that's currently not possible from a single track. But what else is missing for you?


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Oct 2, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Which limitations do you mean? I've been making orchestral mock-ups with Studio One for 8 years. And I agree that there were BIG limitations in terms of MIDI editing and template work in version 2 or still in version 3. But I don't notice any limitation anymore... all my bigger long-term feature wishes have been added in version 4 and finally in version 5.



Since you don't use Cubase, I would imagine the differences don't stand out to you - and that's great! Ignorance is bliss as they say. If S1 does what you need without limitation, embrace it. There's not much value in asking others "what features are you missing" unless you have a direct connection to Presonus somehow. Plenty of the limitations show up in the S1 feature requests. I own the latest versions of both along with Logic, PT, and Ableton. Due to that, I get to see the pros and cons of each. S1 is improving, but still has a way to go (articulation maps were only just added, but are very basic, their macro functionality is also pretty basic compared to Cubase, it has significantly worse CPU utilization on Mac, Cubase has way more advanced marker tracks, the UI customization and color choices are still piss poor, external controller support has been lacking for a long time, the MIDI editing is still not as good as Cubase, etc). I don't have time or interest to list out every limitation I face in S1 - because I don't care to use it now compared to Cubase (or more likely, Logic).

To the OP, both have demos - try them and make the decision for yourself.


----------



## Lukas (Oct 3, 2020)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> I would imagine the differences don't stand out to you - and that's great! Ignorance is bliss as they say. If S1 does what you need without limitation, embrace it.





ALittleNightMusic said:


> There's not much value in asking others "what features are you missing" unless you have a direct connection to Presonus somehow.


I don't think so. I think some functionality in Studio One (especially commands that are hidden in the "commands" list and not exposed in the GUI) is still not as obvious as it could be so people sometimes think something is missing although it's not. That's why I started a Studio One video tutorial series on MIDI editing and workflow topics some years ago. I have a pretty good connection to PreSonus and actually most of the "new" MIDI features in Studio One 3 and 4 have been added because I (and of course many other users) had missed it, especially the note actions in 4.5. I'm also a moderator on answers.presonus.com so I have a pretty decent overview of the pending and completed feature requests.

You mentioned the moderate MIDI features but what you've listed in your last posting was mostly not about MIDI (except articulation management and MIDI editing). So I'm interested in the details  But if you don't have time or interest to tell is, that's perfectly fine with me.


----------



## khollister (Oct 3, 2020)

So I have been doing more experimentation on the S1 CPU overload issue. My test project has 4xKontakt (Noire), 4xDiva (great/"Beauty Pad"), 4x Diva (great/"Deep Space Diva"), 4x Repro-5 (no HQ/"Ghost Ship") and 6xNADA ("Astral Echos") with a 4 voice chord progession on all tracks.

I have also tried my Babyface Pro in addition to the Apollo X6. On all 3 platforms I used an empty audio track for focus so all tracks playing were not record armed or monitored. iMac Pro 10 core. I did NOT have multi-core enabled on any of the U-he stuff. Results as follows:

LPX - approx 75% load across 19 cores, last core (live core) quiet, no significant difference between RME/UAD. Process buffer Normal

Cubase 10.5 - approx 75% average load, minimal peak load, no significant difference between interfaces. ASIO Guard High is slightly better than Normal.

Studio One 5 - trainwreck overload even with Process buffer to Maximum. Interestingly, it is much better with the RME, but still unusable.

The really telling part is that playing a stack live works pretty well on S1 - not too much worse than LPX/Cubase. It appears that the real issue for me is that the process buffer doesn't work. And while the CPU load on the Apollo is marginally better than the Babyface Pro on LPX & Cubase, the UAD driver apparently sucks on S1. Even so, there is still something serioously wrong with the process buffer operation even with the RME.

I'm going to try this on my MBP with the RME later out of curiosity. Ihave LPX and S1 installed there.

My impression of Cubase 10.5 is better than 9.5 (GUI), but while it offers features and speed of operation in certain things compared to LPX, LPX's GUI is more logically laid out (at the expense sometimes of more clicks) and offers track stacks (which Cubase doesn't have an analog to AFAIK).

