# Recommendations for someone who wants to leave Cubase.



## Headlands (Jul 17, 2018)

Hi all, I've been on Cubase for many years and am extremely fast on it. But I'm highly frustrated with bugs, issues, and unfinished features that have plagued it for many years now, in addition to their non-existent customer support.

There's no point in going into those, as I've been through the wringer with them on the Cubase forum and the times I was actually able to get through to Steinberg.

I'm both a composer and song producer for a living, with gigantic sessions often using VE Pro, that I also mix in. While I enjoy the features that Cubase has that are good for composing, mixing, and MIDI, there are plenty that it needs including edit mode, instrument tracks with multiple outputs (would make working with VE Pro unbelievably better), and many longstanding significant workflow issues that it suffers from which many users have been requesting for years on end.

I only know Cubase and some Pro Tools (won't be using that) -- what are other DAWs that compares favorably for scoring, with deep and advanced MIDI features as well as the advanced mixing and audio features Cubase has? Please don't argue the point here, and let's not make this a bashing fest -- I'm specifically looking for opinions on other DAWs, hopefully from people who have also used Cubase. I'm not happy at all about having to learn another DAW, but I'm personally at the end of my rope with Cubase these days and can learn in my downtime, to consider another DAW.

Thanks!


----------



## Bohrium (Jul 17, 2018)

Since I noticed in your signature that you're on a Mac. Logic would be an obvious suggestion.

I would go with ProTools, since it is the only DAW I know that is really 100% compatible between platforms. (open the session on a PC from a Mac and vice versa)


----------



## ein fisch (Jul 17, 2018)

Theres no best DAW, everyone here will probably recommend the DAW that qorks best for him/her. From what i heard cubase is superior for filmscoring. Theres also digital performer or logic which you could try. However i often see logic users complaining about its bugs, but even then, it depends on your workflow, if and how they would affect you.

Then the DAWs that get a bit less respect but are also used by many users are reaper, studio one, fl studio (meeh) and even ableton. Ableton is more or less designed for EDM, but daniel james used it earlier so it must be possible to do orchestral work on it too.

Try out the demos is my suggestion


----------



## Headlands (Jul 17, 2018)

ein fisch said:


> Theres no best DAW, everyone here will probably recommend the DAW that qorks best for him/her. From what i heard cubase is superior for filmscoring. Theres also digital performer or logic which you could try. However i often see logic users complaining about its bugs, but even then, it depends on your workflow, if and how they would affect you.
> 
> Then the DAWs that get a bit less respect but are also used by many users are reaper, studio one, fl studio (meeh) and even ableton. Ableton is more or less designed for EDM, but daniel james used it earlier so it must be possible to do orchestral work on it too.
> 
> Try out the demos is my suggestion



I hear you, yeah -- I just wanted to get some general opinions since I won't be able to put them through the paces of scoring a full project when I demo them since I won't know them well enough.


----------



## Bohrium (Jul 17, 2018)

ein fisch said:


> Theres no best DAW, everyone here will probably recommend the DAW that qorks best for him/her. From what i heard cubase is superior for filmscoring. Theres also digital performer or logic which you could try. However i often see logic users complaining about its bugs, but even then, it depends on your workflow, if and how they would affect you.
> 
> Then the DAWs that get a bit less respect but are also used by many users are reaper, studio one, fl studio (meeh) and even ableton. Ableton is more or less designed for EDM, but daniel james used it earlier so it must be possible to do orchestral work on it too.
> 
> Try out the demos is my suggestion


I agree with you ... and I own all the ones you have mentioned except DP. 

I still think Logic is very usable for the work the OP does.


----------



## aaronventure (Jul 18, 2018)

Try REAPER.

I don't think I'll ever use another DAW (as a primary), frankly. I think you'll find it similar to Cubase in terms of workflow and if not, you can make it so and can adjust almost anything in the program to your liking. 

In terms of performance, it's a ~14 MB install and loads and closes faster than MS Paint. I believe I've only ever run into a bug once around a year ago, but the free updates keep coming every month or so, with fixes and new features.

On top of all that, there's the community. When you're working in Reaper and encounter an obstacle in your workflow, try to imagine the most ideal solution. If it can't already be done in Reaper by default, most likely somebody already wrote a JS solution that will let you do it (like all the advanced MIDI features). The boards are well indexed (is that the term?) and Googling them is a breeze.


----------



## jneebz (Jul 18, 2018)

aaronventure said:


> ...and loads and closes faster than MS Paint.



Not a Reaper user, but this comment definitely brightened my day.


----------



## joebaggan (Jul 18, 2018)

I'd give Logic a try. I have Reaper but doesn't cut it for me as a pro level tool for Midi work.


----------



## resonate (Jul 18, 2018)

Re: Bugs and issues. Did you run Cubase under Windows? Seems a lot of folks are happy with it there.


----------



## Headlands (Jul 18, 2018)

aaronventure said:


> Try REAPER.
> 
> I don't think I'll ever use another DAW (as a primary), frankly. I think you'll find it similar to Cubase in terms of workflow and if not, you can make it so and can adjust almost anything in the program to your liking.
> 
> ...



I should check Reaper out. I tried it once a couple of years ago just to see how it works and it felt pretty daunting, but I learned that, as you wrote, you can configure it pretty much any way you want. The company was literally light years ahead of Steinberg as far as updates and customer support. Maybe I'll give it a go again. I just need to make sure it's up to snuff in the MIDI/composing to picture department.


----------



## Headlands (Jul 18, 2018)

resonate said:


> Re: Bugs and issues. Did you run Cubase under Windows? Seems a lot of folks are happy with it there.


'
I was thinking about that, yeah. I used to be on Windows with it and got tired of the dealing with Windows' issues so I switched to Mac, but that was about four years ago and I now hear about many Mac users (including a few people I personally know) switching over to Windows. It's a little scary, of course.

But a lot of my frustration is also with workflow issues/some significant bugs that haven't been addressed in many years. With 9.5 they did listen to people for what seemed like the first time in many years, but they still have a lot of work to do and it's literally almost impossible to get support from them. They also are famous for barely ever responding in their own forums, which is tiring and alienating.


----------



## cmillar (Jul 18, 2018)

MOTU Digital Performer.

Can do pretty much anything you ask of it....and you can set your own keystrokes to make life very easy.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 18, 2018)

I use both Cubase (now v.9) and Logic Pro. I love both, but tend to gravitate to Logic for bigger, more serious projects with a deadline. Why? It's rock solid for me; I've literally only had one single crash in the past couple of years and it was because of a bad plugin. My only gripe with Logic is it's lack of routing options with VEPro, unlike Cubase where you can route multiple channels within an instance. I always liked Cubase, but also prefer the GUI in Logic, and it's easier on my eyes over long sessions.

I'd probably hold out for Cubase 10 if I was in your shoes. Since you're a working professional, learning a new DAW will need a lot of time investment, and inevitably a whole new world of headaches.


----------



## Headlands (Jul 18, 2018)

Wolfie2112 said:


> I use both Cubase (now v.9) and Logic Pro. I love both, but tend to gravitate to Logic for bigger, more serious projects with a deadline. Why? It's rock solid for me; I've literally only had one single crash in the past couple of years and it was because of a bad plugin. My only gripe with Logic is it's lack of routing options with VEPro, unlike Cubase where you can route multiple channels within an instance. I always liked Cubase, but also prefer the GUI in Logic, and it's easier on my eyes over long sessions.
> 
> I'd probably hold out for Cubase 10 if I was in your shoes. Since you're a working professional, learning a new DAW will need a lot of time investment, and inevitably a whole new world of headaches.



Interesting, thank you. You're probably right about waiting for Cubase 10, though at this point I don't have high hopes for the longstanding issues that we've been asking to be remedied for years on the Steinberg forum.


----------



## Vik (Jul 18, 2018)

Headlands said:


> I only know Cubase and some Pro Tools (won't be using that) -- what are other DAWs that compares favorably for scoring, with deep and advanced MIDI features as well as the advanced mixing and audio features Cubase has?


You'll find some opinions about that topic here:
https://vi-control.net/community/th...-work-with-orchestral-libraries.43016/page-14


----------



## Paul SAS (Jul 18, 2018)

@Headlands
What exactly do You mean by multiple outputs on Instrument tracks?


----------



## resonate (Jul 18, 2018)

Wolfie2112 said:


> I use both Cubase (now v.9) and Logic Pro. I love both, but tend to gravitate to Logic for bigger, more serious projects with a deadline. Why? It's rock solid for me; I've literally only had one single crash in the past couple of years and it was because of a bad plugin. My only gripe with Logic is it's lack of routing options with VEPro, unlike Cubase where you can route multiple channels within an instance. I always liked Cubase, but also prefer the GUI in Logic, and it's easier on my eyes over long sessions.
> 
> I'd probably hold out for Cubase 10 if I was in your shoes. Since you're a working professional, learning a new DAW will need a lot of time investment, and inevitably a whole new world of headaches.



