Gone back to Cubase but here's what will bring me right back

[c-wave]

Yeah, I don't see why there is so much of an issue with his list. There are some bug fixes in there, some no brainer tweaks, and some subjective stuff. Even the subjective stuff is not too crazy, for example comping is one of the biggest things in that list and the devs have been planning for comping since before the release. Dom mentioned this in the original Bitwig hype thread. Same with retrospective record. If you don't agree with this or that point you can simply say why. But I think it's clearly constructive, it's just feedback for the devs, they can take it or leave it. Now that Bitwig is not so much of a noobie any more it makes sense to talk about what's going to "bring it home," and maybe that's even more helpful than just listing everything every feature you'd want in a dream daw as it usually goes with feature requests.

Saying "go back to cubase" doesn't make sense because that's clearly not a list of every feature in Cubase, and clearly there are things about Bitwig he prefers or he wouldn't be using it in the first place. He doesn't want Cubase, he wants that stuff added to Bitwig. "You don't have to just use one or the other," well actually I think most people prefer to just use one DAW if they can, there's nothing wrong with wanting one daw that works instead of constantly transferring stuff between program. In fact a lot of people are here because they are tired of Live only being good at one thing. And as far as wanting the daw to take a certain path, well we all do, all we really can do is give feedback and let the devs choose. Once before in the forum I was giving my idea about how a particular feature should work, and instead of telling me why that wouldn't work for some, someone tells me "Well you know, you can't just have everything YOUR way." Well yes, obviously. I knew that, Bobby knows that too. That kind of lecture doesn't really solve anything.

All you gotta do is take a post to say "I disagree with x because I'd rather have it this way."

+1 Well said..

[SLiC]

I haven't lectured anyone, I made the point that I don't like the negative thread title or agree that some features should be more like Cubase (as I think S1 has more elegant workflow in many cases). I noticed one other person on this thread is now saying they are thinking of selling their BWS licence so, so it obviously is putting people of BWS who may be browsing here. I am sure it wasn't the OP's intent, but to me, it looked very negative at a time I believe BWS Devs are really working hard....they are a small team, I bought in to BWS to offer support, encouragement and because I enjoy innovation and cowbells.

The thread title is 'gone back to Cubase' so maybe the question is why did you leave Cubase to come to BWS and what has changed about Cubase (or BWS, in my opinion it has only got better, and pretty fast by DAW standards....) that makes you go 'back' to Cubase and leave BWS? Was it something in 8.5? (The only killer feature for me is the new punch in/out without using loop settings) or just that BWS is developing fast enough (from 1 to 1.1, 1.2 and now 1.3 in a year seems super rapid to me, all free and a ton of new stuff I wasn't expecting)

My original point (before everyone started defending free speech!!) was that I disagreed with the OP's premise that Bitwig Dev's should look towards Cubase as an example of how things should be done as the OP had referenced Cubase many times as an example. In MY opinion (as a user of Cubase and S13), S13 does a lot of things better than Cubase, and would be MY definitive reference (for example, right click tools. audio editing with a single screen layout, melodyne integration, automation, comping, mastering etc.)

Bitwig already does far more than was advertised when I bought it at 1.1 but is missing a lot of basic features for a DAW to multitrack and record bands (I have made my feature requests for input monitoring, comping without using clips, melodyne editor AKA etc.) but the list for audio editing would be very long and I just don't know if that's where BWS is heading- Live is on V9, is a massive hit and has almost no audio editing- it did 'other things' better and originated a new workflow. I have already posted features of Studio One (which has a similar feel to BWS in terms of the one window approach) I would like to see in BWS relating to comping (I think S1 is better than Cubase in this respect) and audio editing, but I didn't say I would leave and not come back until it was implemented!

If you only want 1 DAW, and you currently work recording bands, live instruments (multitrack recording) then BWS probably isn't the best DAW for you- Logic, S1, Cubase or even Reaper will do a better job in most cases and in reality, they may always stay a step ahead of BWS in this respect, as this is what they were really created for, and they cant do many of the amazing things BWS can do....even before it goes modular like and integrated MAX DAW hybrid in V2 (V2!! not V 8.5 or V9.5....BWS is rocking along!!)

