# Studio One 5 : A Viable Option?



## mjsalam (Sep 7, 2020)

Been playing about with Studio One 5 Pro demo and without having gone super deep am intrigued by what appears to be a decent middle ground between Logic and Cubase (both of which I perpetually waffle between). Reading though threads here the consensus on S1 seems to be one (or all of the following):

- Great DAW - want to like it but performance is awful (compared to ...) and crashes a ton.
- Great DAW - worthy of serious consideration...in 5-10 years.
- Great DAW - so close...but not quite for "serious" work.

On the surface though here is what I like about it:

- has the track visibility and management options I really like in Cubase (which logic doesn't have)
- cross-platform (in case that dark day comes where I can no longer justify the Apple ecosystem)
- much better licensing scheme than Steinberg (ie. no dongle). I work between a laptop and desktop a lot and for me dongles are pure shite.
- seems to have a sensible balance between power features and "simplicity" / workflow
- like the idea of of the "project" component allowing you to treat a body of work as a ..well...a body of work and apply treatment accoridngly

In terms of what I want to do - I write all manner of music - but I am very focused these days on orchestral/hybrid.

So my question to all is ...have any of you gone down this path for similar reasons (or coming from similar places) only to find that you hit a wall and returned to from whence you came?

TIA!


----------



## RenePedersen (Sep 7, 2020)

I would say the only reason not to use S1, is if you work with video, as its player is not really up to par with something like Cubase or Logic. Apart from that there's nothing that should hold you back from writing any music with the DAW, with v5 it now has Expression Maps and notation editor, basically all the things that kept orchestral composers from using it.


----------



## mjsalam (Sep 7, 2020)

Thanks for the input! Apart from the lack of a video track is there anything specifically wrong with their video implementation? I didn't notice anything glaring.


----------



## RenePedersen (Sep 7, 2020)

mjsalam said:


> Thanks for the input! Apart from the lack of a video track is there anything specifically wrong with their video implementation? I didn't notice anything glaring.


I would say no. But not having a video track is my opinion the only problem S1 has now, when it comes to scoring.


----------



## Kuusniemi (Sep 7, 2020)

mjsalam said:


> - Great DAW - want to like it but performance is awful (compared to ...) and crashes a ton.
> - Great DAW - worthy of serious consideration...in 5-10 years.
> - Great DAW - so close...but not quite for "serious" work.



Yeah, I think these are all pretty much BS. 
Personally I have not had any performance problems nor crashes. It is just as much for serious work as any other DAW. 5 to 10 years, come on it is already a mature DAW.

Besides and again, no one is going to know what software you used in the end. It's not the DAW making the music. If it works for you and you like it then use it.


----------



## RenePedersen (Sep 7, 2020)

Kuusniemi said:


> Yeah, I think these are all pretty much BS.
> Personally I have not had any performance problems nor crashes. It is just as much for serious work as any other DAW. 5 to 10 years, come on it is already a mature DAW.
> 
> Besides and again, no one is going to know what software you used in the end. It's not the DAW making the music. If it works for you and you like it then use it.


I agree 100%. The only problems I have had with S1 was related to ASIO driver while not using an audio interface, it would cause projects hang and not respond for a bit, but other than that, it's a fucking amazing DAW, with one of the best workflow and quality of life features that most other DAWs don't have. 

It's all about workflow, so like Kuusniemi says - Use it if you like it, it's up there with the big boys now.


----------



## Mucusman (Sep 7, 2020)

RenePedersen said:


> I would say no. But not having a video track is my opinion the only problem S1 has now, when it comes to scoring.



Last week I created a quick soundtrack (underscore) for a video I shot for work; it was the first time I ever imported video into Studio One. I can’t speak to how other DAWs handle video, but the process for me was painless. Worked like a charm. But perhaps this is because the video I imported already had audio (dialogue) I was able to extract to its own audio track. Whenever I hit play or record, the picture was in sync.


----------



## RenePedersen (Sep 7, 2020)

Mucusman said:


> Last week I created a quick soundtrack (underscore) for a video I shot for work; it was the first time I ever imported video into Studio One. I can’t speak to how other DAWs handle video, but the process for me was painless. Worked like a charm. But perhaps this is because the video I imported already had audio (dialogue) I was able to extract to its own audio track. Whenever I hit play or record, the picture was in sync.


