# Logic 8 to Cubase 4.1? Should I?



## Nathan Allen Pinard (Dec 21, 2008)

This is yet another thread about Logic to Cubase. I had a hard time finding anything on this, but it's 5am...

My problems with Logic:

Apple tends to ignore it update wise.
Small visual bugs that aren't bad at first, but then get to you.

Main Problem:

Doesn't seem to run my external Vienna Ensemble 3 instruments (which is a large amount) very well. Sometimes I get overload errors when only one track is playing. Logic only seems to run really great when there are a limited amount of them. In fact, when click and hold happens, it takes 2-3 seconds to show up.

Logic still hasn't seemed to really be a 64-bit app. So I can't load a lot until move to external apps.


So how would Cubase help me in terms of fluent orchestration mainly?

Programs I use are:

Vienna Ensemble 3
VSL Instrument Plugin
Bias Peak Plugins
Altiverb
Omnisphere, Trilogy, RMX
Kontakt Libs
EXS Libs, which I think I have in Kontakt as well.
AKAI Libs

Does Cubase 4.1 have any major breaking issues?

Does anyone here have problems with Cubase using a lot of instruments. Do large projects slow down, or crash, or freeze?

Can you edit volume curves like automation and breath control with ease?


NOTE: Mac only in this case. 3.0ghz, 16gb RAM, Apogee Ensemble (I can use this with any daw) CME UF8 Keyboard, EWI

Sorry if this is a redundant thread.


----------



## Daryl (Dec 21, 2008)

I think that now is not the right time to make this decision. There are limits in OSX with any application, and until that changes I don't think that you'll have any better luck with Cubase. Furthermore, it also means that you would lose access to the EXS player.

There are advantages to using Cubase over Logic, but I would first consider what you stand to lose before we get into the more advanced features that Cubase has.

D


----------



## Ashermusic (Dec 21, 2008)

You might want to visit here and spend some before you decide.

http://www.cubase.net/phpbb2/

Also, I have helped three composers in the last 2 years transition from Cubase to Logic. They miss some things, but none of them are talking about going back.


----------



## José Herring (Dec 21, 2008)

Logic 8 is cool. Imo it's more of an all in one solution. In general the plugs are better and of course there's EXS.

On the other hand I find Cubase to be more of a flexible environment to work in. For me it's more logical than Logic. Logic has some quick and easy editing that I find good though. The main thing that I find with Logic is that it's just a tiny bit less flexible workflow wise and also there seems to be some serious compatibility issues with third party plugins that my logic friends are always complaining about.

But these are all personal things. Both programs are outstanding and both have their short comings. But, in general I do prefer Cubase and it is much snappier and not sluggish at aò²a   þ²a   ÿ²a    ²a   ²a   ²a   ²a   ²a   ²a   ²a   ²a   ²a


----------



## Nathan Allen Pinard (Dec 21, 2008)

Hmmm...good comments.

There are a few settings in Logic that will probably solve my problem. So I'll do some more testing and see how my next few projects pan out.

The plugins I do use in Logic, even though I have 3rd party ones. EXS is useful, but I don't use it all the time.

Cubase seems to deal with external sources better though. The thing that bugs me, is I can't really try it before I buy it.

As a result, I don't know if I even want to take that leap because of that.


----------



## Hardy Heern (Dec 21, 2008)

Waywyn, I've been meaning to say for ages and ages, just how much I love your Avatar.......absolutely hilarious!! ...... that is, of course, unless it's one of your _own _photographs! 

Just love it though....

Frank


----------



## Scott Cairns (Dec 22, 2008)

I cant comment on Logic cause Ive never used it. But I recently upgraded from Cubase Sx 3.1 to Cubase 4.5.2 - its a HUGE improvement, really cool.


----------



## Nathan Allen Pinard (Dec 22, 2008)

Seems to be a tough decision. DP6 is also looking pretty nice. Might wait, but any more comments on just about ANYTHING (mac) would be nice.