PS- to the OP- have you ever tried S1 3? It was built by some of the original Cubase Devs who had 'other ideas' (like BWS is built by some of the original Ableton team)- its like a cross between logic and BWS, try it, you may like it- may be your one DAW solution already exists!

[Bobby L'Avenir]

I haven't lectured anyone, I made the point that I don't like the negative thread title or agree that some features should be more like Cubase (as I think S1 has more elegant workflow in many cases). I noticed one other person on this thread is now saying they are thinking of selling their BWS licence so, so it obviously is putting people of BWS who may be browsing here. I am sure it wasn't the OP's intent, but to me, it looked very negative at a time I believe BWS Devs are really working hard....they are a small team, I bought in to BWS to offer support, encouragement and because I enjoy innovation and cowbells.

The thread title is 'gone back to Cubase' so maybe the question is why did you leave Cubase to come to BWS and what has changed about Cubase (or BWS, in my opinion it has only got better, and pretty fast by DAW standards....) that makes you go 'back' to Cubase and leave BWS? Was it something in 8.5? (The only killer feature for me is the new punch in/out without using loop settings) or just that BWS is developing fast enough (from 1 to 1.1, 1.2 and now 1.3 in a year seems super rapid to me, all free and a ton of new stuff I wasn't expecting)

My original point (before everyone started defending free speech!!) was that I disagreed with the OP's premise that Bitwig Dev's should look towards Cubase as an example of how things should be done as the OP had referenced Cubase many times as an example. In MY opinion (as a user of Cubase and S13), S13 does a lot of things better than Cubase, and would be MY definitive reference (for example, right click tools. audio editing with a single screen layout, melodyne integration, automation, comping, mastering etc.)

Bitwig already does far more than was advertised when I bought it at 1.1 but is missing a lot of basic features for a DAW to multitrack and record bands (I have made my feature requests for input monitoring, comping without using clips, melodyne editor AKA etc.) but the list for audio editing would be very long and I just don't know if that's where BWS is heading- Live is on V9, is a massive hit and has almost no audio editing- it did 'other things' better and originated a new workflow. I have already posted features of Studio One (which has a similar feel to BWS in terms of the one window approach) I would like to see in BWS relating to comping (I think S1 is better than Cubase in this respect) and audio editing, but I didn't say I would leave and not come back until it was implemented!

If you only want 1 DAW, and you currently work recording bands, live instruments (multitrack recording) then BWS probably isn't the best DAW for you- Logic, S1, Cubase or even Reaper will do a better job in most cases and in reality, they may always stay a step ahead of BWS in this respect, as this is what they were really created for, and they cant do many of the amazing things BWS can do....even before it goes modular like and integrated MAX DAW hybrid in V2 (V2!! not V 8.5 or V9.5....BWS is rocking along!!)

PS- to the OP- have you ever tried S1 3? It was built by some of the original Cubase Devs who had 'other ideas' (like BWS is built by some of the original Ableton team)- its like a cross between logic and BWS, try it, you may like it- may be your one DAW solution already exists!

Again there you go imposing limited beliefs without anything constructive the devs could use to improve bitwig. Come on fella this isn't about who's wrong or who's right, forget all that because it pointless and nobody wants to read it. It's simply about people like you saying bitwig isn't the best at recording live instruments or multitrack recordings, ok i agree in it's current form it isn't but then why won't you give proper constructive info on why that is. I made a list of very basic tools bitwig could add that I feel would allow it be perfect for recording live instruments or multitrack recordings, if you have a list and you obviously do because you keep taking about S1, lets have it bud, only your top 5 if can't be bothered to do what i did?

