SX3 more intuitive and user friendly?

[Jaeson Merrill]

A lot of people do have faith in Cubase... You just rarely see em cause they are actually getting work done. Rather then hanging out on internet forums.

excellent point.

[original flipper]

HI

Just as a final point - I could go into my studio now and knock up a midi/softsynth driven tune in about an hour using SXV3, editing midi, loading up synths and arranging the parts would not be a problem - what would stiffle this procces would be the increasingly large mixer as I add synths/fx/sampler/fx returns, this would also be mimicked in the arrange window as the audio/midi track bar starts to fill up.

The automation would also slow me down as I don't (with limited use) find it as easy as say Logic - this also leads to a further issue, as you add layers of automation you get another automation track pop up for every different parameter you automate - unlike some systems that overlay the automation on the track SXV3 creates another track.

So for me these are the kinds of things that make SX less than ideal - you can without doubt be comfortable with this program but I personally prefer a more compact approach to making music, perhaps I am set in my ways!

Just read the point about midi in Logic - I agree the piano-roll was a work of art - it was designed to give the maximum 'best view' for intricate editing.

Flipper.

[Sascha Franck]

Just read the point about midi in Logic - I agree the piano-roll was a work of art - it was designed to give the maximum 'best view' for intricate editing.

Yes, that and the ability to actually SEE what quantization/dynamic and whatever actions you applied to a part (using the parameter or extended parameter box).
In Cubase, quantization allways is "destructive" (yes, you can undo it, but it's still destructive) while in Logic it's just a playback parameter.
That's just SOOO much superior once you deal with different shuffle grades in one song.

Same goes for MIDI dynamics. The only thing possible in SX are a few trackbased things (such as delay), as they removed this for parts when SX came out.

This and the lack of a velocity tool make it ten times harder to do certain rather basic MIDI operations in SX.
Let's hope Steinberg will catch up - just as they did with relative snapping.

[stag]

1. The hype and some magazine reviews say that Steinbergs Cubase SX3 is more user friendly than before. Would you agree, and why?

2. As a Cubase SX2 owner I haven´t tried SX3 yet, since the upgrade costs some bucks. Meanwhile, I have had an eye on Tracktion, that compared to SX2 seems to be extremely intuitive and user friendly. The thing I like with Tracktion is that is allows me to have an immediate overview of the tracks, the order of VST-instruments and effects and volume levels at the same time, without having to open several windows/mixers. Is this possible to achieve in SX3?

Man you don´t make sense at all.
if you know how to handle SX2 you are able to run SX3. It´s an upgrade not a different app.
Tracktion it´s okay ,very good indeed but not better than cubase SE ,wich is in the same price range .
BTW the thing i like the most in SX is the same thing you like so much about tracktion. I do everything from the track view ,ocasionally i take a peep at mixer...well ,when i mixing.

@Sasha :
has anyone forced you to buy SX???
why do talk about something that you obviously don´t master or at least know,
your previous post not only it´s not true but reveal that you have issues with cubase,
I believe that goes to previous pieces of trash you have used and now cubase shows the same function in places you don´t bother to look ,for once the manual.

[Sascha Franck]

@Sasha :
has anyone forced you to buy SX???
why do talk about something that you obviously don´t master or at least know,

Are you going to talk biased bullshit again?
OK, do so - but don't accuse me of not knowing something!

your previous post not only it´s not true but reveal that you have issues with cubase,

What wasn't true in my post?
Facts, no bullshit! Save that for someone else!

[stag]

HI

Just as a final point - I could go into my studio now and knock up a midi/softsynth driven tune in about an hour using SXV3, editing midi, loading up synths and arranging the parts would not be a problem - what would stiffle this procces would be the increasingly large mixer as I add synths/fx/sampler/fx returns, this would also be mimicked in the arrange window as the audio/midi track bar starts to fill up.

The automation would also slow me down as I don't (with limited use) find it as easy as say Logic - this also leads to a further issue, as you add layers of automation you get another automation track pop up for every different parameter you automate - unlike some systems that overlay the automation on the track SXV3 creates another track.

So for me these are the kinds of things that make SX less than ideal - you can without doubt be comfortable with this program but I personally prefer a more compact approach to making music, perhaps I am set in my ways!

Just read the point about midi in Logic - I agree the piano-roll was a work of art - it was designed to give the maximum 'best view' for intricate editing.

Flipper.

you may hide channels on cubase, you may have four diferent mixes configured at least for what the purpose you have,
and let´s not forget the Cubase manual wich states clearly on the recommendations :"Dual monitor setup".
To run a 800EUR Pro-app don´t make sense to run it
with nothing less than the best hardware available.

[stag]

Sasha don´t make me waist my time.
RTFM the all post it is not correct.
i can tweak every parameter known to men on cubase ,via
mouse or midi controller.
the track based dynamics you refer it´s changing accents ,syncopate things automatically.
and destructive editing ,FCS ,this is 2005.

[Sascha Franck]

Sasha don´t make me waist my time.
RTFM the all post it is not correct.
i can tweak every parameter known to men on cubase ,via
mouse or midi controller.
the track based dynamics you refer it´s changing accents ,syncopate things automatically.
and destructive editing ,FCS ,this is 2005.

OK, where's the MIDI compression?

Seems you need to learn reading...

[Sascha Franck]

the track based dynamics you refer it´s changing accents ,syncopate things automatically.

Laughable.
As said, learn to read. Then you may accuse me of whatever you wish.

[stag]

There is on the midi plugs,

[Sascha Franck]

There is on the midi plugs,

Would you PLEASE learn to f**king read?
I was talking about PART BASED stuff, I even DISTINGUISHED between TRACK and PART based stuff for morons like you who OBVIOUSLY just can't read properly!

[Sascha Franck]

My last posts may look a tad harsh - be it so!
I am just getting f**king SICK of getting accused of not knowing certain things - very often and most obviously by people who are just in "Oh no, not that dude again" mode and therefor completely ignoring what I was actually writing!

During the last months I have been learning QUITE some things in SX, and I'm someone getting the hang of computer music programs rather quickly.
It's not completely without reason that I'm testing for quite some companies (some of them you may even know) and that I'm teaching computer music classes at the local music university.
You may argue that this doesn't say anything, and I may agree with you... still, I am getting angry when being pointlessly accused on a permanent base.

[Moritz Morpheus MkIII]

doublepost

[Moritz Morpheus MkIII]

[Sascha Franck]

Pull that trigger!