Presonus Studio One 5.2 vs Cubase 11

[jamcat]

It takes roughly 1 ms for sound to travel 1 foot.
So when you're jamming live in your rehersal space and your drummer is 15 feet away, you're experiencing about 15 ms "latency". That's never been a problem for anyone.

[jancivil]

lol
the internal card on my MBP is Intel. The GPU thing with 8GB NVRAM is AMD. Sure the next bit is some kind of Apple sucks gesture. They kinda do but this is a worthy machine for everything I do, the best system I'll ever see in all likelihood.
the reason for using the graphics switching is to preserve the battery, hence a longer life for the computer.
I'm not a graphic designer, further this is not a graphics design plugins forum, so talk about 'who cares'...
off topic posturing regarding the irrelevant and missing some basics. shrug, rolls eyes

it's a very fine display and it's easy to look at, for me.
I think Cubase 11 doesn't like something about this switch, where 10 was not too worried. If it stays stable, the topic of the graphics card is of zero further interest to me.

[rardier]

(out of the box my zephyrus g14 had more than 1ms dpc latency now i m more in 0.1ms)

Why is 1ms a problem? My bandmate plays drums through my laptop and the round-trip latency is reported as more than 20ms on my system but everything sounds in time to us. I've never really bothered doing any optimisation on my laptops. We've been using them live for 15 years and they've worked perfectly well. If you don't know the numbers, you probably won't notice any latency. It is only because you know it's there that you think it makes a difference. Try it - get someone else, who can't see what the latency is, and see how far you can push things before they notice. I bet you get to a 512 sample buffer before he/she thinks there's a problem.

and yes i told explicitly cubase to run only on the amd graphic instead of nvidia or letting the system choose

So it's a Ryzen system? Why would you run on shitty internal graphics and not the (presumably grunty) nVidia card? As a graphics professional, you couldn't give me a computer with AMD graphics.

Digital Performer is almost certainly used more for scoring than REAPER and Studio One, and I'd even believe it if someone said Pro Tools was used more often than both of those, right now.

Who cares? Seriously, how many Pro Tools users do you think even know Reaper exists? It's not a popularity contest. Unless you want to do it professionally, in which case you have no choice but to know all the industry standard tools inside out, it only needs to be about what works for you, as an individual. And if you can't make Reaper or Studio One work for you, there is something seriously wrong with you.

I m talking about 1ms dpc peak latency not latency of the daw.
It s a problem because a dpc peak latency can t be planned by the daw, so that means when the dpc latency occurs : drop out can happen when it shouldn t because your audio process couldn t have the needed time to fill in the audio buffer .
For example : you set your audio buffer to X samples that leads to give the audio process Y ms to fill in the audio buffer,
In the case of 1ms dpc peak latency if your audio process take more than Y-1 ms you ll have a drop out because the Daw can't compensate (by delaying).
The greater is your buffer size , the less the risk of glitch/drop out, but you raise the latency (delay) of the daw and that could lead to other problem if you play real time virtual instruments or if you do automation with plugin that don t have sample accuracy automation.

I don t do graphic and amd graphic card seems to be better in dpc latency.
There s just less memory on amd card so you can t open an infinite number of plugins windows.
But if i want to play games (but i never did) i can set which card i want to use for a program.

[THE INTRANCER]

......

Arguing with BONES is like punching yourself in the face, don't do it.

[BONES]

I m talking about 1ms dpc peak latency not latency of the daw. It s a problem because a dpc peak latency can t be planned by the daw, so that means when the dpc latency occurs : drop out can happen when it shouldn t because your audio process couldn t have the needed time to fill in the audio buffer.

Unless it happens twice every bar, I wouldn't see it as a problem. We can live with the occasional glitch on stage, as long as it's not happening all the time, you just live with it. That said, it's something we have only encountered very rarely, and only in rehearsal. That's mostly why we rehearse - to make sure those kinds of things don't happen on stage or, if they do, we can deal with them. So far, though, we've always been able to fix it by swapping instruments around or doing something to the mix/arrangement, we've never had to deal with it by f**king about with the computer itself. That said, I did have a laptop for a while that tended to give me grief at regular intervals so I sold it and got something better. I think that was the first time I learned about DPC latency but the monitor application didn't find any problems. And when it had a problem, you could get a full second or more of nothing before it went back to doing what it was supposed to be doing. But we weren't playing live at that time so I put up with it for 5 or 6 months. That's the thing, if we didn't perform live, none of that would bother me at all. Yes, it can be annoying but, ultimately, it doesn't stop me from working so I can put up with it.