One minute you act as though i've put bitwig down and you need to defend it only to put it down again within a paragraph of the attempted (and unnecessary) defence Like you said yourself you don't know where bitwig is heading so making assumption without putting ideas or simple feedback on the table makes no sense.
You seem like you really rate S1, (i've tried it and it's not filling the gap that bitwig have identified so no point with how similar it is to cubase) if you rate S1 and also use cubase as well as bitwig then you're using three programs right. Well what's in S1 that bitwig doesn't have, just list you top 5, can't be that difficult with how much you've wrote up here so far? Also you use cubase too right, you just paid to update it so you must feel like it has functions both S1 and bitwig too is lacking, list the top 5?. That's all we want to know so we can discuss and compare ideas and workflows. Simply saying bitwig isn't good at this and that and it will never be good at this and the other daws will always add something and be a step ahead on features is a limited belief you have, again look at what they've done to catch up to ableton in your very own opinion which you don't seem to realize. You yourself say you don't need ableton anymore right, bitwig is only 1 year old, how long has ableton had to mature? So bitwig beats out ableton in your studio in one year but it will never be able to beat out cubase in my studio or pro tools in the next users studio? Limiting beliefs, i just don't accept them.

On a lighter note don't complain if you can't be bothered to feed anything back on why you don't use bitwig in favour of cubase and S1 for certain tasks/projects and everyone else follows suit. Even to the point bitwig are not getting any feedback at all so they go to themselves (as people coding all day unlike us making music all day so it's our role to feedback bugs and workflow issues that hinder real world use with clients around and deadlines to meet) we know what are users who can't be bothered to feed any thing back to us want, a Sheep Bell device, yeah that's what they need, with dubstep wobble knobs and no mousewheel support too
are you gonna start complaining about all the crappy edm with a dub step wobble Sheep Bell synth on it at that point when you couldn't be bothered to feedback anything that would actually be useful? Now we have to listen to a million tracks with the same bloody distorted Sheep Bell sound on it, is that what you want?

Come on give up the goodies, top 5 reasons/tools that make you boot S1 followed by the same for cubase?

[xbitz]

all the audio related tasks(comping,multi-track recording) can be outsourced to Reaper (and the mix also can be finished there) don't have to leave Bitwig just because of its audio weakness



using Bidule as ReWire host

[SLiC]

@ Bobby - I have posted many threads on this forum with my constructive feedback and opinions, some specifically on copying the live recording features of S1 and adaptation of melodyne (which can be implemented by any DAW with an API from the Dev), just use the search function if your interested. I believe the Devs know what needs doing, they have had literally 1000s of feature requests and I have already given my ideas and opinions (a lot way back in the beta and cat thread!)

[Liquinaut]

Hey Bobby,

as others already have pointed out, the list you put up for discussion is a fairly reasonable one. And if you had put it up for discussion with a thread title like "50 points to improve Bitwig" I think we would have had a nice discussion about the contents here.

But you decided to label it "Gone back to Cubase but here's etc. pp." and tried to establish it as an open letter to Bitwig and that you had to leave because of all this. And so a reasonable list (it really is!) turns into the ultimate 50 points of no return and a debate about your attitude...

I don't think that was your intention at all. But maybe next time... just focus on the feature list instead, it will help to drive your points forward. Anyway: thanx for putting the list together, it's good to see such well thought out feature requests, in the end it will help make Bitwig better

Hope to see you around anytime soon again! Until then, have fun with Cubase!

[pc999]

You should probably just stick with cubase mate

yea. have fun in cubase

I like my DAW simple and fast!

[Bobby L'Avenir]

You should probably just stick with cubase mate

yea. have fun in cubase

I like my DAW simple and fast!

Not being rude but thinkers like this would've said flying machines, what do we need flying machines for, we've got feet, horses, cars and boats, come on man. What do we need to go to the moon for, we've got everything we need down here, there's nothing for us up there. Why do we need to improve, we're already 80% of our potential, why do we need to aim higher, just be content with 80% for heavens sake

A limited belief systems says no daw can be simple and fast with ALL the basics one would need and expect for editing and composing without ever having to even install another app on the same system

If history has taught one thing it's that one man/womans limited thinking and approach will ALWAYS, be surpassed by another in no time at all simply because the other man/woman choose to aim higher without such limited thinking.

