You happy with Studio One 3?

[nostradamoose]

Gotta give presonus some slack. Still haven't been around that long.

In what ever way one wants to look at it, they have been around long enough not to be a "new underdog" anymore. Comparable to the length of Ableton Live's history, for example.

I believe he meant that Studio One the DAW hasn't been around as long as those going on or passed double digit release numbers.

[Muziksculp]

Hi,

Any clues if S1V3.5 or S1V4.0 will be released next ?

It would be cool if they release v. 3.5 out this year, and v. 4.0 during Q1 of 2017.

Also looking forward to the release of Faderport 8

[Guenon]

Gotta give presonus some slack. Still haven't been around that long.

In what ever way one wants to look at it, they have been around long enough not to be a "new underdog" anymore. Comparable to the length of Ableton Live's history, for example.

I believe he meant that Studio One the DAW hasn't been around as long as those going on or passed double digit release numbers.

Indeed. There are some DAWs that have been around for a loooong time -- and in that case, "gotta give some slack" to Live and Reaper etc, too, which have development histories of equal or shorter length than Studio One. Just keeping things in perspective there, as I've noticed Studio One still often attracts those "well, it's still an early DAW, relax" types of responses.

It's a great DAW with a very well thought out workflow. The best advice on this I've heard is: which ever environment one chooses to work in, choose one that works best in your case now, instead of jumping into one and hoping it to, at some later date, incorporate some key features/qualities important to you.

[LawrenceF]

@ Muziksculp: I doubt we'll see 3.5 this year but no cluem there's still some time left.

x.5's of Studio One are typically major updates... if the old pattern holds up.

[LawrenceF]

Indeed. There are some DAWs that have been around for a loooong time -- and in that case, "gotta give some slack" to Live and Reaper etc, too, which have development histories of equal or shorter length than Studio One. Just keeping things in perspective there, as I've noticed Studio One still often attracts those "well, it's still an early DAW, relax" types of responses.

But it is. That's not an excuse though, either it does what you need today or it doesn't.

But it quite literally is the second youngest (so called major or popular) daw out there, with Bitwig being the newest. It released in 2009. Reaper released in 2006. I'm pretty sure Live was around before both of them. Their version numbers are pretty much in line with that.

Nobody should ever expect a version 3 anything to do everything feature wise that Cubase v19 does... unless they just enjoy being disappointed.

I would say (mmv as usual) that it takes about 10 years for a new modern DAW product to mostly mature.

[nIGhT-SoN]

Gotta give presonus some slack. Still haven't been around that long.

In what ever way one wants to look at it, they have been around long enough not to be a "new underdog" anymore. Comparable to the length of Ableton Live's history, for example.

I believe he meant that Studio One the DAW hasn't been around as long as those going on or passed double digit release numbers.

Indeed. There are some DAWs that have been around for a loooong time -- and in that case, "gotta give some slack" to Live and Reaper etc, too, which have development histories of equal or shorter length than Studio One. Just keeping things in perspective there, as I've noticed Studio One still often attracts those "well, it's still an early DAW, relax" types of responses.

It's a great DAW with a very well thought out workflow. The best advice on this I've heard is: which ever environment one chooses to work in, choose one that works best in your case now, instead of jumping into one and hoping it to, at some later date, incorporate some key features/qualities important to you.

Agree. I still use it, even with those CPU problems, because it has the best workflow for me. The problem is that Presonus doesn't see this as a problem and not acknowledge it means we won't see a fix, that's my only problem with them.

The first step in fixing a problem is to acknowledge you have one first and then find solutions.

[Guenon]

It released in 2009.

http://www.kreatives.org/kristal/index.php?section=k2

Its history extends well before that, all the way to the turn of the millennium. If you wish to "reset the clock" at 2009, so to speak, then those historically longest standind DAWs need similar resets as well at similar turns in their journeys, though they are still of veritable age in comparison.

But yeah, in essence we agree completely, of course. My point is, even though Studio One as a Presonus product is a relative newcomer in the DAW field, it isn't quite a newcomer in development years anymore (even when counting from 2009, to be fair), and issues like CPU utilization aren't a case of "well, it's such a new product, cut them some slack" (not that I'm saying anyone here claimed that, just an example).