I have an older PC I built a few years ago to use with Cubase which is sitting unused. I may fire it up, insstall 10.5 and try the RME with S1 to see what happens on Windows 10.

But for me currently, S1 5 is completely unusable on the Mac - money down the drain.


----------



## EgM (Oct 3, 2020)

Lukas said:


> I'm currently on 256 samples and my S1 Dropout Protection is set to maximum (that all tracks / instruments / plug-ins are running on the maximum buffer size and only the "active" track which is armed for recording uses 256 samples). If I need to record piano tracks or fast synth solos, I switch to 128. My jazz/funk/fusion arrangements are usually more lightweight and for my orchestral projects don't need the lowest available latency. I use an RME HDSP 3296.
> 
> 
> Which features are you missing...?  I suppose "assign MIDI channels to specific notes" refers to switching articulations when working with a multitimbral VSTi like Kontakt / SINE Player / PLAY with different articulations on different MIDI channels? It's true, that's currently not possible from a single track. But what else is missing for you?



Exactly, other than that there is nothing missing for me and is still my favorite of 'em all.


----------



## StefanoM (Oct 3, 2020)

I've Nuendo, Cubase Pro, ProTools, Logic, Studio One & Reaper.

I'm an advanced user of all These DAW.

I Use Nuendo and ProTools, since 1998.

So,

I use Studio One since version 2.5 but until now It was a DAW installed on my computer, but I ever used It professionally.

I always upgraded it, I saw Grow UP it, and NOW the Version V5 is quite Perfect.

Cubase has more features, but many of these are not really useful, Cubase has a heavy engine.

Cubase has the MIDI that is a little bit advanced but, I don't use many of these " advanced" Features, every day.

Cubase has a GUI that is really redundant. Studio One has a Cleaner and Faster GUI.

I Love Cubase, but for Now, for Music Production, I work really faster with Studio One.

Yeah, S1 doesn't have a real Video Track, but it's coming.

At this moment, Nuendo is my First DAW when I work on Audio Post Production, and advanced Mixing Processing ( Multichannel ) and big Template.

Studio One V5 is my first DAW for general use, music production, Mixing & Mastering.

Ste


----------



## markleake (Oct 3, 2020)

Film Sounds said:


> S1 has tabbed CC lanes AND multiple if you want. Cubase is a screen real-estate hog
> S1 notation is great and fast to work in, fits any # of notes into a tuplet/run
> S1 had track data import before Cubase, they just didn't sell it as a big update item.
> S1 has a transform tool similar to the velocity compression handles in Cubase.
> ...


Thanks for putting the effort into comparing them. Is very useful to many people... well, me at least.


----------



## Film Sounds (Oct 3, 2020)

markleake said:


> Thanks for putting the effort into comparing them. Is very useful to many people... well, me at least.



As I finished that post, in the back of my mind I thought "No one will ever read this long novel. Well, hopefully someone gets something out of it".

Thanks for telling me it helped!


----------



## Babe (Oct 3, 2020)

I went back to S1 from Cubase when S1 came out with articulation maps. I left S1 back when Cubase came out with their maps. The maps in Cubase are much better but the ones in S1 are adequate and in their infancy.

The kicker for me in S1 is the midi editing. (I use midi only.) The midi lanes in S1 are sooooo much better. I also love how the track automation integrates with track automation in S1. (Track automation is a misnomer as it's actually channel automation. This is what I hate most about S1. If you change the channel of the track, the automation doesn't follow. When you add a track with a different channel, you can't copy which parameters you want from another track. Big PIA.) What I do is set the default value for each parameter in track automation. If you don't change the parameter in the part, you will get the default value. You don't have to worry about changing back to the default value if you do a change.


----------



## markleake (Oct 3, 2020)

Question... looking at the Studio One "Compare Versions" page, it looks like the Artist version has almost all the features you'd need for producing music using VSTs. Am I missing something?


----------



## Film Sounds (Oct 3, 2020)

markleake said:


> Question... looking at the Studio One "Compare Versions" page, it looks like the Artist version has almost all the features you'd need for producing music using VSTs. Am I missing something?



