Studio One 5.1 released!

Hi,

I understand you are enthusiastic about Studio One but giving false or uneducated information without knowing Logic Pro or any other DAW at all is just wrong and wastes peoples time.
Smart tempo has nothing to do with Melodyne and no Studio One does not have it (If you knew what smart tempo in Logic is you wouldn't say Studio One has it too anyway)
Or Auto Track Zoom
You do not know Logic Q Sampler's features but yet you say Stdio One Sampler has them all.

Please.
Thank You.
You do realize what ARA is? It's not necessary Melodyne. For example, Studio one has features like chord and tone detection in audio and midi material(and an option to change that), it's integrated into the DAW, but had nothing to do with any plugins, but, on the same time, it uses Melodyne's algorithms.

And yes, I've made a mistake - because Flex is an outdated thing, so I assumed that "Smart tempo" uses Melodyne algorithms, which aren't as destructive as Flex. This is really weird that they they decided to go with Flex.

In S1 you can basically drop the file on tempo line and it will write down the entire tempo map, chasing the project's tempo. I'll spend some time in this subject and drop results here.

Speaking of sampler. Yes, Sample One has them all(except tone detection), but some of them are not as advanced as in Logic's sampler.

A trillion year ago I used to work on Logic and every time have an update, I watch some videos and read their release notes. This is why every time I wrote about Logic I add "As far as I know", and not "I'm sure that..." or any alternatives that imply that. Some of my assumptions were wrong, but they came from common sense(for example, why would you use Flex to timestretching these days - it ruins the sound so bad, that most of this "Smart tempo" features don't make sense(but again, from solely my point of view of course)).
 
Because Presonus advertises (or advertised) that. Same as DP with Zynaptiq (which is really embedded). In reality ARA as standard is already dead, there are IIRC two more programs/plugins that use it.

Oh, it's 3 more (Spectralayers also supports it)
ARA is not dead, it's just making its way to the industry. Like VST3 it was ignored for a long time. It is pointless to ignore this standart as it gives a much deeper access to audio related data, which allows much more sophisticated solutions. One of the reason people are begging iZotope to develop an ARA version of RX is exactly because of the opportunities it gives to an end user.

So ARA is as important as VST3, but DAW developers were failing to implement that(see Reaper, Logic and so on - there is an integration, but clunky one; the only developers who came close to S1 level of ARA implementation is Cubase, which is funny tbh). Just read DAW forums - literally everywhere people are begging their devs to integrate this standart.
When more and more DAWs have ARA, you'll see cascades of new plugins working via ARA.
 
Last edited:

ReleaseCandidate

Active Member
It is pointless to ignore this standart as it gives a much deeper access to audio related data, which allows much more sophisticated solutions.
Yes, and that's also the main problem implementing it, because you have to _deeply_ integrate it in your audio engine. That's why it is a problem for DAWs that haven't been designed with such a possibility in mind (like S1 did).

What missing is a real integration of Notion and S1 (no, the 'Send to S1' and 'Send to Notion' are not what I'd call integration).

And the plugin API I have problems with is AU, because that doesn't support MIDI generation. But I've just been fiddling a bit with JUCE and MIDI plugins and in no way know múch about the VST APIs.

But don't get mé wrong, I'd love to see better integration of Melodyne and RX (use both) in all DAWs (at least that I use :D
 
Yes, and that's also the main problem implementing it, because you have to _deeply_ integrate it in your audio engine. That's why it is a problem for DAWs that haven't been designed with such a possibility in mind (like S1 did).

What missing is a real integration of Notion and S1 (no, the 'Send to S1' and 'Send to Notion' are not what I'd call integration).

And the plugin API I have problems with is AU, because that doesn't support MIDI generation. But I've just been fiddling a bit with JUCE and MIDI plugins and in no way know múch about the VST APIs.
Agree. But like I said - VST3 was as problematic as ARA now(ok, maybe not that bad, but devs were trying to ignore it really hard🥴). And like I said - they'll have to find a way to implement that, because it is a next step that you just have to make, like it or not. And Cubase, despite my absolute lack of love toward this software, proved that it can be implemented as good as PreSonus(or to be very close to that level).
 
@Lukas hi again. As promised, here's an explanation of what is wrong with 1)Import Song Data and 2)Routing.

1.ISD

I created a small test project for the example. On the first screenshot you can see the project from which we supposed to import data to another project(aka from Template to Ongoing project).
Pay attention to Sends: 1603543336212.png

Let's start to list the problems
1)These folder icons(SC and CC) do now work as folders, instead they just import the folder itself without anything it includes in the template. It is very counterintuitive, but not that problematic as you can just select the folder+the tracks\channels it includes. Unpleasant but very minor thing.
1603543546317.png

2)A more serious problem is how it imports routing. Look at the first screenshot again and pay attention to Sends, and now look at how it imports the same tracks and channels in a new project:
1603543936317.png

As you can see it doesn't import Sends at all. That makes this feature near to useless from Mixing and Sound design templates perspective.
This is the only serious problem with ISD I've stumbled upon. The rest of its features are working greate - all states of plugins are the same, I/Os are the same, multichannel instruments import with dedicated channels are in place and so on.