Oh yes I'm sure it works fine, but it's the video thumbnail track that is missing mate. That's all.


----------



## easyrider (Sep 7, 2020)

Cubase-Bloat
Pro Tools- It’s AVID, horrendous company.
Studio One- Brilliant

Of course this is my opinion.


----------



## mjsalam (Sep 7, 2020)

This is great feedback thanks - definitely giving me some confidence to invest some real time and effort.


----------



## chocobitz825 (Sep 7, 2020)

If you master it, and your system can handle the tasks you intend to do, Studio One will do most everything you need it to do. I agree that it'd be nice to have a video track, but even without it, I've scored a film with no problem. I am sure that feature will come soon, and maybe even expression maps if people vote it up enough on the forums. Presonus is very responsive like that.


----------



## Al Maurice (Sep 8, 2020)

It's possible to score to picture, but if you need to create a fixed tempo map then you will be out of luck, as still of SO5 you are unable to lock the markers; so any changes there will lead to your lines going out of sync with the timing.

Also handling lots and lots of tracks can become cumbersome for those wanting to have all their instruments in the template from starting your project, whether you're using them or not due to their restricted instrument pane in the the mixer view; for instance this may be the case when dealing with lots of instruments or if you prefer one articulation per track. Although SO has a clear separation of tracks which are essentially data lists and the audio signal path which is bound to their mixer which can prove handy.

Like many DAWS you can always freeze your tracks and bounce them to audio or if you prefer a bonus feature is Studio One supports hybrid tracks, allowing you to easily convert midi to audio and back again.

Other than that I'd say the workflow makes up for the shortcomings; although some duplication of UI features in the various panes may seem redundant and don't always behave in each case as expected.

Studio One probably covers 90% of most features that the competitive professional DAWs have, just the rest of them are not so advanced. If you can live without expression maps and don't need to seriously score to picture then why not check it out.


----------



## dylanmixer (Sep 8, 2020)

Tried the demo, it's beautiful and some of the functionality is really intuitive. But it still isn't nearly as deep as Cubase. Maybe in a few years.


----------



## RenePedersen (Sep 8, 2020)

dylanmixer said:


> Tried the demo, it's beautiful and some of the functionality is really intuitive. But it still isn't nearly as deep as Cubase. Maybe in a few years.


What do you mean by it not being as deep as Cubase? Keep in mind that the demo is probably has restrictions when comes to features.


----------



## Dr.Quest (Sep 8, 2020)

RenePedersen said:


> What do you mean by it not being as deep as Cubase? Keep in mind that the demo is probably has restrictions when comes to features.


I believe all Studio One demos have always had full functionality for 30 days. That was always my experience.


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Sep 8, 2020)

The articulation support they just added was very welcome and thankfully they quickly fixed their track delay issue. It's still has a subset of the functionality of the big guys (Cubase, Logic) but that isn't surprising given how long it has been around. And of course, part of the appeal is the lean-ness of it and not having all the bloat. However, sometimes that bloat is helpful when you're trying to do specific things - and then when there is a DAW that is a superset, hard to not choose that. While I own it, I prefer working in Logic (and sometimes Cubase).


----------



## mjsalam (Sep 8, 2020)

ALittleNightMusic said:


> ...when there is a DAW that is a superset, hard to not choose that...
> 
> I think this is really basis of my hesitation.


----------



## jonathanwright (Sep 8, 2020)

It’s a great DAW, but it is still a little lacking when it comes to scoring to video, fine for a linear short, but for anything involving multiple tempo changes etc, it’s not as accomplished as other DAW’s. The Studio One workflow is still very good though.

A couple of points.

1. Use VST if you’re on a Mac. I found using AU caused all sorts of problems with crashing. As soon as I disabled AU they all disappeared.

2. Look into Macros. They’re very easy to configure, and you’ll probably be able to cover 90% of features you miss from Logic or Cubase, probably adding others you hadn’t thought of.