Studio One Prime (the free version) actually has enough to do quite a lot, just with restrictions like single VST's, no multi's. If you're not thinking pro, I'd look at the list of features on Prime just to be sure even that wouldn't work for you.

Some freemium options are trickery to get you in, but you don't really have much choice other than upgrading. S1 Prime & FL Studio are probably the best free/low-mid options out there, being robust enough in features that many could actually get use out of. I'd certainly be happy if everyone adopted FL Studio's pricing model.

I'm a fan of free updates for life and holding dev roadmaps accountable to existing users.


----------



## Lukas (Oct 3, 2020)

Film Sounds said:


> Studio One Prime (the free version) actually has enough to do quite a lot, just with restrictions like single VST's, no multi's


What do you mean by "single VSTs, no multis"? Studio One Prime does not support 3rd party plug-ins (VST, AU) or Rewire. So only stock plugins (instruments and effects) can be used.

It's new that the Artist version (V5) now has VST/AU included... so I agree - if someone does not need the Pro features like NoteFX, Chord Track, Melodyne integration, Multi Instruments, Video, Score View etc., it's a pretty good deal I think


----------



## markleake (Oct 3, 2020)

Lukas said:


> What do you mean by "single VSTs, no multis"? Studio One Prime does not support 3rd party plug-ins (VST, AU) or Rewire. So only stock plugins (instruments and effects) can be used.
> 
> It's new that the Artist version (V5) now has VST/AU included... so I agree - if someone does not need the Pro features like NoteFX, Chord Track, Melodyne integration, Multi Instruments, Video, Score View etc., it's a pretty good deal I think


Yeah, that was my question. Just looking at the listed differences, it seems the Artist version makes it possible to do most composing tasks with VSTs _without_ any need of the Pro version.

I don't think anyone's gonna be interested in the free version if into composing.

My interest is more for people who don't write to video or use some of those "extras" (that most of us probably don't use, or have alternatives for), then S1 Artist seems to work fine. Am I misunderstanding something here? Why would you need Pro? It doesn't seem to cut down on number of tracks and such like the cheaper version of Cubase does.

What does "Multi Instrument" mean?


----------



## Film Sounds (Oct 3, 2020)

Lukas said:


> What do you mean by "single VSTs, no multis"? Studio One Prime does not support 3rd party plug-ins (VST, AU) or Rewire. So only stock plugins (instruments and effects) can be used.
> 
> It's new that the Artist version (V5) now has VST/AU included... so I agree - if someone does not need the Pro features like NoteFX, Chord Track, Melodyne integration, Multi Instruments, Video, Score View etc., it's a pretty good deal I think



I stand corrected. I must have misread something and it stuck with me. I thought it would load a VST, but not allow multiple instrument tracks on that VST.

With that in mind, the feature list is fairly robust if in-house only, but I'd rather drop other features and include vst. That's me.


----------



## Lukas (Oct 4, 2020)

markleake said:


> What does "Multi Instrument" mean?


It's a special instrument type which basically is a containern for multiple instruments that can be stacked or split. Every instrument within a Multi Instrument can have its own NoteFX (like Arpeggiator, Chorder, Repeater) and insert FX.

And they can be saved as Multi Instrument presets.

If you have an instrument track with an instrument already assigned and you drag another instrument on that same track, you get asked if you want to replace the old instrument or combine both. If you choose "Combine" a Multi Instrument is created.



Film Sounds said:


> I stand corrected. I must have misread something and it stuck with me. I thought it would load a VST, but not allow multiple instrument tracks on that VST.


Maybe what you read was about Multi Instruments. Would make sense to me.


----------



## dylanmixer (Oct 4, 2020)

The fact is that S1 does not really offer much over Cubase (at least in the film scoring realm) other than a prettier looking GUI. While S1 catches up to Cubase, Cubase is already working on the next thing. And that is even if S1's goal is to catch up to Cubase. Imo I feel as though they should focus on the EDM and electronic music market as that really seems to be S1s strengths. Unless they come up with something really innovative, I doubt you will see any pro composers switching over from Cubase/ Logic. 

Or I could be totally wrong and in 5 years everyone will be using S1 and Steinberg will crumble like an oatmeal cookie. Who knows.


