# Anyone using Cubase and Studio One?



## Studio E (Oct 15, 2020)

I’ve never understood why people would want to run more than one DAW, other than working with Pro Tools to integrate with other professionals. Well now it makes sense to me, as I want to have a mobile system, but I don’t want to move my e-licensee from one machine to the other. It’s just too risky to me. So, I’m a 20-year Cubase user, and sat for one session with a guywhoused Studio One, and it seemed very intuitive having come from a Cubase background, but that was years ago. Any opinions?


----------



## dzilizzi (Oct 15, 2020)

If I'm not mistaken, Studio One was started by a group of former Cubase developers. I have both, though my first choice of DAW is ProTools. But that's a "I learned it first and it is easy for me" thing. 
I find S1 easy to use. Biggest complaints I hear are that it can't handle big templates. I'm not sure at what point the number of tracks is a problem. My projects, as a hobbyist, rarely get past 50 tracks. I also haven't tried it with video. I'm sure there are a lot of things it doesn't do yet, but to me, it does what I need it to do.


----------



## dylanmixer (Oct 15, 2020)

I might have seen an inkling of Steinberg moving away from the e-licenser in the future. Daniel Spreadbury, product manager at Dorico, said on the forum something along the lines of "when we move away from the current licensing system" in response to an issue with an e-licenser.


----------



## EgM (Oct 15, 2020)

You could use Cubase Elements or LE when you're on the go, doesn't need a dongle just software eLicenser.

Re: using more than one DAW—I use Studio One Pro, Cubase Pro, Logic Pro, Digital Performer 10, Reaper, Cakewalk, Voyetra Record Producer 

I just get bored with one DAW and hop to the next because I don't find it hard to adapt to new workflows, in the end functions are all the same but under another name. But if I'm asked which is my favorite, it's definitely Studio One because the workflow is the fastest of all those.


----------



## Lukas (Oct 17, 2020)

dzilizzi said:


> If I'm not mistaken, Studio One was started by a group of former Cubase developers.


That's correct: Matthias Juwan (*the* mastermind behind Studio One until now) and Wolfgang Kundrus.



dzilizzi said:


> Biggest complaints I hear are that it can't handle big templates. I'm not sure at what point the number of tracks is a problem.


My current Studio One 5 orchestra template consists of 350 tracks. Works as a charm and it will become even better!



EgM said:


> Voyetra Record Producer


Record Producer!  I love MIDI Orchestrator / Digital Orchestrator ... but can't get it to work on Windows 7 / 10 :-( It had the best piano roll I've ever seen.


----------



## InLight-Tone (Oct 17, 2020)

Lukas said:


> My current Studio One 5 orchestra template consists of 350 tracks. Works as a charm and it will become even better!



Is that using VEP or just Studio 1? Disabled tracks as well?


----------



## bfreepro (Oct 17, 2020)

I really like Studio One, and I own all the latest versions of FL Studio, Cubase Pro, and Studio One. Especially with version 5, where they’ve integrated articulation/expression maps (which are SIGNIFICANTLY easier to set up than Cubase expression maps), a notation/score editor view within the piano roll, as well as the great previous features like a drum map editor and scratch pads.
For libraries like VSL or the Sonokinetic woodwinds, where there are multiple “banks” of keyswitches, using the expression map menu in addition to the drum map editor is seriously intuitive and massively speeds up my workflow. For instance, you can set up the expression maps to switch between long/short/legato/trem/etc, then use the drum map editor to label out normal, marcato, portamento, etc. It’s just a very handy way to visually label the keyswitches and have them instantly available to change on the fly with a single click in the piano roll instead of hunting for keyswitches and scrolling through octaves.
I feel like Studio One, for me, is the perfect balance between speed/ease of use (Which FL studio excels at) and deep options for using virtual instruments and MIDI composing (which is where cubase excels). I also love the “scratch pad”, which acts similar to the “patterns” in FL Studio, and makes it very easy to sketch out various ideas and variations of melodies or harmonies before fully committing it to the final playlist. Little things like that are just super intuitive and user friendly in my experience.

