# Urgent advice needed on switching DAWs - are Cubase users happy?



## noiseboyuk (Dec 18, 2009)

I'm currently on Sonar Producer 8.5.2, but I'm getting to the point where I can't stand it any more. There is a metronome bug which means I can't change meter mid-project... unbelievable. There have been so many bugs over the years with Sonar, and to realize they can't even get a metronome or meter change right is the final straw for me.

So I'm thinking the unthinkable and considering changing DAWs over the Christmas break. I'd really rather not switch to Mac, the learning curve would be too steep in too short a time (it'll be bad enough as it is). The obvious contender is Cubase - are cubase users happy? Is it stable? Is it easy to work with picture?

Thanks for any help and advice.


----------



## Dynamitec (Dec 18, 2009)

Personally I'm on Cubase 5.1.1 on PC. 
I think Cubase has a very nice workflow, which is the reason I'm still using it - and I'm on Cubase since Cubase Vst 32 (ten years ago or so). However I'm definitely not too happy with the way Steinberg handles updates, bugfixes and customer support nowadays (but it has improved a little bit over the last half year in my opinion, more response from admins on Cubase.net etc).

Cubase 5 as it is right now is pretty stable and in my opinion it's very easy to learn (compared to other sequencers), however I would suggest you also give Samplitude 11 a try. Samplitude has some unique features (e.q. complete object oriented handling) and Magix is known for a much better customer relationship than Steinberg currently is.


----------



## hbuus (Dec 18, 2009)

When Apple bought Emagic some years ago, I continued to use Logic 5.5.1 on the pc for a few years. But finally I switched to Cubase, which I have not regretted, although it is extremely annoying having to learn your way inside a new sequencer.

Cubase 4.5.2 is rock solid here, and I am very happy with it.
So happy, also with features etc., that I in fact see no reason currently to update to Cubase 5.

Notice however that I am a hobby user and thus cannot comment on how the program performs in a professional context.

Henrik


----------



## Andreas Moisa (Dec 18, 2009)

I switched from Logic 5 to Nuendo and I never looked back. Go ahead, Cubase has a lot of great tools and features and is even ahead of Nuendo (that is until N5 comes out next year).
+1 for Cubase


----------



## Justus (Dec 18, 2009)

Happy Cubase user for over 15 years!


----------



## germancomponist (Dec 18, 2009)

I use Cubase since it was invented. 

+1 for Cubase


----------



## Aaron Sapp (Dec 18, 2009)

The lack of native VST support alone was enough to prompt my switch from Sonar to Cubase. I could never get that damned Wrapper to work properly. 

If things haven't changed in that regard, I would switch over immediately and save yourself a few headaches. The learning curve is not terribly steep if you get the tutorial videos (they existed for SX3, at least). 

No regrets here.


----------



## DynamicK (Dec 18, 2009)

Recently switched to Cubase from Sonar and have not regretted it. 
Vst expression is a great feature and also the new VST3 standard, which I heard Sonar has no intention of supporting. 
If you aren't in a hurry you can get secondhand ones on Ebay for about half the retail. Another plus for Steinberg.......you are allowed to sell Cubase and transfer the license, unlike Sonar.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Dec 18, 2009)

Thanks guys! Sonar can natively support VST right now btw Aaron.

Hmm... does seem like a good idea to me, and thanks for the 2nd hand tip. I'll have a look.


----------



## Farkle (Dec 18, 2009)

Haven't used Cubase, but...

I was a big Sonar user for years, had it from Sonar 3 all the way up to 6.

Switched to Mac for the power, and because I was doing more TV that needed big scores.

Anyways... never really found any software that I liked, until I tried Presonus' new DAW, Studio One.

www.presonus.com

It's lean, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of Sonar or Cubase, and, it doesn't import movies (I still use DP 6 for that).

BUT... the workflow and engine optimization for multi-cores is, IMHO, excellent. It's blazing fast, and I love the look and feel of it. 