And actually there is another very minor problem is you can't choose where to put those channels and tracks in the arrange window - it imports everything at the end of the list and you have to move it to the right place manualy.


1.Routing

1)You see this "Close" track and 3 channels in a mixer, dedicated to this instrument? It's Kontakt with 3 mics output routing. I renamed the first channel to "Close" because it's the first stereo output in Kontakt and I see this name in an Arrange window which confuses a little bit. And the more project builds up, the more confusing it becmoes. Another minor, but unpleasing thing.

2)Using this "Close" track example again, imagine that you have to add a number of different instruments in the same Kontakt, each of them has at least 2 mics, but it's impossible to see them at the same time in an Arrange window(something you would want in big projects and if you aren't a big fan of classic mixing layout). The best you can do is to switch between those mics in an inspector. It would be soooo much easier if the audio channels were tied to certain midi channels. I don't know how they can implement that(maybe making automation tracks under midi channels more functional(like when you clicking on it, it shows you certaion audio channel) or something like that).

The point is to be able to create something I would call "Packs" inside the project. Where everything is logically connected and "packed".

Regarding of routing, I would agree with you generally - S1 is indeed a better option comparing to most of other DAWs, but there are still things to improve. Besides S1 is famous for exactly this reason - making your life and work easier😎
 

Ivan M.

Active Member
Yes
Click and hold the right side of last selected note ( you should see the sizing tool)
Press alt/option while holding
and drag now

Ah, yes, if you click first, and then alt, it will do what it's supposed to, thanks!
 
Ok, speaking of Tempo(Smart and not that Smart).

Here's a bunch of videos about S1 Tempro features and about Smart Tempo for comparison.
Decide what you life more.

Also, don't forget about Groove Q feature in Studio one, that allows us to use any midi or audio file as a guiding groove for 1)the entire project or 2)particular track(s).






 

Ashermusic

Senior Member
Faruh, Logic also has Groove quantize that works with any MIDI or audio file.

Just saying, not trying to discourage anyone from Studio One. With the little I have worked with it, I already see that if Logic were to go away, it would be my DAW.
 
Faruh, Logic also has Groove quantize that works with any MIDI or audio file.

Just saying, not trying to discourage anyone from Studio One. With the little I have worked with it, I already see that if Logic were to go away, it would be my DAW.
I didn't mean anything "anti-" in my posts as well 😉
In this case I'm just implying that these two DAWs are different in their approach in this case and everyone can decide which one is better for their workflow. Or at leats to know what they sucrifice.

I've made a mistake by judging Logic based on old memories about it and about a bunch of videos from updates. Now I spent some time watchign a reading more about these Logic's features and realized that it'll take me a few hours to sum up everything(compare it to S1, how we can do something like this in S1(and if we need it in the first place) and so on), so I just decided to give some general videos and people can look up more details themselves(if they need to).

We almost slipped into another DAW war🤐
 

Ashermusic

Senior Member
We almost slipped into another DAW war🤐
Not me, ever. I candidly tell people what I like and don't like about Logic. Over the years I have been very candid about how I wished it had a "Chunks" feature like DP, how I wish we could have the Mixer instruments order separate from the Track List, how I wished it didn't frequently misbehave if you start a project before bar 1 or have more than one project open at the same time.

There are no perfect DAWs.
 

easyrider

Senior Member
Before I submit my video to Presonus...just wanted to check if people are using quick load with latest Kontakt in Studio 1 5.1

cheers
 

Lukas

Keyboardist / composer
@Faruh Al-Baghdadi Okay, it seems to me that you have not yet internalized the concept of working with multitimbral instruments with multiple outputs in Studio One.

1.Routing

1)You see this "Close" track and 3 channels in a mixer, dedicated to this instrument? It's Kontakt with 3 mics output routing. I renamed the first channel to "Close" because it's the first stereo output in Kontakt and I see this name in an Arrange window which confuses a little bit. And the more project builds up, the more confusing it becmoes. Another minor, but unpleasing thing.
I'm not sure why it confuses you. Of course you have an instrument track in the Arrangement, otherwise you wouldn't be able to send notes to Kontakt. If you want your track to have a different name than your channel and/or you don't want track and channel to be linked, you can set the channel to "None" in the inspector. Of course you don't see the channelstrip in the inspector anymore... well, if that's what you want :) Additionally, I think "Close" is not the right name because it does not say anything about your instrument. You would end up having 200 "Close" channels in the console.

