Presonus Studio One 5.2 vs Cubase 11

Plug-in hosts and other software applications discussion
KVRAF
21106 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia

Post Tue Jun 15, 2021 3:00 am

BONES wrote:
Mon Jun 14, 2021 8:03 pm
jens wrote:
Mon Jun 14, 2021 7:03 am
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.
But then you'd expect those super-cool dudes who walk all over the big outdoor festival stage would go in and out of time as they move around but you don't hear that at hose events, do you? I certainly don't but, to be fair, I don't go to a concert to listen for all the little technical details, I go to hear music I like played as loud as possible.
That's again another can of worms, me thinks.

First of all, most professional musicians nowadays use in-ear monitoring, and then it's a non-issue anyway - and then for bigger concerts there is always a dedicated monitoring tech, who ideally really know what he does and who will seek to make sure there's no weak spots anywhere on the stage, so even without in-ear monitoring there really shouldn't be much of an issue. Then, as I mentioned before, a skilled player will be able to work around latency, at least to some degree and those playing on bigger festivals usually have practized a lot. But then again, it's not as if I have never heard lousy timing on recordings of such a concert (not saying latency should be the cause or the sole cause then, but it has to be mentioned)
That's an awful amount of (false) presumption right there.
Actually Scot Solida, who you may of heard of, ran some tests on his basement full of vintage gear, many years ago, and posted the results here somewhere. From memory, the average latency came out at 9.5ms or so and some instruments were as high as 20ms. So not all presumption, some memory involved, which may or may not be 100% but will be in the ball park.
You must be talking about vintage digital synth then as these are typically just a bespoke computer running dedicated software basically and thus WILL introduce latency indeed. It's presumption on your part to argue I use these. My electric guitars don't have any intrinsic latency and neither do my acoustic guitars, my basses, my mandoline, uke, rajao, dulcimer, etc. - and the same goes for my Hohner Electra & Organa, my Eko Orchestra, my Elkas, yadda yadda. My Refaces could have latency, but I can't remember ever having noticed any, so it's pretty safe to say that Yamaha managed to keep it really low.

If I would use such a vintage digital synth, I would be able to somehow play around the latency - also by simply avoiding to play what can't be properly played with it.

As I already mentioned, it depends a lot on the music you play and how well you play it. I linked to a video that gave examples of music where it would matter A LOT. That does not mean it naturally should matter fo you or anyone else equally. I never made such a generalization - it was YOU who quite blatantly did it by claiming latency factually is generally irrelevant and an imagined problem because you and your mate can't hear/feel it.

And lastly, this certainly is an area where you could ask the henn/egg question. Can you not play a groove because you can't imagine it or can you not imagine a groove because you can't play it? Also in a band groove is very much a group-thing, so it depends a lot on your co-musos too - they might push you or they might hold you back. It's not entirely impossible that latency could be big issue for your mate if he played different music with different folks.

In regards to the music, I think tempo, note-length and micro-timing are not the only relevant factors btw. - staccato notes, short rests, syncopation and such also may matter a lot in regards to how problematic any given latency is.

Personally I am always interested in reguarly pushing my own limits, and in that case sgnificant latency is really the last thing I need.

User avatar
KVRAF
4240 posts since 22 Mar, 2009 from gent

Post Tue Jun 15, 2021 3:28 pm

BONES wrote:
Mon Jun 14, 2021 11:24 pm
"Noticed"? I've never so much as heard it mentioned in 40 years. Or is this specifically a Studio One issue?
It has been a long standing issue , some never had it /noticed it , maybe because they don't play live etc.
Since bumblebee made a video about it , presonus fixed it a year later ( release 5.1)
It's been well documented .
We all are different when it comes to hearing , noticing timing issues etc..just because you haven't noticed it doesn't mean it's not there .
And please , let's not go there (again ) :lol:
Eyeball exchanging
Soul calibrating ..frequencies

User avatar
GRRRRRRR!
11949 posts since 14 Jun, 2001 from Somewhere else, on principle

Post Tue Jun 15, 2021 6:10 pm

OK, I only got on board with S1 at about that time, so it was probably fixed by the time I first installed it.
NOVAkILL : Zenbook Duo, Core i7, 16GB RAM, Win10, UR44C | Studio One | JP6K, Union, Hexeract, bx_oberhausen, Odyssey, TRK-01, Vacuum Pro, Invader, Concept, GR-8, Viper, Equator, VG Carbon | Uno Pro Desktop, Uno, Rocket.

KVRAF
3129 posts since 25 Mar, 2016 from Seattle

Post Tue Jun 15, 2021 9:17 pm

Does Studio One 5 handle MPE as well as Cubase 11?