+1 to all above, but first i'd try to run Cubase under Boot Camp. Since you know it, it could be faster to setup than to change DAWs. Logic has it's own issues like editing mutliple CC data (re-recording CC has to be done after manually deleting the data or on another track) and VSL guys seem to be more interested in Synchron Player now than implementing AU3, which would put Logic Pro X on par with Cubase, re: multiple midi channels. All software has drawbacks. That is just life...


----------



## Headlands (Jul 18, 2018)

Paul SAS said:


> @Headlands
> What exactly do You mean by multiple outputs on Instrument tracks?



In Cubase, when you use VE Pro, for example, you need to use Instrument Tracks, as you know. And in Cubase, there is always a separate MIDI track and separate audio track for every output. In Reaper and many others, audio and MIDI are united on every output so that plugin/instrument automation easily moves with the MIDI events and you don't have gigantic amounts of extra tracks for MIDI that you have to deal with. In those DAWs you can also have separate MIDI tracks as you need or want, but the difference is significant with what I'm talking about. On the Cubase forum there have been many people requesting this for many years now.


----------



## Headlands (Jul 18, 2018)

resonate said:


> +1 to all above, but first i'd try to run Cubase under Boot Camp. Since you know it, it could be faster to setup than to change DAWs. Logic has it's own issues like editing mutliple CC data (re-recording CC has to be done after manually deleting the data or on another track) and VSL guys seem to be more interested in Synchron Player now than implementing AU3, which would put Logic Pro X on par with Cubase, re: multiple midi channels. All software has drawbacks. That is just life...



Duh, I didn't even think about that -- thank you for knocking my head!


----------



## steveo42 (Jul 18, 2018)

Since you are on a Mac I would try the demo of Digital Performer as it seems to be very popular with composers , film scoring ans so forth. On the PC it's not that great because the interface is way too small and it's difficult to see things. I do not believe the Mac has that problem. My next choice for a Mac would be Logic. I've never used it but it does seem to have a good following. I would try every demo I could find before committing to a change in DAW because they all have bugs that can be frustrating at times. Best wishes!


----------



## Bender-offender (Jul 18, 2018)

Disclaimer: I didn’t read all the posts in this thread, so forgive me if others already said this. 

Main point: I think if you switch from Cubase to a different DAW you’re just going to find all its bugs and quirks and then dislike it as well. 

I say this because I’ve been in your shoes and have used DP, Logic, Pro Tools, and Cubase extensively and I always find things that I really dislike then start thinking about switching DAWs again. In the end, I always return to Cubase because, despite Steinberg not maintaining it well, it does everything I need and want from a DAW (with occasional extreme frustration). 

I have briefly tested Reaper and Studio One years ago, so I cannot speak for either, though I imagine they are just as good as the aforementioned DAWs but with their own quirks.


----------



## JohnG (Jul 18, 2018)

I use DP and it does address at least one of your frustrations with Cubase (multiple outputs) [edit: actually I'm not sure I understand what you're driving at so maybe DP will not solve your particular issue]. And, as someone else posted, you can customise the shortcuts to match those in Cubase to ease the transition.

I've had good results with MOTU customer service over many years, though I haven't tested that in some time now.

That said, it's likely there will be features of Cubase that you'd miss in any alternative.


----------



## meradium (Jul 18, 2018)

As you can see in my signature I just recently gave Reaper a serious run-through coming also from Cubase 9.5.

To be honest, my experience with it so far is a bit mixed... 

It is absolutely stunning in terms of customization and in particular the offered built-in scripting capabilities which no other DAW I know of offers. Yet, this comes at a considerable cost.

If you love programming a bit and are not afraid to hunt down web forums in search for even (coming from Cubase camp) seemingly simple functions you might find it to be quite a daunting exercise. Then again, if you spend you time you will most likely find a scripted "workaround" offered by someone in the community (or by writing it your own) which eventually might supersede your accustomed Cubase workflow entirely.

Just definitely be prepared that it will take considerable TIME to setup everything the way you want it or are comfortable to work with.

It took me two attempts to set it up. My initial custom setup was... mehh.... so I reset everything starting from scratch. Now I found a much better custom configuration... but I am still in the setup phase.

Latest gotcha: how to make the MIDI Editor remember its window size and position regardless of the double-clicked media item... but I am sure eventually I will find also a solution for that bugger...

The GUI is a bit messy IMHO. But you get used to it. I am still struggling to find a good theme.

There are some absolutely great user contributions e.g. for MIDI editing and particularly the articulation management plugin Reaticulate contributed by @tack . The later one simply blows the socks off of Cubase's internal variant.


----------



## Vik (Jul 18, 2018)

Headlands said:


> I'm specifically looking for opinions on other DAWs, hopefully from people who have also used Cubase. I'm not happy at all about having to learn another DAW, but I'm personally at the end of my rope with Cubase these days and can learn in my downtime, to consider another DAW.
> 
> Thanks!



Hi! This could easily end up as some thread which tries to compare Cubase with many other DAWs, which may be a less ideal situation than a few threads comparing Cubase with each of the DAWs out there which you think may be interesting for you. 

And - some of these threads already exist. I was equally frustrated with Logic a while ago, and started a thread comparing Cubase and Logic at some point (ended up buying Cubase, which I almost never use partially due to frustration with too many solutions that are implemented, IMO, in ways that everything but obvious for new users, but that may be a Steinberg thing and not specific to Cubase). Here's one of these threads:
https://vi-control.net/community/th...d-cubase-for-use-with-sample-libraries.61884/
This was written, btw, before Logic 10.4 which contained some important improvements.

But good luck - you're probably going to need it!


----------



## Øivind (Jul 18, 2018)

Hmm, have you tried to run VEpro in Cubase as a Rack instrument instead of Track instrument? Should clear up any issues you have with VEpro and multiple outputs, unless i misunderstood your problem.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 18, 2018)

oivind_rosvold said:


> Hmm, have you tried to run VEpro in Cubase as a Rack instrument instead of Track instrument? Should clear up any issues you have with VEpro and multiple outputs, unless i misunderstood your problem.



Yes, and Cubase has the best VEPro routing options when using the VST3 version, it is wonderful. I really with they would make a similar version for Logic.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (Jul 18, 2018)

Headlands said:


> '
> I was thinking about that, yeah. I used to be on Windows with it and got tired of the dealing with Windows' issues so I switched to Mac, but that was about four years ago and I now hear about many Mac users (including a few people I personally know) switching over to Windows. It's a little scary, of course.
> 
> But a lot of my frustration is also with workflow issues/some significant bugs that haven't been addressed in many years. With 9.5 they did listen to people for what seemed like the first time in many years, but they still have a lot of work to do and it's literally almost impossible to get support from them. They also are famous for barely ever responding in their own forums, which is tiring and alienating.


I can second and third it being more stable and performing far better on Windows.

I recently purchased Cubase, because I am considering moving from macOS, due to ITS bugs 

*EDIT:* Had to remove the Cubase Session image as this was from another test. The you are looking at was running 200 instances of VEP at multiple buffer sizes:-
512/256/128/64
64-Bit Proessing, ASIO Guard on Max

But here are some results I found with Cubase on each platform:


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 18, 2018)

I never trust that "audio performance" meter in Cubase, I've seen it go to nearly 50% when it's just idling in Windows.


----------



## SBK (Jul 18, 2018)

I have a reccomendation from Cubase 3-4-5 user that gone to Reaper and FL Studio....Just return to Cubase! :D Reaper is lovely and very advanced but lacks "smoothness" of graphics and functions, FL Studio is awesome and fast but they can't even handle latency of plugins in parallel buses, how do you call that PCD?


----------



## dcoscina (Jul 18, 2018)

Bohrium said:


> I agree with you ... and I own all the ones you have mentioned except DP.
> 
> I still think Logic is very usable for the work the OP does.


I’d been using Cubase for the last 2 years having come from DP. For some reason, perhaps as of 3 months back, it’s been giving me no end of problems. So I moved to LPX having taken a break from Logic since 2007. I was amazed at how efficient LPX is on my CPU and while some work flow isn’t as fast as I’d like, I’m digging the new stuff like the articulation feature. Expression maps never quite took for me in a Cubase. So one more plug for LPX


----------



## meradium (Jul 18, 2018)

... just to add one more example to the Reaper story of love-and-hate relationship. I just stumbled across a rather strange (again from Cubase perspective) issue: How do you toggle the metronome on or off while working inside the Midi Editor?

...

