DAW: Which is Best for Sample-Based Music Production?

[sleepypoos]

This talented young lady is doing just fine 'looping' or as you say 'sampling' in Cubase

[machinesworking]

Cubase has all sorts of time stretch capability, any time I drag a loop in, it fits the bar(s) automatically. There's all sorts of utilities as well in terms of tempo mapping. The latest is, they just added in V12 multi-track phase coherent timewarp editing and it's significantly good.

None of that is related to sample based production. You're confusing sample based production with audio track based production. Plus all DAWs have those features, it's not unique to Cubase.

Mhm, I'm going to have to ask, have you ever used Cubase bro? You should do a bit of reading into who Mark Wherry is, and his work with Hans Zimmer. Hans Zimmer does an interview somewhere where he talks about how they sample their recordings of musicians and reuse them in new film scores.

You should go watch some of Junkie XLs youtube series on Cubase, and take a look at his setup. He's all about his own samples and resampling.

Yeah, that's a logical fallacy, I can do that too. Danny Elfman uses Digital Performer, therefore since Elfman is arguably a more complex film score writer than either Junkie XL or Zimmer, then DP is better at film scoring. This is a simple fact, Studio One added in features for VSL libraries that the rest do not have, and DP11 added in compensation for articulations that neither Cubase or Logic currently have. (i.e. Cubase and Logic will occasionally skip articulations because the sampler can't tell which event was first, the articulation or the note).

I mean, fck them talk about me. I've recorded and or extracted already recorded projects, fine edited, mixed/processed, named+described, organized and implemented over 10,000 of my own samples. I'm sort of an undeniable expert in this, and there is no way in hell any of the other DAWs could have done it as fast or better. I know this without a doubt Everything is tagged in MediaBay, I can find things by microphone used, outboard processor used, what album it's from, what instrumentalist was recorded, what year, which projects it has already been used in, genre, sub genre, style, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

That's cool, but that's just one aspect of using a DAW as a sample workstation. Cubase is not and has never been set up to be a Sampler, Live flatly has, that's what I'm trying to get through to you here. It doesn't mean Cubase is a bad DAW, I flatly answered the question asked here based on my knowledge of DAWs and their workflow. I've used and wrote songs in pretty much every DAW out there, currently there are 6+ DAWs on my system. Cubase is an old School DAW that does a great job of keeping up with modern features no doubt, but with the parameters of the original question in mind, Live is a superior sampling based DAW, period.

Sweeping a filter is cool bro, for sure. I said, Live is good for looping or clips or whatever you want to call it - for me Sampling is about a lot more than that. It's not one thing. Live manipulation of samples, is not really sampling. That's a performance with samples. What you are describing is more sound on sound looping... you can see a guy on Twitch named HoneyCombBeats who does Ableton shit as good as anyone with a Boss looper or something - no DAW.

You clearly haven't used multiple DAWs and samplers in your life. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, I'm not trying to be, it's just it's a super simplistic way to look at sampling and recording into a DAW, especially the clip based ones. Resampling is a huge part of almost any Live users workflow, and Cubase just doesn't as a DAW qualify as a workstation sampler the way Live does. This is getting pointless, because you haven't even for yourself defined what a sampling DAW would be, you just like Cubase.

I can emulate Ableton production styles in Groove Agent pretty much..

No you can't. sorry, that's as dumb as me saying I can do articulations by hand so it doesn't matter if Cubase has Expression Maps. You can get to the same end product, sure, but in no way is Groove Agent and Cubase as a DAW set up for a sampler type workflow, and Live flatly is.

If the OP wants to work with loops on the fly, perhaps Live is the choice. But in the big picture for general sample management, use, implementation, recording, editing, customization, organization, composition, I wouldn't recommend Ableton.

If you're incapable of working and thinking linearly, then I would maybe recommend Ableton.

Again, you haven't used Live that long or at all, clearly. Recording, editing, and customization of samples is where Live is king, by a long shot.

[Spin Boyz]

serato studio

[sleepypoos]

None of that is related to sample based production. You're confusing sample based production with audio track based production. Plus all DAWs have those features, it's not unique to Cubase.

Okay, now you've lost me lol. Are you telling me if I have 808 Samples and Loops, and I drag them onto a track and manipulate them, extract data, edit - that's not sample based production because it's on an audio track and came from a library?

I think you're confused mate. You're talking about looping, or shortening the loop in real-time to create effects, and such - that's a performance.

Bro, you realize all this existed before Ableton right? the sampling thing? Before Cubase had audio, it was used to sequence samplers.