You can d/l the demo and try it out, I really like it. Just a thought. 

Mike


----------



## misterbee (Dec 18, 2009)

Cubase user since v2 on Atari. Cubase 5 (Vista 64 bit) is really nice, and it actually came with some decent plugins for a change!

Wouldn't want to use anything else.


----------



## Ian Dorsch (Dec 18, 2009)

I switched to Cubase from Sonar back around Sonar 6 due to stability issues. I wouldn't go back, but there are a few caveats:

- You cannot move frozen tracks. This has been an issue for years, and AFAIK Steinberg has no plans to address it. If your workflow is anything like mine, and you do a lot of freezing and unfreezing VSTis in dense orchestral mixes, this may be a sticking point for you.

- On certain systems, video support in Cubase 5 is inconsistent at best. Although a wide range of video file formats are supposedly supported, I have had no luck at all with WMV and MOV files in Cubase 5. The DAW either simply fails to import them, or they won't play back without crippling audio stuttering, followed by my ASIO drivers totally crashing. There are certain codecs that supposedly work better than others for MOV files, but none of them worked worth a shit with my system (Q9550, 4 GB RAM, XP32, Presonus Firepod). With some experimentation, I've found a combination that works for me, but it involved several days of seething rage (and lots of friendly advice from fellow forum members). So be aware that you may have that to look forward to. 

Supposedly there is a major overhaul of the video engine coming down the pipeline, but I'm not sure if we'll see it before Cubase 6.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Dec 18, 2009)

Thanks Jay... 13 hours of instruction! Oh boy. Do I REALLY want to do this? Actually I know the answer to that... no I don't. But I think I need to.


----------



## Ian Dorsch (Dec 18, 2009)

noiseboyuk @ Fri Dec 18 said:


> Thanks Ian - obviously video is pretty crucial for me, so that's quite alarming. At the mo I'm using AVIs and a divxpro codec (keyframed on every frame).
> 
> My main VIs are Play, Kontakt 3.5, Omnisphere, EZ Drummer, Kore Player. Anyone had any issues with any of these in Cubase?



I use all of those VIs in Cubase 5 except Play, and a few others besides (Superior Drummer, Rapture, z3ta, Reaktor 5) and everything works flawlessly. As a DAW, I really like it a lot.

Regarding the video issues, AVI is the only format with which I've had any consistent success in Cubase 5, although I don't believe I've experimented with divxpro. Also, from what I've pieced together at the Cubase forums, the issue seems at least partially related to quad core CPUs, so if you're running a dualie you might be okay. FWIW, my last studio rig was a dual core Opteron running Cubase SX 3, and I recall a variety of video formats working with no problems.

Hope that helps, and feel free to ask if you need more info.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Dec 18, 2009)

Thanks Ian - mine is a quad, actually (Q6600). I forgot VE Pro, btw, but it's only in use as the audio / midi connections (VE Pro is only hosting VSTs on my slave machine). Good news on those plugs, though keen to hear from a Play user or two as I know Play can be temperamental with some hosts.


----------



## NYC Composer (Dec 18, 2009)

I'm on a Mac, but from what I understand, optimization is much better on PC. That having been said, I've been on Cubase since '97, and its current iterations are the most stable I've seen. I was on SX-3 forever( 4 years), hardly ever crashed-had to upgrade to C5 when I went to an Intel Mac- I've been very pleasantly surprised.

As to learning, the curve really isn't steep. It's pretty intuitive and I love the workflow.


----------



## Frederick Russ (Dec 18, 2009)

Ah, a brave soul to switch. Seems you'll have a lot of friends and a useful support network with Cubase. 

I went with Logic back in 2003 and still hanging in there. I like Logic - just don't like the bugs and 32-bit limitation. If 64-bit support is missed here, I honestly predict that eventually a lot of people would be bailing on their present daw for the one that would allow it.


----------



## NYC Composer (Dec 18, 2009)

I'm not sure, but I believe Cubase 5 is 64 bit on PC.