In the base setup you cannot  You can only toggle it in the main arrangement window. But wait... what you need to do to make it work:

Define a keyboard shortcut for the metronome in the main window, e.g. "c" via the actions settings for the main window

Then switch to the actions settings of the Midi Editor and look for action "Misc: Pass through key to main window"
Here also define an additional (!) shortcut mapping to "c"
Hurray! Done! Now you can toggle the metronome from both worlds via pressing "c" on your keyboard.
Simple, isn't it? 

So in case you give it a shot be prepared for surprises. To be honest though I have to mention that it took me only a few mins to find an online post in the Reaper forums to outline this solution. Could be worse...


----------



## germancomponist (Jul 18, 2018)

Interesting. Today I worked on an old computer where is installed Cubase 5. I had no problems, it still worked perfect.


----------



## sinkd (Jul 18, 2018)

If I were starting over right now I would probably be going with Cubase on Windows 10. But I am a basically happy DP user (Mac OS) otherwise, now that VEPro works again in High Sierra. Like 5 months we waited. Don't ask.


----------



## Zoot_Rollo (Jul 18, 2018)

Studio One Pro v4.0.1 and VEPro 6 here.

Windows 10 Pro.


----------



## samphony (Jul 18, 2018)

I would try running Cubase of an SSD with a fresh install of macOS. Only install cubase, VEP and the libraries you need. Do a Test for a couple of days with just that setup without running any third party plugins. 

Does it run more stable now? Yes? 

1.) Make a clone backup or dmg of that setup. 
2.) Start installing your third party plugins step by step with tests in between. 

Repeat 1.) & 2.) until you’ve satisfied

One of many possible ways to figure out the issues you have with your daw in relation to third party hard and software involved. 

Don’t forget. The issues you have can depend on your user account, hardware and or third party plugins or other software running in parallel. 


I had serious issues recently and it turned out that my macOS user account was screwed. A reset or step back to an earlier backup fixed that issue.


----------



## Headlands (Jul 18, 2018)

oivind_rosvold said:


> Hmm, have you tried to run VEpro in Cubase as a Rack instrument instead of Track instrument? Should clear up any issues you have with VEpro and multiple outputs, unless i misunderstood your problem.



It doesn't because Track Instruments have only the _first_ output combined with a MIDI track -- every other output has to have a separate MIDI track. Again, this has been complained about tons on the Cubase forum for years.


----------



## Headlands (Jul 18, 2018)

samphony said:


> I would try running Cubase of an SSD with a fresh install of macOS. Only install cubase, VEP and the libraries you need. Do a Test for a couple of days with just that setup without running any third party plugins.
> 
> Does it run more stable now? Yes?
> 
> ...



That's good advice -- I'll try starting out over with a brand new OS. Or I might the suggestion here to Boot Camp Windows since I understand Cubase performs better on it with overall "snappiness" and GUI.


----------



## Øivind (Jul 19, 2018)

Headlands said:


> It doesn't because Track Instruments have only the _first_ output combined with a MIDI track -- every other output has to have a separate MIDI track. Again, this has been complained about tons on the Cubase forum for years.



My initial question remains, have you tried Rack instrument instead of Track instrument?

Also, i would recommend watching som great VEpro & Cubase tutorials.

Videos from Jason Graves, lots of Cubase & VEpro specific videos:
https://www.youtube.com/user/jgmusic408/videos

Playlist from: Dirk Ehlert


Playlist from: Mihkel Zilmer


----------



## Headlands (Jul 19, 2018)

oivind_rosvold said:


> My initial question remains, have you tried Rack instrument instead of Track instrument?
> 
> Also, i would recommend watching som great VEpro & Cubase tutorials.
> 
> ...




I think I'm confusing the Track Instrument and Rack Instrument (I always confuse the names). My bad! I've always used Rack Instruments in my VE Pro setup, have been using it for a while that way from day one. What I'm talking about is the fact that Track Instruments would be easier to use/better than Rack Instruments with VE Pro if they were developed further and better, instead of being stuck with having separate MIDI and Audio Output tracks for every output (aside from the first one as it is now), and not being able to label the first audio output properly. It would reduce your track count by half as far as the VE Pro setup (and all of your virtual multi-output instruments that you have in Cubase), if it were implemented in Cubase properly. You could still use extra MIDI tracks on their own if you wanted/desired, but the flexibility/movability and ease of use would be night and day for VE Pro, if Track Instruments were developed fully and implemented properly.


----------



## Headlands (Jul 19, 2018)

You know what , after reading what you've all written I think I'll stick with Cubase for now and try doing the Windows thing on my Mac (even though even the most powerful Macs are underpowered compared to Windows and have worse audio performance than Windows -- if it's working well I would get a custom mega-powerful Windows machine that would blow the doors off of my Mac Pro). You've all made some very good points about issues with every DAW. Cubase is a great DAW in so many ways. My main gripe with Steinberg is the tragically bad customer support and the fact that there are many bugs/issues that never get fixed after years and years, some being very significant to one's workflow. I could list those, but that's a whole other thread.


----------



## erikradbo (Jul 19, 2018)

Hi there. Sounds reasonable to stick with Cubase, but let me give my opinion in case you get there again.

I was a Cubase user from 1993-2011, mostly on a PC, and then started using Logic 9 in parallel around 2009, then upgrading to X when it came out. I won't say that I never looked back, because I did many times, but at the moment I'm really happy with Logic. This is, obviously, all very subjective, and I can't even remember what version of Cubase I was using when I switched, but my main feelings are:

Cubase
- Felt faster. I think it's also partially a Mac/PC thing, the smoothness of everything on Mac makes it feel like it's not as snappy at times. Can't say anything in Logic is particularly slow.
- Felt like I could do everything I wanted, the way I wanted it. Re-routing? Done! Drag and drop things everywhere? Done. Maybe it was because I started there, but it all felt very intuitive.
- Cubase on a mac was so much worse than on a PC. And I never really liked the hassle with boot camp, even though this worked better than the OS X native version.

Logic
- Switching to logic it took some time to assimilate, even though the main views are similar. Luckily you can edit key commands to taste, so it's easy to keep the keyboard handling from Cubase (even though I gradually moved towards "standard" Logic shortcuts.
- There's so much more in the package, especially VI's. Sounds like you don't need this, but there are some goodies in there.
- Can feel a bit less professional since it has some "Garage band"-feeling, but I've never been bothered, and some of the "fun" stuff is really usable (e.g. Drummer is awesome).
- I've been frustrated at times regarding small obvious things that should be possible to do, that was possible in Cubase, but not in Logic, such as dragging and dropping channel strips in mixer view. I'm sure there are other similar issues when switching the other way.

In summary I can still miss the memory I have of some tasks being easier to perform in Cubase (again, some tools felt more intuitive to work with), but this is a minor issue probably based on pure nostalgia. Logic X is stable as heck with great built-in tools, and if you give it some time (and possibly buy a logic keyboard overlay to get started with shortcuts) I'm sure you'll be happy.


----------



## novicecomposer (Jul 19, 2018)

I have been trying out Reaper for quite some time now and I started liking it. Very lightweight, fast, very usable, fast update cycle and quick fixes. No longer need to be a slave of expensive upgrades of Cubase. Companies providing questionable customer service and slow responses need to learn.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 19, 2018)

Headlands said:


> You know what , after reading what you've all written I think I'll stick with Cubase for now and try doing the Windows thing on my Mac (even though even the most powerful Macs are underpowered compared to Windows and have worse audio performance than Windows -- if it's working well I would get a custom mega-powerful Windows machine that would blow the doors off of my Mac Pro). You've all made some very good points about issues with every DAW. Cubase is a great DAW in so many ways. My main gripe with Steinberg is the tragically bad customer support and the fact that there are many bugs/issues that never get fixed after years and years, some being very significant to one's workflow. I could list those, but that's a whole other thread.



I guess I'm one of the lucky few, I never had any real gripes with Cubase regarding bugs, etc; the forum at Steinberg is crazy, one needs to walk on egg shells over there. Other than the goofy lack of retina support (which doesn't really bother me), it has been great from version 7 to 9. Also, I never really experienced a difference in stability/performance between mac and PC; I'm sure there is though, as other have posted (but I haven't experienced it myself). Albeit, I work mainly with VI's...maybe it's the audio portion that has issues? I dunno, but Cubase has always ben solid for me on both platforms. I have a big project coming up soon (scoring to pic), I'm going to try and do the whole thing in Cubase 9 on the Mac and see how it holds up (haven't done a project in Cubase this big since 8.5). If it doesn't flinch, I may go back to Cubase myself. I just love the MIDI editing features and the VEPro routing is unmatched. I have the 9.5 upgrade, but not going to register until C10 comes out.


----------



## gjelul (Jul 19, 2018)

Nuendo would be my first suggestion, more solid than Cubase, and for you, it would be no difference whatsoever in time to adjust.

Or Logic, the one I personally use (for years now.) Funny, I am considering to do the exact opposite, fed-up with Logic and thinking to move to Cubase. Haven't done it yet because I am on a couple of things and cannot afford to slow down.