For example : you set your audio buffer to X samples that leads to give the audio process Y ms to fill in the audio buffer,
In the case of 1ms dpc peak latency if your audio process take more than Y-1 ms you ll have a drop out because the Daw can't compensate (by delaying).

So you make your buffer bigger to compensate. That's what it's for. It's also why even though we can usually run well enough with a 128 sample buffer, we use 256 samples as a minimum because that's still low enough for my bandmate to be able to hit drums pads to trigger sounds on the laptop without anything sounding wrong. (He's the muso, I'm really just the pretty-boy singer.)

The greater is your buffer size , the less the risk of glitch/drop out, but you raise the latency (delay) of the daw and that could lead to other problem if you play real time virtual instruments or if you do automation with plugin that don t have sample accuracy automation.

Again, only if you are performing live. If you are working in a studio or at home, it doesn't actually matter all that much.

But it's the fundamental difference in approach - you want to agonise over every little millisecond whereas we just want it to be low enough that we can get up on stage and not look/sound like incompetent dickheads. So once we get below that threshold, which is around 20ms (20.63ms with our current buffer setting), it no longer matters and we can instead worry about things that do matter, like whether our hair looks right and our imperious sneers are menacing enough. For all I know, DPC latency might be 3ms or more but our current buffer size absorbs it so it just doesn't matter.

[trusampler]

Presonus Studio One needs a proper browser for tagging instruments and samples, Cubase's mediabay is still King in the browser regard.imo.. Please Presonus fix this..

[wuworld]

Presonus Studio One needs a proper browser for tagging instruments and samples, Cubase's mediabay is still King in the browser regard.imo.. Please Presonus fix this..

Cubase is behind Studio One.

[BONES]

Yeah, I'd have thought the same. I'm not a huge fan of using any kind of browser but the one in S1 is a lot more useful to me than what you get in Cubase.

[jancivil]

I seem stupid to me for not acting before I did, the only harm is using up the battery and having a stable Cubase is overwhelming that. So, zero crashes with the feature not ticked. I have only suppositions and lazy enough to have no inclination to wonder or look for documentation if it just works now. It isn't apparent from their forum, if it is the case, but I can suppose there was some optimization of the graphics processing aspect which doesn't like the internal card, or it stupidly switches.

there may be people underspec for using it if this is actually true. don't quote me, just a supposition.
I still say demo it/don't buy on rep.

[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.)

That person is clueless. Digital Performer is almost certainly used more for scoring than REAPER and Studio One, and I'd even believe it if someone said Pro Tools was used more often than both of those, right now.

Both REAPER and Studio One are niche in that market.

Oh yes. "Almost certainly" is definitely an evidence of fact Mr. "Cluemore".

[jancivil]

Well, there will be reasons for someone with a filmscoring day job to desire the workflow of Digital Performer over REAPER, or S1, or Logic, or Cubase for that matter.
If it's a job with a whole lot of post- say, in the Ambisonics realm Nuendo is going to tend to out, but the workflow of DP - chunks specifically - is intentionally suited to music for picture. Whether this argument from popularity can be litigated successfully in KVR court or not there are things to grasp about differences. I'd buy it if that were my job.

[simmo75]

Sorry to interrupt…

How well does Studio One handle MPE?

I’m really considering switching but Cubase/Nuendo handles MPE so well and it’s so easy.

[jens]

Why is 1ms a problem? My bandmate plays drums through my laptop and the round-trip latency is reported as more than 20ms on my system but everything sounds in time to us. I've never really bothered doing any optimisation on my laptops. We've been using them live for 15 years and they've worked perfectly well.

Ignoring for a moment that latency is not at all the issue he was talking about in the first place,
you fall for the common fallacy of trying to extrapolate your personal experiences to everyone else.