----------



## germancomponist (Dec 18, 2009)

It is


----------



## Ian Dorsch (Dec 18, 2009)

Yup, it's been 64-bit native for most of the year, and now officially Win7 compatible too.


----------



## MCS (Dec 18, 2009)

Hi!
I switched from Sonar to Cubase one year ago since i switched to Mac too. I am happy with my choice. There are some things i miss but there are also other things which are much cooler than in Sonar, so all in all you cant go wrong with Cubase.

best,
Michael


----------



## noiseboyuk (Dec 18, 2009)

Thanks Michael - out of interest, what do you miss?


----------



## Polarity (Dec 19, 2009)

I use Cubase since v1.0 on Atari ST... what it was? 1990 or 1991.
(switched for Windows version (the score edition) when I got a working PC for music).
For me Cubase always had the best GUI interface for a sequencer...
can't be able to work with any other sequencer... 
never liked the other's one GUI.


----------



## Mr Greg G (Dec 19, 2009)

Very happy Cubase 4 and 5 user here. I also heard some great things about Presonus Studio One so if I had to start to learn a new sequencer from scratch, I'd give it a shot!


----------



## noiseboyuk (Dec 19, 2009)

Well, I've taken the plunge and ordered. Rather than faff for more days over which version to get, I went for Studio - it seems to have everything I need, I already have stacks of plugs from Sonar, and if I do want to upgrade there's no financial penalty anyway.

The joy if it is - if it's all a disaster, I just go back to Sonar and sell Cubase. Here's hoping it does work out though - I've been really miserable this past week fighting with such basic things on Sonar, I hope I can make the transition without too much pain. I did used to use Atari Cubase 20 years ago, but think I'm being optimistic if that will help me now!

I decided not to go for the Studio One / Reapers of the world - unfortunately wide support and having been around a long time counts for an awful lot in my book when it comes to compatibility issues.

Thanks again everyone for your input, I really appreciate it.


----------



## Mahlon (Dec 19, 2009)

Was that bug introduced in Sonar 8.5? I've read your post at the Sonar forum, but I don't think I'm able to reproduce the bug. I'm using 8.3 though, and who knows, something could've been changed.

The only bug I know of is the one Brundlefly mentioned concerning that with count-in metronome enabled in mixed meters, it can screw up your audio metronome until you switch it back to midi -- which admittedly is a pretty stupid bug.

I've thought of switching to Cubase before, too, but everytime I've gotten close to doing it, I back off because of I fear opening one can of worms for another. That said, ever since Sonar 8, I've not had many problems and I like the workflow interface and customization available in the UI.

Now if Sonar could just get a vst expression type system and a pick-up bar for the first measure, I'd be happy. Oh, and an integrated lane for the tempo view.

By the way, is there a demo for Cubase 5? I'd like to give it a try. :D 

Mahlon


----------



## noiseboyuk (Dec 19, 2009)

I definitely wasn't using count in during one session last week where the bug reared its ugly head. Because of the other bug where video will go nuts after a count in, I'm in the habit of spinning back, playing and dropping into record. Since 8.5.2 I've very occasionally used the count in (they fixed the video bug) - perhaps just using it once can trigger the bug?

I've definitely had it before, but it has seemed worse lately for whatever reason. Sometimes - usually - switching meters is fine, then other times it all goes disastrously wrong and there's no recovery. Honestly, I was so miserable this week, just swearing constantly at the computer... not good for my health! If Cubase just works, then that's good enough for me.... hopefully I'm done beta testing non-beta software.


----------



## Mahlon (Dec 19, 2009)

Please post your experiences with, and what you think about Cubase. I'm interested.


Mahlon


----------



## noiseboyuk (Dec 19, 2009)

Certainly will. Should be receiving it by Christmas (snow permitting) but may not have much chance to begin to get to grips with it til New Year sort of time.


----------



## Stephen Baysted (Dec 20, 2009)

Cubase 4 and Nuendo 4 here. All good and generally rock solid.