[LawrenceF]

Yeah. But Studio One was a whole new DAW. There were going to do K2 (Kristal v2) but something else happened along the way and they wrote an entirely new daw, after writing Capture for PreSonus.

That's my understanding anyway. I'm not sure if K2 would have been Studio One, the same daw, or just a better updated version of Kristal... an entirely different product. I've never seen any DAW change that much from v1 to v2... they're really nothing alike.

As for CPU efficiency ... if it's a problem that they need to address it's (imo) likely very low level and architectural or they'd have addressed it already, if it really needs fixing, which it may. The audio engine is likely the most fundamental low level part of it so... reworking it for better performance may not be so easy. Maybe they'll improve it at some point.

At any rate, it's still just a v3... like Steiny's new scoring thing will be a v1 and will take some years to fill out.

[beatmangler443]

[beatmangler443]

Caught this on presonus facebook . "Please add high end film/tv/game sound post features to S1. When you do you will own every facet of the game." Answer "n the works and some are already using it for that."

[xcentric]

It released in 2009.

http://www.kreatives.org/kristal/index.php?section=k2

Its history extends well before that, all the way to the turn of the millennium. If you wish to "reset the clock" at 2009, so to speak, then those historically longest standind DAWs need similar resets as well at similar turns in their journeys, though they are still of veritable age in comparison.

But yeah, in essence we agree completely, of course. My point is, even though Studio One as a Presonus product is a relative newcomer in the DAW field, it isn't quite a newcomer in development years anymore (even when counting from 2009, to be fair), and issues like CPU utilization aren't a case of "well, it's such a new product, cut them some slack" (not that I'm saying anyone here claimed that, just an example).

Are you comparing early development of S1 (not even named yet at the time) to other DAWs that were released to the public? Would a fairer comparison be to use the early development periods of the other DAWs as well?

[Guenon]

Are you comparing early development of S1 (not even named yet at the time) to other DAWs that were released to the public? Would a fairer comparison be to use the early development periods of the other DAWs as well?

That fairness is exactly what I mean, yes. (Kristal Audio Engine was released to the public.) If someone says Cubase is in "version 19", that includes all the major versions all the way from Atari ST, after which the software has seen complete rewrites more than once. If Studio One hasn't got anything to do with Kristal, per its history and background, I don't see how the current Cubase still has so much to do with Cubase 1.0 on Atari . That's what I wanted to come across: when drawing these comparisons and wanting to start at the beginning of a product's history, it's only fair to do so on both accounts. No worries: the grand old DAWs are still grand old by comparison.

Note that Lawrence said they actually didn't use direct K2 development in launching Studio One, and he knows Studio One so well, that's where I readily admit I'm wrong. I remembered the continuity being more unambiguous, hah. Had I known that, I probably would have just emphasized the main point: if you find that there's currently something lacking in, say, CPU utilization, in any of the DAWs that were first released on the previous decade, that's not such a short while ago that "come on, it's still new, give it some slack" quite applies. Use what works for you now.

[Guenon]

Caught this on presonus facebook . "Please add high end film/tv/game sound post features to S1. When you do you will own every facet of the game." Answer "n the works and some are already using it for that."

That's very cool !

[tatanka]

To the experts:

could anyone say something about new "direct input" in 3.3 which should help solving the problem of midi vst (like kirnu or any other midi arp/seq) in front of vst instrument ? Where is it and how to use ? Nothing in the manual or elsewhere. Should solve this normally so easy thing were all of the mulab, tracktion etc. users only laughing about studio one 3 PRO.....

[bungle]

As for CPU efficiency ... if it's a problem that they need to address it's (imo) likely very low level and architectural or they'd have addressed it already, if it really needs fixing, which it may.

Hahahahaha, that post sums you up completely
If its a problem
If it really needs fixing
Which it may

It is a problem, it does need fixing, and no amount of shillary will stop that, it is more prevalent on OSX, but if you can't see the Resource issues, well it says way more about your ability to test than anything else !!