----------



## Waywyn (Dec 22, 2008)

Hardy Heern @ Sun Dec 21 said:


> Waywyn, I've been meaning to say for ages and ages, just how much I love your Avatar.......absolutely hilarious!! ...... that is, of course, unless it's one of your _own _photographs!
> 
> Just love it though....
> 
> Frank



Haha, thx! Sorry to Hijack, but just google yearbookyourself


----------



## Nathan Allen Pinard (Dec 25, 2008)

Ok, well I'm definitely going to make a leap to change either to Cubase or DP6. DP6 has some good features, mac exclusive (which usually leads to decent support and updates) not to mention some nice bells and whistles.

So now it's really a comparison between Cubase and DP6, keeping in mind that I'm a Kontakt, VSL, and Play user, as well as a Mac user.

Has anyone made a switch to DP or vice versa?


----------



## Daryl (Dec 26, 2008)

Nathan Allen Pinard @ Fri Dec 26 said:


> Ok, well I'm definitely going to make a leap to change either to Cubase or DP6. DP6 has some good features, mac exclusive (which usually leads to decent support and updates) not to mention some nice bells and whistles.
> 
> So now it's really a comparison between Cubase and DP6, keeping in mind that I'm a Kontakt, VSL, and Play user, as well as a Mac user.
> 
> Has anyone made a switch to DP or vice versa?


Difficult one. I like a lot of the features (not that I've used them, just seen them in action) in DP, but there seem to be a lot more problems in DP than Cubase when using Vienna Ensemble. However, I would suggest trawling the VSL and NI forums to see what problems other users are having before making a final decision.

D


----------



## Farkle (Dec 26, 2008)

Daryl @ Fri Dec 26 said:


> Nathan Allen Pinard @ Fri Dec 26 said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, well I'm definitely going to make a leap to change either to Cubase or DP6. DP6 has some good features, mac exclusive (which usually leads to decent support and updates) not to mention some nice bells and whistles.
> ...



I started in Sonar on PC (went up to Sonar 6), then moved to both Logic 8 and DP 6 (I had used DP 5 in my intern studio for 2 years). I subsequently dropped Logic 8, and am now exclusively DP. Some points that made me do it:

1. Awesome MIDI control on DP, that is lacking in Logic 8. For example, in Logic 8, there's no way to do a diatonic transposition (really important for orchestration workflow); DP has it as a hot key. That's just one of many points that DP has that shows that it really focuses on MIDI implementation.

2. For me, easier visual layout and workflow. DP has the nested folder approach, and the color scheme makes it easier to work. Logic's handling of multi-timbral, multi-output synths really bothers me... I don't "get" it...

3. Really strong community support on Motunation. I have a ton of questions about it, and the guys over there are really helpful.

Having said that, there are several things Logic excels at. It's built-in effects are really impressive, and low CPU overhead. It handles loops excellently, where DP doesn't really handle it as intuitively. 

But, for MIDI orchestration, and creating and editing lots of MIDI data (which I focus on), DP is, IMHO, phenomenal. It also handles audio very well, and with a couple of well-placed searches on KVRAudio, you can supplement it's EQ and dynamics effects (which are mediocre) with some inexpensive donation-ware, and be very competitive with your mixes.

Mike


----------



## billval3 (Dec 26, 2008)

Farkle @ Fri Dec 26 said:


> Daryl @ Fri Dec 26 said:
> 
> 
> > Nathan Allen Pinard @ Fri Dec 26 said:
> ...



About Sonar 6:

1. It does diatonic transposition. Anything can be assigned as a key command.

2. Uses nested folders. Are you talking about assigning colors to a specific folder? I don't know about doing that. I know that you can use graphic icons to label tracks, but I've never bothered with that.

3. I assume every sequencer has a forum associated with it, but I can't compare them as I've only occasionally used Sonar's and never used any other.

I'm not trying to get into an argument here...only pointing out that you already had these features with Sonar. 8)


----------



## Ashermusic (Dec 26, 2008)

Farkle @ Fri Dec 26 said:


> Daryl @ Fri Dec 26 said:
> 
> 
> > Nathan Allen Pinard @ Fri Dec 26 said:
> ...



I can only say that I have helped a number of people who do lots of MIDI orchestration, including our own Craig Sharmat, to switch in the last couple of years from DP to Logic and they are not talking about going back.


