Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Studio One 5 : A Viable Option?

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.

:)
 
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.
 
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.

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.
Click to expand...


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.
 
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.

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.
Click to expand...

what do you mean by “performance”?
 
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.
 
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!
 
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!
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
They are based in Hamburg
 
mjsalam said:
what do you mean by “performance”?
Click to expand...

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)
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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 ....
 
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.
Click to expand...
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. :)
 
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.
Click to expand...


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.
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom