When it Comes to MIDI...Cubase vs. Bitwig

[Ciberithm]

Cubase. It's the most powerful midi sequencer in the universe, if you want the midi sequencer that can do the absolute most with midi.

Ableton Live Suite is more powerful than Cubase

My car has more horsepower than Ableton. That's how ridiculous the MIDI comparison between Ableton and Cubase is. I own both, and they are both good, but anyone making that statement has obviously never used Cubase.

[pdxindy]

Cubase. It's the most powerful midi sequencer in the universe, if you want the midi sequencer that can do the absolute most with midi.

Ableton Live Suite is more powerful than Cubase

My car has more horsepower than Ableton. That's how ridiculous the MIDI comparison between Ableton and Cubase is. I own both, and they are both good, but anyone making that statement has obviously never used Cubase.

Ableton Suite has M4L... which has vast capability beyond Cubase...

[SJ_Digriz]

Ableton Suite has M4L... which has vast capability beyond Cubase...

You mean you can use a convoluted reaktorlike but shitty interface to add cobbled together capability that are already built into Cubase ... sure.

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[pdxindy]

Ableton Suite has M4L... which has vast capability beyond Cubase...

You mean you can use a convoluted reaktorlike but shitty interface to add cobbled together capability that are already built into Cubase ... sure.

You can add a vast amount of functionality that is not in Cubase

[pdxindy]

Ableton Suite has M4L... which has vast capability beyond Cubase...

You mean you can use a convoluted reaktorlike but shitty interface to add cobbled together capability that are already built into Cubase ... sure.

oh, and yes, it is convoluted... but still, more powerful than Cubase. Which brings up workflow and which relates to the OP topic.

Bitwig is much less feature-ful than Cubase, but it has workflow advantages.

[SJ_Digriz]

oh, and yes, it is convoluted... but still, more powerful than Cubase. Which brings up workflow and which relates to the OP topic.

There are a small number of things you can do with Max from a MIDI perspective that you can't in Cubase. There are LOT of things you can do in Cubase that you can't do in Live even with Max.

Bitwig is much less feature-ful than Cubase, but it has workflow advantages.

Depends ... I find Live and Bitwig difficult and limited from a workflow standpoint. But I don't do loops and triggers or DJ stuff either. So, I don't need/want their strengths. There are a couple of features I like, such as a more direct method to modulate plugin parameters across the board. But, Cubase advantages far outweigh those types of things for me.

[SJ_Digriz]

Just to make sure this doesn't turn into a flame fest ... Bitwig and Live are kick-ass DAWs. But, their target user/workflow is a bit different than Sonar/Reaper/Cubase/Protools etc... Sonar and Reaper have some things you can do to emulate some of the clip based workflow behavior, but nothing like the Wigs or Live stuff. Cubase likes to market the Arranger track as something similar, but it's completely unsuited to the task. It seems to me that that feature set was written by someone who never touched DJ gear or Live in their lives.

[pdxindy]

oh, and yes, it is convoluted... but still, more powerful than Cubase. Which brings up workflow and which relates to the OP topic.

There are a small number of things you can do with Max from a MIDI perspective that you can't in Cubase. There are LOT of things you can do in Cubase that you can't do in Live even with Max.

Bitwig is much less feature-ful than Cubase, but it has workflow advantages.

Depends ... I find Live and Bitwig difficult and limited from a workflow standpoint. But I don't do loops and triggers or DJ stuff either. So, I don't need/want their strengths. There are a couple of features I like, such as a more direct method to modulate plugin parameters across the board. But, Cubase advantages far outweigh those types of things for me.

For you that is fine... I was offering some other perspective besides yours

I much prefer Bitwig to Cubase. The speed of doing stuff like layering synths, drum racks, routing, modulation, and so on. Push support, controller support in general... all connected to midi functionality. Bitwig feels more like a creative instrument... Cubase not so much

As for M4L, there is a lot it can do that Cubase cannot... for example, one can create an vast array of step sequencing devices, Midi transform devices, GUI's to integrate with hardware, light setups for performance etc etc etc... I find it too difficult to enjoy using... but some people do amazing stuff with it.

With version 2, Bitwig will have its modular environment available to users. All the included Bitwig devices are built in their modular system so if you want to take the Bitwig LFO device and add an envelop to it, you will be able to do that. Cubase cannot touch that kind of flexibility.

[SJ_Digriz]

cool and the next version of Cubase will have unicorns with rainbows flying out their ass.

The only thing you've mentioned so far that Cubase doesn't already do in spades is easy distribution of modulation to all parameters. Which I already said. However it can be done, just a bit more work. some of your comments about layering and midi setup lead me to believe you don't actually know how to use Cubase. Let's see that bitwig or live control panel that will run my mooger foogers with delay compensation and automatable controls to all stomp box Params as a plugin. Just 1 of 100s of things Cubase has over others...

[SJ_Digriz]

Fn cell phones

[incubus]

It's not the tools, it's how you use them!

Errrrrr, unless shit crashes........then it's the tools.

Ohhhhh, man the circles keep spinning!

[rod_zero]

Cubase has more midi functions than Live.

But both DAW have different paradigms and workflows. So which is better depends a lot on how you work.

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]