Yeah, that's a logical fallacy, I can do that too. Danny Elfman uses Digital Performer, therefore since Elfman is arguably a more complex film score writer than either Junkie XL or Zimmer, then DP is better at film scoring. This is a simple fact, Studio One added in features for VSL libraries that the rest do not have, and DP11 added in compensation for articulations that neither Cubase or Logic currently have. (i.e. Cubase and Logic will occasionally skip articulations because the sampler can't tell which event was first, the articulation or the note).

False equivalency, Danny Elfman could write his scores on nothing but a piano - but, he also didn't get the XLs gigs. Apples to Oranges - I wasn't comparing anyone to anything. You made claims about Cubase - I pointed out that one of the top level composers, in terms of technological composers not *classical composers who could use anything*, relies on Cubase to manage and implement their own samples. Why are we talking about Danny Elfman?

And - none - of the DAWs have Logical Editor and Project Logical Editor which Cubase has had for over 20 years. The features you pointed out, if Cubase doesn't have them currently, will within a year.

Why are we talking about articularions and VSL now anyways?

That's cool, but that's just one aspect of using a DAW as a sample workstation. Cubase is not and has never been set up to be a Sampler, Live flatly has, that's what I'm trying to get through to you here. It doesn't mean Cubase is a bad DAW, I flatly answered the question asked here based on my knowledge of DAWs and their workflow. I've used and wrote songs in pretty much every DAW out there, currently there are 6+ DAWs on my system. Cubase is an old School DAW that does a great job of keeping up with modern features no doubt, but with the parameters of the original question in mind, Live is a superior sampling based DAW, period.

Don't repeat the philosophy I gave you about 'one aspect'.

You're just not telling the truth, Cubase literally, has something called a SamplerTrack. How is that not set up to be a sampler? It's literally the fking definition of a sampler. Groove Agent is literally the definition of a sampler.

I'm literally working on 3 separate samples based productions this week, in Cubase.

What are you talking about?

Groove Agent, literally, by definition, a sampler.

You clearly haven't used multiple DAWs and samplers in your life. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, I'm not trying to be, it's just it's a super simplistic way to look at sampling and recording into a DAW, especially the clip based ones. Resampling is a huge part of almost any Live users workflow, and Cubase just doesn't as a DAW qualify as a workstation sampler the way Live does. This is getting pointless, because you haven't even for yourself defined what a sampling DAW would be, you just like Cubase.

I put it into quotations for a reason if you didn't catch that. My view point is actually psychotically uncoloured, I don't give a flying sh!t mate. I use what is undeniably best as if I'm using it to launch a rocket with human life onboard - I'm not going to fk around. I started on FL Studio, then Cubase, then I spent $15,000 to learn Pro-Tools and Logic, and I've used just about everything else including SAW studio.

Actually correction, I started on 1/8th input soundblaster card into Windows Recorder, then Band In a Box, then Logic, then Fruity Loops, then Cubase, then I spent $15,000 on AE school learning Pro-Tools and Logic. I've had to use Ableton because of clients (such a fking pain in the ass to do any kind of professional work in beyond 'looping'), SAW Studio, DP, Reaper, Acid, Garage Band, Bespoke, BitWig, SAW studio, Cakewalk, Samplitude, Sequoia.. I'm missing at least 3 others.

No you can't. sorry, that's as dumb as me saying I can do articulations by hand so it doesn't matter if Cubase has Expression Maps. You can get to the same end product, sure, but in no way is Groove Agent and Cubase as a DAW set up for a sampler type workflow, and Live flatly is.

Dude, I've got an AKAI S1000HD racked in front of me. Don't tell me what is and ins't a sampler.

Here's my sampler workflow, it's called Workspaces, nice feature. Anything I need at any time, I press a button on my touch panel at it appears, track selected, MIDI routed, armed ready to go - zero setup time.



Works great, sampling all day every day.

Again, you haven't used Live that long or at all, clearly. Recording, editing, and customization of samples is where Live is king, by a long shot.

I - avoid - using it. At all costs. It's not professional software, it's a music production toy that some professionals have used successfully - people have also successfully used casio toys and childrens walky talkies as microphones on top charting records. I'm not knocking what people have been able to output of it - but it's a horrendous program to work in for anything other than live performance looping. That being said, as stated earlier, I've had to use it all the time because of clients and collaborators and every time I have to convince them to break the project out of that DAW into Cubase and they always thank me - the projects get done quicker, and it helps them break out of their loop induced writers/composition block.

[sleepypoos]

...Look... sampler

[machinesworking]

I - avoid - using it. At all costs. It's not professional software, it's a music production toy that some professionals have used successfully - people have also successfully used casio toys and childrens walky talkies as microphones on top charting records. I'm not knocking what people have been able to output of it - but it's a horrendous program to work in for anything other than live performance looping. That being said, as stated earlier, I've had to use it all the time because of clients and collaborators and every time I have to convince them to break the project out of that DAW into Cubase and they always thank me - the projects get done quicker, and it helps them break out of their loop induced writers/composition block.

