What's new

Studio One 3 pro.

David Hall

its difficult to learn but not impossible
Hi.

I recently joined this community, And I haven't found yet a thread from composers who use Studio one 3. I haven't used any other DAW, it seems like most have their favorite, I for once like it.

I would like any information of others like me who are also using this DAW as their main platform. As of right now it has not been optimized to take advantaged of multicore processing, it does have the option however from their forums and my experience it seems that it tends to put more stress on 1 core rather than use them evenly.

anyways, thanks for the support and if you know if there is a dedicated thread with users that have this DAW as their main, i'll be glad to know.

thanks.
 
After more than a decade on Pro Tools, I switched to Studio One. I mainly work in midi (both hardware & VI's), and found the Studio One workflow much faster and more productive for me. I no longer have "running low on ram" messages that were frequent on PT. Granted, I am still working on a '08 Mac Quad Core (22GB ram), but it was nearly impossible to have more than one or two VI's open at the same time on PT. I tried a demo of Studio One (just as it was upgraded to 3), and before I knew it, I had 10 or 11 VI's open, dragging and dropping midi and audio files from other sessions, ability to have multiple sessions open, selecting a track and recording in one step, etc. I was sold.

Like anything, there is always room for improvement. And given time, I think (and hope) Studio One will. I do experience CPU spikes from time to time that others have mentioned (though mostly on CPU intensive VI's). Midi and audio editing (nothing like editing audio in PT, simply the best) could be expanded and improved. However, I am happy with the switch and recently added the Faderport 8 for even more Studio One enjoyment.
 
Like anything, there is always room for improvement. And given time, I think (and hope) Studio One will. I do experience CPU spikes from time to time that others have mentioned (though mostly on CPU intensive VI's).
thats exactly my issue.

maybe i should just start doing what i used to do which is transform to audio to save ram and cpu.
i just can't get enough of studio one. the ability to drag and drop its great.. although like samphony mentioned.. it still lacks some cpu management features. i used to have a template with 40+ VI on 8 kontakt instances.

another thing i would like to mention is that studio one does not have the compatibility yet (or at least i hope it will someday) of integrating komplete kontrol S series keyboards. I know that cubase does and so does DP. I've been thinking on getting Cubase just for the fact that its almost the "to-go" DAW for VI composing these days.

I've heard many reviews, and they have improved drastically.

thanks for your imput.
 
there are rumours that cpu usage will be better pretty soon and iam also really looking forward to that.

there is between an interesting project going on for s1, and it will get quite a nice update soon. the developer is also here on vi ;)

https://studioonex.narechk.net/index_en.html
 
I no longer have "running low on ram" messages that were frequent on PT.
What's funny is that I changed from Studio One to Reaper for this exact reason. My template took over 50% resources in S1 and under 20% in Reaper. I've used all the major DAWs and Reaper is the most CPU and RAM efficient DAW I've seen.
 
What's funny is that I changed from Studio One to Reaper for this exact reason. My template took over 50% resources in S1 and under 20% in Reaper. I've used all the major DAWs and Reaper is the most CPU and RAM efficient DAW I've seen.
Apparently, Reaper (which is not alone) is displaying the average CPU performace for all cores, wheresas, S1 is displaying the CPU performance for the core taking the highest load. This, rightly or wrongly, is to help the user make better choices about plugins, instruments, routing etc. How? I don't know, it seems to cause more confusion. Anyhow, Presonus believe their way of displaying CPU performance makes more overall sense, hense, why they haven't change it despite countless enquiries and complaints. I, like many, believe displaying both the average CPU performance and the highest hit core would be best. It would end the frustration and people, like youself, would probably have never jumped ship.
 
I've spend the last few months hopping between Reaper, Studio One, & Cubase for both midi stuff and traditional recording. As a daytime geek, I prefer working in the "all powerful but set it up yourself" editor than a full fledged interface that makes things "easier." So I appreciate the power and flexibility of Reaper. I just don't want to work with music like that.

As for Studio One & Cubase, I recently saw a video by Daniel James about why he switched from Ableton to Cubase and one of the points he brought up was looking at the direction the product/company was headed. While I prefer the workflow and dongle-free nature (which as a hardcore anti-DRM person is highly important to me) of Studio One, Presonus seems scattered and less in touch with their users. Yes, Steinberg has problems with customer service (such as the lack on communication until recently about their iPad remote control software not working) but at least they're doing the weekly hangouts and their Austin/Nashville targeted hipster videos with the bearded guy. But they're at least focused on their DAW and do communicate in some way with their users. Presonus appears to spend more time on hardware and their proprietary add-ons then on Studio One and you rarely hear from them except for the hyped up announcement videos. Which is fine, but it also doesn't make the DAW a priority.

So to sum up, Studio One is perfectly acceptable. Because for every thing you find in one DAW that you can't live without, I bet there's another thing in another DAW that you're not aware of yet that you can't live without if you knew about it. I just am not 100% confident in the company to go all in with them. I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up being another Tracktion that gets sold around.
 
I've tried Studio One twice. And deinstalled it twice. Reaper was easier to learn and it has a less geeky interface. I'm not going back to Cubase, although I might try Dorico in the future.
 
Here is a hint what's coming next with studio one

https://blog.presonus.com/index.php/2017/05/19/presonus-live-breaking-barriers/

img_4226-jpg.8549
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4226.JPG
    IMG_4226.JPG
    53.5 KB · Views: 114
I used Cubase , Ableton and Studio One 3. For the last 2 years Studio One is my main daw. The workflow is superb (unless you are working for video). But for creating scores fast and efficient no other DAW does it for me. Cant wait for v4! :)
 
I heard Troels Folmann mention he's made the switch to Studio One (he briefly spoke about it in one of his recent walkthrough videos)
 
Top Bottom