----------



## Snarf (Oct 4, 2020)

Film Sounds said:


> Both have curve editing, but Cubase did a really nice job with theirs for mouse drawing.



Interesting, could you tell a bit more about this? I don't quite understand what you mean. Are you saying Cubase allows better/smoother curves when drawing in CC automation? If so, have you turned the automation reduction down in Studio One? (the default is pretty high, which makes drawing automation feel 'stiff')



Film Sounds said:


> Cubase velocity compression handles are faster to access than the transform tool. Not big, but faster.



A tip for those who don't know, instead of pressing 3 repeatedly (this is what I did when I started with Studio One - I kept wishing you could turn off some of these modes like sine and triangle etc), you can actually select the notes you want to edit and then press Alt+T for the transform tool!


----------



## Film Sounds (Oct 4, 2020)

Snarf said:


> Interesting, could you tell a bit more about this? I don't quite understand what you mean. Are you saying Cubase allows better/smoother curves when drawing in CC automation?



Better curves. Custom curves.

In Studio One...







The bend 'in the middle' exponentially gets closer to the start. The more you bend, the more it moves. That's all it does. Period. Still useful and you can still add dots to get any performance. But, look at these Bezier curves:

I avoided grabbing my dongle to give a side by sided. It's like a resistance of effort thing for me now. But suffice it to say that the bend direction follows the mouse in Cubase, making it easier to shape the sound to the type of performance you want.






Not all crecendos are created equal, which is true of orchestral or synth writing for me.


----------



## khollister (Oct 4, 2020)

An update on my gross CPU performance issue with S1 on my iMac Pro. I installed both Cubase 10.5 and S! 5 on a Windows machine I used as a Cubase host back in 2016 (now doing occasional duty as a VEP slave). I brought over the projects, installed the latest RME driver for my Babyface Pro, updated the VST's used in the test and let it rip.

Cubase did fairly well (I had to disable several tracks to get it to not overload - 6 core 6850K vs 10 core Xeon). I then tried the same cut down version in S1 - severe overloads. I had to chop it down by about 50% to get it to run.

I would love to know what I'm doing wrong, but S1 is completely unacceptable in terms of CPU efficiency for me on both platforms. The interesting thing is Cubase and S1 are reasonably close while live playing a stack of instruments, but when I record a bunch of tracks and play it back (nothing record armed, focus on a blank audio track), S1 goes to hell. I have ASIO Guard and the S1 process buffer on max settings.

Oh well, money wasted (should have done more testing before buying the crossgrade), but if I want a cross platform DAW, Cubase it is.


----------



## Film Sounds (Oct 4, 2020)

Expression Maps vs S1, an overlooked point:

1) Hairpins & KS need linking in the S1 editors. Vote on my *feature request here.* 
2) S1 doesn't need MIDI Channels in their mapping. They should absolutely not do this.

Spitfire, OT, EW, VSL... Kontakt + proprietary sampler messes. If a DAW dev cares about future users that don't want apps that require a tutorial to simply start using, they'll copy StaffPad here and focus on integration. -- I removed Spitfire's script and made mine work a lot like Aaron Venture results, just different. I don't need midi channels at all, have a far more agile and proper instrument, and it has 2 mics with full RR's on every playing technique on my Surface Book. How? By making smarter sampling decisions. I'll add more to my blog on this later on. Suffice it to say that sample devs should adapt to a well made DAW, not the other way around. Dorico integration is coming, but they still rely on an open ended mapping UX nightmare. S1 is minimal right now, but also quite able to do integration like StaffPad if they want to go that route, or just... keep it simple for their users. Maps are a terrible workflow compared to agile instruments.

Studio One is in a MUCH better position right now for this. I love saying this way, but I'd really rather ditch the workhorse tank full of features and get a simpler Tesla. I should have lead with this. Feature comparisons are one thing, but look at StaffPad. It has FAR less features, yet now that I'm past the handwriting learning curve (takes a week, really) I write faster than I ever have in a DAW. I'm not saying everyone should get SP cause of that. I'm saying that feature lists don't make a program great, otherwise the most bloated programs on Earth would be the best ones.


