OP
OP
Vik
Vi-k
FYI, Cubase isn't the only one with expression maps anymore.
POLL: Preferred DAW/program for work with sample libraries 2018/19?
- Thread starter Vik
- Start date
jononotbono
Luke Johnson
Cubase does it for me. Love it.
OP
OP
Vik
Vi-k
I was very interested in Cubase for a while, even bought the program and gave it (and Dorico) a try.
But partially because I know Logic so well, and because Cubase and Dorico IMHO has many cumbersome workflow solutions, I'm still on Logic, which also has gotten a little better (with an expression map equivalent and some improvements in other areas). A main thing I regularly miss in Logic, though, is something Cubase has: the ability to unload Kontakt samples when freezing a track (and reload upon unfreeze) + a general option to fully disable am instrument track and free up sample and Kontakt memory.
Handling CC Automation/smart controls also need improvements.
Other than that, I mainly miss functions that are related to musical decisions - not technical/mix/audio decisions, like some of the stuff I liked in Sibelius (but which I see no signs of Dorico getting):
Logic has no dedicated Ideas Hub (like Sibelius) for organising users ideas (and using the Apple loop function for doing that means many limitations).
The score development has been slow for many years now, but there are hints about improvements here
The key command for go to next/previous only plays one note at a time when there are chords. Bummer, especially when editing piano compositions.
Likewise, transposing a single MIDI note with a key command doesn't allow immediate auditioning of all the notes in piano chords. Major bummer for me.
So, in general: commands related to composing... so I wonder what Logic 11 (10.5?), and future versions of Cubase and Dorico will bring. Meanwhile, I'll keep using Logic, at least until Steinberg improves their apps in terms of how easy/hard it is to learn it for someone who knows another DAW really well, and have done that for many years.
But partially because I know Logic so well, and because Cubase and Dorico IMHO has many cumbersome workflow solutions, I'm still on Logic, which also has gotten a little better (with an expression map equivalent and some improvements in other areas). A main thing I regularly miss in Logic, though, is something Cubase has: the ability to unload Kontakt samples when freezing a track (and reload upon unfreeze) + a general option to fully disable am instrument track and free up sample and Kontakt memory.
Handling CC Automation/smart controls also need improvements.
Other than that, I mainly miss functions that are related to musical decisions - not technical/mix/audio decisions, like some of the stuff I liked in Sibelius (but which I see no signs of Dorico getting):
Logic has no dedicated Ideas Hub (like Sibelius) for organising users ideas (and using the Apple loop function for doing that means many limitations).
The score development has been slow for many years now, but there are hints about improvements here
The key command for go to next/previous only plays one note at a time when there are chords. Bummer, especially when editing piano compositions.
Likewise, transposing a single MIDI note with a key command doesn't allow immediate auditioning of all the notes in piano chords. Major bummer for me.
So, in general: commands related to composing... so I wonder what Logic 11 (10.5?), and future versions of Cubase and Dorico will bring. Meanwhile, I'll keep using Logic, at least until Steinberg improves their apps in terms of how easy/hard it is to learn it for someone who knows another DAW really well, and have done that for many years.
Nico Schuele
Tolerated Member
As someone who doesn't play keys very well and is just at the beginning of learning music theory, Cubase is the perfect DAW for me: Chord Track. Can't live without it. Also things like Expression Maps (I've written about 50 of those), Drum Maps, remembering the zoom level on the MIDI grid, etc.
Tried Studio One for a while but small quirks like it not supporting my Komplete S61 or not being able to input a send level with keyboard digits (have to do it with the mouse) makes it a no go.
Tried Studio One for a while but small quirks like it not supporting my Komplete S61 or not being able to input a send level with keyboard digits (have to do it with the mouse) makes it a no go.
jbuhler
Senior Member
It's actually the other way around: Native Instruments doesn't support Studio One and they discontinued Mackie Support (or at least Mackie hasn't yet been implemented in the MKII). I found that the Korg Nano Studio (which supports Studio One) fits nicely on an empty portion of the top of the S61 MKII and restores most of the functionality of the S61 while adding functionality not included with the S61. Version 4 also has a version of chord track.
DS_Joost
One day I'll fly away!
And one that puts the Cubase one to shame as it can also handle audio. Cubase however was first with the idea. You see this a lot with Studio One. Someone comes up with an idea, they take and add to it substantially. You can call this lazy, but in my DAW I don't care. I don't want it being original, I want it to work.
