Why did you leave Studio One?

[dartfordyes]

because i only have the artist version which is very good but , man the ableton colours look so much better i haven’t decided yet

[AdvancedFollower]

It's true that many businesses love subscriptions like Office 365 and Adobe because it lets them optimize costs by adding and removing licenses when they hire or let go of employees. The subscriptions also includes premium support, which most companies would have paid for anyway. In the past it was common for companies to end up with more licenses than they needed, which was a waste of money, or too few licenses, which could incur heavy fines. It also wasn't uncommon for larger companies to have an entire department dedicated to managing licenses.

However DAWs are a bit different. A studio typically doesn't have a cubicle farm where 250 office drones slave away on their own copy of Pro Tools. It's usually just a handful of computers, even in a large studio. Large studios also probably pay a recurring fee for priority support, so they're essentially already paying a subscription. The "subscriptions" DAW companies promote towards consumers is simply meant to extract a more steady stream of money from them. They aren't targeting the large studios with this marketing, and there are no additional "services" in this form of "software as a service". It's just a different way to pay (more) for the license.

[eerie_audio]

The subscription models for software like DAWs and Plug-ins will eventually hit a roadblock with over saturation and price cutting to stay competitive. Just like the streaming services are finding out now after losing billions of dollars throwing their hat into the ring.

The consumer and customer can only afford a certain amount of subscriptions, and when the services start crossing over and offering pretty much the same content and features it becomes a dog eat dog scenario, which doesn't work for a corporate profit generating model for shareholder.

It's also a lot to ask the older generations to start adopting subscriptions when they are perfectly content with using their perpetual version for many years.

Expect to see a lot more buyouts and investors, just like Slate the king of subscriptions has done.

[Hallo Spaceboy]

For my part, it's settled.

I switched to Cubase Pro 13 and pure joy.

Once properly configured and everything updated, it works perfectly.

A daw remains a personal choice and one where you feel good, given the time you spend there.

Before, I only wanted Studio One and now, I have delved into Cubase Pro 13 and even if far from being perfect, it gives me better satisfaction for my use and responds more to my needs and expectations.

I suppose the grass is always greener on the other side. I've been considering making the switch to Studio One Pro for a while now but I have so many projects in Cubase Pro that it would be a nightmare to make the switch unless I basically abandoned over 100 nearly completed songs (or simply made peace with the fact that I would have to work in two different DAWs for the rest of my days).

My problem with Cubase is that it includes WAY too much legacy bloat and can't seem to commit to consistent design patterns. It's always a hoot to open a dialog window, for instance, in Cubase Pro (even the latest version 13) and stare 1989 in the face. It's gotten better, but Cubase Pro almost needs a complete rewrite, IMO. There are too many features that have just been tacked on over the years. It's like the Microsoft Word of DAWs.

Because Studio One is more recent, it doesn't have to contend with 30+ years of outdated features that have been kept along for the ride to maintain backward compatibility.

At the end of the day, Cubase certainly gets the job done which is why I continue to somewhat begrudgingly use it.

[as1988]

For my part, it's settled.

I switched to Cubase Pro 13 and pure joy.

Once properly configured and everything updated, it works perfectly.

A daw remains a personal choice and one where you feel good, given the time you spend there.

Before, I only wanted Studio One and now, I have delved into Cubase Pro 13 and even if far from being perfect, it gives me better satisfaction for my use and responds more to my needs and expectations.

Have either of you had any experience with Ableton Live 11? Or a previous version? How does it stack up to Cubase or S1?

[Trancer]

No, the grass is not greener elsewhere, quite the contrary.

the choice of a daw is really a personal choice, depending on what you expect from its workflow, ergonomics, way of working, organization, etc...

Studio One for my part, is moving away from my expectations, on the other hand Cubase, even if not easy given the number of years of its creation, is slowly but surely returning to the position of my preferences, hence my choice.

Cubase is on the right path, even if it will still take a long time to achieve optimal results, but most importantly it is progressing.

I used Live 11 Suite, it was my main DAW.

For my part, always had a CPU load that was way too high, despite all the settings and optimization required.

For some inexplicable reason, after the Windows 11 update, it was magical for Cubase Pro 13.

Different and much better CPU management.

Coming back to live 11, beyond the concern of the CPU load, I realized that my way of composing and organizing myself was more favorable on a classic DAW.

Why I chose Cubase Pro 13.

What is really missing, however, is a dedicated controller like the CC 121.

That's really a concern for me.

There is the faderport v2, the x touch one, ssl uf1, but you have to add scripts and even if these are excellent and a big thank you to the developers of these scripts, I prefer a dedicated controller and native functional.

Even scripts do not always give access to all the functions, even if once again they are of immense help for operation.

All this to say that I am very happy with my choice for my daw.

If I needed a clip launcher, I would without a doubt take Waveform Pro 13, very sufficient for my use and what's more, version 13 seems to be much more stable and also a nice development.

Congratulations to the developers for a superb job.