User avatar
GRRRRRRR!
11949 posts since 14 Jun, 2001 from Somewhere else, on principle

Post Tue Jun 15, 2021 11:14 pm

Dunno, it seems to work perfectly well in both to me, although I only use it to play Equator with my Roli Seaboard. I have no idea how it might work if I were to try and record it as automation or anything. The Seaboard is my main MIDI controller but I mostly don't use it in MPE mode.
NOVAkILL : Zenbook Duo, Core i7, 16GB RAM, Win10, UR44C | Studio One | JP6K, Union, Hexeract, bx_oberhausen, Odyssey, TRK-01, Vacuum Pro, Invader, Concept, GR-8, Viper, Equator, VG Carbon | Uno Pro Desktop, Uno, Rocket.

KVRAF
1624 posts since 28 Mar, 2007

Post Wed Jun 16, 2021 5:38 am

jens wrote:
Mon Jun 14, 2021 1:00 pm
c0nan wrote:
Mon Jun 14, 2021 8:18 am
jens wrote:
Sun Jun 06, 2021 12:29 pm
the problem is that if you record (say) ten takes, you have ten individual clips SITTING ON TOP OF EACH OTHER while there should only be ONE and there IS only one in every other DAW that I ever tried.
Just change the record mode to "Replace".
What? :lol:

How is that a solution? :shock:
Ok, one last go at trying to identify the problem first and then suggest the solution. First off, we have found out that the problem is not about "takes" in Cubase, but arranging them afterward in the same way that Reason does so simply and well.

I am still in the dark to some extent, so bear with me please. You seem to want to audition parts of each take and then re-arrange them into one final take ?

In Reason you do this with "comp handles". In Cubase you can do the exact same thing very easily with the "comp hand" tool.

1.So in Cubase record your audio takes which "sit on top of each other".

2.Now press the "lanes" tool" in the audio track (three little boxes).

3.choose any one of the takes now displayed in "lanes" below and right click to display the "comp hand".

4.Turn off the "snap" button in the toolbar at the top.

5.Select parts of each take that you want to keep by swiping with the "comp hand".

6.When finished close the lane button.

7. The top audio is now a combination of all your little take bits.

If this is not what you are after then I have no clue.

KVRAF
21106 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia

Post Wed Jun 16, 2021 1:53 pm

Yeah, that assumes I record and then have to make one final comp immediately and get rid of all the rest of the takes right away and be done with it.

I on the other hand want to be able to keep as many takes as I ever want for as long as I ever want. I wsnt to be able to re-record additional takes for a clip at free will for any version/copy of that clip whenever I decide to do so and then again keep as many of these new takes in combination with any number of previous takes that I decide to keep; and then access them and re-access them for comping whenever I wish to with all the individual takes hidden from view during arranging.
I can do that with ease in both Studio One and Reason. This is 2021, not 1990.

KVRAF
1624 posts since 28 Mar, 2007

Post Wed Jun 16, 2021 2:35 pm

jens wrote:
Wed Jun 16, 2021 1:53 pm
Yeah, that assumes I record and then have to make one final comp immediately and get rid of all the rest of the takes right away and be done with it.

I on the other hand want to be able to keep as many takes as I ever want for as long as I ever want. I wsnt to be able to re-record additional takes for a clip at free will for any version/copy of that clip whenever I decide to do so and then again keep as many of these new takes in combination with any number of previous takes that I decide to keep; and then access them and re-access them for comping whenever I wish to with all the individual takes hidden from view during arranging.
I can do that with ease in both Studio One and Reason. This is 2021, not 1990.
http://handmademusic.ch
No, its non destructive. Save the project and re-open Cubase and the takes are all still there. I am not so sure about recording new takes into the same track though.

Can Studio One and Reason do that ?

Record new takes into the original track ?

KVRAF
22340 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from not here

Post Wed Jun 16, 2021 3:03 pm

RTFM
lanes, comping, track versions
PEBCAK

KVRAF
21106 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia

Post Wed Jun 16, 2021 11:39 pm

dellboy wrote:
Wed Jun 16, 2021 2:35 pm
jens wrote:
Wed Jun 16, 2021 1:53 pm
Yeah, that assumes I record and then have to make one final comp immediately and get rid of all the rest of the takes right away and be done with it.