----------



## gsilbers (Dec 26, 2008)

Thomas_J @ Sun Dec 21 said:


> I'm a Cubase user and I love it. It is snappy, silky smooth and stable. I do not use the VSL ensemble software so I can't give you a field report of its performance in Cubase. I've tried to like Logic many times. I really have. I just don't get the big fascination. Granted, I was playing with a really old version of Logic. I think you'll be happy with Cubase. It's a very solid sequencer and the track presets function is extremely time saving. It allows you to drag and drop track configurations into your project. Say you have a standard strings setup and you're working on an electronica piece and decide you need some strings. Instead of loading Kontakt, spend time finding and loading the .NKIs, create and assign midi channels and set up a reverb send etc., you just drag and drop your saved strings track preset into the current project and it takes care of all that work for you. I'm working on a track of immense complexity right now (well over 800 tracks), with a TON of plugins. The CPU is barely coping, but that's not Cubase's fault  I think back to my SONAR days and recoil in horror. It would grind to a halt if challenged with even just 100+ tracks. I know I'll be a Cubase user for life. For what it's worth, Herb (the founder of VSL) is also a Cubase user.





i think u can do that with logic, if im understanding correclty. 
u can save channel configurations. in logic pro 8. not in the older versions. 
out of the box, logic comes with with a lot of garageband channel strip configs so u have to change them. 

what cubase has which i saw was a little diferent was that u can see the automation 
of many diferent things. in logic u can only see one midi automatin at once. not the track automation but the midi automation.


----------



## gsilbers (Dec 26, 2008)

u mentinoed about 64 bit apiication. 

EXS does a thing called virtualization... fancy word that means that exs uses memory ram from outside logic so its not stuck with the 3gh imit kontakt and any othe sampler has. 

a lot of composers ive heard seems that are using logic as thier sampler triggered via dp or another logic. but instead of gigastudio3 or kontakt. cause it also has a lot effects and synths. wich u already knew. 

i have a few things against logic, buts thats because i use pro toos HD a lot. 
so things like timestamp, import session data, and audiosuite (which soundtrack has )
and other things that make logic pro not as a pro application as pro tools. 
many other things which are very easy on PT HD are wierd in logic. 

but i feel more inspired by loigc and works for music. maybe u should look at pro tools 8 for music. seems very cool. i hate producing with pro tools but this versin seems very promising. but ill have o try it 1st.


----------



## Farkle (Dec 26, 2008)

billval3 @ Fri Dec 26 said:


> Farkle @ Fri Dec 26 said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl @ Fri Dec 26 said:
> ...



About Sonar 6:

1. It does diatonic transposition. Anything can be assigned as a key command.

2. Uses nested folders. Are you talking about assigning colors to a specific folder? I don't know about doing that. I know that you can use graphic icons to label tracks, but I've never bothered with that.

3. I assume every sequencer has a forum associated with it, but I can't compare them as I've only occasionally used Sonar's and never used any other.

I'm not trying to get into an argument here...only pointing out that you already had these featurò´(   p§´(   p¨´(   p©´(   pª´(   p«´(   p¬´(   p­´(   p®´(   p¯´(   p°´(   p±´(   p²´(   p³´(   p´´)   pµ´)   p¶´)   p·´)   p¸´)   p¹´)   pº´)   p»´)   p¼´)   p½´)   p¾´)   p¿´)   pÀ´)   pÁ´)   pÂ´)   pÃ´)   pÄ´)   pÅ´)   pÆ´)   pÇ´)   pÈ´)   pÉ´)   pÊ´)   pË´)   pÌ´)   pÍ´)   pÎ´)   pÏ´)   pÐ´)   pÑ´)   pÒ´)   pÓ´)   pÔ´)   pÕ´)   pÖ´)   p×´)   pØ´)   pÙ´)   pÚ´)   pÛ´)   pÜ´)   pÝ´)   pÞ´)   pß´)   pà´)   pá´)   pâ´)   pã´)   pä´)   på´)   pæ´)   pç´)   pè´)   pé´)   pê´)   pë´)   pì´)   pí´)   pî´)   pï´)   pð´)   pñ´)   pò´)   pó´)   pô´)   põ´)   pö´)   p÷´)   pø´)   pù´)   pú´)   pû´)   pü´)   pý´)   pþ´)   pÿ´)   q ´)   q´)   q´)   q´)   q´)   q´)   q´)   q´)   q´*   q	´*   q
´*   q´*   q´*   q ´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q              ò´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q´*   q ´*   q!´*   q"´*   q#´*   q$´*   q%´*


----------



## Nathan Allen Pinard (Dec 28, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Dec 26 said:


> I posted this earlier but for some reason my post didn't make it from my iPhone - probably pilot error.
> 
> Anyway...without commenting on the theological issues, to me it doesn't sound like the solution to the problems with Vienna Ensemble 3 is to change DAWs. That's more of a machine upgrade issue. VE3 runs beautifully on an Intel Mac.
> 
> ...