I used to get bad cpu spikes with previous versions of Studio One, but this hasn’t happened since version 4.5 and onward. Sometimes for scoring to picture I still use cubase because it has been fine tuned over the years with this exact thing in mind, but I’d say today, for 95 percent of my work, I use Studio One exclusively. It’s still a very young/new DAW relatively, and each update shows significant advances in features and performance, and I can genuinely say it inspires me to enjoy the process and write more music instead of fussing with templates and deep menus and tedious editing.


----------



## Sean J (Oct 17, 2020)

bfreepro said:


> (which are SIGNIFICANTLY easier to set up than Cubase expression maps), a notation/score editor view within the piano roll...



Exp Maps are complex and allow for a lot, but bloated in many ways as well. More agile instruments are the answer, not complex maps. So I appreciate Studio One keeping it very simple. The notation is absolutely brilliant, but hairpins and articulations don't tie to the piano roll right now.

I created this *feature request* for it if anyone wants to vote for it (any sane person, basically).

To the OP,

I spent nearly a decade with Cubase, then demo'd Studio One after a Windows reinstall. I had no Cubase to fall back to, so I forced myself to ONLY use S1 for 30 days. The first hour was odd. Things were different. I got over it. The rest of the day was "oh geez, why hasn't Steinberg done this after so many requests and forum posts and... oh look, another thing... oh look, another one". I fell in love.

Then I used Cubase again.

1) It was a nightmare. The piano roll, the lanes, resizing things, little things, big things. All a nightmare. But... a few good things too. Some things I couldn't do in Studio One. So a trade-off.

2) After getting back to Studio One, I've found that everything I thought I couldn't do, I could. Some features are just deep in programs. Studio One generally isn't, as the workflow and UI are brilliant. A few things are buried though. But musically, there's nothing I can't do in Studio One. There's more I CAN do. Plus the notation is wicked awesome.

3) The only thing lacking in Studio One is film features. It DOES have a video player. It has markers. Yes, you can work with it. A video track would be great, but it's honestly not necessary. I'd much rather have chunks like DP, and have multiple videos and multiple sequencers (like the sketch-pad... ish). So more video is needed, but I hate when people say it should copy Cubase. As a Cubase user, I always envied the chunk feature.


----------



## Lukas (Oct 18, 2020)

I pretty much agree to everything being said here!



Sean J said:


> 3) The only thing lacking in Studio One is film features. It DOES have a video player. It has markers. Yes, you can work with it. A video track would be great, but it's honestly not necessary.


I think it's necessary. It would make it way more convinient to sync audio and video...



InLight-Tone said:


> Is that using VEP or just Studio 1? Disabled tracks as well?


Just Studio One & hide & disable tracks. I stopped using VEP in 2013.


----------



## Ivan M. (Oct 18, 2020)

You've all made me try S1 again, starting to like it, stuff is well organized, I think I'm going to buy...


----------



## Ivan M. (Oct 18, 2020)

Aaaaand bought it :D through that subscription thing


----------



## bfreepro (Oct 18, 2020)

Ivan M. said:


> Aaaaand bought it :D through that subscription thing


Good choice!


----------



## Sean J (Oct 18, 2020)

Lukas said:


> I think it's necessary. It would make it way more convinient to sync audio and video...



You can do that with an offset. All I mean by not necessary is that other possibilities ought to be considered. Workflow, UX, and UI is best thought of when not copycatting someone else, but thinking about norms AND applying creativity with designs and user testing to see if a different approach could be even better. I'd rather PreSonus research, test, and come up with an answer that's innovative. A lot of times it does mean copying (or near copying) as there's often merit to an established design.

I LOVE a video track. I'd be happy enough with it (much more than an offset, obviously). But perhaps chunks might open a different door? No idea. But I also don't love the idea of everyone saying "we need a track, a track, a track!" and having PreSonus listen to this while not looking at video at large. If they overhaul, we could get a track lane AND chunks AND something else.

Studio One works with video, but I'd rather they try to up Cubase, given how many people have said Cubase has the upper hand here. I'm not saying I want Steinberg to fail. Just, I want solid competition for film scoring features.


