Studio One 2.6.2 - with new pay add-ons

[LawrenceF]

I do have to say, Reaper is certainly onto something with their extension model, even if it's all free there the model still makes perfect sense. And of course, nobody is actually prevented from making commercial Reaper extensions.

It would be a great world indeed if one could essentially "Build your own Cubase" starting with a base model of Essentials or whatever. To gradually just pay to "turn on" the things you want and nothing else. Although, that also might be a bit of a coding nightmare for Steinberg, trying to make the codebase that modular.

Anyway, buying all of it piecemeal, all of the individual parts that eventually get you to the full Cubase, to get everything it does, would have to likely be priced 15-25% more (collectively, the parts) than just buying a full Cubase license, or there would be no incentive for them to do that.

How f'ing cool would that be? To go to the online store, see Cubase for $199, and have a long list of checkboxes for the things you do and do not want working in it, and only buy those things, only have that in your version?

[fese]

Regarding the hypothetical thinking of LawrenceF:
I highly support the idea to strip the hosts of their "additional content" again, and focus on the very basics. If Cubase - for example - would drop Halion One, the sample content and what else, but keeps the Chord Track, the MIDI instruments (at least the beat designer, though I wrote a couple of devs to maybe create something similar) and the FX plugins (most of them anyway). Then sell Cubase for 399EUR instead of 599EUR. Then call this new version Pro, while the "Instrument and Sample Enhanced" version could be called "Pro Extended"... well then a lot of people would actually be more happy towards interim upgrade fees and the regular upgrade fees. Then Cubase Artist could turn into LE/AI what it is currently (sans the 4 insert limitation), and "Studio" is the entry level.

YES please! I totally support that. Maybe even three version would be enough. Or, if they were really convinced of the quality of their add on instruments and content, they could just sell it as common VSTs or sound ware for everyone.
I'll consider S1 if they'd massively pimp the MIDI features (I love the Cubase logical editor!), add a sample editor, input gain is important, too, and maybe spice up the slightly too grey and boring GUI a little bit - provided that they don't go Cubase 7...

[Compyfox]

How f'ing cool would that be? To go to the online store, see Cubase for $199, and have a long list of checkboxes for the things you do and do not want working in it, and only buy those things, only have that in your version?

This would only work, if a certain price isn't exceeded.

Personally I think, 399 for a host is more than enough, with a reasonable upgrade fee - but not interim payments. Studio One is going towards the right direction in this case. Steinberg on the other hand let themselves being payed "royally" and anually. Same with AVID.

For what actually? The MOTIF sets? You still have to pay extra for PADshop Pro, Halion Symphonic and Halion full version. So why bundle everything else other than "demoing" them. With one exception, these tools work OUTSIDE of Steinberg Cubase/Nuendo.

Still, IMO not a good solution, and definitely not worth the high money (other than cutting off semi pro's). Especially if you barely use these tools (I certainly don't, as I have enough third party plugins - so even more voice to "customizing").

All we can do is wait and hope, that things improve in 2014. For all developers.

[SODDI]

I would add my vote for a completely stripped-down DAW, without any plug-ins of any sort, as long as it was offered at a substantially lower price. I don't need their instruments - I've got my own. And if I want a demo I'll ask for it. In many ways, the majority of the FX plug-ins native to the DAW I have are of lesser quality and utility than those I could purchase on the open market. The MIDI plug-ins are not even a case of the baby/bathwater thing.

[Weasel-Boy]

Compyfox wrote:

Especially considering that half of the Presonus coders once worked for Steinberg and created Cubase SX. (at least according to legend)

Not legend. True. That would be Wolfgang Kundrus you're talking about. Nuendo, Cubase SX and particularly the Nuendo audio engine (still used in Cubase today) were the highlights.

[kelldammit]

Interestingly, steinberg took a more modular approach to nuendo. Apparently these days, it ships without the content CREATION features. They're now a paid add-on.

Were S1 modular, I'd probably opt for the full pro version anyway, perhaps without the stock plugs or instruments? Not really a huge issue for me, but it would be cool to cherry pick the features you wanted, were you operating on a lower tier of the product line. The mp3 addon for artist seems to point in this direction.

Presonus has sort've dabbled a couple of times in similar turf with 3rd parties as promotional things...nuklear automatically authorizes as the solo version in s1, and of course the softtube extension. The way they did it with nuklear would work pretty well for lawrence's idea, so long as the limitations weren't too severe, otherwise, it'd be pretty useless, and aggravating..."just a teaser to force you to buy". i think they hit the balance right with nuklear solo. it's probably harder to do that with an eq, though...perhaps the freebie's limitation could be to remove a feature like mid/side, paired with a nice discount to the full version?