2)Using this "Close" track example again, imagine that you have to add a number of different instruments in the same Kontakt
Why do you have to add a number of different instruments in the same Kontakt? I understand that if you want to layer them... but otherwise you could also have different instruments in different Kontakt instances. It's more flexible, easier to route in the mixer and easier to remove and add new instruments.

2)Using this "Close" track example again, imagine that you have to add a number of different instruments in the same Kontakt, each of them has at least 2 mics, but it's impossible to see them at the same time in an Arrange window(something you would want in big projects and if you aren't a big fan of classic mixing layout).
Why is it impossible? When I want all instrument outputs to be mirrored in the Arrangement, I just add some more instrument tracks and link them to the corresponding channel. You don't need to do this but you can.

The best you can do is to switch between those mics in an inspector. It would be soooo much easier if the audio channels were tied to certain midi channels. I don't know how they can implement that(maybe making automation tracks under midi channels more functional(like when you clicking on it, it shows you certaion audio channel) or something like that).
I'm not totally sure if know what MIDI channels are...? "Audio channels tied to MIDI channels" does not make any sense to me. An audio channel can be linked to an instrument track. You can have one instrument track but many instrument outputs. You can have many instrument tracks going to the same instrument (on different MIDI channels if you want) but only one instrument output. And you can have as many instrument tracks as you want and multiple output channels... then you can link them if you want to, but you don't need to.

Please correct me if I'm missing your point.
 

samphony

Senior Member
Logic has a Zoom selected track. Does S1 have anything like that? So I can have my tracks a smaller to medium size - when I select a track it zooms up to a size I determine. Select another track, that track zooms, the other track goes back to the smaller size. Very handy.
Also option + shift will temporarily change the arrow tool into a magnifying glass which behaves the same way logic does = drag to zoom in and click to undo zoom steps!!!

also assigning Z as the toggle zoom is easy. You can also range select and zoom to the range
 
@Faruh Al-Baghdadi Okay, it seems to me that you have not yet internalized the concept of working with multitimbral instruments with multiple outputs in Studio One.


I'm not sure why it confuses you. Of course you have an instrument track in the Arrangement, otherwise you wouldn't be able to send notes to Kontakt. If you want your track to have a different name than your channel and/or you don't want track and channel to be linked, you can set the channel to "None" in the inspector. Of course you don't see the channelstrip in the inspector anymore... well, if that's what you want :) Additionally, I think "Close" is not the right name because it does not say anything about your instrument. You would end up having 200 "Close" channels in the console.


Why do you have to add a number of different instruments in the same Kontakt? I understand that if you want to layer them... but otherwise you could also have different instruments in different Kontakt instances. It's more flexible, easier to route in the mixer and easier to remove and add new instruments.


Why is it impossible? When I want all instrument outputs to be mirrored in the Arrangement, I just add some more instrument tracks and link them to the corresponding channel. You don't need to do this but you can.


I'm not totally sure if know what MIDI channels are...? "Audio channels tied to MIDI channels" does not make any sense to me. An audio channel can be linked to an instrument track. You can have one instrument track but many instrument outputs. You can have many instrument tracks going to the same instrument (on different MIDI channels if you want) but only one instrument output. And you can have as many instrument tracks as you want and multiple output channels... then you can link them if you want to, but you don't need to.

Please correct me if I'm missing your point.
Like I wrote, I created this project just as an example. Ofcourse I'm not naming every instrument "Close, Amb and Tree" :D

Adding different instruments in Kontak is a pretty common practice. One instance of Kontakt takes about 400mb of RAM. Also, it is much easier to layer different instruments for one purpose(sound or SFX) in one instance of the plugin.

Just adding instrument tracks and adding audiochannels to them it is what creates the mess.
For example, I want to use Battery as a multi output instrument(audio outputs). There can be up to 32 mono or 16 stereo audio channels. I want to use all of them. It means I'll have to create 16 or 32 midi tracks every time I need those audio channels manualy(because now this feature doesn't work via Import Song Data: every time I import created layout with Battary, it adds the instrumet, the channels and the tracks, but all these tracks are imported with default 1/2 stereo pair instead of the routing I assigned to it in the template from which I import stuff). This stuff makes your suggestion unusable in most cases.
If PreSonus fix this thing(when routing keeps its state, that was created in a template(same goes to Sends btw)), we can live with that(it's still not perfect solution of multi-channel instruments, but it's pretty acceptable). But it would be much better if they work out something more sophisticated regarding multi channel instrumets alongside with fixing these ISD problems. Now we can't even save multi-output preset for Drum Machines and Samplers like Battery, XLN XO and so on. Every time we need MO instrument, we have to make it manualy. Not to cool, man, not cool 😏

Linking audio outputs with midi tracks was just a suggestion(as a new option). Besides we already can do this, but it feels like a halfway solution. Like I said, we have to do all this job manually and can't even recall it later. I meant that we could have something like "special audio output" or something like that. It's a new category for audio outputs, tied to certain instrument.