Your right. VE3 at the moment doesn't work as well for me on the same machine as VE2. So VE2 as a stand alone seems to work.

As long as I don't load any VI's in Logic with Kontakt, I think I'm fine. K2 tends to make Logic really sluggish (and I've heard K3 does too)

However, during all this time looking at other DAW's and finding DP6, I'm finding that Logic is missing a lot of features, or they are just implemented poorly.

The only huge advantage I see with Logic, is being able to bounce everything to disk without tracking or freezing anything. As well as the Offline bouncing.

However, this is moot when you run VI's externally with an audio routing program.


----------



## dcoscina (Dec 28, 2008)

I have every sequencer known to man (and woman) and while I find advantages with each one, I constantly boot up either Logic 8 or DP6. I also have Sonar 7 Producer on my PC but it often crashes or hangs up. Also, its notation editor sucks a$$. For those of us trained in traditional music nomenclature this is a must from any DAW that I work with. 

Logic 8 has the advantage of excellent notation and superb plug-ins. Plus, as I recently discovered, its EXS does not tax the CPU like AU plug ins.

Cubase 4 mixes down nicely and also has (to me) more straightforward MIDI tools in some ways. It also handles plug ins like DP and Sonar do. It assigns a MIDI channel separately. This means you can apply CC7 toward a multi channel VST instrument without having to do cartwheels to avoid global volume changes. But frankly, I think Cubase'sGUI is aesthetically off putting. My work flow is not better on it than Logic. 

Although, I have been messing around with Pro Tools 8 LE these past few days and while it's still a little buggy, the GUI is pretty solid and my work flow is as fast on that as Logic practically. I recently got Jay's Logic 8 book though so I expect to be doing even better things with Logic. PT8 has much better MIDI editing than it used to but it's nowhere near Logic 8 in most respects. I have to compose a couple film scores in the new year and will be doing both on Logic as it is the most stable of my 4 Mac DAWs and I know it the best. DP6 is sexy when it comes to film scoring apps and its realtime transcription to notation is simply the most accurate I have seen. Those Digi guys say PT8 is the best but I have it and while it's not bad, it ain't DP. I mean, DP can transcribe septuplet figures played in realtime accurately. 

Anyhow, any DAW is a tool and which ever one allows you to get the most music out of your head and into the world is the one you should go with. I personally would not get rid of Logic 8 or Cubase 4 if I had to choose between the two, that's for sure.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 28, 2008)

What missing features, Nathan?

I'll cut you off short  : for every one you mention there's going to be an advantage Logic has that others don't.

These programs have all been worked on constantly for 20 years by teams of very bright people. They're all incredibly advanced.


----------



## billval3 (Dec 29, 2008)

dcoscina @ Sun Dec 28 said:


> Also, its notation editor sucks a$$. For those of us trained in traditional music nomenclature this is a must from any DAW that I work with.



Well I'm certainly trained in traditional music nomenclature, but I don't expect my sequencer to fiddle with that. I suppose I may be missing out on something in that department, however. What is it that you feel you need this feature for?

P.S. Sorry for the slight sidetrack. The rest of you continue talking amongst yourselves.


----------



## Daryl (Dec 29, 2008)

billval3 @ Mon Dec 29 said:


> dcoscina @ Sun Dec 28 said:
> 
> 
> > Also, its notation editor sucks a$$. For those of us trained in traditional music nomenclature this is a must from any DAW that I work with.
> ...


All sequencer notation sucks. PT8 may be better, as it is Sibelius based. I don't know. However I would have thought that this would be the least important feature of a DAW. I believe in using the correct tools for the job, and sequencer notation just isn't good enough for serious professional work.

D


----------



## Ashermusic (Dec 29, 2008)

Daryl @ Mon Dec 29 said:


> billval3 @ Mon Dec 29 said:
> 
> 
> > dcoscina @ Sun Dec 28 said:
> ...