----------



## dylanmixer (Sep 9, 2020)

Just a few things from my short time with it:

-No drag/ pencil duplicate feature like in Cubase
-Limited to one marker track
- Expression map functionality and customization very limited
-No link between MIDI tracks and faders. This is a huge one for me. It takes a minute just to set up a MIDI track to a rack instrument and have it controllable by a fader in the mixer. And then doing simple things like coloring the track are not linked and you have to do it twice
-Lack of saveable workspaces
-Video options limited
-Seems optimized for one screen, rather than multiple. I didn't see any options to always have the mixer as a separate window, or the MIDI editor etc. I always have to click and drag it out. Seems like they're more concerned with the usability on a laptop than an actual workstation
-No separate keycommand to return to last start position. In Cubase I have two. One to return to project start, and one to return to last start position.
-No divide track list option

I think there were more but these were the things that turned me off right out of the gate. I could be wrong on some of this as I only used for a short period, so please correct me and point me in the right direction if so. On top of that, these are just the cons. There were many many positives and things that I envy as a Cubase user. Just not enough to switch yet.


----------



## Al Maurice (Sep 9, 2020)

dylanmixer said:


> Just a few things from my short time with it:
> -Seems optimized for one screen, rather than multiple. I didn't see any options to always have the mixer as a separate window, or the MIDI editor etc. I always have to click and drag it out. Seems like they're more concerned with the usability on a laptop then an actual workstation



Actually from base principles this seems like it is true, as SO has a consolidated window optimised for the Mac.

In practice just go to any view, and click on the diagonal arrow icon at top right-hand corner of the pane. And then the window peels out and you can resize and move it elsewhere -- even to a new monitor. This works on Windows PC. Haven't tried it on a MAC.


----------



## dylanmixer (Sep 9, 2020)

Also what you guys like to call "bloat", I sometimes find helpful. I like the ability in Cubase to add almost any menu option to any toolbar or Window. I like that in the editor window I can choose to have a button for literally anything at my fingertips. Or I can choose to hide as much as possible and have a cleaner interface. 

I feel like what a lot of people say is "bloat" is just the ability to customize Cubase to do whatever you want it to do. There is an option for (almost) everything, and almost any option could be a global setting if you wanted it to. Meaning it would be the same every time you opened up Cubase. I don't see S1 being that customizable.


----------



## Macrawn (Sep 10, 2020)

I've had less problems with crashes and things not working than Cubase. I've got a PC though. The new version of Studio one has had some quirks they are working out as probably does any big upgrade to any Daw. 

As said above video work isn't great in Studio One. That's the one area left they need to up the game. 

Studio one just got some articulation mapping but I don't think it's on the level of Cubase.


----------



## maestro2be (Sep 10, 2020)

It's really a personal opinion on most of it. I have Cubase, Nuendo and Studio One and Studio One absolutely destroys Cubase and Nuendo in performance on my machine. With or without ASIO Guard, with or without VE Pro 7, with or without hyperthreading enabled/disabled.

Studio One windows all break out into a perfect smooth secondary or third window. Steinbergs windows do not snap to scale and perform as good as Studio One does. The workflow of Studio One is also much easier to grasp and smoother to work with.

There are certainly many things Steinberg has built into their product that are still not available in Studio One. Certainly the difference in years of development impact that. I myself, not needing most of it find it very overwhelming to navigate and operate basic functions within Steinberg products simply because of the tremendous amount of options you find. This however to some, would be a huge benefit. Some of those deep and confusing/overwhelming options are things that some can't live without so I can see the appeal for them on that. I am often irritated that Studio One still doesn't have surround sound support.

All in all, I love the DAW and use it for every project I do. However, I am not currently in need of those other functions (Except surround support) enough to make me use the Steinberg products. It's extremely capable as long as it has all the features you need it to have and or can live without and do a manual work around until it gets implemented.


----------



## dylanmixer (Sep 10, 2020)

I'm sure a lot of it comes down to fear of looking "unprofessional" too. All composers use either Cubase or Logic, sometimes DP and sometimes Pro Tools. There has been no mainstream composer yet to endorse Studio One. I agree that I'm on the other side looking over the fence. Maybe if Cubase 11 is a disappointment I will consider switching.


----------



## RenePedersen (Sep 10, 2020)

dylanmixer said:


> I'm sure a lot of it comes down to fear of looking "unprofessional" too. All composers use either Cubase or Logic, sometimes DP and sometimes Pro Tools. There has been no mainstream composer yet to endorse Studio One. I agree that I'm on the other side looking over the fence. Maybe if Cubase 11 is a disappointment I will consider switching.


