Presonus Studio One 5.2 vs Cubase 11

[jens]

I think your conclusion about Cubase is off base (sic.). They do innovate.

I think it is not at all - Cubase to me feels like a total dinosaur - clunky and convoluted in the way computer programmes were 20 or 30 years ago - no amount of innovation is going to change that.

They started all over in 2002 as a means to dust it off - but in the meantime it has become more dusty again than Cubase 5 ever felt. Old dogs can't learn new tricks, as they say. The only DAW that feels even more ancient to me is Samplitude.

[syntonica]

Cubase and Logic are two top DAWs used in scoring. Reaper and Studio One are on second place, slowly gathering bigger and bigger crowd.
Post Pro: ProTools and Nuendo.

That's a bit surprising to me. Is this from your experience, or can these numbers be found somewhere?

(I can believe the "Reaper, cuz it's free! hur-de-hur" thing though. Sadly.)

[chk071]

I think your conclusion about Cubase is off base (sic.). They do innovate.

I think it is not at all - Cubase to me feels like a total dinosaur - clunky and convoluted in the way computer programmes were 20 or 30 years ago - no amount of innovation is going to change that.

Completely exaggerated. Your short memory seems to be clunky and convoluted.

[pixel85]

Cubase and Logic are two top DAWs used in scoring. Reaper and Studio One are on second place, slowly gathering bigger and bigger crowd.
Post Pro: ProTools and Nuendo.

That's a bit surprising to me. Is this from your experience, or can these numbers be found somewhere?

(I can believe the "Reaper, cuz it's free! hur-de-hur" thing though. Sadly.)

Just go to places that gather small and big composers like VI Forum and you'll see what is often used for scoring. Then you have people like Junkie XL, Hans Zimmer and many, many more who use Cubase. Majority of composers that I know or follow use either Cubase, Logic or StudioOne (still in minority but is gaining in popularity).
Oh some use ProTools for scoring - they're hardcore imo

For Post Pro, PT is simply an industry-standard like for recording studios. PT and Nuendo have tools (plugins, formats), specific hardware and support.

Btw. I feel like DP may be more popular in the US than in Europe due to being MacOS exclusive for many years.

[wuworld]

Studio One is more for the modern users. Studio One has done a better job of adjusting to where the market is today. Steinberg is content with just catering to the same customer base from 30 years ago. It's a reason you don't see many young upcoming producers/engineers using Cubase compared to Live/Logic/FL Studio.

I think the copy protection has more to do with that. I see pirated Studio one everywhere. No one is pirating Cubase.

If someone pirates and kearns on Studio One, there is almost no chance they will switch to Cubase when they decide to buy - especially given the cost disparities. PreSonus had more discount promotions that Steinberg.

Lastly, AudioBox interfaces are relatively popular among upstarts, ship with Studio One Artist, and give you a de facto $100 discount on Studio One Pro via upgrade.

I think your conclusion about Cubase is off base (sic.). They do innovate. They just have matured to the point where there is less room for it. DAWs like Studio One are newer with less in there, so updates and upgrades will naturally seem bigger because there are more solved problems for them to implement in their software.

This becomes an advantage in Cubase when your needs are outside of the mainstream. For example, if you do a lot of film post or film scoring, then these "features for old guys" suddenly rocket to the fire and become significant competitive advantages over Studio One.

More cubase users are switching to Studio One it's not the other way around. No young modern or in general modern producer uses Cubase compared to Studio One. Cubase is feature rich, but modern users are looking for something easy to use. Steinberg missed the boat with hardware/software integration. This is where Presonus are killing them. Look at the type of customer base these companies are going after. This is what Output, Presonus, Slate Digital have in common. The producer market. Steinberg isn't going for that market. Cubase is the AARP of the DAW market.

[xbitz]

I really enjoy Cubase's media bay and ability to click mouse 3 to drag to scroll the tracks. I know Studio One 5 can do the same dragging with autohotkey, but, I would prefer it to be baked into the daw.

What you mean? You don't need any additional software to scroll and drag tracks in S1. It's all native, 'baked into the DAW' too.