----------



## OvaltineJenkins (Dec 22, 2009)

+1 on Presonus' Studio One. What the heck, +10. Having used Cakewalk/Cubase/Reaper/Logic, the gold medal goes easily to Studio One for being intuitive, easy to use, as well as surprisingly well featured. Seems like with Cubase et al, it was always a fight against the machine to get it to do what I wanted and what I wanted was buried in the 3rd level of some hierarchical menu in confusing, ambiguous language, discovered only after 3 hours of searching forums. Studio One seems to work with me instead of against me. I seriously love it. I'm still on the 30-day demo, but if my experience so far holds true it looks like I *finally* found a half-decent DAW.


----------



## billval3 (Dec 22, 2009)

Mahlon @ Sat Dec 19 said:


> Please post your experiences with, and what you think about Cubase. I'm interested.
> 
> 
> Mahlon



I'll be interested to hear about your experience as well. I've been on Sonar since v.1 and hate the idea of switching, but I don't want to keep my head in the sand. I haven't had the problem you're facing, but I'm still on v.6! :oops:


----------



## misterbee (Dec 22, 2009)

OvaltineJenkins @ Tue Dec 22 said:


> like with Cubase et al, it was always a fight against the machine to get it to do what I wanted and what I wanted was buried in the 3rd level of some hierarchical menu in confusing, ambiguous language, discovered only after 3 hours of searching forums.




I'm interested in examples of this. I don't doubt that its true for you, and countless others (I had the same issue with Digital Performer, a DAW that some people love), I find Cubase to be so incredibly intuitive that I never find myself fighting the machine. On several forums I've seen people claim that it is too complex or whatever... I know that everyone's perception of what is intuitive is different, hence the popularity of many DAW's rather than a single clear winner, but I'm just curious as to what kind of things have produced the biggest barriers for you - not necessarily in Cubase, but with any DAW. Is it the documentation that is lacking or the interface itself?


----------



## MCS (Dec 22, 2009)

noiseboyuk @ Sat Dec 19 said:


> Thanks Michael - out of interest, what do you miss?




I am working with staff view a lot and the note entry in sonar was much easier and faster somehow... also editing in staff view. Also multiple staff views are not possible in Cubase. 
But... i guess thats nothing really important.  Since Cubase version 5 i am very happy with it.

Michael.


----------



## billval3 (Dec 22, 2009)

MCS @ Tue Dec 22 said:


> Also multiple staff views are not possible in Cubase.



I would miss that. A lot of times I end up creating voicings on the fly and it's easiest to see what I've already done for a section using the staff view.


----------



## Mahlon (Dec 22, 2009)

billval3 @ Tue Dec 22 said:


> Mahlon @ Sat Dec 19 said:
> 
> 
> > Please post your experiences with, and what you think about Cubase. I'm interested.
> ...



I don't think you're sticking your head in the sand with Sonar. Far from it. I too loathe to switch -- and probably won't. I don't use notation in Sonar because it's just not up to snuff yet. But the rest of the program is solid. For notation I go to Sibelius.

I just wish Sonar would begin to throw some bones to composers for media, games, tv, and film. If not, and if Cubase continues to accept that these types of huge orchestral compositions are an important part of the way their software is used, I'll have no choice but to switch for the obvious reason.

Mahlon


----------



## billval3 (Dec 22, 2009)

Right...I don't use Sonar's notation view to actually create parts. I just use it if I'm creating some orchestrations on the fly and need to be able to see what I've done so far. I edit mostly in piano roll, but to look at actual pitches it's often easier to use the staff view.

Sibelius is my main notation program as well.


----------



## OvaltineJenkins (Dec 23, 2009)

misterbee @ Tue Dec 22 said:


> OvaltineJenkins @ Tue Dec 22 said:
> 
> 
> > like with Cubase et al, it was always a fight against the machine to get it to do what I wanted and what I wanted was buried in the 3rd level of some hierarchical menu in confusing, ambiguous language, discovered only after 3 hours of searching forums.
> ...