----------



## Film Sounds (Oct 4, 2020)

khollister said:


> I would love to know what I'm doing wrong... I have ASIO Guard and the S1 process buffer on max settings.... Oh well, money wasted (should have done more testing before buying the crossgrade)...



I've run 1,000+ instrument tracks in Studio One, hundreds of audio tracks, and experienced more stability than I had in Cubase for years... only to return to Cubase for a project and CRASH... well, I'll just click CRASH... constantly. *And since then, I've had the opposite happen, where Cubase won the battle.* DAW devs, plugin devs, MS/Apple, hardware, Intel... it's not you doing it wrong. It's multiple industries.

ASIO Guard and high buffers aren't always good. Someone told me to drop my buffer settings and ASIO guard on an i7 desktop with an RME AIO PCIe and it all suddenly worked. On my Surface Book 2, changed CPU power settings https://dancharblog.wordpress.com/2019/03/31/audio-music-production-tweaks-for-surface-disabling-intel-turbo-boost-for-better-asio-latency-performance-and-less-glitching/ (per this article), disalbed 48-192 rates in Asio4All, only using 44.1 or 48, as multiple outs caused an issue, and find the FL Studio ASIO driver with S1 a bit more stable (the driver installs with the FL Studio demo and there's no limit on using it).

The safest & simplest solution I've found is to pick your favorite DAW workflow & copy a working build down to the motherboard model & SSD. Or... order pizza, get a drill, & start "troubleshooting".


----------



## khollister (Oct 5, 2020)

Success  - I found the problem with my S1 testing vs LPX & Cubase! I woke up last night with the "duh" moment when I realized I used multi-instruments for the Kontakt, Diva and Repro instruments in S1 but had to build out individual tracks in LPX & Cubase. My theory was the multi-instruments all piled onto a single thread instead of scaling across multiple threads. This would explain why live mode busking looked fine, but multi-track playback sucked.

I just rebuilt the test song using individual tracks with separate instrument instances per (exactly how my Logic & Cubase projects were done), set the process buffer (aka ASIO Guard in Cubase or Process Buffer in Logic) to High and hit Play - approx 50-75% CPU, no overloads at all! This is a bit worse than LPX (expected on Mac) and a bit better than Cubase.

I also was getting stuck notes on the Diva instances which I seem to have cured by using VST2 versions instead of VST3.

I knew I must have done something idiotic.

UPDATE - still getting stuck notes on the VST2 DIVA instances, so I guess I need to email Uhrs on that.


----------



## Lukas (Oct 5, 2020)

Good to hear you could solve your issues. However I never had this kind of problem with Multi Instruments even with my ancient music computer :D



khollister said:


> UPDATE - still getting stuck notes on the VST2 DIVA instances, so I guess I need to email Uhrs on that.


I also use DIVA (VST 2 version) quite frequently but never had stuck notes. But I'm on Windows 10... maybe there is a MacOS issue!?


----------



## Trancer (Oct 5, 2020)

Thank you for your answers and opinions.

For stability the same for you, but more positive points for Studio One.

My use will only be for vst, therefore, better Cubase or Studio One Pro?

Questioning what you say about Studio One ...

I intend to take a pc, it will be the same problem or Studio One Pro more optimized for a pc?

Thank you for your feedback and opinion on Studio One.

In fact, what does Studio One Pro really lack compared to a Cubase?

I mean by that, for vst use and without the video part.

Of course it helped, all opinions, feedback, experiences matter.

I looked at the different versions of Studio One, this is the Pro version best suited to my needs, thank you for your answer.

One thing that both Cubase and Studio One lacks is a clip launcher.

Very relevant your intervention on the artist version of Studio One, it is true that for a lot of users it will be quite sufficient.

Regarding your thoughts on Studio One and EDM, it would even be an excellent idea that he continues to develop in this direction.

With the Atom SQ controller, it opens a way, as a clips launcher said above and voila, it could offer a daw hybrid, mix of Live and Cubase with Presonus DNA.


----------



## Brian2112 (Oct 5, 2020)

Honestly, I use both. I compose mostly in S1 (Because I like the workflow better), Then, sometimes I'll move it to Cubase if I need something I didn't have in S1 (which is becoming a short list).