From what i could see in my user account, it looks like these are more like pieces of software authorized via your user account in the same way studio one itself is? Maybe future versions will bring stuff like being able to add scoring (via notion) via this route.
In any case, hopefully, the expansions are downloadable installers or files (like the extensions are), and don't rely on cloud-based "we'll install it when you connect" like IK's custom shop. it sort of makes me itch to pay for something and not get an installer

[VariKusBrainZ]

But the addons feature was already there only the addons are part of the product, you just dont have to download / install them

[lfm]

I don't get this - is it just addons for plugins - what is the purpose of that as proprietary format? Is it a special format like Sonar ProChannel, to fit in nicely in gui?

The purpose of the extension system is for adding optional functionality. The Macro Toolbar, Soundcloud, Nimbit, the Softtube plugin, the Fat Channel audio plugin, etc, etc, etc, all the way through the Soundset Builder, are all extensions. So now (I suppose) it has been updated to also manage "commercial" extensions... which (given the prevalence for sharing) probably require some kind of protection.

Had hoped for something like Cockos SWS extensions or something - to make custom toolbars and other things. That I would have been prepared to pay for.

The only difference between the two systems is that there is no public API for the S1 Extension system, so we cannot build our own extensions.

Otherwise, much the same thing really. I mean, you can't use SWS Extensions in any other host but Reaper like you can't use S1's extensions in Reaper or Cubase.

Thanks.

But paying for extenstion that can be made as any VST plugin effect/synth - why should you?
Unless it's something that really extend functionality and what cannot be done in ordinary plugins - and which you could not use in any host.

No wow-factor at all - just Que?

I miss ability to make my own toolbar sets in S1 - so that I was willing to pay extra for if it existed.

[Skorpius]

Steinberg on the other hand asks for wild prices every year and forces you to get these tools (even if you will never use them), while ultimately abandonning earlier versions and their customer base.

Which is one of the various reasons why I'm finally leaving Cubase for good - in favor of Studio One. I don't want to have to pay for Dance- and Techno-oriented add-ons like the EDM Toolbox and other stuff which I'll never use in my whole life.

The new strategy of Presonus to offer optional add-ons better is sooo much more customer-oriented - and much wiser in terms of marketing as well.

So yes - Presonus doesn't milk their customers and rather learns from other developer's mistakes. Like it or not.

I most certainly like it. Thank you, Presonus, for giving us such a great, innovative and user-friendly DAW.

[LawrenceF]

But paying for extenstion that can be made as any VST plugin effect/synth - why should you?
Unless it's something that really extend functionality and what cannot be done in ordinary plugins - and which you could not use in any host.

No wow-factor at all - just Que?

I hear you. Like I said earlier, I can only think of one good reason to ever do that for a plugin that also exists as a universal VST or AU, to save money, because it might cost a good bit less that way. Other than that, I doubt anyone would ever do that.

That would be the only real incentive, to save money by buying a specific "single product limited" version... and getting some credit for that in an upgrade path later if you decide to buy the unrestricted plug.

I miss ability to make my own toolbar sets in S1 - so that I was willing to pay extra for if it existed.

You can do that now with the macro toolbar obviously, but there's only one toolbar, not multiple toolbars like Reaper, and swapping out different configs (buttons, macros) on the one toolbar isn't all that user friendly. I coded a little win app for that, an app that saves and loads different configs, because I too wanted to do that, have different toolbars and macros up front there for editing, mixing, etc.

My current toolbar is pretty filled up with most of the functions I regularly use for audio or midi. You can see it on the link below. I also edited the toolbar xml skin to get rid of the group headers.

http://theaudiocave.com/tips

I don't have super high resolution monitors but people who do would be able to squeeze in more functions and buttons on the toolbar than I did there.

[hibidy]

That just makes me realize how little I actually know with S1. There are times I think I know a fair amount, then I see I've not even scratched the surface.

[Compyfox]

Same here with all other hosts as well.

I mean... I can use the rudimentary stuff, controls, automation, hotkeys... but in-depth... even though I'm using Cubase since 1995 - I still have to learn from scratch every time a new features is sneaking into a host.

[hibidy]

I just feel like as much time as I've put into this, I should know everything

[LawrenceF]

Yeah. Once you to decide to use a kind of "new" (as in 'feature limited', relatively speaking) host, you do kinda have to dig all the way in to make the most of it.

At the least when I come across something that can't be done, I know with relative certainty that it actually can't be done, and I'm maybe not griping unnecessarily about it.

The biggest issue with complex macros in S1 is no drag and drop re-positioning of action steps. With long macros that becomes a major headache... clicking "up" or "down" a ton of times to move action steps around. The second biggest is no "Run" button in the editor, having to close it and run it to test.

I hope it's not fully cooked yet and they improve some of that.

Anyway, I suspect some hardcore Bitwig users will probably be pushing it's scripting to it limits to make up for some 1.0 shortcomings in whatever ways that may be possible.

[tapper mike]

Dammit, I just posted a long reply and it vanished into thin air.