Studio One 5 : A Viable Option?

[Macrawn]

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!

People who using templates and not presets ihave no idea what they are missing. The macro system is fantastic. For some reason people think that because studio one doesn't have pages and pages of buried menus with obscure functionality that it isn't as complex. A lot has gone into making complex functions simple with buttons (macros) and drag and drop.

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.

I like Studio one a lot better but I wouldn't use it over Cubase for video. I have both and tried doing some video in Studio One and kept wondering why the video wasn't on a track... oh.. it doesn't have one. It's just clunky doing video work without a track, sort of the complete opposite of what I'd expect from Studio One. Though in every other aspect of making music especially mixing, I prefer Studio One by a large margin.

 

[ridgero]

It’s strange, but I seriously wanted to switch to Logic Pro and keep coming back to Studio One and Cubase. The workflow of both programs just amazingly great, especially the automation view of Studio One.

 

[Gary Williamson]

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.

I can see that , DP has a video track, it just hasn’t been a problem for me, yet.

 

[samphony]

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.

I too think a multiple video track workflow should be added. I mean Studio One should offer at least 2 or even more video thumbnail tracks like nuendo/ Pro Tools.

 

[jonathanwright]

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 ....

Yes, you can render any of their inbuilt Note FX (MIDI FX) to MIDI. Very handy.

 

[StefanoM]

I too think a multiple video track workflow should be added. I mean Studio One should offer at least 2 or even more video thumbnail tracks like nuendo/ Pro Tools.

I Agree with you.

Having multiple Video Track ( as in Nuendo or ProTools Ultimate) is really useful if you are working in an audio post-production workflow.

A lot of fo time the client sends a different version of Video, with different editing.. so is really useful in this scenario having 2 video tracks at the same times to compare the versions, and maybe fix some synch issue.

I hope Presonus will add this feature.

 

[rardier]

i am a cubase user since cubase sx3 and now cubase 11 pro,for composing/recording i ve just switch to studio one v5.2 the transition was easy, to be honest i prefer the "visual" of cubase BUT the workflow for my type of composing is just better in studio one i can run more virtual instrument more polyphony, no audio engine interruption when adding a new virtual instrument , (i'm using atom sq), for my need i found midi editing quite similar between both but the macro on S5 are really helpful (and easier to use and understand) , right now i just found only two three quirks (some command related to automation cannot be executed with shortcut nor midi , some options arent accessible with macro - for example macro knob view in channel editor, mouse hover the meter to see the digital value of a peak). But that's said in mixing mode i'll keep cubase (the new delay, the new frequency dynamic eq, vari audio, peak value...). Honestly i could work only with studio one or only with cubase, i wish there was a single daw with all the strengh of live, studio one and cubase with a not expensive dedicated hardware.