----------



## Lukas (Oct 18, 2020)

Sean J said:


> You can do that with an offset.


I know that you can do it with an offset, thanks  It's a working but very basic way to move video on the timeline. There are several ideas to make using this offset more convenient, for example by adding a "Set video start time to cursor position" command - as a walkaround until there's a real solution. (It's even already possible to do this via scripting - very unofficial)



Sean J said:


> I LOVE a video track. I'd be happy enough with it (much more than an offset, obviously). But perhaps chunks might open a different door? No idea. But I also don't love the idea of everyone saying "we need a track, a track, a track!" and having PreSonus listen to this while not looking at video at large. If they overhaul, we could get a track lane AND chunks AND something else.


It is a common phenomenon that users usually only want things they know from somewhere else. Users are not good at imagining features that do not yet exist anywhere. That's why it's the developer's job to find a good solution / good implementation (which in the best case is superior to what the users originally described in their feature requests).

I don't know the Chunks feature in Digital Performer but I've recently added more categories to the Studio One Feature Requests database (answers.presonus.com) ... including Keyswitches, Score Editor and Video.



Highest voted questions in Video - Questions & Answers | PreSonus



Maybe you want to add your "Chunks" idea to the database so PreSonus can take a look at it? (Don't forget to add a meaningful description and make some screenshots so everyone understands how it's supposed to work.)



Sean J said:


> I created this *feature request* for it if anyone wants to vote for it (any sane person, basically).


Yes...  Let's see what happens in the future.


----------



## Sean J (Oct 18, 2020)

There's a request already, albeit a bit forgotten. I've added a screenshot mock-up to it in a post below.

https://answers.presonus.com/26386/chunks-feature-like-in-dp?show=26386#q26386

More votes = better film features!


----------



## Lukas (Oct 18, 2020)

Okay, it's in "Editing". Nice mockup.

However the description, your screenshot and the video don't really make it clear what this feature is supposed to do and how it's related to video at all.

More details = better chances for getting this feature


----------



## Sean J (Oct 18, 2020)

Lukas said:


> More details = better chances for getting this feature



Well, more votes = better chances. The articulation editor request had tons of detail, covered other DAWs, pros and cons, MPE, and more... and all they added was a simple keyswitch feature to do the basics. Asking devs to build mountains from the start is less likely, so I wanted to keep it simple. I gave reason why it matters, an example of how it would fit in the GUI, and the basic functionality needed (multiple sequences and multiple videos). I could see more helping or hurting, depending on the dev.


----------



## pixel (Nov 11, 2020)

I'm testing Studio One 5 now and I'm surprised that Markers are still in very infant version. No possibility to set loop markers like in Cubase (and then batch export them)? Just marker start and that's it? 
For me it's a feature without which I can't move to Studio One.


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Nov 11, 2020)

pixel said:


> I'm testing Studio One 5 now and I'm surprised that [FEATURE] are still in very infant version.


Welcome to S1. No, really, that bugged mé most about S1, they introduced feature after feature, instead of refining them or getting them into a usable state (like the keyswitches they introduced).


----------



## Lukas (Nov 11, 2020)

pixel said:


> No possibility to set loop markers like in Cubase (and then batch export them)?


Of course you can batch export them. However it's true that they can't have a length yet. So when you export it will batch export the parts between these markers.


----------



## pixel (Nov 11, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Of course you can batch export them. However it's true that they can't have a length yet. So when you export it will batch export the parts between these markers.


Unfortunately, it's ineffective for my workflow. I have to wait for looped markers. But good to know that batch export is already there


----------



## Lukas (Nov 11, 2020)

I'm also waiting for section markers 

What do you mean by looped markers?


----------



## lux (Nov 11, 2020)

I use both, but mostly I still use Cubase as I have dozens unfinished/raw projects to complete. Once done that I'll probably just keep up with Studio One, as it boosts my creativity quite better than Cubase.