Between the two: 
No one DAW will be perfect. Cubase is light years ahead in features compared to Logic, its exporting / bouncing / outputing feature, customization, etc. are great. And then you can't print audio to the movie file you're working on (stupid things like that.) LPX is way more solid than Cubase, I do not remember when I had the last crash in LPX. Until now, stability has been the decisive factor for me.

Nuendo is something that I have been considering (and would be my first choice.) Being Steinberg's flagship software, I am assuming the support would be better than for Cubase. However, the price tag on Nuendo is way too high ($1,200 for a crossgrade.)

ProTools is another option, but the MIDI is not what it should be.

So, back to square one... 

P.S. If you're fast enough and can do what's needed in Cubase up to 85% - 90%, then the 10% - 15% frustration should be seen as part of reality. We all have that regardless of DAW.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 19, 2018)

gjelul said:


> And then you can't print audio to the movie file you're working on (stupid things like that.)



This! Maybe they'll do this in Cubase 10, but I highly doubt it.


----------



## Øivind (Jul 19, 2018)

Yeah the Track/Rack instrument, easy to get confused 

Sorry if i am derailing here.
I would be very happy if someone could point out the big difference that would make Track instruments be the successor of Rack instruments (as i guess it was meant to be), when it comes to using VEpro.

The only instances of VEpro as a Rack instrument i have are Winds, Brass, Other, Strings and maybe one that is project specific. So the number of additional tracks for me is just 4-5. Unless you count the audio out tracks, which i do not see as a negative, quite the opposite.

Also no problem renaming the first instance/output here.


----------



## brek (Jul 19, 2018)

Surprised to not see more mentions of DP here. Been using Cubase 15 years and it's the one that I always look to in moments of frustration with Cubase. I always thought it was one of the best DAWs for scoring, but since joining here and following composers on YouTube it really doesn't seem to be all that relevent these days. 

I've spent siginificant time with Logic and it's just not for me. I also don't like relying on one company to meet my software and hardware needs.


----------



## MarcelM (Jul 19, 2018)

studio one v4 would be also an option. it has the fastest workflow out of all daws, and i own all of the major daws.
for songwriting (pop/rock etc) it would be very good.

to be honest i use cubase the most since most of the stuff i do is orchestral based and i just love the expression maps and all the other midi stuff it can do. it simply has the best piano roll out there


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (Jul 19, 2018)

Headlands said:


> You know what , after reading what you've all written I think I'll stick with Cubase for now and try doing the Windows thing on my Mac (even though even the most powerful Macs are underpowered compared to Windows and have worse audio performance than Windows -- if it's working well I would get a custom mega-powerful Windows machine that would blow the doors off of my Mac Pro). You've all made some very good points about issues with every DAW. Cubase is a great DAW in so many ways. My main gripe with Steinberg is the tragically bad customer support and the fact that there are many bugs/issues that never get fixed after years and years, some being very significant to one's workflow. I could list those, but that's a whole other thread.


I am actually afraid that the two statements:
-Macs are underpowered
-Have worse Audio

Are false statements.Completely false, as the CoreAudio Framework on macOS is one of the best and a lifesaver in many regards. Take also, CoreMIDI that fully supports MIDI ports, where as on Windows you have to get 3rd party software for this.

Mac also supports duplex audio, allowing for playback from multiple sources at once on macOS.

I can understand you want to try out the other way, but your statements are as founded as the Mac vs PC debate. Sorry, just need to highlight this so people are not mislead, which I am sure was not your intention anyway 

Finally, a Mac Pro is almost pure Intel Hardware, meaning the difference between it and a PC is negligible. Broadcom, Realtek, Intel etc, chipsets are used throughout the production of all PCs and Macs.


----------



## sinkd (Jul 20, 2018)

brek said:


> Surprised to not see more mentions of DP here. Been using Cubase 15 years and it's the one that I always look to in moments of frustration with Cubase. I always thought it was one of the best DAWs for scoring, but since joining here and following composers on YouTube it really doesn't seem to be all that relevent these days.
> 
> I've spent siginificant time with Logic and it's just not for me. I also don't like relying on one company to meet my software and hardware needs.


Still a lot of DP users out here.


----------



## robgb (Jul 20, 2018)

joebaggan said:


> I'd give Logic a try. I have Reaper but doesn't cut it for me as a pro level tool for Midi work.


Ive never understood why people say this. Reaper's midi is as "pro" as any DAW I've worked with, including Logic, Studio One, Sonar and Cubase.


----------



## robgb (Jul 20, 2018)

Shad0wLandsUK said:


> the CoreAudio Framework on macOS is one of the best


Yes. Core Audio just WORKS. When I switched from PC to Mac, it was such a pleasure not to have to deal with sound cards and ASIO.


----------



## Chris Richter (Jul 20, 2018)

robgb said:


> Ive never understood why people say this. Reaper's midi is as "pro" as any DAW I've worked with, including Logic, Studio One, Sonar and Cubase.


Because Reaper isn't able by default to do certain things with midi, e.g. compress/expand velocity of selected notes or ramp velocity while keeping the relative values to each other of those notes. All basic things you can do very easily in Cubase for example.
However it's possible with scripts or maybe extentions (SWS maybe, don't know about that) to add functionality of course. But if you just open Reaper you wouldn't be able to do that and that's maybe why people think it isn't possible.

Edit: If you have good pointers for some resources on that topic, I would love to check them out. I am kind on the jump to Reaper, too, after heaving severe crashes in Cubase


----------



## kavinsky (Jul 20, 2018)

cubase is a nightmare when it comes to multiout tracks.


----------



## robgb (Jul 21, 2018)

CQrity said:


> Because Reaper isn't able by default to do certain things with midi, e.g. compress/expand velocity of selected notes or ramp velocity while keeping the relative values to each other of those notes. All basic things you can do very easily in Cubase for example.
> However it's possible with scripts or maybe extentions (SWS maybe, don't know about that) to add functionality of course. But if you just open Reaper you wouldn't be able to do that and that's maybe why people think it isn't possible.
> 
> Edit: If you have good pointers for some resources on that topic, I would love to check them out. I am kind on the jump to Reaper, too, after heaving severe crashes in Cubase


The best resource for Reaper is the Reaper.fm forum.


----------



## Chris Richter (Jul 21, 2018)

robgb said:


> The best resource for Reaper is the Reaper.fm forum.


Well, I hoped for something more specific. Like: If you need that mentioned functions of warping/compress/expand, try this script:
https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=176878

Something along those lines would be helpful. Or maybe a hint of where your mentioned "pro midi features" are. I would love to check them out.


----------



## sinkd (Jul 21, 2018)

kavinsky said:


> cubase is a nightmare when it comes to multiout tracks.


Do you mean MIDI multi out (DP handles this easily) or audio (which any DAW should handle fine)?


----------



## pderbidge (Jul 21, 2018)

I


CQrity said:


> Edit: If you have good pointers for some resources on that topic, I would love to check them out. I am kind on the jump to Reaper, too, after heaving severe crashes in Cubase


I would recommend starting a new thread for that question. Us Reaper users are a bit fanboi'ish about our DAW , and for good reason, that it would be too easy to derail this topic.


----------



## kavinsky (Jul 21, 2018)

sinkd said:


> Do you mean MIDI multi out (DP handles this easily) or audio (which any DAW should handle fine)?


audio. here's a few threads for details
https://vi-control.net/community/threads/cubase-multiout-tracks-problem.73295/
we even have a case number now, but steinberg still can't fix it and its been at least 3 years since it was reported
https://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=253&t=123873&p=759559#p759559

if anyone knows how to fix it I'd be forever grateful


----------



## DS_Joost (Jul 21, 2018)

Will just quote myself from the other recent DAW thread. I use Studio One 4 now and I'm sticking with it (yes, for heavy film/game/orchestral work):

_''Studio One 4 is where I'm at now, and if Presonus keep the exciting updates up, I don't think I ever have to switch anymore. They show the kind of innovation, implementation and focus Steinberg used to have. Presonus seems to be the only company trying to push the DAW (okay, apart from Cockos, but that development is REALLY different) into the actual 21st century, speeding up decade long processes and making it easier and more inspiring to be creative. It works where it counts most: it's the most inspiring program I've ever used. Between the awesome transform tool (beating out Cubase's by a wide margin), the visualisation of CC's as automation, the ease of the automation in general, the mind bendingly awesome and easy to use multi-instruments and especially multi-FX, fantastic integration with Notion, the drag and drop functionality, the awesome browser, Sample One XT beating out the Cubase Sampler Track so much it's silly, AAF export and import, loading tracks from other projects from the browser without having to load the project (BIG DEAL if you're into modular templates), the workflow relation between Impact XT and patterns, the mind blowing Chord Track that, again, just beats the Cubase one over the head, the great mastering page, complete integration with Melodyne and ARA, the intuitive and beautifully relaxed (and light!) UI, unbeatable integration with professional Presonus hardware, etc.