----------



## Trancer (Oct 5, 2020)

Thank you for your reply.

What do you lack in Studio One compared to Cubase?

Do you have good cpu management both in Cubase and in Studio One, where one of the two is more greedy and more quickly saturated with the number of tracks?


----------



## jonathanwright (Oct 5, 2020)

Honestly, just download the demo.


----------



## Øivind (Oct 6, 2020)

I agree. You will never know how a DAW works for you or your system before you try it yourself. Download the trials/demos. Its free and you get all of your questions anwsered emediatly.


----------



## khollister (Oct 6, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Good to hear you could solve your issues. However I never had this kind of problem with Multi Instruments even with my ancient music computer :D
> 
> 
> I also use DIVA (VST 2 version) quite frequently but never had stuck notes. But I'm on Windows 10... maybe there is a MacOS issue!?



The Diva stuck note thing is very intermittent - not a huge problem. There is a known issue with the Diva arpeggiator causing stuck notes, but the patches I was using don't use the arpeggiator.

I am going to test the multi-instrument thing again today, but it makes sense to me. I was also using 3-4 multi's, each with 4 instruments (1 Kontakt, 2 Diva and 1 Repro), so it was likely not a real world use case.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 6, 2020)

Thanks for your feedback.

Indeed, doing a test would be the most appropriate.

But as already said, I am not a fan of essays and therefore risk creating conflicts and the like.

The reason why I ask your opinions, I know my expectations and your feedback helps me to make the most suitable choice according to the advantages and disadvantages of each one and my expectations.


----------



## Lukas (Oct 6, 2020)

khollister said:


> I am going to test the multi-instrument thing again today, but it makes sense to me. I was also using 3-4 multi's, each with 4 instruments (1 Kontakt, 2 Diva and 1 Repro), so it was likely not a real world use case.


Indeed! DIVA und Repro can be extremely CPU consuming. I can easily bring my computer to 95% ASIO usage with just one DIVA instance... well, it's modeling and it's quite expensive. So it's not really surprising if 4 multis (8x DIVA and 4x Repro) take your computer to the limits. BUT there shouldn't be big differences between Studio One and Cubase. If they are, this suggests that the settings (S1 Dropout Protection / Cubase ASIO Guard) are not the same / not set correctly. Did you check out the S1 videos / tutorials that show how to set up the DP / dual latency engine in Studio One? I'm just asking because this sounds really strange


----------



## dawtrek (Oct 6, 2020)

I starting posting Studio One articles on http://www.dawtrek.com (www.dawtrek.com).

I only have one article posted on Cubase/Nuendo so far.

The Chord tracks of both DAWs are similar.

Cubase/Nuendo can extract chords from a MIDI Part.
S1 can extract chords from MIDI parts and audio events.

Chord specification in Cubase/Nuendo has more assistance.
Chords can be picked from the circle of 5ths or by proximity.
It can also suggest alternative nearest chords and assist with cadences.
S1 doesn't have that.

Cubase/Nuendo chord pads have adaptive voicing calculated automatically.
With Cubase/Nuendo chord pads you can enter chords fast into a MIDI/Instrument track with the adaptive voicing.
S1 doesn't have chord pads.
S1 does have macros that allow you to edit MIDI really fast but that's not the same thing.


I find S1 workflows to be among the fastest.
If you are coming from another DAW you may be able to start using S1 without looking at the manual.

Cubase/Nuendo is well organized and generally goes deeper.
Workflows are not as intuitive as S1 or optimized for workflow speed.
S1's forte is working fast.


The Presonus ecosystem of external hardware makes it easy to setup a Presonus shop.
S1 doesn't have the VR and gaming friendly features of Nuendo.
And S1 only has the Video player versus the 2 video tracks in Nuendo.
Cubase/Nuendo has many marker tracks that are ideal for working in film or broadcast
S1 has only one marker track. 

If need to work in production or post production audio, Cubase/Nuendo is going to be a better choice IMO.
If you want to record songs and put together albums fast then S1 will save you time.

DAWs are like guitars IMO, it helps to have more than one. 
But if I had to choose between having a second guitar or a second DAW, I'd buy the second DAW instead of the second guitar.