----------



## PaulieDC (Nov 11, 2020)

Studio E said:


> I’ve never understood why people would want to run more than one DAW, other than working with Pro Tools to integrate with other professionals. Well now it makes sense to me, as I want to have a mobile system, but I don’t want to move my e-licensee from one machine to the other. It’s just too risky to me. So, I’m a 20-year Cubase user, and sat for one session with a guywhoused Studio One, and it seemed very intuitive having come from a Cubase background, but that was years ago. Any opinions?


I used Studio One through v4.6 for years as a mix engineer and doing tracking with mics, not VI. When the VI Orchestration bug bit, S1 fell short in its horrid multicore processing and the fact that the score app Notion 6 wouldn't support Xeon-based processors, which all i9s were in 2018 and I had rebuilt my tower with a 14-core i9. Large templates were doable but had specific issues, although Jonathan Wright posted good tutorials on that because Track Presets actually work well. Instead of enabling a disabled track in a template, you drag your premade preset and everything's there. But the multicore issue wasn't good. I switched fully over to Cubase/Dorico in 2019 and now I'm invested, not changing again.

Having said all that, looks like v5.1 has rectified all that stuff and even has a built-in score editor. Those turkeys! What took so long??  The Studio One UI is SO NICE... man, Alt-Drag an Effect and BOOM, your effects buss is setup and ready to go. The number of steps I have to do in Cubase is almost goofy. There are so many great things in Studio One, I never wanted to leave but v4 is not your composer's version. But the GOOD thingsof S1 are awesome. I mean, FIVE INSTALLS per license and all you need is a LOGIN?? Built in Mastering? Native Melodyne integrated? And the bundles they provide, like Lexicon MPX for FREE. Granted PCM blows it away but for the budding orchestrator, wow. The Drag and Drop they offer is so good and definitely better than Cubase hands down. I would encourage folks who are new to this to consider it. Buy an AudioBox interface, get the free Light version, and at Black Friday upgrade to Pro for half-price. S1 Pro with interface, $300 out the door and NO DONGLES.

I do miss it. But I'm a little ticked how they kept focusing on the EDM nd rock world. NOW they have come of age, so good for them. I can't speak of reliability not having used it though. Now I'm fully in on Cubase and TBH, that and the RME BabyFace Pro are made for each other. On a single 14-core machine I get ZERO crackling. IF Studio One has that sorted, I will still be its cheerleader even though I jumped ship. Man, I miss that UI.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 11, 2020)

PaulieDC said:


> IF Studio One has that sorted, I will still be its cheerleader even though I jumped ship.


If Studio One has *what *sorted?


----------



## pixel (Nov 11, 2020)

Lukas said:


> I'm also waiting for section markers
> 
> What do you mean by looped markers?


It's Cycle Marker actually (I had to look in Cubase for the name). Not loop per se, I used wrong name. 
I showed Cubase example in post #18

Studio One seems to have macros/keyboard shortcuts to so it's almost, almost there to make me switch to Studio One at some point


----------



## PaulieDC (Nov 11, 2020)

Lukas said:


> If Studio One has *what *sorted?


Sorry, true multicore support, meaning the Performance monitor shows all 28 threads dancing like Fred Astaire when the pressure is applied in Studio One. v4 didn't, it would fill up Core #1 (0 technically) then jump to the next. I have a feeling that's been fixed because I don't see complaints about it in v5. Methinks I'll upgrade when S1 v5 Pro upgrades eventually go to 50% off and try it.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 11, 2020)

pixel said:


> It's Cycle Marker actually (I had to look in Cubase for the name). Not loop per se, I used wrong name.


Well, there are Markers and there is a Loop Range. You can select markers and press Shift+P to set the Loop Range between these two markers. You can also select and edit the markers in the inspector.






If you prefer sections, you can use arranger sections. And if you need markers, you can convert sections to markers... and vice versa.






Studio One is not Cubase. When you change to a new DAW, in my opinion, it doesn't make much sense to wait until one DAW offers the exact same workflow like the other one. You can get pretty much the same results and a similarly good workflow if learn to know the DAW and its special capabilities.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 11, 2020)

PaulieDC said:


> Sorry, true multicore support, meaning the Performance monitor shows all 28 threads dancing like Fred Astaire when the pressure is applied in Studio One. v4 didn't, it would fill up Core #1 (0 technically) then jump to the next. I have a feeling that's been fixed because I don't see complaints about it in v5. Methinks I'll upgrade when S1 v5 Pro upgrades eventually go to 50% off and try it.