I could go on and on and on about the program. For me it's the only DAW not stuck in the paradigms of the 20th century, throwing away processes that used to be cumbersome and convoluted. One thing for me is just rendering a piece of midi to audio. Just a press of a button. Nothing more. But wait! Want to go back? Thanks to that ARA integration, you don't even have to go back. Just edit the embedded midi information and you're good to go. It has so many ''why did nobody think of it this way before?!'' moments it makes other programs seem ancient by comparison (and some are). The way these guys integrate features into their DAW, the interrelationship between features and functionality and ease of use just make Steinberg look like clowns (not to be disrespectful). It hasn't got all the advanced functionality of older, more 'mature' DAWs. Some older users might hate it for that and will miss some functionality, but for me, I miss almost nothing. If Presonus comes through and adds a couple more features for film and game guys, I'm done. I will finally have the DAW that does everything I will ever need. I mean it.

EVERYTHING.

It's beautiful having seen this DAW grow from 2.6 and not being able to stand up to literally see it barging through the status quo with version 3.5/4. Mark my words, there's a generation of musician's coming that will do away with the old and embrace the new. Steinberg and Avid aren't just going anywhere, but they're not the untouchable giants they used to be. There's a new kid in town, guys. And boy is that kid talented.

Edit: apologies for my abuse of caps. I'm just a very enthousiastic person sometimes.''_


----------



## robgb (Jul 21, 2018)

CQrity said:


> Well, I hoped for something more specific. Like: If you need that mentioned functions of warping/compress/expand, try this script:
> https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=176878


Well, first, I'd have to know what "pro" features you specifically want. Then I'd have to go hunt for a tutorial or script, if I don't happen to use them myself, and post them here. OR, you could search the Reaper forums yourself and find what you're looking for much faster. I'm all for helping people when they have a specific problem, and I try to do it pretty regularly, but give a man a fish and all that. Anything you want to do in midi can more than likely be done. Go to the forums. They're very helpful.


----------



## robgb (Jul 21, 2018)

DS_Joost said:


> I use Studio One 4 now and I'm sticking with it (yes, for heavy film/game/orchestral work)


Studio One is a great DAW, no question about it. It's what I used before I switched to Reaper. You can't really go wrong with either.


----------



## DS_Joost (Jul 21, 2018)

robgb said:


> Studio One is a great DAW, no question about it. It's what I used before I switched to Reaper. You can't really go wrong with either.



Both are the only programs I see that are really doing something innovative with the paradigms that have been established for decades. Both couldn't, however, be more on the other side of the spectrum, haha. I feel to choose between the two is really a matter of preference. Endless customization or extremely well thought out basic workflow.


----------



## KV626 (Jul 21, 2018)

I've been doing "pro level MIDI work", whatever that means, for well over 10+ years now, on Pro Tools. Can you believe that?? I know OP already said PT doesn't seem to be an option for him, not sure why but he has his reasons ; however I just wanted to let everyone know that you actually can compose in Pro Tools! From film music to EDM in my case, yes, EDM in Pro Tools, oooooooh the horror!

I've used DP for years as well but it has become an extremely frustrating experience so I gave up a couple years ago. I still have it, but almost never use it anymore. I also use Logic, and for film music it's still not really ideal for me. So why PT? Well it's the one I know the most, it's the one I'm the fastest with, and it just feels like home. I guess that can be true for any DAW depending on how comfortable we are on them.


----------



## sinkd (Jul 21, 2018)

kavinsky said:


> audio. here's a few threads for details
> https://vi-control.net/community/threads/cubase-multiout-tracks-problem.73295/
> we even have a case number now, but steinberg still can't fix it and its been at least 3 years since it was reported
> https://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=253&t=123873&p=759559#p759559
> ...


Ah. Read the thread and this is obviously more involved than what I was thinking. Good luck.


----------



## muziksculp (Jul 23, 2018)

I switched from Cubase to Studio One a year ago.

I recommend_ Presonus_ *Studio One Pro 4*  I'm Very happy with the switch.


----------



## Brueland (Jul 23, 2018)

Try out the demo for Bitwig Studio!


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (Jul 23, 2018)

I almost want to cry.
Just as everyone else talks about switching from Cubase, I finally went ahead and bought it :/
Though I still have Logic, Pro Tools and Ableton Live...

So there are options


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 23, 2018)

Shad0wLandsUK said:


> I almost want to cry.
> Just as everyone else talks about switching from Cubase, I finally went ahead and bought it :/
> Though I still have Logic, Pro Tools and Ableton Live...
> 
> So there are options



You made the right choice.  I'm about to dive back into the Cubase world (as my primary DAW) and see what happens. I just love the new features too much.


----------



## Craig Allen (Jul 24, 2018)

I'm following this discussion with interest as I'd like to get (back) into orchestral scoring after many, many years away. Samplitude Pro X2 (I also have/but not installed X3) has been my main Windows DAW for 20 years for recording/editing/mixing/mastering audio. I also have Studio One, Reaper, and now Logic for my Macbook Pro (plus formerly Sonar Plat. for Windows), but am a newbie at best on each of these. I just got an NI KK S61 Mk 2 keyboard which includes deep integration for Logic and Cubase (plus Ableton Live) which gives me some incentive to check those out.

Here, I'm hearing concerns about:
- Cubase with stability and multiple outs (duplicate MIDI & Audio Tracks);
- Reaper with editing midi velocities, and complexity in customization,
- Logic Pro X with limitations of export/bouncing features.

Which is all bringing me back full circle: Samplitude does all of these things with ease and stability, for many versions now.
Is there a reason why composers have not discovered or are not using Samplitude?
(Audio editing, mixing, and mastering features have been tops for -- well a couple decades now. The weaknesses have been in songwriting, hardware integration, and lack of included V.I.s -- somewhat helped in Pro X3).

I'd love to continue to hear along the lines:
- This is the DAW I use (i.e. rather than Cubase) and hear's why (beyond: It's what I know and have paid for).
- This is the only DAW that does THIS or does this BEST for scoring/editing/setting up templates, handling resources, etc.

Many thanks!


----------



## DS_Joost (Jul 24, 2018)

Craig Allen said:


> I'm following this discussion with interest as I'd like to get (back) into orchestral scoring after many, many years away. Samplitude Pro X2 (I also have/but not installed X3) has been my main Windows DAW for 20 years for recording/editing/mixing/mastering audio. I also have Studio One, Reaper, and now Logic for my Macbook Pro (plus formerly Sonar Plat. for Windows), but am a newbie at best on each of these. I just got an NI KK S61 Mk 2 keyboard which includes deep integration for Logic and Cubase (plus Ableton Live) which gives me some incentive to check those out.
> 
> Here, I'm hearing concerns about:
> - Cubase with stability and multiple outs (duplicate MIDI & Audio Tracks);
> ...


It's the cc editing. I'm not joking...


----------



## cmillar (Jul 24, 2018)

I stick with MOTU DP because:

- you don't always have to upgrade to the newest Mac OS to run DP (I use El Capitan 10.11.6 without problem)
- they let you download earlier versions of DP from their website if you prefer a previous version
- you can totally customize the key commands
- it comes with some great built-in effects (IR reverb, etc.) that are top notch
- you can load a 'template' and create many different musical cues from the same set of software instruments (this is call 'Chunks' in DP-speak...your mixer rack contains several instruments that be accessed by different sequences that you compose using the same instrument rack of sounds and effects
- you don't really need VEP if you set things up properly and your computer is functioning well
- it rarely freezes or gets the 'spinning beachball'...if it does, it will re-open with everything just as it was before the crash
- you can really customize pretty well any aspect of the interface and windows. 
- you can look at MIDI data in several different ways; whichever you're used to
- the audio engine is really oustanding ...(some 'blind-fold' listening tests all have DP coming through with the "best" subjective sound)....I say subjective, as bias' can clould anyone's judgments...but, regardless, the audio sounds great.
- you can truly work with any possible time signatures, tempos, ritardandos, accelerandos, etc.

Maybe not as many people use DP as some of the other DAW's, but think....do you ever see anyone here posting about the problems they may or may not have while using DP in their studio?

Maybe that's because DP doesn't have as many problems as the other DAW's?


----------



## DS_Joost (Jul 24, 2018)

DS_Joost said:


> It's the cc editing. I'm not joking...


Okay for real now. Studio One isn't specialized for scoring... like at al. But it does one thing very right. And that's working for you. The program gets out of the way. It might not be made for scoring buy right now it's perfectly adequate.


----------



## storyteller (Jul 24, 2018)

Craig Allen said:


> Here, I'm hearing concerns about:
> - Cubase with stability and multiple outs (duplicate MIDI & Audio Tracks);
> - Reaper with editing midi velocities, and complexity in customization,
> - Logic Pro X with limitations of export/bouncing features.