Nico Schuele
Tolerated Member
Correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I tried it, S1 Chord Track can't give audio feedback when you click on a chord, you can't map chords to keys on your keyboard, doesn't do inversions automatically and when you apply it to a MIDI track, you can't copy-paste the result to another track (only the original chord gets copied), and many more other features like this which make S1 Chord Track a good start but very far from its older brother. As for the audio part, it's nice sure, but I only work with MIDI when composing, not using loops or pre-made audio tracks. To me, it seems more oriented towards EDM than orchestral composition. Of course, I may be wrong and would need to learn how to use it effectively. Only spent a day or two with it.
Nevermeister
New Member
MarcelM
Senior Member
for orchestral work there is nothing what comes close to cubase. i do use it mostly but also sometimes logic. i like studio one aswell, but i hate the gui so i dont use it actually. reaper? no. gave it a try a couple of times since its cpu usage is superb, but the rest is not mine 
OP
OP
Vik
Vi-k
I don't know how Reaper works, and Apple's Articulation IDs may not be optimised for 3rd part libraries yet, but the Logic solution lets you add articulations on each note, meaning that you can have several articulations happening on the same track, at the same time. Dorico also has Expression Maps.
Last edited:
InLight-Tone
Senior Member
Cubase is still king for working with sample libraries and large track counts (1000+) disabled or not. Couple that with the Logical Editors, Visibility agents etc., it's hard to beat. Some parts could use an upgrade for sure.
I am hoping Studio One adds articulation maps and works on the ability to handle large amounts of tracks without LONG save times. Their automation system, both regular and midi is what I always wish Cubase had. I also hope they open up their JavaScripting and expose the API so we can do some Reaper like customization. It's a modern, cleaned up DAW for the 21st century and it feels like it.
Gotta love Reaper and the amazing ingenious community behind it. Despite it's insane flexibility, and lietrally unlimited potential, I find the other DAW's far easier and more pleasant as far as GUI and interaction to work in despite setting up tons of scripts, and the Frankenstein nature of the whole thing leaves me cold...
I am hoping Studio One adds articulation maps and works on the ability to handle large amounts of tracks without LONG save times. Their automation system, both regular and midi is what I always wish Cubase had. I also hope they open up their JavaScripting and expose the API so we can do some Reaper like customization. It's a modern, cleaned up DAW for the 21st century and it feels like it.
Gotta love Reaper and the amazing ingenious community behind it. Despite it's insane flexibility, and lietrally unlimited potential, I find the other DAW's far easier and more pleasant as far as GUI and interaction to work in despite setting up tons of scripts, and the Frankenstein nature of the whole thing leaves me cold...
It’s funny to see that my feature request is one of the most popular on the PreSonus forum right now from a logic user perspective. I’m curious how the Presonus devs will implement it.
Like vik I’m mainly using logic as I know it so well but for both DAWs I wish they would add visibility agents like cubase has.
musicalweather
Senior Member
Really interesting discussion here. I appreciate everyone's insights into the different DAWs. I've been a faithful DP user for about 15 years. Recently got Logic in order to teach composition to a student who had it, and it's been enlightening to compare the two programs. Here's a fascinating, in-depth look at and rating of several different DAWs. (I can't imagine it hasn't been already mentioned on this forum, but I'll include it here anyway.). Well worth the read, even if you don't agree with the ratings. And here's the author's gripes about DP. Yikes.
Solarsentinel
Active Member
Hi all,
For now my DAW is ableton. Yes i know it is not popular for orchestral work, but it's the DAW which i'm the most confortable with. Everything is so easy with it.
I tried cubase and studio one when i started to learn music and i went not be able to learn them quick.
I found that Ableton is a good all rounder. You can do all sorts of things with these two modes of view. The session view can be used for sketching ideas that you can play and switch instantly, and with the arrangement view you can do your stuff more normally. I like the good compatibility with hardware like synths or controllers and also the vst'ies.
I like also the way we can do automations and how we can handle audio with all the rooting possibilities. It's very quick for sound design purpose.
I think it lacks some midi features like multi clip editing, a chord track, and a more tradionnal view for mixing purpose in order to be complete.
I tried many times to use cubase, but i'm always blocked with the way they displayed everything. And for studio one the compatibility problems with controllers is a real break for me.
But It is just my feelings
.
For resume you can do orchestral music with ableton, perhaps not so quick against cubase or logic but it works
For now my DAW is ableton. Yes i know it is not popular for orchestral work, but it's the DAW which i'm the most confortable with. Everything is so easy with it.