I think by "fighting against the machine" I'm referring to unnecessarily steep learning curve. Even with elementary things that should be easy, such as how to open an instrument and start playing music. In Logic you have to know to go to down to the lower left side of the screen, and press and hold on a little button with no markings on it whatsoever, then navigate a hierarchical menu to find your sound engine. Easy once you know it, but hardly intuitive unless you have experience working the board in the studio. You shouldn't have to refer to documentation to do something that basic...you *should* just be aòqó   »¾{qó   »¾|qó   »¾}qó   »¾~qó   »¾qó   »¾€qó   »¾qó   »¾‚qó   »¾ƒqó   »¾„qó   »¾…qó   »¾†qó   »¾‡qó   »¾ˆqó   »¾‰qó   »¾Šqó   »¾‹qó   »¾Œqó   »¾qó   »¾Žqó   »¾qó   »¾qó   »¾‘qó   »¾’qó   »¾“qó   »¾”qó   »¾•qó   »¾–qó   »¾—qó   »¾êqó   »¾ëqó   »¾ìqó   »¾íqó   »¾îqó   »¾ïqó   »¾ðqó   »¾ñqó   »¾òqó   »¾óqó   »¾ôqó   »¾õqó   »¾öqó   »¾÷qó   »¾øqó   »¾ùqô   »¾\qô   »¾]qô   »¾˜qô   »¾™qô   »¾šqô   »¾›qô   »¾œqô   »¾qô   »¾žqô   »¾Ÿqô   »¾ qô   »¾¡qô   »¾¢qô   »¾£qô   »¾¤qô   »¾¥qô   »¾¦qô   »¾§qô   »¾¨qô   »¾©qô   »¾ªqô   »¾«qô   »¾¬qô   »¾­qô   »¾®qô   »¾¯qô   »¾°qô   »¾±qô   »¾²qô   »¾³qô   »¾´qô   »¾µqô   »¾¶qô   »¾·qô   »¾¸qô   »¾¹qô   »¾ºqô   »¾»qô   »¾¼qô   »¾½qô   »¾¾qô   »¾¿qô   »¾Àqô   »¾Áqô   »¾Âqô   »¾Ãqô   »¾Äqô   »¾Åqô   »¾Æqô   »¾Çqô   »¾Èqô   »¾Éqô   »¾Êqô   »¾Ëqô   »¾Ìqô   »¾Íqô   »¾Îqô   »¾Ïqô   »¾Ðqô   »¾Ñqô   »¾Òqô   »¾Óqô   »¾Ôqô   »¾Õqô   »¾Öqô   »¾×qô   »¾Ø              òqô


----------



## MCS (Dec 24, 2009)

DynamicK @ Wed Dec 23 said:


> > Also multiple staff views are not possible in Cubase.
> 
> 
> Not true. To open multiple tracks in the score editor, first select all the parts in the project view you want, then go then MIDI->Open Score Editor or CTRL+R on Windows.
> ...



DynamicK, what i meant was to open more than one notation windows, e.g. one for woods, one for brass etc...

Michael.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Dec 24, 2009)

I've spent a little bit of time with Cubase so far, really just to set up some basics and begin work on a template for the new year. Early signs are very encouraging I have to say - several things in basic workflow that Cubase seems to have right (dragging tracks in and out of track folders is a cinch; clicking a track defaults to auto-arming it and disarming the previous; adding a group of midi tracks auto increments the channel numbers). It was the basics that always irritated me with Sonar (cf the metronome and workflow) - the bells and whistles were fine. The overall impression (I hasten to add very provisional) is that it is making Sonar look very clunky by comparison.

I've found quite a bit NOT instantly intuitive, but it's the kind of one-off thing that once learnt you go "oh, I get it now, no problems". Only real negative so far is that - inexplicably - track names can only be really short!