I've posted this a couple of times in other threads but thought I would add it to this thread. Reaper is fully capable of full midi CC editing and has great flexibility in editing. There are a number of scripts made by Julian Sader that allow this to happen. These scripts are also implemented in Orchestral Template for Reaper (OTR). The videos below are demonstrations of how the scripts look when properly implemented. There are more scripts than these that Julian has created, but these are the ones that cover 98% of the special needs for CC editing. Videos below. As I always note, these videos are valuable even if you are not using OTR because they demonstrate what is possible with midi in Reaper. The second video shows off the advanced midi functionality in the most detail.







Also, I want to mention @tack's Reaticulate which handles articulation mapping in Reaper like a champ. His thread about the software is located here. 

@calebfaith also has a set of scripts that offer CSS legato delay compensation without manual editing.

Anyway, these are a handful of things myself and some of the members here have contributed. I'm sure I'm missing a couple of other contributions on VI-C, but this will get you started if you are considering Reaper.

Cheers!


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (Jul 24, 2018)

cmillar said:


> I stick with MOTU DP because:
> 
> - you don't always have to upgrade to the newest Mac OS to run DP (I use El Capitan 10.11.6 without problem)
> - they let you download earlier versions of DP from their website if you prefer a previous version
> ...


I have read plenty of issues people have had with DP

And on the other points:
-Cubase alows expansive customisation of key commands and macros also
-Logic Pro allows you to assign both key commands and control/Program/OSC to almost anything
-You can run previous versions of Cubase on the same license
-Logic has a very stable engine also
The list goes on...

I am not trying to say your points are... 'pointless', just that it seems you have not researched into the other DAWs before giving your 10 reasons DP is superior


----------



## cmillar (Jul 25, 2018)

Just saying that DP works... it's an option. All DAW's are options. 

All depends on the work you do.

If you just make music out of loops and snippets of pre-composed music tracks, then DP is probably overkill. Save your money. 

(If I was only making music with loops all the time, I'd probably just use BeatHawk or Cubasis on my iPad. 
Or just use Lauchpad on your iPad.
Who even needs a big computer these day to "create music" out of loops? You don't.)

But, DP gives you a ton of different ways to create your music. It has something for everyone.

Buying a DAW is like searching for a car. See what feels good to you. There are no "best".


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 25, 2018)

cmillar said:


> you don't really need VEP if you set things up properly and your computer is functioning well



Although I highly recommend it for those who work with multiple cues (projects) in a session. Everything remains loaded when switching projects (in any DAW).

Also, hosting VI's in VEPro is a huge plus inside Logic, as it spreads the core loads more efficiently.

Regarding the "chunks" feature in DP, I always liked that. I think Apple finally took notice, as Logic now has a feature called "track alternatives" which is along the same lines.


----------



## InLight-Tone (Jul 25, 2018)

DS_Joost said:


> Both are the only programs I see that are really doing something innovative with the paradigms that have been established for decades. Both couldn't, however, be more on the other side of the spectrum, haha. I feel to choose between the two is really a matter of preference. Endless customization or extremely well thought out basic workflow.



Another Studio One 4 user here. Used Cubase for awhile but found Studio One a much more streamlined, modern version of it. It lacks a few things sure, especially for film composers but I'm doing library and trailers so it's perfect, fast & lean. 

It's weak with the large template thing though as save times are astronomical once you're past 100+ tracks.

Reaper has TOO MUCH customization for my taste, and feels like a mess when using it. I hope that Presonus opens up the Javascripting+API in the future so we can write our own scripts...


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Jul 25, 2018)

I love cubase, but the CHUNKS feature has got me considering a move to DP.


----------



## cmillar (Jul 25, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> I love cubase, but the CHUNKS feature has got me considering a move to DP.



DP's 'Chunks' is really handy. 

(disclosure: I'm not a composer who needs to have a template loaded with 100 - 500 tracks and 20 VI's all ready to go for everything I do. I do such a wide variety of music work with DP that I only need a smallish template of a few favorite VI's, and even then I add or subtract to my track count as needed. Nothing is ever 'pre-ordained'. Or, you can just creat a template with different sets of MIDI tracks that can be grouped and ready to assign to a VI when you decide what you need for your project. Setting up a bunch of MIDI track groups and saving them as a template makes even more sense that pre-setting a bunch of VI's...you can add the VI's to a MIDI group and put the VI in a 'chunk' when you know you'll be using the same instruments/orchestration for a variety of cues.)

So, if you are working on projects where you know that you'll be composing many cues or pieces that will use the same instrumentation, 'Chunks' is a real time saver and is very resource friendly on your computer. The only load on your processors happens when a VI is actually in use.

And, DP has a nice way of spreading the load out amongst the different cores of a Mac.

*FYI: please check out the website 'MotuNation'.

It's the best resource for all things MOTU on the web, and the people that frequent it really know the program and Mac's inside out. It's been a life-saver of a resource.


----------



## KV626 (Jul 26, 2018)

cmillar said:


> *FYI: please check out the website 'MotuNation'.
> 
> It's the best resource for all things MOTU on the web, and the people that frequent it really know the program and Mac's inside out. It's been a life-saver of a resource.



That's arguable. But it might be a good starting point. I guess.


----------



## Erick - BVA (Jul 26, 2018)

aaronventure said:


> Try REAPER.
> 
> I don't think I'll ever use another DAW (as a primary), frankly. I think you'll find it similar to Cubase in terms of workflow and if not, you can make it so and can adjust almost anything in the program to your liking.
> 
> ...


Ever since starting with Reaper, haven't looked back. A few glances towards Cubase and others, but it seems that the Reaper workflow just suits me better. Love all of the custom scipting and actions. Makes it awesome for sampling work.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 26, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> I love cubase, but the CHUNKS feature has got me considering a move to DP.



In Cubase the "track versions" feature is pretty much the same thing.


----------



## starise (Jul 27, 2018)

I find this thread interesting. There are some daws that professionals or people doing large compositions for a living seem to lean on. Cubase is in that elite group of programs as is DP. I always viewed programs like Reaper and Studio One as very good for most work but not heavy players in the soundtrack for film category, so it surprises me that some are using these for heavy movie track templates. Granted Reaper is said to be light and easy to customize. The same can also be said for a bunch of other programs when discussing customization.

I recently followed the process of the Cakewalk acquisition online. A bunch of those users were concerned about the long term viability of that daw, some thought a replacement was needed because they had projects to finish or begin.
Since Cakewalk began as a midi daw it was especially well developed over the years for midi. The only daw that came close or exceeded it was Cubase when it came to the deep kinds of midi editing these guys do, so many bought Cubase out of fear even though Cakewalk ended up staying solvent, was acquired by Bandlab, and continues to be developed. Some switched over to Cubase 100%. Some didn't.

During that process many of those midi power users who bought Cubase looked seriously at Studio One. I should mention I am also a Studio One User and I use several daws. The interesting thing is many of them didn't think Studio One had deep enough midi editing ability and chose not to buy it for that reason. This causes me to question it as a serious professional midi daw.

The way Studio One deals with midi isn't the same as most daws. They change the protocol in the daw from midi to something else. It isn't a deal breaker for most average users.It appears as midi in the daw. OTOH power users making 100 track movie mixes or script editing lots of complicated stuff, Studio One wouldn't seem to stand up to doing some of the things they need to do.

I recently set up template multi's for Kontakt in a few of my daws. They all have pluses and minuses. After you set the templates though it gets easier. I think the midi editing then becomes more important. Here's a real surprise- The easiest daw to build a template in for me was Mixcraft 8 Pro. One 5 minute YouTube video and I was up and running. Studio One wasn't bad but it seemed a bit clunky. CbB was complicated to get the routing right the first time. You have to tie the audio/midi track together in it, color them the same , name them etc. Not really intuitive but it can be done. Ableton Live 10 wasn't difficult since they have their own little block you drag that ties it together. I also like Ableton's multi track midi window pane. I would think that having this ability in any midi editor would be beneficial, especially for large midi track counts.

CbB midi editor is deep and very useful with lots of ways to copy/paste and paint automation.Probably very close in ability to Cubase. 

Core audio is amazing in how you don't need to think about it to use it and it's plenty fast. Presonus has latency reduction technology and most drivers written for ASIO or Waves RT in new interfaces are also fast so I don't think it is Mac-fast, windows-slow anymore. A windows user must choose hardware wisely. Hard to go wrong with RME or Motu. I'm not a pro, so I can get by fine with an older Presonus and my Focusrite. I'm only mentioning this because I think windows is a viable option, even for large projects. I build my own machines and my most recent build- a 5820K OC to 4.4ghz hasn't stalled at anything I threw at it yet. That's an older cpu. Imagine a new i9 chip.