Studio One has true multicore support, for years. Of course Studio One distributes different tasks / plug-ins across multiple cores. Of course, this is not possible in any situation. Again it's a thing where so many misunderstandings are out there. And in most cases people report serious problems here it's because they didn't understand what happens technically. It's a complex topic so it depends on many different factors. You don't mention one of them so nobody can say what happens on your end. There are things that are possible and there are things that are not possible - in no DAW.


----------



## Blakus (Nov 11, 2020)

PaulieDC said:


> Sorry, true multicore support, meaning the Performance monitor shows all 28 threads dancing like Fred Astaire when the pressure is applied in Studio One. v4 didn't, it would fill up Core #1 (0 technically) then jump to the next. I have a feeling that's been fixed because I don't see complaints about it in v5. Methinks I'll upgrade when S1 v5 Pro upgrades eventually go to 50% off and try it.


In my experience, S1 has near identical CPU performance to Cubase. Both distribute load on a per track basis, so you want to stay away from overloading a single channel with too many heavy plugins.

S1 provides detailed CPU statistics allowing you to avoid this issue by spotting potential issues before your project explodes. Cubase however, is still in the stone age in this respect, and expects users to guess how much cpu each plugin is using.

Another thing I notice is that the S1 GUI doesn’t seem to become sluggish while under heavy loads for me (Windows 10). Also, progress bars, render in place, and generally everything else still seems to function correctly in large projects. Unlike my beloved Cubase :(

Interestingly, S1 can sometimes have the same hanging Issue when closing a large project. This makes me wonder if it’s a Kontakt or plug-in complication with windows in general.


----------



## Uiroo (Nov 11, 2020)

Blakus said:


> Another thing I notice is that the S1 GUI doesn’t seem to become sluggish while under heavy loads for me (Windows 10). Also, progress bars, render in place, and generally everything else still seems to function correctly in large projects. Unlike my beloved Cubase :(


Oh god, that sounds so tempting.
In the last weeks my projects have become worse and worse, especially the ones using many plug-ins. 
The GUI becomes so laggy it's almost impossible to work with., and it seems to be partly because of my 4K monitor, every thingstarts being super quick if I switch to lower resolution.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 11, 2020)

Blakus said:


> In my experience, S1 has near identical CPU performance to Cubase. Both distribute load on a per track basis, so you want to stay away from overloading a single channel with too many heavy plugins.


Yes. Many think that multiple plug-ins on a single insert chain can be processed on different cores. Which is not possible. So if someone adds lots of heavy plugins on a Diva track and try to play eight-note voicings with low latency, he shouldn't be surprised about dropouts.



Blakus said:


> Interestingly, S1 can sometimes have the same hanging Issue when closing a large project. This makes me wonder if it’s a Kontakt or plug-in complication with windows in general.


I sometimes have that. Hard to say where it comes from. It can even be two programs allocating / deallocating memory at the same (wrong) time.


----------



## shponglefan (Nov 11, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Yes. Many think that multiple plug-ins on a single insert chain can be processed on different cores. Which is not possible. So if someone adds lots of heavy plugins on a Diva track and try to play eight-note voicings with low latency, he shouldn't be surprised about dropouts.



Shouldn't that depend on the plugins themselves? Diva for example has multicore support, which AFAIK is designed to split individual voice processing on different CPU cores.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 11, 2020)

What every single plug-in does is out of Studio One's hands  What I mean is that the host (Studio One) can't distribute a chain of plug-ins across cores.


----------



## Jaap (Nov 11, 2020)

Since my son is born 3 months ago, that is exactly the setup I use. In my working studio I have Cubase but I dislike switching dongles and want to not work with a limited version and tried Studio One and loved it for what I need to do. So now I am using on my mobile setup Studio One and when I am working in my studio space Cubase.


