Cubase or StudioOne?

[flugel45]

for midi composers
either Cubase or Reaper
forget Studio One, even v3 is still very lacking in midi editing/routing/filters

I know plenty of midi composers who do just fine with Studio One.

Better to say, if you're a power-midi-composer who needs advanced midi functionality, you will likely find Studio One lacking.

That being said, I agree with the others who say there is no substitute for trying the demos and deciding for yourself.

[LawrenceF]

I'm neutral on the subject actually.

When I was on Cubase 5 I had very specific annoyances that made me start looking at other products. There was really nothing about Cubase other than mostly the windowing that annoyed me. It ran fine. When I started looking around I tried Reaper and mixed a few things in it and it's consolidated UI kinda made how I felt about Cubase's MDI windowing even worse... so I kept looking.

Tried Logic on my MacBook. It seemed ok but I wasn't ready to invest in a desktop Mac and I'm Win guy for the most part. Studio One showed up so I tried it and got on board, used them both, Cubase and Studio One for about 18 months. [<-- Edit: Obviously, S1 1.x had a good bit of growing up to do back then, it wasn't quite ready for prime time yet]

I eventually transitioned over fully. That Studio One opens Steinberg Track Archive xml directly made it easier.

If Steinberg had done some of the things they did through v7-8-9, I might have never stopped using it but I'm not the type to jump DAW's every five minutes so once I moved to Studio One there was no real reason for me to get back on the Steinberg train.

I could use either one without any issue but I just don't jump around like that so, I'm a Studio One user.

On the direct comparison front there are two unarguable truths, imo anyway. Cubase is obviously the more powerful midi sequencer and Studio One clearly has the better UI design for workflow.

[recursive one]

for midi composers
either Cubase or Reaper
forget Studio One, even v3 is still very lacking in midi editing/routing/filters

I know plenty of midi composers who do just fine with Studio One.

Not sure if the word "composing" appies to what I do (psytrance) but I work with MIDI exclusively and don't feel that S1 is lacking anything.

[igoramos]

I have both. I use Cubase cause of the way it handles Note Expression since I own a Roli Seaboard. I like Cubase quite a lot, but I like Studio One overall even more. There is just something that feels more integrated with Studio One and better considered functionality than Cubase to me. I guess overall the workflow, whatever that is, is actually more robust in Studio One. Maybe cause it was conceived later in time and feels less kludgy. Studio One seems peppier and intuitive, Cubase seems like cobbled chunks that are bolted together solidly. Cubase for me is hard to understand. Constantly looking up stuff online or in the manual. I rarely use the Studio One manual on the other hand. Might just be the way my brain works.

[LawrenceF]

I guess overall the workflow, whatever that is

It's the UI processes, doing A, B, C. It's just all more consolidated and connected there. It's not so much that it does things Cubase doesn't allow doing (where they share common features), it's more that in those cases the design and UI approach in Studio One is just much more fully thought through.

That's not a knock on Steinberg. That's really just the predictable result of doing a "mulligan", where when you design a brand new product you can look at everything else and improve UI processes right off the bat.

I haven't really used any DAW where things are quite as connected and immediately available on the main work surface as with Studio One. I rarely if ever have to open a secondary window or dialog window or a main menu for anything... which translates to what people call "workflow" I guess. Coincidentally, that's one of the very few gripes I have with Reaper, that you have to go to a "second level" or popup window so often to get to some things... and it doesn't really give a lot of (or enough) status feedback of some things on the main work surface.

One random example of that is with macros. Overall, Cubase gets the nod for power with it's macros because the Logical Editor is conditional and can be linked with it's macros, which gives it the win in that comparison overall for sheer power. But the design and layout and user interaction method of the macro system in Studio One is a much, much better design.

That was their saving grace at 1.0 tbh, workflow, design, because that early on it didn't have much else to offer really feature wise.

[CTStump]

Studio One,
Because it works for me.

That said, so what, don't mean it will work for you.

I think threads like these tend to keep arguments and debates, hates, dislikes and peevs going rather than solving the OP's choice of which DAW to settle on. Get a demo and an elicenser key and find out for yer self.