[takaii]

Just lock this thread people cant handle opinions good enougth here... If he want to switch daw because bitwig lacks 50 features to him that is important... Why do you argue about it? He gave constructive cretisism. He just left what he use for service to look at. Its not that he intented offending anyone. This is getting rediculous. People hold your horses. No one tells him or anyone how they should use anything. you can say you like something else better but that would still be stupid taking away the point of what he doesnt like. But everybody is right and wrong. its opinions people! Opinions! Not so much to argue over

[Bobby L'Avenir]

Hey Bobby,

as others already have pointed out, the list you put up for discussion is a fairly reasonable one. And if you had put it up for discussion with a thread title like "50 points to improve Bitwig" I think we would have had a nice discussion about the contents here.

But you decided to label it "Gone back to Cubase but here's etc. pp." and tried to establish it as an open letter to Bitwig and that you had to leave because of all this. And so a reasonable list (it really is!) turns into the ultimate 50 points of no return and a debate about your attitude...

I don't think that was your intention at all. But maybe next time... just focus on the feature list instead, it will help to drive your points forward. Anyway: thanx for putting the list together, it's good to see such well thought out feature requests, in the end it will help make Bitwig better

Hope to see you around anytime soon again! Until then, have fun with Cubase!

Fair point, you said what you had to say in a classy and mature way so i take it on board but at the same time i always try to look at things from different perspectives and thinking hard about tilte threads is a tough one to justify when we're all adults and capable of reading. Please don't assume I’m being rude when I say that, just being honest, if everyone was to think carefully about title threads when the actual content of what they say in the thread is perfectly reasonable as you agree yourself, it would be like saying to ones sub conscious, people are dumb, they don't read and react to tiles over actual content. They favour confrontation over constructive discussion, i need to phrase this so i don't set them off. I don't think this is true so editing myself and titles of threads isn't something i feel anyone should do. Honesty and substance cuts through the bs and gets things done.

At the end of the day if i had a product that hundreds or thousands of customers used, i wouldn't want sugar coated feedback, "yeah we really love your product" but then they use a competing product for some other tasks as soon as they get a chance Who asked for windows 8 for example, now they gone back to a program that's pretty much windows 7 with a few of the best bits of 8, how? From customer feedback, honest and helpful customer feedback based on real world use.
It would be more helpful to just say hey we love you product but we use a bit x and a bit of y sometimes because x has this and it's very helpful, y has that and we really like that. With this information i'd be able to improve my product, so will bitwig. This is how all companies thrive and grow, most of you know this but a few of you maybe don't grasp the concept?

After all as you say my comments as reasonable, as they say in the UK "it is what it is", the title is the title and I'd be dishonest to change it or apologise for it (even though now I've said that some who are focussed on confrontation over anything constructive will be predictable as ever and WILL now insist I do so i'm saying this in the hope they'll check themselves before typing anythihng). At the same time though it's not like if people actually read the post (properly) instead of flying in with nonsense destructive comments based off the title and what they ASSUMED, the content was about (even though they were in too much of a rush to actually read it as one guy with a bit of class on page one admitted after he went in hard without reading)
come on people, seriously, read the op properly, even just the first few paragraphs, if after that you come away with the impression like I was say "I've got a lazer particle destroyer in space focussed on Germany, if you don't make these changes, no more efficient high performance cars, no more Bockwurst and no more bloody Germany beating England at football, hahahahahahaha", please explain how I give this impression and I’ll check myself, change the tile and apologize (but do it in another thread, the destructive one made to mock this one seems perfect).

[Bobby L'Avenir]

Ok so back to the topic we should be focussed on, this thread has had many views and it's disappointing so many good ideas could've been put forward but most of what's here to read is not really worth reading. I'll make it simple, just vote A or B.