I think there's some truth to that. But I also think it in general has something do with people just looking at what others use and they pick it up and get biased, just like people keep buying things from the same brand. Most people get comfortable with things and don't like change.


----------



## dcoscina (Sep 13, 2020)

I am finding S1 v 5 to be great. Just got it yesterday and it's super fast. Low CPU, no crashes on my MB Air i7 2015 or my MP 6,1 2013. I love the mastering suite built in. It's great to have score editor with the font from Notion which I've used forever. I enjoy Cubase quite a bit for its workflow but it's buggy for me on my Macs and I'm never fully confident that it won't crash in the middle of a session. Also, S1 doesn't have the stupid e licenser (I cannot articulate how much I loathe it- no issues with iLok btw). I'm going to spend a good month getting into it. I really love the work flow and I like building my own KS sets anyhow. I've been using S1 on and off since its inception and there's a lot to like about it. For me, the notation editor was a big deal. And I dislike the Cubase notation editor (I never use it, whereas in Logic, I do often work with it). 

But hey, these are all tools. Whichever gets you to write music the best way is the DAW for you.


----------



## dcoscina (Sep 14, 2020)

I do wish Studio One would have retrospective record much like Cubase or even Logic. It's handy to capture noodling. Some great ideas happen when the RECORD is off.


----------



## StefanoM (Sep 14, 2020)

maestro2be said:


> It's really a personal opinion on most of it. I have Cubase, Nuendo and Studio One and Studio One absolutely destroys Cubase and Nuendo in performance on my machine. With or without ASIO Guard, with or without VE Pro 7, with or without hyperthreading enabled/disabled.
> 
> Studio One windows all break out into a perfect smooth secondary or third window. Steinbergs windows do not snap to scale and perform as good as Studio One does. The workflow of Studio One is also much easier to grasp and smoother to work with.
> 
> ...




I Agree with You,

My first DAW is Nuendo because I work also with MultiChannels, Audio Post Production, in addition of course to Music Production and Scoring. But I've Studio One since V2.5, and I saw it grow. And Now with V 5, studio One is really near to be a GREAT DAW for everyone.

I've also ProTools Ultimate, Cubase Pro and Reaper.

The Studio One V 5 Performances are better than Cubase & Nuendo on PC

Presonus needs to works only on some Features really important to transform Studio One in a super BIG DAW that can compete with Nuendo on all scenarios.

1) MultiChannel, at least up to 5.1
2) Better Video Engine
3) Better Batch Audio Export ( Example " Export Selected Elements" as Nuendo Feature.
4) Better History Processing Off Line

For me, These are 4 Killer Features.

In any case for the normal music scoring, now I use Studio One V5, in particular for the amazing performance and for the workflow.


----------



## mjsalam (Sep 14, 2020)

StefanoM said:


> I Agree with You,
> 
> My first DAW is Nuendo because I work also with MultiChannels, Audio Post Production, in addition of course to Music Production and Scoring. But I've Studio One since V2.5, and I saw it grow. And Now with V 5, studio One is really near to be a GREAT DAW for everyone.
> 
> ...



what do you mean by “performance”?


----------



## muziksculp (Sep 14, 2020)

By the way, just in case you didn't know, quite a few of the Presonus Studio One Pro development team are the same software engineers that worked on Steinberg's Nuendo a while back, they are based in Berlin. They know what they are doing very well, I'm sure we will see S1Pro become a very popular DAW with composers for media in the not so distant future.


----------



## InLight-Tone (Sep 14, 2020)

I absolutely love Studio One 5, fast lean and mean. I've got the Atom SQ for recording duties, step sequencing and drum programming as well as tweaking sound with the knobs and Control Link. I wanted an articulation system and the current works for me, don't need anything more elaborate. The Macro system is genius once you wrap your head around it. I don't run large templates anymore, just groups and FX buses and use an extensive preset system instead which S1 browser makes a joy to use. My presets are broken down into Keyswitch patches as well as single articulations so you can work either way. Studio One Remote is robust and keeps your most used keyboard shortcuts in your face one button press away. Between that and the SQ, I'm good to go. Only need great, inspired ideas to go with it!