In regards to audio-latency this totally depends on the kind of music you make and your own skills. Nomally those less skilled in regards to timing have a bigger general tolerance when dealing with smallish latencies (i.e. if you own timing inconsistencies/fluctiations are larger than the latency you deal with you most likely won't noitce it in the first place), while those with greater skills will be able to deal with even larger latencies if need be by anticipating it and compensating for it.

So there is a huge difference between not noticing a given latency in the first and being able to live with it if neccessary. Most of those to whom the latter applies will most likely still try to bring down latency below the threshold where they notice it. Especially in regards to micro-timing latency can be a real nuisance or even a show-stopper (i.e. you can still record/play the same notes, but the groove will suffer).

Speaking from experience I expect you to completely dismiss what I say here; that however solely may be to your own disadvantage ( in German we call that "beratungsresistent" )



Edit: in order to lift some of the burden of having to explain in detail what I refer to off of me, I looked a bit around on youtube and found this fantastic video:

https://youtu.be/jPcXABJVjI8

Now that seems to be someone worthy of subscribing to!

[BONES]

All well and good except I wasn't talking about me, I was talking about my bandmate, who is a way better musician than I will ever be. He has no problem and neither of us can hear any timing issues with the results. That says there are no problems. I'd also suggest that a really good musician would handle it better than a mediocre one because they'd be better at adjusting and likely used to playing with lesser musicians who can't always stay in strict time.

Remember, 20ms of latency is the equivalent of being around 6.9m from the source of a sound (at sea level), or roughly as far away as the two guitarists in a rock band might set up their amps/stacks on a good sized stage. You don't see those guys all setting up on top of one another so they can stay in time, do you? So why would you worry about a similar amount of delay? It's just the kind of natural delay your brain deals with all the time, in all kinds of situations. You only worry about it because you know it's there, not because it's any kind of problem. After all, your average hardware synth has latency in the order of 10-20ms so if you're using a hybrid set-up, a bit of latency might actually help you stay in time.

[jens]

I was not talking about you either but about anyone who is not able to feel/hear these kind of latencies...

skills... that's all both specific and relative, right?

The distance within a band thing has the potential to be a real can of worms, I think:

First of all it's of course an entirely different thing whether the bass-player him- or herself delayed or whether he/she hears the drummer delayed. Imagine a bass-player standing right in front of his amp twenty meters away from the un-amplified drummer - both would hear each other with the same exact same delay and themselves with no delay, so this delay would automatically be compensated for automatically and hence there'd be no issue at all. But then of course for such adistance you'd have to mike up and amplify the drummer and then the question would be where the PA is. Wold the bass-player go over the same PA and it would be right in the middle between them, it would create the same Haas effect for both instruments and both players, which again would make it pretty much a non-iussue indeed. If the PA however was anywhere else, issues would start to arise, slight ones or more severe ones, depending on the actual circumstances.

In a rehearsal room, the bass-amp normally is placed close to the drummer and the bass-player tends to stand near his amp, and now you know why that is. But this and the rest of the setup depends on the specifics, not the least the size of the room. With a bigger room, chances are the drummer is going to get miked up. Then the acoustic signal that comes directly from the drum-kit itself will have a tendency to create a Haas effect which should be a non-issue. Also, in bigger rooms all the musicians will tend to have their own monitoring device, which again will help to minimize any potential issues. On stages - and especially bigger ones - the situation tends to be smiliar to a bigger rehearsal room.

But it's not hard to imagine that there may be thousands of inexperienced bands somewhere out there in somewhat bigger rehearsal rooms who sound decidedly untight and wonder why the f**k that is while each of the musos comfortably sits in his/her own cozy corner of the room without much of a proper monitoring solution (if any) and an un-miked drummer. I've been there to some degree myself in the past. This sort of potential issue is very real and ideally is dealt with in a proper and competent manner.

That says there are no problems.

No, it really does not - unless you logically get your head around this there is not a hint of a chance that this conversation of us is in any way productive between you and me.

You only worry about it because you know it's there, not because it's any kind of problem. After all, your average hardware synth has latency in the order of 10-20ms so if you're using a hybrid set-up, a bit of latency might actually help you stay in time.

That's an awful amount of (false) presumption right there.