Baloney. I have printed out the score for well over a thousand film cues/TV episodes with Logic's score editor and the L.A. players have never complained.

Would I use it to create engraving quality scores? Probably not, But if you already compose in Logic, it is quite capable if you know it well.


----------



## Daryl (Dec 29, 2008)

Ashermusic @ Mon Dec 29 said:


> Daryl @ Mon Dec 29 said:
> 
> 
> > billval3 @ Mon Dec 29 said:
> ...


And how many scores have the copyists from JoAnne Kane used Logic for? Ask them.

The fact that you say "I have printed out " says it all. For major feature films, forget it. Just because you get away with it doesn't make it good.

D


----------



## Ashermusic (Dec 29, 2008)

Daryl @ Mon Dec 29 said:


> Ashermusic @ Mon Dec 29 said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl @ Mon Dec 29 said:
> ...



Well, if you say so, Daryl, it must be so I guess. I guess it also doesn't count that orchestrator/copyists I know used it for some feature films that David Newman, Klaus Badelt, Klimek-Heil, and David Michael Frank scored also, among others.

I am not saying it is the equal of FInale or Sibelius, but if the score is composed in Logic, it is quite usable if one wants to keep the files all in one DAW.


----------



## Frederick Russ (Dec 29, 2008)

The files are very usable with Logic's Score Editor. I've used it exclusively for live string players before getting Sibelius 5. It works great - thing is, some of the extra notations that are automatic with dedicated scoring programs need to be put in manually - if you know what you're wanting, its really no big deal to do that although it might be easier in a scoring program when dealing with complex scores.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 29, 2008)

Darryl, you aren't a Northerner by any chance, are you?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 29, 2008)




----------



## Daryl (Dec 30, 2008)

Jay, I never said that you couldn't use the Logic Score features. I was very specific. However, if it satisfies you, I'll quite happily stipulate:

1) The Logic Score Editor is quite adequate for the music that Jay Asher works on.
2) The Logic Score Editor is not remotely adequate for the music that I work on.

Is that better?

D


----------



## Daryl (Dec 30, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Dec 30 said:


> Darryl, you aren't a Northerner by any chance, are you?


Racist. :evil: 

D


----------



## Ashermusic (Dec 30, 2008)

Daryl @ Tue Dec 30 said:


> Jay, I never said that you couldn't use the Logic Score features. I was very specific. However, if it satisfies you, I'll quite happily stipulate:
> 
> 1) The Logic Score Editor is quite adequate for the music that Jay Asher works on.
> 2) The Logic Score Editor is not remotely adequate for the music that I work on.
> ...



No, you said specifically that "all sequencer notation sucks." 

Interesting that you choose to ignore some of the other composers I mentioned, all better known than you, who also either use of have used Logic for their parts/scores.

Please point me to your website so I can hear some of this music that Logic would not be adequate to print out the parts for. I am not being a smart ass here. When I hear it, I will pretty much immediately know if t is possible to do it well in Logic by someone like me who knows Logic's score editor well, and if I think I could not I will immediately say so. If otoh, I think you are talking out of your ass, I will immediately say so.

For instance, I would not want to do a score that relied heavily on avant garde techniques in Logic like Stockhausen's "Gruppen." Of course, I have not heard a lot of film scores that do much of that.

OTOH, assuming I composed it in Logic. I certainly can and would do an Indiana Jones type score in Logic.

BTW, the bible on Logic's score editor was written in 1998 by Johannes Prischl and is entitled "The Logic Notation Guide." It is incredibly thorough and while much of Logic's terminology has changed, and a few features have been added and methods slightly changed, it is still a must have for anyone who is serious about using Logic's notation.

http://prischl.net/LNG/index.html


----------



## Daryl (Dec 30, 2008)

Jay, whatever I do or say, you will still be convinced you are right. Why would I play your silly game? No, I don't need to prove anything to you. I'm not going to get sucked into your Logic love-fest. If you can't tell the difference, then nothing I say is going to make any difference.