----------



## muziksculp (Sep 14, 2020)

InLight-Tone said:


> I absolutely love Studio One 5, fast lean and mean. I've got the Atom SQ for recording duties, step sequencing and drum programming as well as tweaking sound with the knobs and Control Link. I wanted an articulation system and the current works for me, don't need anything more elaborate. The Macro system is genius once you wrap your head around it. I don't run large templates anymore, just groups and FX buses and use an extensive preset system instead which S1 browser makes a joy to use. My presets are broken down into Keyswitch patches as well as single articulations so you can work either way. Studio One Remote is robust and keeps your most used keyboard shortcuts in your face one button press away. Between that and the SQ, I'm good to go. Only need great, inspired ideas to go with it!



Yes, S1Pro 5 is an awesome DAW, I also use their ATOM, and a Faderport 8, all working smoothly, as part of my DAW System.


----------



## samphony (Sep 14, 2020)

muziksculp said:


> By the way, just in case you didn't know, quite a few of the Presonus Studio One Pro development team are the same software engineers that worked on Steinberg's Nuendo a while back, they are based in Berlin. They know what they are doing very well, I'm sure we will see S1Pro become a very popular DAW with composers for media in the not so distant future.


They are based in Hamburg


----------



## StefanoM (Sep 15, 2020)

mjsalam said:


> what do you mean by “performance”?



I mean the relation between Buffer Size, CPU Used, Number of Kontakt Instances Activated. And in general also the GUI, it's Very Smooth and Faster.

For my experience, Now Studio One V5 runs better than Cubase/Nuendo, CPU more stable. ( I'm on PC)


----------



## Gary Williamson (Sep 15, 2020)

don't understand everyone's problem with S1 video engine? I've done several shorts and a trailer with it and it locks to picture perfectly. And, I can count the number of crashes in the last year with one hand and still have fingers left over.
I have DP 10.11 and never use it, S1 is so much more "fluid" in its workflow. Only reason I'm keeping DP is surround support if I ever need it.


----------



## muziksculp (Sep 15, 2020)

samphony said:


> They are based in Hamburg



Yes, Hamburg, not Berlin. Thanks for the correction.


----------



## Paul Jelfs (Sep 15, 2020)

How does the Midi writing/features /editing compare with Cubase? I am right in thinking that Studio 1 has a Function that lets you quickly turn a Midi part in to an Arpeggio or Strummed etc - 

These type of features that are so accessible (Cubase can do things like this, but not as immediate) would be what would appeal to myself and have to be big enough to make the jump. 

Though interesting about Studio One performance on Windows- i might try the demo and see if it fares better ....


----------



## Kuusniemi (Sep 15, 2020)

Gary Williamson said:


> don't understand everyone's problem with S1 video engine? I've done several shorts and a trailer with it and it locks to picture perfectly. And, I can count the number of crashes in the last year with one hand and still have fingers left over.
> I have DP 10.11 and never use it, S1 is so much more "fluid" in its workflow. Only reason I'm keeping DP is surround support if I ever need it.


The problem being the lack of a thumbnail track where you can turn off the video and still see what is happening. Personally I do not miss this, but I do understand how others find the lack of it a problem.


----------



## StefanoM (Sep 15, 2020)

Gary Williamson said:


> don't understand everyone's problem with S1 video engine? I've done several shorts and a trailer with it and it locks to picture perfectly. And, I can count the number of crashes in the last year with one hand and still have fingers left over.
> I have DP 10.11 and never use it, S1 is so much more "fluid" in its workflow. Only reason I'm keeping DP is surround support if I ever need it.




The problem is not the performance of Video Engine, the problem is , it's missing of a Real Video Track.

In many workflows the video track is very important.


----------



## muziksculp (Sep 15, 2020)

Using markers usually does the job for me, while watching the video in studio one, for spotting various cues of the video.

Yes, having a video track will allow me to see the thumbnails, so I get an idea what's in the video track at a certain point in time. So, Yes, I see that being handy, and nice to have in S1Pro. But for most the video work I do, I can spot the video first, via markers, then go to scoring. They might add a video track to S1Pro in the future if there is enough feature requests for it.

IIRC the Video Player of Studio One Pro is not developed by Presonus, but by a third-party developer.