----------



## PaulieDC (Nov 11, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Studio One has true multicore support, for years. Of course Studio One distributes different tasks / plug-ins across multiple cores. Of course, this is not possible in any situation. Again it's a thing where so many misunderstandings are out there...


There are. Not here. Same 14-core machine, Studio One 4 choked, Cubase cruises. In my last 22 years as lead software developer for the 2nd largest semiconductor company in the world, I've run across a few PCs and servers in my day. Studio One VERSION FOUR did not cut it. I hope 5 does, I really do. There aren't THAT many factors when your rig is totally dialed in. I'm pretty sure we've hit the exit ramp on this subject and I'd rather we discuss cool stuff about Studio One, not bicker, doubt either of us will give on our position.


----------



## Lukas (Nov 12, 2020)

PaulieDC said:


> There aren't THAT many factors when your rig is totally dialed in. I'm pretty sure we've hit the exit ramp on this subject and I'd rather we discuss cool stuff about Studio One, not bicker, doubt either of us will give on our position.


But then an identical setup (under same conditions) should behave almost the same, no matter if it's Cubase, Studio One, Reaper. Reaper has some magic built in so it kind of simulates a really high buffer size (which can be enabled/disabled in the options). Cubase has ASIO Guard, and Studio One has Dropout protection. Of course they need to be set to an equal value... but I'm sure I don't need to tell you that  But that's what I meant with different factors. I've looked into a lot of different systems and in most cases it turned out that users did not set Dropout Protection correctly (or didn't even know about it), run the dual latency engines in the two DAWs with different settings ... or directly compared the CPU meters between the DAWs without testing for actual dropouts...


----------



## pixel (Nov 12, 2020)

Lukas said:


> Well, there are Markers and there is a Loop Range. You can select markers and press Shift+P to set the Loop Range between these two markers. You can also select and edit the markers in the inspector.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Unfortunately these solutions are not as fast as the way it works in Cubase. I just select object, shortcut, done - I have Cycle Marker with exact length of the selected object. Sometimes I have hundreds of them in a project and it takes me a few seconds to Cycle Marker all of them. 
Studio One is not quite there. 

I'm looking at Studio One because it seems to have faster workflow than Cubase (except Cycle Markers) and I'm disappointed with latest updates. So naturally I'm looking at alternatives. 
Also Studio One looks like quite easy DAW with minimum learning curve - so I'll not need to spend another year learning everything from scratch.
For now I don't see a point of switching from Cubase but if next update will be poor and Studio One will show very good update patch then it may be an alternative.


----------



## Uiroo (Nov 12, 2020)

@Blakus , what would you say are the major changes for you using S1? 
Any important features you're missing?


----------



## Blakus (Nov 12, 2020)

Uiroo said:


> @Blakus , what would you say are the major changes for you using S1?
> Any important features you're missing?


The main things that I’m missing in S1 so far:

Video Track - current video implementation is basic. Although, it works great with VideoSlave, which i tend to prefer, but this is definitely a missing feature.
Surround support. Doesn’t affect me too much currently, but still a big deal.
Stem export batch naming features.
Multiple mix consoles displayed simultaneously. I like having main stem groups visible at all times on a separate monitor in addition to a window that follows my selection. This isn’t possible in S1.
Inability to remap mouse modifiers for zooming etc. getting used to complete opposite behaviour to cubase is difficult at first.
zoom/scroll speed is painfully slow for large projects. There are some workarounds, but this needs to be faster or at least adjustable.

Features in S1 that I love so far:

Detailed CPU/performance meter stats! With cpu core bottlenecks being the main issue plaguing our machines these days, it shocks me that Cubase still doesn’t have this. Seeing precisely which plugins are causing the most resource usage is invaluable and has already informed me how to structure my template better for optimum cpu load distribution.
VI windows automatically follow track selection. No endlessly opening and closing windows for each channel.
Overall engine and gui performance feels more optimised than Cubase. I.e. in a large project, I can still render in place, see progress bars etc without crashes. analysers and meters don’t seem to lose fps in large projects like Cubase does too.
Workflow feels more pleasing in general. Eliminating cumbersome processes with drag and drop. I.e. Drag a verb/effect onto a track’s send fader and a new fx track is automatically routed and created etc.
I have only been working in S1 for 2 weeks so far, Im sure I’ll find more pros and cons. However, I’ve been surprised at how quickly I’ve adjusted to S1. There are a lot of similarities to Cubase which has definitely helped the transition for me, but it is quite intuitive. I am still undecided which way I’m going to end up ultimately, but I feel more optimistic about S1’s future atm. If Cubase can focus their updates on core bugs/issues and performance overhauls then I’d be more likely to stay.