Live cannot be compared with Cubase, Studio One, not really the same operating philosophy.

Starting with the clip launcher function.

The linear part of Live not yet at the level of Cubase, Studio One, personal opinion of course.

[jamcat]

I've been considering making the switch to Studio One Pro for a while now but I have so many projects in Cubase Pro that it would be a nightmare to make the switch unless I basically abandoned over 100 nearly completed songs (or simply made peace with the fact that I would have to work in two different DAWs for the rest of my days).

I ported everything over from Cubase 5 to Studio One 1, 15 years ago, though it wasn't anywhere near 100 song. I just did it one song at a time, when I wanted to work on one. It's not too bad, unless you have a lot of automation. It's also a good way to weed out songs that aren't worth the effort. Or you could just finish them, then you don't have to port them... nah.

[Hallo Spaceboy]

Have either of you had any experience with Ableton Live 11? Or a previous version? How does it stack up to Cubase or S1?

Live has an almost completely different workflow from a more traditional linear DAW like Cubase or Studio One. Of course, you don't have to use any of the "clip launching" features of Live. But then I would ask, "What's the point?" Live's linear workflow is inferior to that of Cubase and Studio One in almost every respect, IMO.

I guess I just don't see the value in "jamming" with clips to work out your song arrangement. Is it really that hard to figure out the structure of your song in your head? Of course I'm not denying that interacting with clips in this fashion can be fun and perhaps even inspiring. But at the end of the day I'd like to think of myself as a thoughtful (and even methodical) songwriter and not an improviser.

Plus, I don't use audio loops (drum or instrument) at all. I program my own drum parts and if I want a guitar or other instrument in my song I'll just hire someone to come in and play. I've even hired student string players to lay down string parts.

So if you are like me, it's not worth putting up with Live's deficiencies for features I will never use. I'm just glad that Steinberg and Presonus have so far resisted the misguided (in my opinion) calls to add a clip launcher to their respective DAWs. As I mentioned in a previous post, Cubase is already bloated enough for my tastes.

[jamcat]

I find Studio One's scratchpad+arranger track+sync mode to be a really good way to work out song arrangements. Clip launchers seem like a dumber version of that.

This video does a great job of demonstrating it. Just try not to get distracted by Gregor's mustache.
https://youtu.be/56f8HzMiRJQ

[Hallo Spaceboy]

This video does a great job of demonstrating it. Just try not to get distracted by Gregor's mustache.

I can't decide which is more captivating. His mustache or the Trump-style "comb over"? LOL.

[dellboy]

I find Studio One's scratchpad+arranger track+sync mode to be a really good way to work out song arrangements. Clip launchers seem like a dumber version of that.

This video does a great job of demonstrating it. Just try not to get distracted by Gregor's mustache.
https://youtu.be/56f8HzMiRJQ

Thanks for posting the video,it was well worth the watch. I must admit that I have never used the scratch pad,and never knew what its purpose was. "Sync mode" makes it in some ways similar to "scene mode" in the Live session view.

[dellboy]

Is it really that hard to figure out the structure of your song in your head?

A song has lyrics and a structure, and is something I would compose using a notepad and pen while accompanying myself with guitar or piano.

When I have fun with a clip view\launcher It will normally be to mess around with synths, making an electonic tune without lyrics, and palyed out in real time. Occasionaly, happy accidents can happen and go on to form part of a structured song. But its main purpose for myself is just fun.

For practical purposes its exactly the same as using the linear mode of Studio One, but without having to copy and paste the recorded bars out using the duplicate function (D). In Live I just hit record and once it has looped out to as many bars as I need I hit stop. Job done, then onto the next track.

[BONES]

I find Studio One's scratchpad+arranger track+sync mode to be a really good way to work out song arrangements. Clip launchers seem like a dumber version of that.

This video does a great job of demonstrating it. Just try not to get distracted by Gregor's mustache.
https://youtu.be/56f8HzMiRJQ

I find that a ridiculously complicated way of doing something simple. First he goes to the trouble of setting up an Arranger track, which is tedious. Then he goes through the rigmarole of saving a new version. Then he has to move everything to a scratchpad, which compresses it to half the width of the screen. After he's done all of that, he can finally start to do some actual work on the arrangement. Then, when/if he's happy, he has to move it out of the scratchpad and replace the main arrangement with the new one. It's stupid.

All you need to do is press CTRL+S to save a version you're happy with, then work on the new arrangement and, when you've got something else you are happy with, save it as a new version. If it doesn't work out, just revert the file to the last saved version and try again. It couldn't be simpler but people seem to enjoy making their lives far more complicated than they need to be, just because they can.

I tried out scratch pads when I first moved over to Studio One but I never really saw any advantage to them.

[frankpain]

Because I don't want to look at blue meters..

[Hallo Spaceboy]

Because I don't want to look at blue meters..

Ha ha. So true. No matter how hard I try, I can't seem to make Studio One Pro (v6.6) look as nice as other DAWs. But the workflow is mostly to die for.