Generally, good organization and features for multi audio channel instruments is a very import part of any music and audio production environment. General templates(in which you start every project) is not the best alternative(at least, from samplers and drum machines perspective).


Summing it all up
I truly love Studio one, but it has blind spots like these problems with ISD(doesn't import sends and drops outputs of multichannel instruments to default St1/2) and a very primitive way of handling multi channel instruments(especially in regard of I/Os).
 

Lukas

Keyboardist / composer
Like I wrote, I created this project just as an example. Ofcourse I'm not naming every instrument "Close, Amb and Tree" :D
Ok ;)

Adding different instruments in Kontak is a pretty common practice. One instance of Kontakt takes about 400mb of RAM. Also, it is much easier to layer different instruments for one purpose(sound or SFX) in one instance of the plugin.
It was pretty common 15 years ago, in times when RAM was very limited and software workstations like HyperSonic, Bandstand, SampleTank were en vogue. Nowadays RAM is not a big issue anymore so everyone can have the workflow he prefers. In terms of CPU utilization, some companies (not sure if I recently read it on Native Instruments' or Spectrasonics' website) recommend using multiple plug-in instances if a multi core system is used. On my system, one instance of Kontakt takes about 120 MB of RAM. If 34 instances of Kontakt use 4 GB, I'm okay with that.

Just adding instrument tracks and adding audiochannels to them it is what creates the mess.
For example, I want to use Battery as a multi output instrument(audio outputs). There can be up to 32 mono or 16 stereo audio channels. I want to use all of them. It means I'll have to create 16 or 32 midi tracks every time I need those audio channels manualy(because now this feature doesn't work via Import Song Data: every time I import created layout with Battary, it adds the instrumet, the channels and the tracks, but all these tracks are imported with default 1/2 stereo pair instead of the routing I assigned to it in the template from which I import stuff).
Well... that's not really the purpose of arrangement. If you don't have any note data (or automation data) on a track, you don't need it actually. If you want to mix these audio outputs, that's what the mixer is for. The arrangement is for... you know. Sure, everybody has his workflow. That's why you can do this. But I see the Song Data Import does not provide what you need. Did you check if there's already a feature request for that so we can push that one?
 
Ok ;)


It was pretty common 15 years ago, in times when RAM was very limited and software workstations like HyperSonic, Bandstand, SampleTank were en vogue. Nowadays RAM is not a big issue anymore so everyone can have the workflow he prefers. In terms of CPU utilization, some companies (not sure if I recently read it on Native Instruments' or Spectrasonics' website) recommend using multiple plug-in instances if a multi core system is used. On my system, one instance of Kontakt takes about 120 MB of RAM. If 34 instances of Kontakt use 4 GB, I'm okay with that.


Well... that's not really the purpose of arrangement. If you don't have any note data (or automation data) on a track, you don't need it actually. If you want to mix these audio outputs, that's what the mixer is for. The arrangement is for... you know. Sure, everybody has his workflow. That's why you can do this. But I see the Song Data Import does not provide what you need. Did you check if there's already a feature request for that so we can push that one?

Fair point on RAM/CPU. But system's performance is not the main issue here. I understand the idea behind this classic separation and where it comes from. But S1 already has almost everything for "one window" layout. It just needs a few tweaks here and there. It's just when you're in the production process, such one window approach feels much more natural and keeps you in a flow better.

No, I didn't find any requests in this regard and I think it's pointless to make them because I'm sure they'll get lost in a million of other requests because it is not a major feature and they closed main feature request related to Import Song Data(well, technically they already implemented that, so why would they keep it opened...). But I know for sore they pay attention to forums😌

Btw, Lukas, don't you think that PreSonus have an advertising problem? Like why don't they advertise features like Import Song Data(especially the ability to just take whatever you need right from the browser). This is such a cool feature, but people often find out about by accidents and on forums 🙃.
 

Lukas

Keyboardist / composer
No, I didn't find any requests in this regard and I think it's pointless to make them
Not at all! I'd recommend you create one. It's not only about the number of votes... when PreSonus think about a certain feature, it's good for them to have more information about how users expect it to work.

Btw, Lukas, don't you think that PreSonus have an advertising problem? Like why don't they advertise features like Import Song Data(especially the ability to just take whatever you need right from the browser). This is such a cool feature, but people often find out about by accidents and on forums 🙃.
Hmmm, I don't think they have a general advertising problem... there are many people making YouTube tutorials. Gregor Beyerle did a great video on that, Marcus Huyskens did a great video... and PreSonus did a video on Song Data Import when Studio One 4 was released. I did a video (in German)... I think YouTube is a great place to explore Studio One features. But I agree... Song Data Import and especially the browser feature is worth making better known.