I think they ment holding the scroll wheel down and panning around seamlessly in horizontal and vertical directions.

this, https://github.com/lokanchung/StudioPlusOne should be native one

[syntonica]

Cubase and Logic are two top DAWs used in scoring. Reaper and Studio One are on second place, slowly gathering bigger and bigger crowd.
Post Pro: ProTools and Nuendo.

That's a bit surprising to me. Is this from your experience, or can these numbers be found somewhere?

(I can believe the "Reaper, cuz it's free! hur-de-hur" thing though. Sadly.)

Just go to places that gather small and big composers like VI Forum and you'll see what is often used for scoring. Then you have people like Junkie XL, Hans Zimmer and many, many more who use Cubase. Majority of composers that I know or follow use either Cubase, Logic or StudioOne (still in minority but is gaining in popularity).
Oh some use ProTools for scoring - they're hardcore imo

For Post Pro, PT is simply an industry-standard like for recording studios. PT and Nuendo have tools (plugins, formats), specific hardware and support.

Btw. I feel like DP may be more popular in the US than in Europe due to being MacOS exclusive for many years.

Those kinds of places are far too classy for my type. I prefer hanging around dives, like KVR and GS. People like Hans Zimmer have full orchestras in the next room, waiting on standby. I'm lucky if I can find two tuba samples to rub together.

I know PT has a death grip on all the professional recording studious, but for scoring? That takes one serious masochistic streak! DP is still out there in Hollywood, getting a tan and scoring film. But mostly working on its tan. You're probably right about their move to PC. It was long overdue and needed to save their bacon since Mac performance was lagging around that time and they need more customers.

I wish I knew that I worked just downstairs from MOTU back in the day. I would've gate crashed and gotten a programming job with them. I think that's why I have a bit of a soft spot for them.

[jens]

I think your conclusion about Cubase is off base (sic.). They do innovate.

I think it is not at all - Cubase to me feels like a total dinosaur - clunky and convoluted in the way computer programmes were 20 or 30 years ago - no amount of innovation is going to change that.

Completely exaggerated. Your short memory seems to be clunky and convoluted.

I do not think it is axaggerated in the slightest - can't do without personal attacks by the way?

[4damind]

The last time I tested Studio One, it was a mixed bag. Some things were great like the fast in-place rendering (Cubase didn't have that at the time), others like recording from Sysex didn't work at the time. It seemed to me that Studio One had a few ideas from Cubase but implemented them differently and had a few new ideas that Cubase didn't have back then (which makes sense, after all Wolfgang Kundrus was a former Steinberg developer).
Of course, you would have to look at the latest versions from time to time, but I think that in the meantime hardly anyone comes close to Cubase/Nuendo in terms of functionality. That's why I would never switch to Studio One, Cubase is IMO the more mature DAW.
(Ok, I like also Ableton Live, known to be a slightly different concept but very popular for electronic music... even Jarre switched from Logic to Live).

[pixel85]

Cubase and Logic are two top DAWs used in scoring. Reaper and Studio One are on second place, slowly gathering bigger and bigger crowd.
Post Pro: ProTools and Nuendo.

That's a bit surprising to me. Is this from your experience, or can these numbers be found somewhere?

(I can believe the "Reaper, cuz it's free! hur-de-hur" thing though. Sadly.)

Just go to places that gather small and big composers like VI Forum and you'll see what is often used for scoring. Then you have people like Junkie XL, Hans Zimmer and many, many more who use Cubase. Majority of composers that I know or follow use either Cubase, Logic or StudioOne (still in minority but is gaining in popularity).
Oh some use ProTools for scoring - they're hardcore imo

For Post Pro, PT is simply an industry-standard like for recording studios. PT and Nuendo have tools (plugins, formats), specific hardware and support.

Btw. I feel like DP may be more popular in the US than in Europe due to being MacOS exclusive for many years.

Those kinds of places are far too classy for my type. I prefer hanging around dives, like KVR and GS. People like Hans Zimmer have full orchestras in the next room, waiting on standby. I'm lucky if I can find two tuba samples to rub together.

I know PT has a death grip on all the professional recording studious, but for scoring? That takes one serious masochistic streak! DP is still out there in Hollywood, getting a tan and scoring film. But mostly working on its tan. You're probably right about their move to PC. It was long overdue and needed to save their bacon since Mac performance was lagging around that time and they need more customers.