----------



## Macrawn (Sep 15, 2020)

InLight-Tone said:


> I absolutely love Studio One 5, fast lean and mean. I've got the Atom SQ for recording duties, step sequencing and drum programming as well as tweaking sound with the knobs and Control Link. I wanted an articulation system and the current works for me, don't need anything more elaborate. The Macro system is genius once you wrap your head around it. I don't run large templates anymore, just groups and FX buses and use an extensive preset system instead which S1 browser makes a joy to use. My presets are broken down into Keyswitch patches as well as single articulations so you can work either way. Studio One Remote is robust and keeps your most used keyboard shortcuts in your face one button press away. Between that and the SQ, I'm good to go. Only need great, inspired ideas to go with it!


People who using templates and not presets ihave no idea what they are missing. The macro system is fantastic. For some reason people think that because studio one doesn't have pages and pages of buried menus with obscure functionality that it isn't as complex. A lot has gone into making complex functions simple with buttons (macros) and drag and drop.


StefanoM said:


> The problem is not the performance of Video Engine, the problem is , it's missing of a Real Video Track.
> 
> In many workflows the video track is very important.


I like Studio one a lot better but I wouldn't use it over Cubase for video. I have both and tried doing some video in Studio One and kept wondering why the video wasn't on a track... oh.. it doesn't have one. It's just clunky doing video work without a track, sort of the complete opposite of what I'd expect from Studio One. Though in every other aspect of making music especially mixing, I prefer Studio One by a large margin.


----------



## ridgero (Sep 15, 2020)

It’s strange, but I seriously wanted to switch to Logic Pro and keep coming back to Studio One and Cubase. The workflow of both programs just amazingly great, especially the automation view of Studio One.


----------



## Gary Williamson (Sep 15, 2020)

StefanoM said:


> The problem is not the performance of Video Engine, the problem is , it's missing of a Real Video Track.
> 
> In many workflows the video track is very important.


I can see that , DP has a video track, it just hasn’t been a problem for me, yet.


----------



## samphony (Sep 16, 2020)

StefanoM said:


> The problem is not the performance of Video Engine, the problem is , it's missing of a Real Video Track.
> 
> In many workflows the video track is very important.


I too think a multiple video track workflow should be added. I mean Studio One should offer at least 2 or even more video thumbnail tracks like nuendo/ Pro Tools.


----------



## jonathanwright (Sep 17, 2020)

Paul Jelfs said:


> How does the Midi writing/features /editing compare with Cubase? I am right in thinking that Studio 1 has a Function that lets you quickly turn a Midi part in to an Arpeggio or Strummed etc -
> 
> These type of features that are so accessible (Cubase can do things like this, but not as immediate) would be what would appeal to myself and have to be big enough to make the jump.
> 
> Though interesting about Studio One performance on Windows- i might try the demo and see if it fares better ....



Yes, you can render any of their inbuilt Note FX (MIDI FX) to MIDI. Very handy.


----------



## StefanoM (Sep 17, 2020)

samphony said:


> I too think a multiple video track workflow should be added. I mean Studio One should offer at least 2 or even more video thumbnail tracks like nuendo/ Pro Tools.




I Agree with you.

Having multiple Video Track ( as in Nuendo or ProTools Ultimate) is really useful if you are working in an audio post-production workflow.

A lot of fo time the client sends a different version of Video, with different editing.. so is really useful in this scenario having 2 video tracks at the same times to compare the versions, and maybe fix some synch issue. 

I hope Presonus will add this feature.


----------



## rardier (Mar 30, 2021)

i am a cubase user since cubase sx3 and now cubase 11 pro,for composing/recording i ve just switch to studio one v5.2 the transition was easy, to be honest i prefer the "visual" of cubase BUT the workflow for my type of composing is just better in studio one i can run more virtual instrument more polyphony, no audio engine interruption when adding a new virtual instrument , (i'm using atom sq), for my need i found midi editing quite similar between both but the macro on S5 are really helpful (and easier to use and understand) , right now i just found only two three quirks (some command related to automation cannot be executed with shortcut nor midi , some options arent accessible with macro - for example macro knob view in channel editor, mouse hover the meter to see the digital value of a peak). But that's said in mixing mode i'll keep cubase (the new delay, the new frequency dynamic eq, vari audio, peak value...). Honestly i could work only with studio one or only with cubase, i wish there was a single daw with all the strengh of live, studio one and cubase with a not expensive dedicated hardware.


----------