I stopped updating at V 2.6.5 by the way.

[LawrenceF]

Get a demo and an elicenser key and find out for yer self.

Yep. We can (and do) say that all day every day but it never stops the threads or questions.

It's the Interwebz. If there's not a "What thing should I buy?" thread question every five minutes it's broken.

[dzilizzi]

Maybe before you ask opinions you should share what you are looking for in a DAW. Makes it easier for people to give you a good response.

I have gotten both recently, but I do use Cubase, whereas every time I open S1, I just don't even feeling like dealing with it. If I'm going to use a DAW that doesn't help me get started, I might as well stick with ProTools. The big plus for me with Cubase is the chord track. I do a lot of midi and using the chord track keeps everything in the same key/chord. Throw in some chords, drag them to the midi, add some adjustments and I'm on my way.

Other than that, Cubase can be very difficult to work with until you learn it. It has a strange workflow compared to other DAWs I've used. For example, I have to "bus" the mic in to record audio. I also can't just click on the midi editor to add midi notes to an instrument without "activating" the area first. And don't try to edit midi that isn't in the highlighted area. Won't let you. And the terms are also not consistent with other DAWs, probably because they invented the term VST, which they use on things I don't associate with VST.

Watch some YouTube videos and then demo them. I think you might be limited in demoing Cubase, unless you already have an elicenser. Not sure about Studio 1

[recursive one]

I stopped updating at V 2.6.5 by the way.

Same here because

it works for me.

[LawrenceF]

Yeah, I've come across a few people still on v2. Not all that unusual.

For (probably) most, it's hard to pass up some of the v3 features like extended fx chains and VCA's, but I still agree, if you don't need or don't see any practical value in any of that stuff, there's no real point in spending money on it.

[koolkeys]

I personally love both for different reasons. Cubase is a powerhouse, and does some things that no other host can do. When it comes down to pure features, there is no comparison between Cubase and Studio One.

On the other hand, Studio One has the better workflow, IMO. Things are easier to do in it (for the most part).

I used Cubase a few years ago and switched away from it for the same reasons that LawrenceF did, because of the windowing and some other annoyances. I switched to Studio One because it gave me the workflow I always wished I had in other hosts. But I always held Cubase in high regard with hopes they would address the issues I had. And as of version 9, they have literally addressed every issue I previously had that made me switch away. As of Cubase 8.5, I am now back with Cubase as my "main" host.

However, I still use Studio One quite a lot because I do a lot of sketching and testing in it, and I love the project mastering workflow. So yeah, I use both, and love both.

I personally feel like the Cubase interface is very well integrated and the program overall is quite cohesive. Maybe not quite as much as Studio One in some areas, but it checks all the main boxes. I think when you consider the sheer power included in Cubase, it is astounding how they have kept the interface clean. Studio One actually took a small step back in V3 because things were a little TOO cohesive. The GUI in general is great, but when using a lot of the functions it gets quite messy. But that is a minor issue that can be cleaned up pretty quickly.

Honestly, if you can't make music in one or the other, it certainly isn't the fault of Cubase or Studio One. With both you are getting a well thought out interface and workflow, and unique features in both. Cubase will bring you more power and features, but Studio One will be much easier to pick up and go with. You really need to try the demos and see which one gels with you. Both are great, both have strengths and weaknesses, but both are completely capable of doing everything most people will need in a host.

Yeah, not a very decisive answer, but as they are my two "big" hosts I use the most regularly, I think you will be happy with either. One note of course is that Cubase requires the dongle while Studio One doesn't. For me that isn't an issue, but for some people it is.

Brent

[Kalamata Kid]

Cubase would be my first choice for my Main DAW.
I do not think I can have a one and only DAW.

Cubase no ARA for Melodyne.
No more support for 32 bit plugins
No Patcher or Mutli-instruments but yes I can use Bidule

Yes SI is a bit easier to learn but Cubase is not that far off considering the larger feature set.
Cubase has the best feature set!!! unfortunately for me it is missing one important feature so I will not use it. Yes I was looking forward to Cubase 9 release but unfortunate my FR was not adopted.