OK you outed yourself. Like a lot of users of traditional DAWs you can’t wrap your head around Live, so you write it off as a toy. You’re not alone, but again, you’re dead wrong in every respect. I’ve used Live as a secondary DAW since version 4, my main DAW is Digital Performer, I’ve used and and done work in Logic, Cubase, Reason, Reaper, Pro Tools, Bitwig, etc. etc. There’s a direct unassailable reason I keep Live around, because It’s like a beefed up version of the MPC or EMU samplers I used to use.

Without any disrespect to Logic, Cubase and DP, they’re complex DAWs with slow methodical workflows, they aren’t and never were designed to act like a hardware sampler, MPC etc. they don’t have that kind of workflow. Groove agent isn’t comparable to the entire DAW being designed around the concept of sample manipulation like Live is.

My point wasn’t directed at you, you’re the one who needs to “challenge” someone about how kewl Cubase is, you could have simply stated your case, but you looked to argue with other users about your DAW of choice, which is beyond dumb really. I’m sorry I got caught up with you in some idiotic pissing contest.

Like the original poster stated, Live is considered by most rational people not getting emotional about their DAW of choice, to be the most sample oriented DAW out there. It’s again pretty much a Sampler workstation disguised as a DAW, and honestly people getting stuck looping in Live are simply in need of more theory. If you need DAW features to finish a song, you’re not actually writing the song in the first place.

[apoclypse]

I don't know if Live is still the "best". I think a lot of DAWs have caught up in-terms of sampling. Logic in particular has a really nice workflow and has a few tricks Live doesn't. I personally don't like chopping samples in Live, I feel like that workflow is a little clunkier than I'd like. I'm sure if I still had a Push I would love it. Personally I like old school sample chopping so Maschine, MPC etc imo is where its at. Slicing in a DAW doesn't give me the same immediacy imo.

[sleepypoos]

OK you outed yourself. Like a lot of users of traditional DAWs you can’t wrap your head around Live, so you write it off as a toy. You’re not alone, but again, you’re dead wrong in every respect. I’ve used Live as a secondary DAW since version 4, my main DAW is Digital Performer, I’ve used and and done work in Logic, Cubase, Reason, Reaper, Pro Tools, Bitwig, etc. etc. There’s a direct unassailable reason I keep Live around, because It’s like a beefed up version of the MPC or EMU samplers I used to use.

My head is completely wrapped around and through Live and all aspects of it. I'm not in the habbit of half-learning things - I've used the program in more complicated ways than the majority of Ableton users. What is it I'm not wrapping my head around? It's not magic dude.

Well, Groove Agent is probably more akin to the MPC or EMU samplers you used to use.

Ableton is 'okay'. That's as much as I will give it, it's 'okay'.

The beginning of my recording passion started with looping. Boss DD-20 Giga Delay with 20sec of sound on sound loop time and one layer of undo. Ran into 1/8th soundblaster card, into Windows Recorder.

I'm well versed in all styles of production, including Ableton - because I have to be regardless of avoiding it like the plague. Any time I've ever worked with someone who has only ever used Ableton - they know NOTHING about professional workflow and ethic - Because Ableton just does not facilitate those things. It facilitates triggering stacked loops and mixing them together, sort of like a DJ, requiring little actual musical skill. I consider that nearly a toy, could you score the next batman movie in Ableton? Yes, but everything would take 100x as long.

Without any disrespect to Logic, Cubase and DP, they’re complex DAWs with slow methodical workflows, they aren’t and never were designed to act like a hardware sampler, MPC etc. they don’t have that kind of workflow. Groove agent isn’t comparable to the entire DAW being designed around the concept of sample manipulation like Live is.

Slow methodical workflows? You've lost your mind. Nothing beats my Cubase workflow, you need to go deeper into the program mate if you think that. If you have seriously used Cubase, you have misused it. Nothing has been able to beat my Cubase workflow - not even close. You don't even seem to be aware of what the PLE is or can do.

Cubase was designed to organize, sequence, and control Samplers. That's why it comes with one, with all sorts of integration features. The entire DAW is designed around that concept.

Tell me this, how do you select the lead vocal track in DP?

My point wasn’t directed at you, you’re the one who needs to “challenge” someone about how kewl Cubase is, you could have simply stated your case, but you looked to argue with other users about your DAW of choice, which is beyond dumb really. I’m sorry I got caught up with you in some idiotic pissing contest.

Bro, I'm not challenging you. I'm trying to help you. Should I go back and start quoting you.

Again, sorry, but stupidly wrong here,

Jesus.

