Has Studio One Pro v6.5 Eclipsed Cubase Pro 12?

[jancivil]

I've never used Media Bay. I don't use samples for basic musical parts but do everything 'the hard way'.
I do rely on Logical Editor even as I'm not the kind of power user some may think of hearing about it. My uses are pretty simple in fact. So it ain't there in S1? Good to know, The statement sock puppet made on this only shows me the stupid.

Even the name speaks "banned". "I just joined KVR" - We have a term for that out here: doing too much.

yeah, I'm taking the night off, too tired to start in on another movie. I finally watched Inglourious Basterds. On Youtube at that. Pretty good!

[Haha Haha]

yeah, I'm taking the night off, too tired to start in on another movie. I finally watched Inglourious Basterds. On Youtube at that. Pretty good!

LOL. The revisionist history of Inglourious Basterds is both hilariously twisted and completely insane just like its famed writer/director Quentin Tarantino. It's one of Brad Pitt's best roles, IMO, with the noted exception of Tyler Durden in Fight Club which is unparalleled. He was beyond awesome in that extraordinary film. It's my all time favorite movie.

You know, I recently rewatched Pulp Fiction after almost 20 years. There have been so many lame knock offs of that movie over the years, none of which hold a candle to the original.

Pulp Fiction really holds up after all this time. It's truly a cinematic masterpiece. Absolutely brilliant in every way a film can be.

[TS-12]

The biggest issues for me in Cubase are: Childish look,
Lots of mouse clicks and menu selections to do simple things,
No volume and pan in the main track “rectangle”,
No leftside track “strip”,
Many features are not complete

[KoisanX]

Speaking as an absolute authority on all DAWS, having used them all to determine exactly their strengths & weaknesses. The answer is....

Mehhh.

[KoisanX]

(Double post)

[Haha Haha]

The biggest issues for me in Cubase are: Childish look,
Lots of mouse clicks and menu selections to do simple things,
No volume and pan in the main track “rectangle”,
No leftside track “strip”,
Many features are not complete

You know, I often go back and forth regarding the look and feel of Cubase. Part of me thinks it looks super stylish in a world of overly "flat" designs. But then I'll click on a button or select a menu option and up pops a hideous window/dialog straight out of Windows 95. WTF?

It's hard to believe Yamaha/Steinberg can't afford to hire a few more visual designers to harmonize this clusterf*ck of a UI. There are so many different font and icon styles that the whole thing looks like the childish mishmash you refer to. Cubase could look so great if it was given the love it deserves.

I would gladly pay the $100 annual "upgrade" fee if all they did was clean up the UI.

[KoisanX]

But I do switch between 48kHz and 96kHz a lot, depending on if I'm tracking, mixing, or exporting audio. Cubase can't handle that, and that is a total dealbreaker for me.

I used to use Cubase back before Studio One (I've also been using Studio One since V1.) Switching from 96kHz to 48kHz for mixing meant I had to make a backup of all of my audio files first, because Cubase does a destructive samplerate conversion on your files if you change your samplerate. As soon as you hit OK, your original files are destroyed. Gone without warning. When switching back to 96kHz for mixdown, Cubase will convert your downsampled files back to 96kHz. So you need to go in and swap out those twice converted files with your backups of your original 96kHz audio.

Cubase gives you the OPTION to do destructive or to retain the original files in the folder that you are working.
I'm curious about reason for this SR conversion while going from recording -> mixing -> mastering. I would've thought that if one started in 96kHz, the idea would be to mix with that and only convert down once to retain as much "useful" sonic data as possible.

[KoisanX]

I haven't bothered with forums for a long time, but I thought I'd weigh in when the 1st post I see after many years, is exactly what people were debating when I left!!

How can one compare software at any meaningful depth unless one is familiar with the depths of the software? Many users spend most of their time with a set of functions and develop their method of working around that. Studio One began with the idea that instead of directly offering a fully alternative to the big DAWS at the time, and especially Cubendo, they would start small and build from there. Nothing wrong with that, considering the asking price reflected this "developing" product.

Cubase without doubt is a behemoth. It features & originated almost everything any other DAW developer may think is unique, except for the LIVE Session technology. That is all Ableton.
The downside is that there are too many functions to keep track off and improve upon. That is NOT to say that these features are fully functional or useful, it simply means that sometimes a new user request will take a while before implementation.

As an end user I have used and still use Cubase, Studio One, Live, Reason, Wavelab, including IOS DAWs like Garageband, Cubasis, Korg Gadget.

All have strengths and weaknesses.

[jamcat]

I'm curious about reason for this SR conversion while going from recording -> mixing -> mastering. I would've thought that if one started in 96kHz, the idea would be to mix with that and only convert down once to retain as much "useful" sonic data as possible.

Great question. Keep in mind that when I’m mixing down, I’m using the original unmolested hi-res 96kHz files. As I said, in Cubase I had to make a backup of them before downsampling, so I could swap them back in before exporting the mixdown. Studio One makes it super easy by doing real-time non-destructive resampling on the fly during playback.

The reason for doing this is simply to free up processing cycles during real-time mixing so I don’t have to worry about choking my CPU. Of course I want 96kHz source files and rendering, but it’s not crucial for mixing, where processing headroom is the priority.

[dellboy]

Great question. Keep in mind that when I’m mixing down, I’m using the original unmolested hi-res 96kHz files. As I said, in Cubase I had to make a backup of them before downsampling, so I could swap them back in before exporting the mixdown. Studio One makes it super easy by doing real-time non-destructive resampling on the fly during playback.

The reason for doing this is simply to free up processing cycles during real-time mixing so I don’t have to worry about choking my CPU. Of course I want 96kHz source files and rendering, but it’s not crucial for mixing, where processing headroom is the priority.

I know next to nothing about professional recording, but has the entire recording industry now moved to 96kHz? Is it really necessary when only a dolphin can perceive such frequencies? I remember not so far back when 24hzHz was deemed more than acceptable.

[jamcat]

I know next to nothing about professional recording, but has the entire recording industry now moved to 96kHz? Is it really necessary when only a dolphin can perceive such frequencies? I remember not so far back when 24hzHz was deemed more than acceptable.

You seem a bit confused. I think you’re thinking of 24-bit. The reason you want to record source audio at 96kHz is two-fold:

1) To move the anti-aliasing filter in your ADC up an octave where its phase ripple won’t reach down into the audible spectrum.

2) To work from a higher base sample rate to minimize aliasing during processing and for less steep filtering when resampling back down when coming out of plugins that use oversampling.

Every oversampling plugin your audio goes through downsamples back to the base sample rate. This may happen dozens of times per track, depending on your plugin chains.

By processing at 96kHz, 2x oversampling plugins don’t need to oversample at all, and 4x oversampling plugins are just going up x2 and back down. It means your audio is undergoing far fewer (and far gentler) conversions during processing. Sample rate conversions are a real fidelity killer, and oversampling converts your audio over and over again.

[dellboy]

You seem a bit confused. I think you’re thinking of 24-bit.

I seem confused, because I am confused.

I just looked in my Studio One audio setup and I am recording @ 32bit - 44.1kHz with 128 samples which i guess must be the default setting. Its all meaningless to me, even though years ago I always bought Sound on Sound every month and tried to understand this stuff. Never liked maths at school either.

[careyletendre]

I'd really like to know what I would be missing ...

I'm sure this thread will finally end the debate.

[wuworld]

Studio One has had some good updates.

[THE INTRANCER]

I believe Studio One has eclipsed Reaper .