A. who thinks bitwig should just fix the bugs and leave it at that, limit itself with no more new features, just leave it as it is now because it's perfect and only needs a few bug fixes. So basically bitwig has it's place at this task, pro tools, ableton, FL, cubase, logic etc have thier place at other tasks and nobody is to cross territories or attempt to be a one stop solution for all tasks? Biwig will never better the rest as the rest will always add a must have feature and be a step ahead as someone was saying, so just keep bitwig as it is and don't bother trying? (not getting my vote)

OR

B. bitwig should keep trying to fill the gap which makes daw users hot swap between different daws using rewire or bouncing stems. Bitwig should continue to innovate with bitwig but at the same time continue to improve based on customer feedback to the pint where users no longer need pro tools, logic, cubase, ableton, FL, Dance EJ ? (I vote B, and no that's not B for Bobby before anyone looking for confrontation over constructive discussion chimes in )

Maybe after a few votes (which isn't massively helpful but hopefully it will put a gap in between where this thread has gone and where we can make a fresh start) we can get back to breaking down just what it would take to drop having to use a number of daws to finish one piece of music. Hopefully at that point you ladies and gents will come forward with your own lists of majors feature requests so we can have that constructive discussion I was hoping but failed to prise out of ya, on my first attempt anyway

[Eleventh]

I vote C for cats

[svervs]

leave it at that, limit itself with no more new features, just leave it as it is now because it's perfect and only needs a few bug fixes.

No one ever said that. What a pathetic, exaggerated claim ...

[SLiC]

Ok so back to the topic we should be focussed on, this thread has had many views and it's disappointing so many good ideas could've been put forward but most of what's here to read is not really worth reading. I'll make it simple, just vote A or B.

A. who thinks bitwig should just fix the bugs and leave it at that, limit itself with no more new features, just leave it as it is now because it's perfect and only needs a few bug fixes. So basically bitwig has it's place at this task, pro tools, ableton, FL, cubase, logic etc have thier place at other tasks and nobody is to cross territories or attempt to be a one stop solution for all tasks? Biwig will never better the rest as the rest will always add a must have feature and be a step ahead as someone was saying, so just keep bitwig as it is and don't bother trying? (not getting my vote)

OR

B. bitwig should keep trying to fill the gap which makes daw users hot swap between different daws using rewire or bouncing stems. Bitwig should continue to innovate with bitwig but at the same time continue to improve based on customer feedback to the pint where users no longer need pro tools, logic, cubase, ableton, FL, Dance EJ ? (I vote B, and no that's not B for Bobby before anyone looking for confrontation over constructive discussion chimes in )

Maybe after a few votes (which isn't massively helpful but hopefully it will put a gap in between where this thread has gone and where we can make a fresh start) we can get back to breaking down just what it would take to drop having to use a number of daws to finish one piece of music. Hopefully at that point you ladies and gents will come forward with your own lists of majors feature requests so we can have that constructive discussion I was hoping but failed to prise out of ya, on my first attempt anyway

Something of a loaded Question Bobby! I don't think anyone is saying BWS should not continue to develop, but I will answer the question in terms of direction.

Firstly, why I think and work the way I do- I'm Old. I think there are many people (like me) who have used Cubase and Live as two totally separate applications over the last decade or so (some rewire, some just look at it as two separate types of creative process, quick, simple, limited can sometimes giver better results than in depth editing and analysis paralysis) so maybe we have a different paradigm to people coming in to the market in the last couple of years (when I started Live didn't use to even do Midi and Cubase as Pro 24 didn't do Audio!)

What I want from BWS is for it to be different to what I already have, not replace it. I think we can all agree stability is paramount, and that some sort of loop/comping type recording (which should be simple now that we have groups) is necessary- but after that I want to see the 'Integrated Modular Environment' as promised for V2....So all in all, I vote 'A', V2 and vive la difference

''Bitwig Studio is designed with a long-term vision in mind - that people can build their own instruments and effects right inside the software, share them with others effortlessly and collaborate in a room or over the internet in real-time''

[takaii]

Bitwig focus on bugs atm. When they think the software is mature and stable enougth to work on features they will work on features. Bitwig work in fast tempo so caching up wont be a problem even if they fix bugs first. They wana make the software stable for those who use bitwig everyday and that is correect decision. We will get features later