I on the other hand want to be able to keep as many takes as I ever want for as long as I ever want. I wsnt to be able to re-record additional takes for a clip at free will for any version/copy of that clip whenever I decide to do so and then again keep as many of these new takes in combination with any number of previous takes that I decide to keep; and then access them and re-access them for comping whenever I wish to with all the individual takes hidden from view during arranging.
I can do that with ease in both Studio One and Reason. This is 2021, not 1990.
http://handmademusic.ch
No, its non destructive. Save the project and re-open Cubase and the takes are all still there. I am not so sure about recording new takes into the same track though.
So you've gone full Groundhog Day on me then? :-o

I thought you were suggesting I should comp and commit to it immediately, which would not be a good solution at all for me, but at least make some kind of sense. But if that is not what you mean, then you again started to go round and round in circles.

I said again and again and again

and then again

that the problem is not comping, is not that there are no lanes

but that if the lanes are hidden, the takes are not really hidden too but instead sit on top of each other, each being an individual clip - which imo is completely insane and super messy.

So how does what you wrote about comping does affect that? How did you not start repeating the same assumption again that I claimed the problem was comping when not only I never said it was but also repeatedly said it wasn't and then repeatedly asked you to stop acting as if I said it was?

What on earth?

Can Studio One and Reason do that ?

Record new takes into the original track ?
Of course they can - why would they not?

Keep in mind that Mathias Jovan, thw brain behind Studio One, worked on Cubendo once.
(It's not hard to imagine him having the same kind of absurd conversations with some of the Steiny staff as we are having here right now.)

KVRAF
1624 posts since 28 Mar, 2007

Post Thu Jun 17, 2021 12:35 am

jens wrote:
Wed Jun 16, 2021 11:39 pm


I said again and again and again

and then again

that the problem is not comping, is not that there are no lanes

but that if the lanes are hidden, the takes are not really hidden too but instead sit on top of each other, each being an individual clip - which imo is completely insane and super messy.
I have tried my best but I genuinely do not understand what you are saying. Really.

Maybe someone who does understand could jump in and explain what it is that I am failing to grasp. In use all three seem to do much the same thing.

I have no desire to be combative and prove that I am right. I own Cubase and Studio One and also have Reason Lite and could use any of them as my DAW. Before this started I did not know how to do takes in any of them and now at least I have some idea. So I have learnt from this.

Of the three, the easiest seems to be Studio One, but I lack the in depth knowledge to understand if that is a correct assumption.

Anyways, I tried.

KVRAF
21106 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia

Post Thu Jun 17, 2021 1:05 am

What is so difficult to understand? You set a loop, and record (say) ten audio takes - do it in most DAWs and you end up with a single clip - do it in Cubase and you end up with ten clips.

Try it and you should be able to verify that it is in fact as I say.

In other words: out of the box take = clip in Cubase. Cubase makes no distinction between the two.

But clips are used for arranging and takes are used for comping, so both are not the same.

As I mentioned before (like weeks ago), there are ways in Cubase to work around this, but they using them is a lot more cumbersome and convoluted that is neccessary.

User avatar
KVRAF
9367 posts since 4 Jan, 2017 from Warsaw, Poland

Post Thu Jun 17, 2021 1:08 am

Music tech enthusiast.
DAW, VST & hardware hoarder.
My "music": https://soundcloud.com/antic604

KVRAF
21106 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia

Post Thu Jun 17, 2021 1:19 am

Or let me say it differently:

In Cubase, the functionality does not really exist. Instead of coding a native solution, they basically just added a few macros.
When you record a loop it starts adding a new clip whenever the cursor jumps back to the left locator and at the same time mutes the clip that has been added in the previous cycle.

When you press the "show lanes" button, it turns the track into a folder track and adds a sub-track for each of the stacked clips and puts them there. When you hide the lanes, it removes the sub-tracks and re-stacks clips.

So, yeah, it's basically just a lame workaround, no real native functionality. And that seems to mostly be the way they develop Cubase. One does wonder what they need the army of coders for.
Last edited by jens on Thu Jun 17, 2021 1:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

KVRAF
21106 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia

Post Thu Jun 17, 2021 1:22 am

No, it doesn't.

Here they explain what I am talking about ("region" is their term for clip - and it makes sense, as a clip
usually is not an individual file, but a region of a longer file):
The available options depend on whether you performed a linear or a cycle recording and the record mode you used. When recording audio in cycle mode, the recorded event is divided in regions, one for each take
And read this:
you will only hear one of them: the one that is actually visible
Which means, that as soon as you shorten the active region, another region shows up and gets played back instead. So that means you always need to awkwardly and cumbersomely make sure to select all regions (i.e. all stacked takes) before-hand to avoid that - that just for starters.

Got it now?

Return to “Hosts & Applications (Sequencers, DAWs, Audio Editors, etc.)”