D


----------



## Peter Alexander (Dec 30, 2008)

Thomas_J @ Sun Dec 21 said:


> I'm a Cubase user and I love it. It is snappy, silky smooth and stable. I do not use the VSL ensemble software so I can't give you a field report of its performance in Cubase. I've tried to like Logic many times. I really have. I just don't get the big fascination. Granted, I was playing with a really old version of Logic. I think you'll be happy with Cubase. It's a very solid sequencer and the track presets function is extremely time saving. It allows you to drag and drop track configurations into your project. Say you have a standard strings setup and you're working on an electronica piece and decide you need some strings. Instead of loading Kontakt, spend time finding and loading the .NKIs, create and assign midi channels and set up a reverb send etc., you just drag and drop your saved strings track preset into the current project and it takes care of all that work for you. I'm working on a track of immense complexity right now (well over 800 tracks), with a TON of plugins. The CPU is barely coping, but that's not Cubase's fault  I think back to my SONAR days and recoil in horror. It would grind to a halt if challenged with even just 100+ tracks. I know I'll be a Cubase user for life. For what it's worth, Herb (the founder of VSL) is also a Cubase user.



This is certainly a great endorsement, Thomas, but what are your PC system specs so we can put this into a perspective? Which CPU? How much RAM?


----------



## Peter Alexander (Dec 30, 2008)

Daryl @ Tue Dec 30 said:


> Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Dec 30 said:
> 
> 
> > Darryl, you aren't a Northerner by any chance, are you?
> ...



My mother-in-law is a Northerner! 

>8o


----------



## Peter Alexander (Dec 30, 2008)

I think two key issues for you to decide on Logic vs. Cubase (or Nuendo) are features and GUI. 

I've both used and written books and online classes on both Logic and Cubase. Getting your head around Logic vs. Cubase is a reading issue. You either feel comfortable visually working with one or the other. 

When Logic was discontinued on the PC, I moved to Cubase. But I never really felt comfortable with the program visually, and the organization of the virtual mixing boards along with all those new icons just threw me off. What I liked about the Logic virtual mixing board was that it more closely resembled a hardware mixing board and you could customize it accordingly.

I much prefer the Cubase notation to Logic's and other features, including the availability of guitar finger symbols which aren't in Logic, or at least I haven't found them yet. 

Aside from my book, The Street Smart Guide to Apple Logic 8, the next complementing instruction I've found that I'm about to review is by Eli Krantzberg in Toronto. He's done an excellent video series through Groovebox.

After that, Jay's book is an excellent problem/solution guide which I'll also be reviewing shortly.

I half agree with both Jay and Daryl re: Logic notation. For me it's a business decision. Is my time better spent learning and mastering Logic notation or Sibelius? 

For me the answer is Sibelius, especially for book publishing where you can export Sibelius in an EPS or TIFF format. 

On printout with Logic, you get the Adobe Sonata font (as I recall).


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 30, 2008)

"If you can't tell the difference, then nothing I say is going to make any difference."

But the difference between what and what?

I don't think Jay's having a Logic lovefest, he's ready to explain what Logic can and can't do in more detail. It's not a silly game.

And I have to add that I first met Jay 13 or 14 years ago when I had this absolutely terrible job transcribing a whole musical of MIDI files that the composer had played in. I farmed a lot of the songs out to Jay, and he really knew what he was doing with Logic's notation section even back then - in fact he convinced me to stop exporting to Encore (by the example of his results, not by proselytizing).

So I think you could stoop to explaining what it is you think Logic can't do.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Dec 30, 2008)

Nick - regarding MIDI file transcription - Daryl talked about the ease of Cubase in handling this vs the struggles he saw other orchestrators having who were using Logic. 

This is a rather pertinent observation. More explanatory prose, please! What were these composers missing in their understanding of Logic that would have made the job equal to working in Cubase?


----------



## Ashermusic (Dec 30, 2008)

Peter Alexander @ Tue Dec 30 said:


> Nick - regarding MIDI file transcription - Daryl talked about the ease of Cubase in handling this vs the struggles he saw other orchestrators having who were using Logic.
> 
> This is a rather pertinent observation. More explanatory prose, please! What were these composers missing in their understanding of Logic that would have made the job equal to working in Cubase?



Peter, you're missing the point. Daryl said "all sequencer's notation sucks", which obviously includes Cubase as well as Logic, and that is what I took issue with.

