What is missing from Cubase 4

[kritikon]

I keep hearing about the wonderful Logic automation, but going on that (admittedly short) insight...I don't see why Cubase's is considered inferior. It can be copied and pasted very easily (I do it all the time even in SX2), each parameter has its own lane, every parameter can be accessed, you can draw curves etc. The only thing I see as missing is the ability to set automation for several tracks at once with the same lane...but it may be that SX does it, but I just don't know how to yet.
All those modes are there in Cubase.
Midi Learn? I don't use it nowadays TBH, so I couldn't swear it's there in SX - it certainly used to be in VST5.1 when I used it more frequently for things like controlling sysex parameters via midi.

So it looks a bit different in Cubase. Why does that necessarily make it inferior?
Personally I really like the way automation is set up in SX. It just seems very natural and obvious to me. There doesn't seem to be anything missing that I would need to use. Apart maybe from an ability to NOT have automation automatically copied along with a part if you copy the part. But that's a pathetically minor thing.

[bduffy]

That's pretty close to Cubase, but that does sound a couple notches more advanced, I will concede.

I'd give it all up for a good sample editor

There is no good sample editor?

not compared to Cubase no.. it got stuck in the ice ages
it's very basic

I don't fancy spending money on something like wavelab and audacity doesn't work with my interface and is buggy on intel mac (for me it is anyway) so a good editor would mean a lot to me

Ah! I see. Then perhaps Cubase 4 is worth checking out!

[bagginz]

O.k, I did the "What Steinberg got right thread"

Now for what's missing in Cubase 4?

1. Group channel limitation is still there.

2. No Batch export feature.

3. Cannot customize background fully (no jpeg and limited colour selection) I actually would be happy just to make the project workspace a lot darker...

4. No flexible bussing, sidechaining etc. (though apparently this is being addressed with the advent of VST3)

5. No mute groupings

6. Clip automation ( Volume envelopes )still has no db value readout and doesn't include panning.

7. Freeze is still very basic and inflexible.


Overall though I will say that, assuming that it is stable, (and personally I am definitely *not* going to assume before I upgrade...) then Steinberg have done an excellent job with Cubase 4, putting in some excelllent and very useful new features.

Judging on how they've streamlined the UI they've apparently been listening to the consensus of user requests.

Cheers,
Bill

[soulkisser]

64-bit sound engine..

I was expecting it in this release..

[kuniklo]

So it looks a bit different in Cubase. Why does that necessarily make it inferior?
Personally I really like the way automation is set up in SX. It just seems very natural and obvious to me. There doesn't seem to be anything missing that I would need to use. Apart maybe from an ability to NOT have automation automatically copied along with a part if you copy the part. But that's a pathetically minor thing.

VST automation in Cubase is a joke. It's all stuffed up in separate lanes in the "VST Folder" and only moves around with corresponding midi regions IF YOU HAVE THE VST FOLDER OPEN at the time. Midi automation is great in Cubase but VST automation is a shambles. Sounds like the new instrument tracks in 4 might fix this though.

[Compyfox]

Never mind to add that they forget A1 (cause of license issues - yeah right!) but still include those crappy VB-1 and LM-7 VSTi that weren't even updated since Cubase VST3.7 (except the GUI).


And yeah, it definitely needs MORE COWBELL!

[stag]

A1 not there? I don't what i'm laughing about but it shure beats crying.

[Compyfox]

Yeah, I asked why and I never got a response except "look into the knowledge base", and there is something like "license issues".

So I asked "well the Filters are from Waldorf... Steinberg worked with Waldorf and created the PPG Wave, Attack and DPole, then later the A1 was included. While Waldorf was gone, A1 was bundled with SX1 to SX3, now Waldorf is back and you say it's a license issue for not selling it?"

Personally I think it's a lame excuse for removing a synth, that barely anybody used cause it was "underrated". It's like TV shows - nobody likes you, you move it out of the program. Then again... why is VB-1 and LM-7 still in there, if there's Virtual Bassist V2 and Virtual Drummer V3 or Kontakt stuff?


This just doesn't make sense. And if I look at it - if I get Cubase 4 now and still want to continue using A1, I need to keep SX3 which makes the A1 a very... very expensive synthesizer.

[Bas]

Apart maybe from an ability to NOT have automation automatically copied along with a part if you copy the part. But that's a pathetically minor thing

Unset the preference automation follows events.

[kritikon]

Unset the preference automation follows events.

See...I knew there was probably a way.


Same with alot of whinges about Cubase...it's often simple "don't know how to do it" rather than "Cubase can't do it".

VST automation in Cubase is a joke.

To you it is...to me it's perfectly reasonable. It's how I would prefer it. If I have automation, I always have that lane open all of the time because I like to know what automation is where, doing what. As ever...it's not that Cubase is silly...it's only that different people prefer different things. Cubase's automation is actually extremely capable and a hugely powerful tool. I like it.

[Jason Brian Merrill]

To you it is...to me it's perfectly reasonable. It's how I would prefer it. If I have automation, I always have that lane open all of the time because I like to know what automation is where, doing what. As ever...it's not that Cubase is silly...it's only that different people prefer different things. Cubase's automation is actually extremely capable and a hugely powerful tool. I like it.

i prefer automation lanes over the events -- can cubase do that?

[Kingston]

based on the two posts above you and the one you actually quoted, take a wild guess if it does both.

[bduffy]

Yeah, I asked why and I never got a response except "look into the knowledge base", and there is something like "license issues".

So I asked "well the Filters are from Waldorf... Steinberg worked with Waldorf and created the PPG Wave, Attack and DPole, then later the A1 was included. While Waldorf was gone, A1 was bundled with SX1 to SX3, now Waldorf is back and you say it's a license issue for not selling it?"

Personally I think it's a lame excuse for removing a synth, that barely anybody used cause it was "underrated". It's like TV shows - nobody likes you, you move it out of the program. Then again... why is VB-1 and LM-7 still in there, if there's Virtual Bassist V2 and Virtual Drummer V3 or Kontakt stuff?


This just doesn't make sense. And if I look at it - if I get Cubase 4 now and still want to continue using A1, I need to keep SX3 which makes the A1 a very... very expensive synthesizer.

But...if you already own SX 1-3, then where is the extra expense?

[kuniklo]

To you it is...to me it's perfectly reasonable. It's how I would prefer it. If I have automation, I always have that lane open all of the time because I like to know what automation is where, doing what. As ever...it's not that Cubase is silly...it's only that different people prefer different things. Cubase's automation is actually extremely capable and a hugely powerful tool. I like it.

No way. You load up three or four vsts, maybe one or two multi-outs like Battery or Tera, and your vst folder takes up the whole screen. Worthless. I only use midi automation in Cubase because it does handle midi automation well.

Like I said though, it does sound like the new Logic-style instrument tracks might solve this problem.

[bduffy]

To you it is...to me it's perfectly reasonable. It's how I would prefer it. If I have automation, I always have that lane open all of the time because I like to know what automation is where, doing what. As ever...it's not that Cubase is silly...it's only that different people prefer different things. Cubase's automation is actually extremely capable and a hugely powerful tool. I like it.

No way. You load up three or four vsts, maybe one or two multi-outs like Battery or Tera, and your vst folder takes up the whole screen. Worthless. I only use midi automation in Cubase because it does handle midi automation well.

Like I said though, it does sound like the new Logic-style instrument tracks might solve this problem.

Do you mean the automation doesn't work or that it takes up a lot of screen space? A little bit different there. I find Cubase autmation perfectly useable, for example, so I think it's down to user preference - like Kritikon said.