Once I've spent a bit more time with it, I think I'll put up a "transition guide from Sonar to Cubase", if others would find it useful.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Jan 2, 2010)

Well, just an update on this as I've had to put Cubase on ice for the time being. In the end I found I couldn't make VE Pro work with Cubase reliably. I'd set it up and get it working fine, but could then not restart the session without VE Pro making Cubase freeze on reloading. It was taking so much of my time just to get to a starting position (it took 2 hours to get it back once) that it's currently unuseable in my set up. And since Sonar plays nice, reluctantly I have to go back.

I don't know what the problem is really, since I'm sure others are using VE Pro and Cubase hand in hand. I'll give it another shot at the end of this project, if I can make it work by then I might well try and migrate cos the benefits are probably worth it. If not, it's off to eBay!

Given the limited amount I used it (1 successful cue!) Here's a very incomplete list of things I liked and disliked in Cubase relative to Sonar:

THE GOOD

Auto-increment of channel numbers of new midi channels
Selecting any track can auto-arm for record and disable previously armed track
Dragging tracks in and out of folders very simple and intuitive
Jog wheel has frame advance / retreat
Very small vertical track width possible which is great for big templates

THE BAD

Can't make it work reliably with VE Pro (!)
Track names very short and cannot be lengthened
Cannot change default media / project folders
Video player cannot be custom resized (only normal / double size etc)
Clicking in free space can be set to move the cursor, but it cannot follow the grid snap settings
Issue with "losing" the soundcard after a freeze or crash and defaulting to very high latency ASIO driver
[APPLIES TO CUBASE STUDIO ONLY] unbelievably, no monitoring of real time mixdown, which isn't stated in the product comparison guide. Monitoring a mix seems about as basic as you can get!

So all round, not really a successful experiment thus far. And - of course - I am so fast in Sonar compared to Cubase because I've used it for so long.

I'm trying a workround with Sonar for the metronome bug, by using an external metronome. I've heard it works, but using midi-yoke to trigger seems to induce a small delay, so it's a case of switching to it as a last resort. Far from ideal, but at least stops the entire session collapsing as happened before Christmas.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jan 2, 2010)

noiseboyuk @ Sat Jan 02 said:


> Well, just an update on this as I've had to put Cubase on ice for the time being. In the end I found I couldn't make VE Pro work with Cubase reliably. I'd set it up and get it working fine, but could then not restart the session without VE Pro making Cubase freeze on reloading. It was taking so much of my time just to get to a starting position (it took 2 hours to get it back once) that it's currently unuseable in my set up. And since Sonar plays nice, reluctantly I have to go back.
> 
> I don't know what the problem is really, since I'm sure others are using VE Pro and Cubase hand in hand. I'll give it another shot at the end of this project, if I can make it work by then I might well try and migrate cos the benefits are probably worth it. If not, it's off to eBay!
> 
> ...



I am Mac Cubase user but no Cubase fanboy. However, at least from the full C5 Mac standpoint, to comment:

1. Ve Pro is working fine for me as long as it is INSTANTIATED FIRST. I found this frustrating at the beginning, but the way it works for me is you have to bring up VE Pro, name a new Project, then if you have an instance within your sequencer project, it will load the correct one automatically.
2. You're right about the track names. Not a dealbreaker for me, but annoying occasionally.
3. On full C5,changing default media folders is in preferences.

4. On Mac at least, video player can be dragged to whatever size you want
5.not sure what you mean
6. I don't have freezes or crashes, but my soundcard driver within Mac is mostly stable. Once in a while latency increases when I'm using a lot of Play instances, but it's a simple workaround that doesn't need a re-start.
7. The full Cubase has realtime export and monitoring of mixes.

All that said, if Sonar works better for you, stick with it! Cheers.


----------



## arnau (Jan 2, 2010)

Hi, I'm a Cubase user on a aAc. I had a lot of troubles with video using 4.5.2 and quicktime. I had to downgrade to an older version of quicktime. Right now is solved and working fine but it took a long time to find the problem. 