Having never used Cubase, I have no opinion on its score capabilities, but Logic's I know well, and while not the equal of a dedicated score app like Finale or Sibelius, it certainly does not suck.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Dec 31, 2008)

Ashermusic @ Tue Dec 30 said:


> Peter Alexander @ Tue Dec 30 said:
> 
> 
> > Nick - regarding MIDI file transcription - Daryl talked about the ease of Cubase in handling this vs the struggles he saw other orchestrators having who were using Logic.
> ...



I didn't miss the point. I asked a question based on Nick's experience with you. I'd like to have the question answered from your perspective.


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Dec 31, 2008)

Heya, Jazz2K!

Doing well?

What audio interface system do you use now? MADI?

A happy and successful new year!


----------



## Ashermusic (Dec 31, 2008)

Peter Alexander @ Wed Dec 31 said:


> Ashermusic @ Tue Dec 30 said:
> 
> 
> > Peter Alexander @ Tue Dec 30 said:
> ...



I see.

IIt was a long time ago and frankly I don't remember. But in those days it was not uncommon for someone to send me a MIDI file with parts that sounded fine on samplers/MIDI modules but were not in a state where they could be printed out as parts and given to real players, so I would be hired. Frequently, the strings would go from 5 note pads, to 3 note pads, to single lines, etc. so thy had to be turned into intelligible string parts, which was a lot of work but quite doable. Similarly with horns the parts would be a jumble. Then dynamics and articulations need to beaded, formatiing, headers, etc. 

I was able to do all this fine in whatever version of Logic I was using at that time. Whether it would been easier or better to do it in Cubase I cannot say as I never owned it or used it. And here in L.A., there were several of us orchestrator/music prep guys, including Daniel Hamuy and Bill Levine who were doing work for some busy composers using Logic. Everyone else seemingly was using FInale or still hand copying. If anyone was using CUbase for that purpose, I was not aware of it.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Dec 31, 2008)

Thomas_J @ Wed Dec 31 said:


> Peter, I should have mentioned that my computer farm (4 computers) with Gigastudio is still running alongside, and I never use my DAW for orchestral samples (except some percussion). Most of the 800 tracks are simply midi channel connections to external hardware. My main DAW is an intel quadcore running @ 3ghz, with 4gb ram in XP32 (3gb switch enabled). By no means a monster computer, but more than enough for my needs. Currently I'm running 4 instances of altiverb, 4 waves IR-1 and 4 Wizoo W2's, along with 5 instances of Kontakt 2. In addition I've got a ton of Sony EQ inserts, db-audioware tempo delays, cubase stepfilters and EQs. Then there's the 3 instances of Sylenth running, as well as two Nexus', Wizoo Darbuka, and two Zebras. CPU is idling at just over 50%, but I have two dedicated Kontakt computers too. They're currently running on XP32 but the computers are 64-bit ready. I'm waiting for K3 to go 64-bit, at which point I will upgrade the ram on both to 16gb and that'll be the end of those worries. My goal is to have my entire sample catalogue loaded and on standby 24/7, accessible from within Cubase. That would require some new Cubase features however, as I think thousands of tracks would be pretty unmanagable. Happy New Year



I see the wisdom of your setup and I appreciate that approach. I think in 2009 you'll see a DAW (Mac or PC), then a VI machine, a PLAY machine and a K3 machine. 

One question for you. Many of the composers in L.A. I know run a maximum template of 200 - 250 tracks. What is your approach that you need 800? With Giga systems, are you running FX Teleport?

A most intriguing statistic to be sure!

Peter


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Dec 31, 2008)

Al long as I know Thomas (9 years?) he has always been a track maniac


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 31, 2008)

To refresh your memory, Jay, the project was converting MIDI files to notation. The composer could improvise Tom Jones type music, and he was good at that. But he didn't know musical notation, so if there was another pianist (and there was) he was SOL.

What I don't remember is how I got your name at the time.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 1, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Dec 31 said:


> To refresh your memory, Jay, the project was converting MIDI files to notation. The composer could improvise Tom Jones type music, and he was good at that. But he didn't know musical notation, so if there was another pianist (and there was) he was SOL.
> 
> What I don't remember is how I got your name at the time.



Sorry. Nick, but I cannot resurrect any of the details from my tired, old memory banks.


----------