----------



## samphony (Nov 12, 2020)

pixel said:


> I'm testing Studio One 5 now and I'm surprised that Markers are still in very infant version. No possibility to set loop markers like in Cubase (and then batch export them)? Just marker start and that's it?
> For me it's a feature without which I can't move to Studio One.


Everything regarding markers need to be refined. They already making progress regarding global tracks and marker list. It’s just a matter of time.


----------



## samphony (Nov 12, 2020)

Blakus said:


> Video Track - current video implementation is basic. Although, it works great with VideoSlave, which i tend to prefer, but this is definitely a missing feature.


Wouldn’t it be cool if videoslave would be integrated like ARA melodyne. Including multiple video tracks etc?


----------



## samphony (Nov 12, 2020)

pixel said:


> Unfortunately, it's ineffective for my workflow. I have to wait for looped markers. But good to know that batch export is already there


As a workaround you can create as many unassigned instrument tracks range draw double click to create events and then lock these events. That’s what i do at the moment until we get loop markers.


----------



## Uiroo (Nov 12, 2020)

Blakus said:


> The main things that I’m missing in S1 so far:
> 
> Video Track - current video implementation is basic. Although, it works great with VideoSlave, which i tend to prefer, but this is definitely a missing feature.
> Surround support. Doesn’t affect me too much currently, but still a big deal.
> ...


Awesome, thanks for the detailed answer! I can totally imagine myself swtiching to S1 at some point.


----------



## lokotus (Nov 12, 2020)

Blakus said:


> The main things that I’m missing in S1 so far:
> 
> Video Track - current video implementation is basic. Although, it works great with VideoSlave, which i tend to prefer, but this is definitely a missing feature.
> Surround support. Doesn’t affect me too much currently, but still a big deal.
> ...



couple of notes:

"Another thing I notice is that the S1 GUI doesn’t seem to become sluggish while under heavy loads for me (Windows 10). Also, progress bars, render in place, and generally everything else still seems to function correctly in large projects. Unlike my beloved Cubase :("

- Had the sample Problem in Cub10 Win10 - Deleting / Resetting Preferences improved this issue for me for heavy load projects (pretty fluid with high Asio load until 85% or so)
- If I have above 85% Asio load, Cubase becomes a bit slow thats true. Presonus does not (remains fluid) but here is the weird thing. I did a performance test with REAPLug Compressors found here http://www.dawbench.com/benchmarks.htm
Using the same buffer settings on the same system I was able to insert about 15 more ReaXComp compressors in Cubase than in Studio One 5 until I could hear the ASIO spike. And another obesrvation. For the Max Limit of ReaXComp compressors in Studio One, Cubase GUI was fluid. Only for the additional 15 ReaXComp that Cubase was able to process without audible Asio spikes its GUI went slow und sluggish.
So my current obesrvation is: Cubase can handle more Insert FX without Asio spikes than Studio one for my PC. The downside is: Cubase GUI gets slow afterwards. The advantage: You can obviously work with more Plugins 
It seems to me Studio One put a internal limit to have faster audible Asio Spikes with less plugins in order to not fill up the program until the GUI gets slow - does that make any sense ?


----------



## Uiroo (Nov 12, 2020)

lokotus said:


> - Had the sample Problem in Cub10 Win10 - Deleting / Resetting Preferences improved this issue for me for heavy load projects (pretty fluid with high Asio load until 85% or so)


So, do you work with default preferences from there on? 
Also, how do you reset preferences, can't find the option. Would be vey interested to try that, I'm kinda desperate.