----------



## khollister (Oct 6, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Indeed! DIVA und Repro can be extremely CPU consuming. I can easily bring my computer to 95% ASIO usage with just one DIVA instance... well, it's modeling and it's quite expensive. So it's not really surprising if 4 multis (8x DIVA and 4x Repro) take your computer to the limits. BUT there shouldn't be big differences between Studio One and Cubase. If they are, this suggests that the settings (S1 Dropout Protection / Cubase ASIO Guard) are not the same / not set correctly. Did you check out the S1 videos / tutorials that show how to set up the DP / dual latency engine in Studio One? I'm just asking because this sounds really strange



All I did was replace the multis with individual tracks and CPU usage went from 100+% (constant clicks and pops, red overload indicator continuously on) to about 50-60%. I left everything else alone. In fact, changing the process buffer makes little difference unless I put it at "low" or "minimal". Likewise changing ASIO Guard between Normal and High in Cubase isn't a huge difference with this project.

I'm completely certain that the multis don't distribute across the cores like conventional tracks.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 8, 2020)

Thank you for your answers.

So, if I understand correctly, not really any fundamental differences between Cubase and Studio One, just for post production videos use, Cubase is more suitable and more complete.

On the other hand, Studio One handling is much simpler and better ergonomic.

Then complete universe for Studio One, dedicated controllers, faderport.

So Studio One remains very competitive with Cubase.

On the other hand, the cpu charge challenges me.

For an equivalent project (vst / audios / samples), which one between Cubase and Studio One best manages the cpu load and consumption?


----------



## Lukas (Oct 8, 2020)

Trancer said:


> For an equivalent project (vst / audios / samples), which one between Cubase and Studio One best manages the cpu load and consumption?


As people make different experiences on different systems with different OS, different instruments and effects, you can't generalize it. You can't go wrong with either of them.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 8, 2020)

Thanks for your feedback.

Indeed, one like the other can quite match.

It's just this cpu load management that worries me a bit.

Not really want at one point to find myself with a daw that will saturate because poor management of cpu.


----------



## Lukas (Oct 8, 2020)

You will probably know after a 2 hours test run with the Studio One 5 demo version... on my system the download takes about 30 seconds.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 8, 2020)

Even if not a fan of trying demos, I would be very interested in Studio One, because it seems easier to use and according to several opinions better ergonomics than Cubase.

What Studio One lacks is a clip launcher like in Live

I learned that Digital Performer 10 has a clip launcher just like Live.

Do you think that it is possible in the near future that Studio One could integrate this function?


----------



## Lukas (Oct 8, 2020)

Trancer said:


> Do you think that it is possible in the near future that Studio One could integrate this function?


It's possible. But nobody can tell you 

But since Studio One recently added the Show Page, it's very likely that more performance features will be added in the feature.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 8, 2020)

Hope so.

Presonus if you hear this request

That's what it lacks, it would be complete that way.

Given its ergonomics and other advantages of Studio One, it would certainly be a perfect hybridization


----------



## Lukas (Oct 8, 2020)

Trancer said:


> Presonus if you hear this request


They do  And there's already a feature request for that:






Clip and sample launcher - similar to Ableton session view - Questions & Answers | PreSonus


I use Ableton to compose song structures and write generic midi parts. I load midi patterns into the session ... like it a lot!! God bless!! -Josh



answers.presonus.com


----------



## Trancer (Oct 8, 2020)

Thanks for the information.

Glad to read it

Who knows maybe for the next update


----------



## David Kudell (Oct 8, 2020)

There’s another thing about Cubase in that its widely used by many top composers like Hans Zimmer. To me, that’s the one I want to be using.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 10, 2020)

Thanks for your feedback.

Cubase is used quite a bit, even in electronic music, but quite often they produce their tracks on Live, Fl Studio and of course use Cubase for the mixing.

But others use Cubase to compose and mix as well.

I'm not saying Cubase is bad, on the contrary.

My question is, what is more than Studio One?

For ergonomics and cpu management, apparently, Studio One wins this title hands down.

The handling also seems much simpler and more intuitive for Studio One.