If you're staying in mac land, then using bootcamp might be a nice alternative, however be aware that bootcamp takes more resources. I could put you in touch with a good builder if looking to move over.He only builds daws for music and media.I can do it too but I'm limited in time.


----------



## JamieLang (Jul 27, 2018)

First off...the function in Cubase that mirrors "chunks" in DP, is using the Arranger Track, I think. Long time since my decade with Performer...but, isn't chunks where you define sections of audio and MIDI as a section and just call the "chunk" to play/repeat at various places on the timeline? 

As to the OP, I'll have to give some thought and reading to WHY one is leaving an app they're familiar with. I will tell you that I just worked too hard to get Cubase v6 running on the new 8700/Win10 build because my last year+ everytime they're release a new version, I'd demo it on my MacBook, and it would either run like crap or crash a lot. I briefly demo'd 9.5 on my last antique Win7 machine...it ran fine, but was really instable. Not as much as OSX, but enough that I'd rather spend the time and energy getting the old version to work than pay them for the new crashing version. I've used Cubase 4 then 6 for a decade'ish...with nary an issue. I've said before that in ten years, I bet I could count on one hands the number of times that app crashed...and at some point, I had a whole studio of analog gear all integrated via compensated hardware inserts in the software mixer WHILE playing virtual instrument software at hardware levels of latency...so...I may have had an old Windows machine, but I don't suffer BS performance.

Anyway, DP...Cubase....Logic. Those are the benchmarks for musical midi sequencing, IMO/E. Others just haven't stacked up well.


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Jul 29, 2018)

Wolfie2112 said:


> In Cubase the "track versions" feature is pretty much the same thing.



I find it to be very difficult for me to successfully keep multiple versions of cues using the playlist function. 

Sometimes I have 30 takes on a particular track and being able to keep track of what track make up that version is near impossible for me. 

If I wanted to have 4 different versions of a cue, each with different tracks and different tempo maps, I would have to switch them all at once right?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 29, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> I find it to be very difficult for me to successfully keep multiple versions of cues using the playlist function.
> 
> Sometimes I have 30 takes on a particular track and being able to keep track of what track make up that version is near impossible for me.
> 
> If I wanted to have 4 different versions of a cue, each with different tracks and different tempo maps, I would have to switch them all at once right?



Or what I do is just save each version as its own project. I have all my instruments loaded into VEPro, so it literally only takes a few seconds to load each project.


----------



## cmillar (Jul 30, 2018)

JamieLang said:


> First off...the function in Cubase that mirrors "chunks" in DP, is using the Arranger Track, I think. Long time since my decade with Performer...but, isn't chunks where you define sections of audio and MIDI as a section and just call the "chunk" to play/repeat at various places on the timeline?



Yes...the more accurate name for using the 'instrument rack template' is "V Racks". 

(...sorry...I've been using DP so long I forget the exact names of all the features!)

Chunks is as you describe it, is where you can assemble various sequences, make copies of them, etc.

V-Racks is the 'equivlalent' of VEP, where you can set up your virtual instrument racks.

Here's a good intro to V-Racks from the MOTU TV on YouTube:


----------



## JamieLang (Jul 30, 2018)

That's the equivalent is the VST Rack, then. Been there as long as there have BEEN virtual instruments. Once upong a time, it was the ONLY way to load VSTis in Cubase. Made sense to me, since my VIs replaced a physical rack of MIDI modules.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 31, 2018)

cmillar said:


> V-Racks is the 'equivlalent' of VEP



To VEPro? Not even close. Two completely different programs.


----------



## cmillar (Jul 31, 2018)

Wolfie2112 said:


> To VEPro? Not even close. Two completely different programs.



Yes...that's why I wrote equivalent as 'equivalent'.

VEP has some more 'power' and 'options', etc.

But, if you don't need to have a major orchestral template loaded at all times with 500 tracks and 12 different libraries, or if you don't need a zillion delay plugins all ready to go at the drop of a hat, then V-Racks does the equivalent sort of job.

Some heavy duty composers just use V-Racks every day for film and TV work.


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Jul 31, 2018)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Or what I do is just save each version as its own project. I have all my instruments loaded into VEPro, so it literally only takes a few seconds to load each project.


Right, which is what I do now. But my template takes 9 min to load (7 slaves) and so with a director sitting here, thats impossible to waste that kind of time. And what happens if they want to modify a single instrument in all 4 version of the cue. 

So it does sound like DP gives me the ability with chunks to have access to every single midi note in the entire score in one session including different versions with different tempo maps. If thats the case, I inda have to move. On a show with directors where comedy timing is important, having access to every single midi note without having to switch sessions would be a game changer for me.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 31, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> Right, which is what I do now. But my template takes 9 min to load (7 slaves) and so with a director sitting here, thats impossible to waste that kind of time. And what happens if they want to modify a single instrument in all 4 version of the cue.



But that's the thing...you can just load it up before the director arrives. Switching between each version (project) only takes a few seconds as long as you're leaving the VEPro template preserved. Even if you change an instrument, it's just a quick save. The last feature length I did, the director sat there and listened to about 50 cues live from Cubase, just a quick close & open of each cue (project). The whole template was already loaded in the slave and master. If you have a completely different template for each each cue, then that's going to be a huge time waster.


----------



## cmillar (Aug 1, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> Right, which is what I do now. But my template takes 9 min to load (7 slaves) and so with a director sitting here, thats impossible to waste that kind of time. And what happens if they want to modify a single instrument in all 4 version of the cue.
> 
> So it does sound like DP gives me the ability with chunks to have access to every single midi note in the entire score in one session including different versions with different tempo maps. If thats the case, I inda have to move. On a show with directors where comedy timing is important, having access to every single midi note without having to switch sessions would be a game changer for me.



You got it


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Aug 1, 2018)

Wolfie2112 said:


> But that's the thing...you can just load it up before the director arrives. Switching between each version (project) only takes a few seconds as long as you're leaving the VEPro template preserved. Even if you change an instrument, it's just a quick save. The last feature length I did, the director sat there and listened to about 50 cues live from Cubase, just a quick close & open of each cue (project). The whole template was already loaded in the slave and master. If you have a completely different template for each each cue, then that's going to be a huge time waster.




I wish it only took seconds to load. If that was the case, I would have no issue. 

My template is always the same with all 6 slaves not changing and 1 slave (synth slave, that changes with each cue.)

I just clocked my template loading time at 7:40. If it was a blank or small session, it would snap quickly between projects, but with 2000+ 5.1 tracks with all mics loaded, 7 min each time I switch projects can easily break an hour of waiting for a single review session. 

Thats why I'm thinking about going to DP.


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Aug 1, 2018)

cmillar said:


> You got it



Wow, I love Cubase. Been on it since SX3!!!

But now that you've confirmed that it works that way, I'll admit, I'm being seduced to switch.

And all for a SINGLE FEATURE!!!!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Aug 1, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> but with 2000+ 5.1 tracks with all mics loaded, 7 min each time I switch projects can easily break an hour of waiting for a single review session



This is definitely strange, there should be no loading of anything if your template is loaded in VEPro, regardless of how many slaves you have.


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Aug 1, 2018)

Wolfie2112 said:


> This is definitely strange, there should be no loading of anything if your template is loaded in VEPro, regardless of how many slaves you have.


Well it has to load over 1000 instrument returns from vienna. I can actually watch it make its progress. And if I'm switching sessions and I have the Export Audio Mixdown window open, I can see it loading each return, Front and Back, one at a time. 

My main computer is a 20 core Dual Xeon VisionDaw, so I have a decent amount of horsepower. 

Is there anything you would advise to make the session load faster? I have been using this rig for years and years and have NEVER had a session load faster than 5 min since Cubase 7.5.

I'm defiantly interested if you have any advice!!!!


----------



## jcrosby (Aug 1, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> Well it has to load over 1000 instrument returns from vienna. I can actually watch it make its progress. And if I'm switching sessions and I have the Export Audio Mixdown window open, I can see it loading each return, Front and Back, one at a time.
> 
> My main computer is a 20 core Dual Xeon VisionDaw, so I have a decent amount of horsepower.
> 
> ...


You have decouple on yeah?


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Aug 1, 2018)

jcrosby said:


> You have decouple on yeah?


Decoupled on all instances except my Synths Slave. 

I have 14 instances and 13 of them are decoupled. 
I just filmed it, I'll upload a video.


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Aug 1, 2018)

So this blank session only took 4:30, but it can take much longer. 

Any ideas?

Sorry if I highjacked the thread but CHUNKS seems like an elegant solution for losing 1 hour in loading time every 12 cues which is why I'm considering DP.


----------



## jcrosby (Aug 1, 2018)

Bohrium said:


> I agree with you ... and I own all the ones you have mentioned except DP.
> 
> I still think Logic is very usable for the work the OP does.