----------



## lokotus (Nov 13, 2020)

Uiroo said:


> So, do you work with default preferences from there on?
> Also, how do you reset preferences, can't find the option. Would be vey interested to try that, I'm kinda desperate.







__





Disabling the Preferences


Sometimes you might experience odd program behaviour that can be due to inconsistent preferences settings. In such a case, you should save your project and relaunch Cubase. You can disable or delete the current preferences settings, and load the factory defaults instead.




steinberg.help





I did a backup before deleting it and wants I started to work with the default presets , I copied some single preferences from my currupt preferences to not have to recreate all settings


----------



## MarcusD (Nov 13, 2020)

oivind_rosvold said:


> There is a script + Windows executable here: https://github.com/lokanchung/StudioPlusOne
> 
> Look to the right of the page and click Releases, here you can see the different download options.
> 
> ...



👆👆👆

Here's the workaround to make scrolling with middle mouse button like Cubase.

The.exe works perfectly on Windows! Just run it and open S1.


----------



## lokotus (Nov 13, 2020)

MarcusD said:


> 👆👆👆
> 
> Here's the workaround to make scrolling with middle mouse button like Cubase.
> 
> The.exe works perfectly on Windows! Just run it and open S1.


Does this solve the issue of the very slow scrolling in Studio One ?


----------



## MarcusD (Nov 13, 2020)

lokotus said:


> Does this solve the issue of the very slow scrolling in Studio One ?



It appears to have made the scrolling better, but that could be a placebo. Having said that, I've not noticed the slow scrolling since using the script. The panning works a treat however!

EDIT: OK so the mouse wheel scroll is the same speed. But when using the Pan (click hold middle mouse) you can drag the screen around to scroll faster providing you're doing it from the timeline.


----------



## MarcusD (Nov 13, 2020)

@lokotus - Updated the last post, but here's how it looks.


----------



## lokotus (Nov 13, 2020)

MarcusD said:


> @lokotus - Updated the last post, but here's how it looks.



great thanks for the feedback...


----------



## PaulieDC (Nov 13, 2020)

Lukas said:


> So maybe there were some changes under the hood which improves the performance in Studio One 5 for you... I certainly hope so  You should test it...!


In all fairness, I will!


----------



## PaulieDC (Nov 25, 2020)

Blakus said:


> The main things that I’m missing in S1 so far:
> 
> Video Track - current video implementation is basic. Although, it works great with VideoSlave, which i tend to prefer, but this is definitely a missing feature.
> Surround support. Doesn’t affect me too much currently, but still a big deal.
> ...


Wow, now THAT’S the A vs B I’ve been looking for. 👍🏼


----------



## PaulieDC (Nov 25, 2020)

Blakus said:


> In my experience, S1 has near identical CPU performance to Cubase. Both distribute load on a per track basis, so you want to stay away from overloading a single channel with too many heavy plugins.
> 
> S1 provides detailed CPU statistics allowing you to avoid this issue by spotting potential issues before your project explodes. Cubase however, is still in the stone age in this respect, and expects users to guess how much cpu each plugin is using.
> 
> ...


It DOES! I see what you mean, the feel and response are definitely the same. I hammered on S1 v5 expecting the implosion and it didn’t even wiggle. I used BBCSO mainly because there’s a finished Studio One template you can download at Spitfire, then purposely added heavy EWHO tracks and S1 was brilliant. Can’t believe it’s the same DAW I abandoned 18 months ago, PreSonus is gaining in leaps and bounds. It’s still my favorite UI, they’ve had fantastic drag-n-drop features for years.


----------



## José Herring (Dec 1, 2020)

I got a Quantum 2626 that came with S1 Artist. So far, I'm impressed. It's fairly similar to Cubase but just seems less cluttered with less bloated features that I don't need. 

But on Cubase for 15 years now. Stopped upgrading at Cubase 9.5 because it just seems that Cubase just isn't heading in my direction. 

Maybe it's a new thing and the newness is exciting but I think I'm going to jump on S1 Pro and give it a shot.


----------