So my current options are:
Sonar Platinum has every feature I want but am not crazy about the Workflow. Has ARA.
Wait for FL studio 13 to be release but V12 is fine. But V13 may just dot it. Very flexible!
Studio One is a strong contender. No 32 bit plugins. But has ARA
Hollyhock 3. Some wishful thinking that it could possibly be a full DAW. But dang it is Multi-touch supreme.
Reaper is not my favorite choice right now but but is a solid possibility. Very efficient!
Bitwig 2 may be too far away to even consider.
Samplitude has ARA. Know very little about it.
Tracktion has ARA but do not like the workflow
Mulab I no longer consider
Mixrcarft is for loops and EDM so might as well use FL studio which is more flexible.

I am now in my Photoshop art mode but early next year I will have to choose a DAW.
Cubase now out of the picture Studio One is a strong candidate.

[LawrenceF]

Well said Brent.

Cubase, being what it is feature wise, more easily caters to a wider demographic because it can more easily handle them all... the wide range of EDM producers and what are varying preferences there, the linear conventional small band audio people, the video score producing people, the studio business people, and just about anything else. It took well over 15-20 years to really get there, and they've been there for awhile. That kind of depth and diversity takes time,

Feature wise it's diverse enough to cater well enough to any musical demographic or musical job really.

Studio One ... not so much for what should be clearly obvious reasons.

It's still kinda like Bitwig, just not as much. In other words, it's still (feature and version wise) in that area where unless you happen to fall right into it's core strengths or whatever, you kinda have to manage your expectations, and go in knowing that it's not Cubase, or Logic 10, or DP, feature wise, and accept that. If you need that or are accustomed to having that, that compromise is (imo) kinda part of the deal, you know that going in, or at least should.

It won't always be that way, but it will be for a bit longer, a few more major versions at a minimum.

The car analogy is that Cubase is a Hummer and Studio One maybe just became a Jeep in v3. If you - really - need a Hummer to get up those hills, the Jeep ain't gonna get you there. Or it will, but it might take more effort.

If you view it objectively it's a minor miracle that v3 S1 or v5 Reaper would even legitimately be in the same conversation with Cubase or some others who had pretty big head starts.

[Kalamata Kid]

For me the best combo is using FL Studio as a VSTi in Cubase or Studio One.
If only one can copy and paste or drag and drop audio and midi files between FLS Studio and Cubase or Studio One. If the issues of using hot keys has been resolved that would be great.

[woggle]

Cubase would be my first choice for my Main DAW.
I do not think I can have a one and only DAW.

Cubase no ARA for Melodyne.
No more support for 32 bit plugins
No Patcher or Mutli-instruments but yes I can use Bidule

Yes SI is a bit easier to learn but Cubase is not that far off considering the larger feature set.
Cubase has the best feature set!!! unfortunately for me it is missing one important feature so I will not use it. Yes I was looking forward to Cubase 9 release but unfortunate my FR was not adopted.

So my current options are:
Sonar Platinum has every feature I want but am not crazy about the Workflow. Has ARA.
Wait for FL studio 13 to be release but V12 is fine. But V13 may just dot it. Very flexible!
Studio One is a strong contender. No 32 bit plugins. But has ARA
Hollyhock 2. Some wishful thinking that it could possibly be a full DAW. But dang it is Multi-touch supreme.
Reaper is not my favorite choice right now but but is a solid possibility. Very efficient!
Bitwig 2 may be too far away to even consider.
Samplitude has ARA. Know very little about it.
Tracktion has ARA but do not like the workflow
Mulab I no longer consider
Mixrcarft is for loops and EDM so might as well use FL studio which is more flexible.

I am now in my Photoshop art mode but early next year I will have to choose a DAW.
Cubase now out of the picture Studio One is a strong candidate.

I'm also shopping for something different (to Reaper in my case). Has to work for sound to video on Windows, which cuts out Cubase, Studio One and Tracktion. From your list I recommend Samplitude as worth a demo - it is very solid and flexible - at least as far as I can tell from demo-ing it. I am quite likely to buy it. I also like Sonar but you can't sell it / transfer license which is not attractive, but still very purchasable and relatively cheap.