Perhaps also that a lot of people prefer to stay on a daw, out of habit, so as not to start again from zero for another and therefore, s used to having a daw can evolve over the years and therefore perfectible and lagging behind the competition.


----------



## sourcefor (Oct 10, 2020)

David Kudell said:


> There’s another thing about Cubase in that its widely used by many top composers like Hans Zimmer. To me, that’s the one I want to be using.


Also keep in mind that zimmer has the most powerful computers you can get and a tech on staff to keep everything running smoothly...


----------



## sourcefor (Oct 10, 2020)

I have been trying both and they both seem so cluttered and clumsy compared to Logic, which I know is not the best, but seems to be the easiest to use!


----------



## Trancer (Oct 10, 2020)

Thanks for your feedback.

I have no doubt that Logic is not bad.

But only for Mac.

The basic reason for not asking for comparison.

Too bad there is not a version of Logic for pc.


----------



## Trancer (Oct 22, 2020)

After a great deal of thought and taking into account all your opinions and feedback, I took Live 10 and Studio One Pro 5.

Thank you again for your feedback which was very helpful.


----------



## Faruh Al-Baghdadi (Oct 23, 2020)

David Kudell said:


> There’s another thing about Cubase in that its widely used by many top composers like Hans Zimmer. To me, that’s the one I want to be using.


Everybody knows that this is not true. He uses GarageBand to produce blockbusters on an iPad.


----------



## jon wayne (Oct 23, 2020)

David Kudell said:


> There’s another thing about Cubase in that its widely used by many top composers like Hans Zimmer. To me, that’s the one I want to be using.


Have any idea what Hans like to snack on? That’s what I want!!


----------



## samphony (Oct 26, 2020)

Hans who?


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Oct 26, 2020)

samphony said:


> Hans who?



Hans Neusiedler.


----------



## Trensharo (Oct 28, 2020)

Trancer said:


> thank you for your reply
> 
> Just apparently catastrophic on Windows 10, instability, crash, slowness, high cpu load.
> 
> Since Cubase version 10, there would be a lot of instability, which at first glance is not the case with Pro 9.5 version.


I have not experienced anything like this one Windows 10. I have a 250 track template. It has been flawless since purchase (Cubase 10.5) on both my Desktop and Laptop. It has never crashed on me.


----------



## kitekrazy (Oct 28, 2020)

Studio 1 has more flexible licensing.


----------



## boxed (Nov 24, 2020)

Whats the latest with the recent C11 update and the most recent versions of version S1 version 5?

Am I right in thinking that Cubase is more mature has far more features and functionality. But there is a lot of old legacy stuff in there that needs updating for modern standards. 

Whereas S1 is newer, has some well thought out features such as the custom UI buttons, but is still playing catch up in terms of overall features compared to Cubase.


----------



## kclements (Nov 24, 2020)

That’s probably a fair assessment. Not a cubase user and have only demoed S1. But I think there are a lot of interesting things going on with S1 and am watching it myself to see where it goes. 

The nice thing is both have demos you can download and try out.


----------



## samphony (Nov 24, 2020)

My take on this:

- commit time to the daws you want to demo
- get one demo first
- create at least one complete cue/song/track with it. The demo timeframe is a great way to limit the time you have with it!
- only after you’ve demoed one with a project go to the next demo!

during these testing periods do work intuitively and/or use the manual. Forget any marketing blurb and try to stay focused. While you will try to adjust the particular daws workflow to your experience also try to stay open and try to understand the daw as well.
Stay focused and mean it!

oh and don’t give up after 10min because you don’t know any better.


----------



## Craig Allen (Jan 17, 2021)

So, I have recently been pusuing Logic Pro for orchestrations. This week I was particularly pursuing learning to utilize track and region automation more fully; particularly CC1 (modulation) and CC11 (expression) via a Nakedboard's hardware MC-8 faderboard and the knob controllers on an NI S61Mk 2 Komplete Komtrol keyboard.
I found Logic to be really inconsistent at allowing me to record various automations and edit record over them. Not at all the smooth experience I was expecting.

Can anyone speak to S1 or Cubase regarding being better and less problematic than Logic with hardware controllers and MIDI automation?


----------