Like the original poster stated, Live is considered by most rational people not getting emotional about their DAW of choice, to be the most sample oriented DAW out there. It’s again pretty much a Sampler workstation disguised as a DAW, and honestly people getting stuck looping in Live are simply in need of more theory. If you need DAW features to finish a song, you’re not actually writing the song in the first place.

So, are you telling me Dorico wouldn't be more efficient in teaching people music theory than Ableton? Ableton doesn't even have a score editor. Why are you even considering this - the entire ethos of Cubase is designed around linear composition and theory. Ableton literally became popular because of a beatboxer doing beatbox loops. And it was cool.

Cool 10 years ago. It is not a benchmark staple. It's a popular fun piece of looping software - until you actually try to do anything serious in it. That's what made it popular because that is what works best in the program - looping and clip launching. Companies released entire hardware lines based on that. They didn't wing it when it came to their market research.

If you need DAW features to finish a song, you’re not actually writing the song in the first place.

It's about finishing songs quicker = more songs.

It's about having your projects, life, career, and samples organized.

Cubase (probably most Ableton sounding pop hit that year)


Cubase


Cubase


Cubase


Cubase


Cubase


Cubase


Cubase


Cubase


Deadmau5 on ditching Ableton for Cubase (because of PDC)



Any sample production in there? I'm not sure.

[tommyzai]

What if Cubase was not an option because dongles led to death? What would replace it for that kind of workflow and features?

[sleepypoos]

What if Cubase was not an option because dongles led to death? What would replace it for that kind of workflow and features?

It's dongleless now

[machinesworking]

I don't know if Live is still the "best". I think a lot of DAWs have caught up in-terms of sampling. Logic in particular has a really nice workflow and has a few tricks Live doesn't. I personally don't like chopping samples in Live, I feel like that workflow is a little clunkier than I'd like. I'm sure if I still had a Push I would love it. Personally I like old school sample chopping so Maschine, MPC etc imo is where its at. Slicing in a DAW doesn't give me the same immediacy imo.

IMO and that is all this sort of argument is, opinion, Live has the most immediate approach to sample mangling. You record something, trim it, set a tempo if needed, then you can immediately start in on pitch and time manipulation of that sample, add FX, flatten it and go. The whole interface is designed around using the clips grid as a sampler, that's exactly how I used it at first. The fact that there are dozens of 8x8 Clip grid control surfaces set up to work with Live (and now Bitwig, Logic, and DP), that's a testament to the concept of samples as the basis of a song, whether as loops or one shots.

Bitwig is the obvious to me second choice here, then the MPC, (barring your example of slicing where the MPC is just a load of fun).. The reason I'm on Live again over Bitwig is simple, MIDI comping IMO is the direction to go in, Bitwig is for me anyway going more in the direction of people who want a lot of random chance type ways of pushing their song creation, and Live went with off kilter MIDI comping, more my style.

[sleepypoos]

IMO and that is all this sort of argument is, opinion, Live has the most immediate approach to sample mangling. You record something, trim it, set a tempo if needed, then you can immediately start in on pitch and time manipulation of that sample, add FX, flatten it and go. The whole interface is designed around using the clips grid as a sampler, that's exactly how I used it at first. The fact that there are dozens of 8x8 Clip grid control surfaces set up to work with Live (and now Bitwig, Logic, and DP), that's a testament to the concept of samples as the basis of a song, whether as loops or one shots.

Cubase can verbatim do

You record something, trim it, set a tempo if needed, then you can immediately start in on pitch and time manipulation of that sample, add FX, flatten it and go.

[machinesworking]

Tell me this, how do you select the lead vocal track in DP?

DP has the absolute easiest to use search function these days. I'm not here to compare DAW d!ck sizes, and please, spare us your terrible taste in music. What a vomit inducing selection of vapid garbage.

[sleepypoos]

I don't know if Live is still the "best". I think a lot of DAWs have caught up in-terms of sampling. Logic in particular has a really nice workflow and has a few tricks Live doesn't. I personally don't like chopping samples in Live, I feel like that workflow is a little clunkier than I'd like. I'm sure if I still had a Push I would love it. Personally I like old school sample chopping so Maschine, MPC etc imo is where its at. Slicing in a DAW doesn't give me the same immediacy imo.

Have you tried Groove Agent, can buy it as a Logic plugin/Standalone. 30day demo if you've never tried it.

[sleepypoos]

Tell me this, how do you select the lead vocal track in DP?

DP has the absolute easiest to use search function these days. I'm not here to compare DAW d!ck sizes, and please, spare us your terrible taste in music. What a vomit inducing selection of vapid garbage.

Never said it was my personal taste, I listen to Brian Blade mate...

f**king goof

I don't have to search, I press a button. so much for your workflow.