Does any Cubase user have problems with the "Selecting any track can auto-arm for record and disable previously armed track" feature? It happens to me that I select a track, it arms, I record, Stop, and suddenly other random tracks are armed...I have to deselect them and arm the one I want. I record, and when I stop, again. The behavior is very confusing and happened to me with Cubase SX3 in a Pc and it's happening againg with 4.5....any advise for this? Thank you. 

Arnau


----------



## NYC Composer (Jan 2, 2010)

arnau @ Sat Jan 02 said:


> Hi, I'm a Cubase user on a aAc. I had a lot of troubles with video using 4.5.2 and quicktime. I had to downgrade to an older version of quicktime. Right now is solved and working fine but it took a long time to find the problem.
> 
> Does any Cubase user have problems with the "Selecting any track can auto-arm for record and disable previously armed track" feature? It happens to me that I select a track, it arms, I record, Stop, and suddenly other random tracks are armed...I have to deselect them and arm the one I want. I record, and when I stop, again. The behavior is very confusing and happened to me with Cubase SX3 in a Pc and it's happening againg with 4.5....any advise for this? Thank you.
> 
> Arnau



I never had this problem with SX-3, but I didn't have that option selected either. I did read about it , and I believe it was finally dealt with in C5.1.1. My suggestion would be to check this Cubase.net Mac forum on that- I get a lot more info there than from Steinberg.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jan 2, 2010)

Maybe, but I wonder- does his program cover all the ground the DAWS do? If you think on it a little, it's pretty astounding , what they do. The 'virtual studio' started in Cubase, and was pathetically underpowered at the beginning- now these programs are behemoths.

Regardless, with a large enough user base, people will complain no matter what. Join any forum, same deal. 

I think you might have done better with the full version of Cubase. I know nothing about the intro versions. I have always found Cubase friendly and flexible, though at times horribly bug ridden. Presently it's very stable for me. That having been said, switching DAWS is a miserable experience. There are always tons of things that don't work the same. I hope you find what you need.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Jan 3, 2010)

NYC Composer @ Sun Jan 03 said:


> Maybe, but I wonder- does his program cover all the ground the DAWS do? If you think on it a little, it's pretty astounding , what they do. The 'virtual studio' started in Cubase, and was pathetically underpowered at the beginning- now these programs are behemoths.
> 
> Regardless, with a large enough user base, people will complain no matter what. Join any forum, same deal.
> 
> I think you might have done better with the full version of Cubase. I know nothing about the intro versions. I have always found Cubase friendly and flexible, though at times horribly bug ridden. Presently it's very stable for me. That having been said, switching DAWS is a miserable experience. There are always tons of things that don't work the same. I hope you find what you need.



It's absolutely true that SpotOn does not cover anything like the same ground as a DAW, but I think the principle still applies. I was thinking, actually, that Reaper is quite possibly the model I'm looking for. I certainly won't be trying it for a while, mind! But I very much like their ethos and approach. I think I'd want to wait until they specifically target our corner of the market for a while - scoring tools etc, and that compatibility is improved. But they are the new boys, so given a bit more time there 's a good chance they will get there, I hope.

While you're comment of "someone will always complain" is true, I don't think it need be the case. I see the same comments in forums made time and again - "no-one listens or cares". That's what I'm arguing for, and that's what Cuckos are seeking to address, I think.

A basic test is this - what reason is there for a developer not routinely saying to its customers "what new features would you like to see?" "What gets in the way of your working day?" Doing a constant feedback trawl rather then producing shiny-looking features that few people use in practice. You won't please everyone, to be sure, but so much of what is asked for by DAW users are basic useabilty / common sense / stability issues.

BTW, I'm sure you're right about full Cubase vs Studio, but it provides a very negative impression of a company if crucial and very very basic features (listening to a mixdown) are withheld from a version without them even telling you beforehand. As it is, I'm glad - I'll have lost less money this way!


----------