Logic for sure... I've used it with VEP for years. Multi-channel instruments are simple and painless to setup, and can be grouped to a folder stack. Folder Stacks give you several benefits... You can fold them up so their screen real estate takes up single track, and they automatically set a VCA fader that you use to level balance into a buss.

Additionally, each multi-out mixer channel can be routed to any aux/bus you want... So you could have brass strings and winds in a single multi-out instrument... Since each multi-out is currently limited to 16 channels, (there are workarounds but they present a number of problems), something like multi mics would make more sense... (The 16 channel limit doesn't bother me at all... My template starts with all stacks folded up, I unfold for writing, once done writing I fold them back up freeing up real estate...

And with the ability to add custom icons for go to libraries it's incredibly easy to know what library you're looking at from a birds eye view, no need to read labels...

Not 100% sure what the OP means by "edit mode" though as I don't know Cubase. Maybe they mean catch playhead?


----------



## jcrosby (Aug 1, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> So this blank session only took 4:30, but it can take much longer.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> Sorry if I highjacked the thread but CHUNKS seems like an elegant solution for losing 1 hour in loading time every 12 cues which is why I'm considering DP.



That's brutal. I don't know DP myself, but am aware it's capable of some pretty complex stuff and chunks are the thing everyone cites as the reason why they love it..

Studio One would be a great option if it had more robust sync features and tempo mapping... The unfortunate part is Scratchpads could solve this issue if they'd just focus on film/TV composers needs... You stay in the same project so no load time whatsoever, and you can have an unlimited number of them.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Aug 1, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> Decoupled on all instances except my Synths Slave.
> 
> I have 14 instances and 13 of them are decoupled.
> I just filmed it, I'll upload a video.



Don't decouple, leave everything preserved.


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Aug 1, 2018)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Don't decouple, leave everything preserved.



Everything in on all slaves is Preserved. 

I changed to couple and it didn't affect loading time.


----------



## cmillar (Aug 2, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> Sorry if I highjacked the thread but CHUNKS seems like an elegant solution for losing 1 hour in loading time every 12 cues which is why I'm considering DP.



.... it's 'V-Racks' in combination with 'Chunks' that make life easy for switching among sequences that use the same rack of instruments....just to clarify


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Aug 2, 2018)

cmillar said:


> .... it's 'V-Racks' in combination with 'Chunks' that make life easy for switching among sequences that use the same rack of instruments....just to clarify


Roger that! Thanks for all the help! 

Going to download a DP trial as soon as I'm done with my current project.


----------



## cmillar (Aug 3, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> Roger that! Thanks for all the help!
> 
> Going to download a DP trial as soon as I'm done with my current project.



Be sure to checkout 'MotuTV' on YouTube for info videos/how to's; and also go to www.motunation.com

You can find the answers to any DP questions from many long time users. Enjoy!


----------



## Headlands (Aug 7, 2018)

Shad0wLandsUK said:


> I am actually afraid that the two statements:
> -Macs are underpowered
> -Have worse Audio
> 
> ...



Thanks for the response! The "Macs have worse audio power" statement was made from thorough research on articles throughout the web, but this was done about 6 years ago so I'm basing it on that, which might very well be outdated. My bad!

The statement "Macs are underpowered" I hold to be true, for the following reason that I should have specified: For Cubase at least (that's the only DAW I can speak for), Xeon processors are not as effective for audio as some of the other equally powered Intel chips. There are many comparisons online that show this, at least when I was researching about three years ago when I still decided to move back to Mac anyway for stability and ease of use. My 6-core Xeon Mac Pro had slightly _less_ plugin power than the 4-core (I can't remember what "i" version it was) PC it replaced that even had a slightly slower processor speed, which of course was a major disappointment, but at the time it was worth it for the other things. This is another reason why I am thinking of going back over to Windows, however (I need more than the iMac Pro offers in a few ways). While some Macs do have these other Intel processors, Mac Pros are stuck with Xeons. I should have specified that, my bad again.

The new Mac Pros might change that, but the price-to-power ratio of Macs is without questions far worse than Windows, always has been. I'm a Mac guy who went to Windows for a bit then came back for stability reasons. From what I understand this has changed in the last few years, though, as far as Windows compared to Mac.


----------



## Craig Allen (Aug 8, 2018)

Headlands said:


> ...
> 
> The new Mac Pros might change that, but the price-to-power ratio of Macs is without questions far worse than Windows, always has been. I'm a Mac guy who went to Windows for a bit then came back for stability reasons. From what I understand this has changed in the last few years, though, as far as Windows compared to Mac.



I have built a number of Windows computers over the years. My most recent Windows tower build from 2015 completely smokes the power off my late 2016 Macbookpro at 1/2 the price. Yet, it has its share of hassles and needs frequent baby-sitting. Meanwhile, my MBP is trouble-free, just a delight to use. I am ambidextrous / fluent in both Mac & Windows now. Interestingly, my preferences go in the opposite direction of most. I use Windows primarily for Audio and Video (bigger system, studio, not-portable, tons of drives, etc.). And I prefer my Mac laptop for office work. Reliable, no viruses, so portable, elegant. I use it for live music. My prior 17" MBP from 2010 was easily the best computer I've ever used -- for 7 years -- and still functions. Power/Price ratio is not the only consideration.


----------



## starise (Aug 9, 2018)

The only thing I'm finding with Windows 10 are the occasional updates which caused the OS to revert back to internal sound on the MOBO. It was a 5 minute fix. Updates can be turned off and this is recommended. If doing a build use Win 10 pro not Win 10. This allows more customization options.

Also, Mac uses proven hardware from reputable vendors. If building a WINPC I recommend the same mentality. My last three builds are still operational and have had zero issues. IOW don't skimp here.

My opinion, and we all have one  is Mac knows they have let the power desktop user down and I expect they will deliver a better product in the future. Will this keep the power user in the game? For those committed to the OS in both hardware and software, yes. For those just now looking at getting into this, maybe not. This is not primarily a Mac/PC question.This is a valid consideration though if:


 Considering a move away from one daw to another.
 Deciding which platform best serves the daw software you choose.
Dual platform daws would seen to get more consideration. As you know though, moving back and forth between studios and platforms can cause issues if it isn't choreographed well. You need plugin compatibility if opening projects. They all export stems in readable formats. At some point it's moot.Beyond that it isn't. It's a call you make. No matter what you do you aren't immune to issues. Things happen.


----------



## Bender-offender (Aug 19, 2018)

ChristopherDoucet said:


> Everything in on all slaves is Preserved.
> 
> I changed to couple and it didn't affect loading time.


Chris is correct about the long loading times with Cubase if you have a large template. Even with VEP decoupled all-around, Cubase needs to route and connect to every MIDI channel and VEP outputs, which isn’t fast at all. I, too, have a large template like Chris’s (minus all the surround channels) and it takes a few minutes to load.

However, I can’t speak for DP and Chunks, but I’m pretty sure all other DAWs would take a long time to load with a large template needing to connect everything like Cubase does. Using a similar template with Logic, it takes quite of bit of time to load as well (maybe a little quicker).

Speaking of Logic, and I know you’re on a PC, Chris, but it has Project Alternatives which might be similar to Chunks. I believe Logic’s old folder system was very cool in the way that you could have projects within projects - so in Chris’s case concerning the 4 cues, you could have all four cues in one project contained in separate folders. The folders didn’t work like Cubase’s folders, but rather like an OS’s folders where it contains separate files and you just open the folder to access those files. (If I’m wrong about the use of Logic’s old folder system, I apologize - it’s been years since I used Logic full-time )


----------



## Nite Sun (Aug 19, 2018)

@Headlands

Might be worth watching this video  from 4.46 onwards. It shows you how to correctly link midi tracks with the correct audio returns coming from the associated VEPro instance. By default i think all midi tracks link to the first VEPro output/return so you have manually set this up. I may be misunderstanding what you're trying to achieve though...


----------



## stigc56 (Aug 21, 2018)

I have been on the journey you are about to take. I think Digital Performer is in it's own way a very fine DAW. I used it for 2 projects some years ago, and found it to difficult to use. I do think that all the the major features are there, but I must say, that the lack of expression maps, the super tiny text - impossible to read on a 4k monitor - the convoluted way the mixer works - no mute button, no listen button, that I use all the time, and so on. Furthermore I must say that I have never experienced a more unfriendly user group than motunation. When I asked questions there I was constantly met with "answers" like "why do you want to do that??", and very fast some of the really old grumpy men was coming on to me in a very rude way. I gave up, and turned to Cubase/Nuendo. My template is only 800 tracks and only 2 slaves, so I haven't experience your loading issues. I have though noticed Orchestral Tools libraries tend to be very slow, and VSL super fast. Spitfire is also quite good. Hope you will find what you are looking for.


----------