I tried cubase and studio one when i started to learn music and i went not be able to learn them quick.
I found that Ableton is a good all rounder. You can do all sorts of things with these two modes of view. The session view can be used for sketching ideas that you can play and switch instantly, and with the arrangement view you can do your stuff more normally. I like the good compatibility with hardware like synths or controllers and also the vst'ies.
I like also the way we can do automations and how we can handle audio with all the rooting possibilities. It's very quick for sound design purpose.
I think it lacks some midi features like multi clip editing, a chord track, and a more tradionnal view for mixing purpose in order to be complete.
I tried many times to use cubase, but i'm always blocked with the way they displayed everything. And for studio one the compatibility problems with controllers is a real break for me.
But It is just my feelings
.For resume you can do orchestral music with ableton, perhaps not so quick against cubase or logic but it works
waveheavy
Active Member
Here's my honest 2 cents. I'm using a PC with Windows 7 Pro, 32 Gig RAM, Quad Core, multiple SSD.
Studio One 3 & 4 ---- nice command setup, easy. Nice drag & drop instruments into the main display to create a track, easiest of all DAWs I've tried. Mixer display could use more work, horizontal spacing gap between instrument faders and master faders, didn't find it useful. Automation lanes could use some work in main display. I find automation lanes apart from their instrument track confusing. It won't fully work with my Nektar LX88+ keyboard, only recognizes my Mod wheel and that's it (I've been to Nektar's support, downloaded latest controller files, etc. Still no joy.)
Digital Performer 9 for Windows ---- not happy at all. They still need a lot more work to transplant this to work on Windows. I couldn't even record my guitar through my Apollo interface, with support from both MOTU and UAD. MOTU just quit responding to my help requests. DP is setup nice for film composing, but still a lot of things you've got to do manually that shouldn't be. And there's need for more error programming. Try to do something and hit a wrong key or command and you'll often get a crash. I suspect the Mac version is more robust, as DP came out originally for the Mac and hasn't been on Windows that long.
SONAR ---- it tried to keep up, and was a pretty good DAW. Got some of my best big band Jazz mixes on it. It still tried to process under heavy loads which degraded the audio, when it should have issued a warning. Needed some more error programming in that area. I didn't like the double tracks assignment for MIDI requirement, which is similar to Cubase.
Pro Tools ---- great for mixing. Not really bad for MIDI. It's got Step Note Entry, what more could a non-keyboard player want? PT is very robust in the error catching area. If you've got the CPU and RAM power, I find it's more stable than any of the above DAWs. Just don't expect a lot of bells and whistles like the other DAWs.
Studio One 3 & 4 ---- nice command setup, easy. Nice drag & drop instruments into the main display to create a track, easiest of all DAWs I've tried. Mixer display could use more work, horizontal spacing gap between instrument faders and master faders, didn't find it useful. Automation lanes could use some work in main display. I find automation lanes apart from their instrument track confusing. It won't fully work with my Nektar LX88+ keyboard, only recognizes my Mod wheel and that's it (I've been to Nektar's support, downloaded latest controller files, etc. Still no joy.)
Digital Performer 9 for Windows ---- not happy at all. They still need a lot more work to transplant this to work on Windows. I couldn't even record my guitar through my Apollo interface, with support from both MOTU and UAD. MOTU just quit responding to my help requests. DP is setup nice for film composing, but still a lot of things you've got to do manually that shouldn't be. And there's need for more error programming. Try to do something and hit a wrong key or command and you'll often get a crash. I suspect the Mac version is more robust, as DP came out originally for the Mac and hasn't been on Windows that long.
SONAR ---- it tried to keep up, and was a pretty good DAW. Got some of my best big band Jazz mixes on it. It still tried to process under heavy loads which degraded the audio, when it should have issued a warning. Needed some more error programming in that area. I didn't like the double tracks assignment for MIDI requirement, which is similar to Cubase.
Pro Tools ---- great for mixing. Not really bad for MIDI. It's got Step Note Entry, what more could a non-keyboard player want? PT is very robust in the error catching area. If you've got the CPU and RAM power, I find it's more stable than any of the above DAWs. Just don't expect a lot of bells and whistles like the other DAWs.
SupremeFist
Senior Member
Abandoned Cubase in the 1990s because it had a showstopping bug relating to hitpoints when scoring to picture which wasn't fixed for too long, and have been on Logic ever since. But sometimes I wonder if I should switch back so I am not held to ransom over the increasingly bad Apple hardware...
Jeremy Spencer
Senior Member
Bad Apple hardware?