I wish I knew that I worked just downstairs from MOTU back in the day. I would've gate crashed and gotten a programming job with them. I think that's why I have a bit of a soft spot for them.

Yeah, I'm not a big PT fun myself, especially in the midi department
For years I was jealous about MOTU audio interfaces for Mac. Apparently, their new interfaces finally have solid drivers for Windows so most likely my next purchase will be MOTU.

[_leras]

Steinberg's practices at this time are big on new features and small on bug repair, it appears. But one may not notice the bugs, it depends. Lotta 'em I never have to see. I think the plague has impacted the company like everything, to be fair. Historically some things don't get fixed until the next paid cycle.

I'm not sure that's fair. Which bugs do you feel have not been fixed in a given version?

[_leras]

I think your conclusion about Cubase is off base (sic.). They do innovate.

I think it is not at all - Cubase to me feels like a total dinosaur - clunky and convoluted in the way computer programmes were 20 or 30 years ago - no amount of innovation is going to change that.

It may be a bit quicker to do some things in other DAWs - but I think in Cubase a Lot, if not all of that, can be made up for if you make good use of templates.

If you have some decent mix templates setup from the get go, with the routing you need etc, yes you have do do some legwork and set it up, but then a lot will go much more quickly after that.

[jens]

It may be a bit quicker to do some things in other DAWs - but I think in Cubase a Lot, if not all of that, can be made up for if you make good use of templates.

I tried a few times to get up to an acceptable level of workflow in Cubase but even just working with multpile audio-takes is such a pain in the arse - it just craps them all on top of each other... would you believe? Why, just why?

I tried putting them all in an audio-part with a macro but for some reason that ended up being utterly cumbersome too. (I can't remember the exact specifics anymore, but I certainly tried.)

It's a total mess, while Studio One's comping-feature is relatively elegant - not quite as nifty as Reason's audio-editor, but still miles ahead of Cubase.

For someone who records a lot of audio on his own Cubase is just no good at all imo. And there were several other things which I just found unneccesarily complicated/convoluted.

[THE INTRANCER]

As mainly now a Studio One user since 2014, I found the experience of using Cubase to be like that of being introduced to a rather Frankenstein experience of old and new. The rounded white thick bordering of the windowing rather than the clean cut lines of S1 makes everything feel more cramp. Generally Studio One feels more like a scattering of thinly sliced pieces of meat on a pizza in development, some pieces hitting the spot whilst others are left half-way off the edges and thus a bit half-baked, but still edible. Studio One provides a full course meal but in the case of Cubase, it's more like something that leaves you bloated after eating several burgers. It's slow moving to digest and there's going to be a lot of left-overs for the seagulls to eat than what you'll find with Studio One. Studio One feels more streamlined and has room to grow and expand although as a user, you just don't know what is going to come out the oven in the future and whether you are going to want to eat it as in pay for an upgrade to get it.

Version 5.0 of Studio One didn't set the kitchen on fire for me, where it didn't really focus on things I wanted, so I stuck to 4.5 Pro. It does what I need but with other cheap DAWs like Mixcraft having basic video clip editing on the timeline, it makes Studio One's video implementation a bit of an undercooked afterthought. Lack of pro features like Surround Sound support in Studio One is really something of a glaring oversight for professional users looking to use it for film production. For that reason Cubase / Neuendo will continue to corner that segment. Ok Presonus brought notation into Studio One, but you would have thought that they would fill the plate and not leave that critical piece out in Surround Sound as well. Perhaps more film production features will make it into version 5.5 like other DAWs.

[dellboy]

I tried a few times to get up to an acceptable level of workflow in Cubase but even just working with multpile audio-takes is such a pain in the arse - it just craps them all on top of each other... would you believe? Why, just why?

I have Cubase Pro 10.5 and Studio One 4.5, I bought both to try them out and have never gotten around to deciding which is better. I like them both. I never use comping but I thought I would give Cubase a go first. I set up a five bar loop and hit record. I was left with four audio takes stacked on top of each other. I clicked everywhere to try to unstack them, and eventually gave up.

But a quick google and I found the little arrow at the bottom of the top take. A little click on that, and all was revealed - all the takes. Just click on one and it appears in the audio editor. Nice. Whats wrong with that ?