KVR Audio

Lunatique · Post by **Lunatique** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 11:06 am

You really should only switch if you aren't happy with what you're using now. Or, if after a little research, the competition offers far more and far better workflow/features. If they are so close that you can't even decide easily, then you aren't missing out on much and should stick to what you're familar with.

popsych · Post by **popsych** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 11:37 am

It's not a matter of being happy. It's a matter of not knowing what your missing.

I was on Cubase since 3.8. Using 5.1 and felt happy with it, until i had to do some work on a mates Logic Audio Plat 5. I was sold. I've never looked back, even now that it's mac only (i refuse Stev(il) Jobs

) i am stuck with a 4 year old sequencer and having tried SX,SX2 and having the chance to get them dirt cheap.

Samplitude is EXCELLENT and if your work mainly involves audio the go for it, i have no doubt that it pips Cubase to the post. However if you are more into MIDI and VST's i'd say a traditional sequencer still has the edge. That said Samp v8 has some excellent improvements in that department and i think the next major improvement will bring it on par with at least Cubase MIDI wise.

It has excellent effects, the object based automation is godsend. The sound is superb - so is the dither and the mixer most intuitive just like with PT and Logic.

Try the demo version but give it some time. The GUI needs a bit of a clean up still, but things have been improving there too.

!BEWARE! it is deep, but that's because it has A LOT to offer.

Just my 0.02

DuX · Post by **DuX** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 11:41 am

Guitarjeff wrote:I would go with Cubase 3 if I were you. Nuendo 3 is running rock solid here.

If you are used to working in Cubase SX, Samplitude will frustrate you as it is not nearly as intuitive (at least V7 wasn't)and the midi isn't nearly as good either. It does sound great and has great audio editing capabilities but you will spend too long learning new ways of doing basic things and cursing at Samp for being designed so inconvienently. IMO, of course, your mileage may vary.

Jeff

That is so right!

Been there, tried them... Cubase is still the best work horse. Samplitude may be better suitable for mastering and Cubase is far better for - making music

.

Cheers.

ericj23 · Post by **ericj23** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 11:41 am

jens wrote:
bmanic wrote: as the top 5 of them can all do about the same things, what's the point?
oh so untrue!

Cubase isn't object-orientated for a start...

eh what people listen to the tune you made and go that one was object orientated

but heres a hint - cubase upgrade €150

crossgrade to new program €600

so you want to pay €450 for the "pleasure" of learning a new program

porpoise · Post by **porpoise** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 11:42 am

HI

I think you can compare practically ANY host - the bottom line being, you can make commercial quality material in any of them.

I have SXV3 and previously used Logic PC - which is similar (in ways) to samplitude - I demoed samplitude and came to feel that is was not for me at this time, it just felt a little cumbersome.

I am using Tracktion at the moment and find it liberating in it's ease of use - I might use SXV3 for particular projects simply as I am getting used to it and it offers some interesting options.

As usual demo Samplitude and see what you think.

Porpoise.

jens · Post by **jens** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 11:47 am

ericj23 wrote:
jens wrote:
bmanic wrote: as the top 5 of them can all do about the same things, what's the point?
oh so untrue!

Cubase isn't object-orientated for a start...
eh what people listen to the tune you made and go that one was object orientated

Could you please explain your so point so that I can understand what you're talking about?

(I got your argument but it is so incredibly stupid that I think it's better for both of us if I pretend
I didn't

)

mojkarma · Post by **mojkarma** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 11:53 am

Could you please explain your so point so that I can understand what you're talking about?

Could you please explain why should object orientated be so important and unique and why does this make samplitude so special.

The guy has Cubase and loves it. He better stays with it. Learning a new program can be difficult without anything special that will make your music better.
When people ask this comparison things, they should post what do they need and expect form their host.
If you work extensice with midi, vst, automation of vst's...forget samplitude.

The initial post was about that the top 5 sequencers all do the same thing.

Forever Sun · Post by **Forever Sun** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:06 pm

ericj23 wrote:
jens wrote:
bmanic wrote: as the top 5 of them can all do about the same things, what's the point?
oh so untrue!

Cubase isn't object-orientated for a start...
eh what people listen to the tune you made and go that one was object orientated

Pardon ?

.This feature is for YOU ( the engineer/musician) and not the listening public. It improves the workflow and gives you more editing options.

Just go and read up on what can be done with the whole 'object' implementation in Samplitude, if you do audio work you will be amazed.

@ the original poster. Stick with Cubase. The new Yamaha connection could make this one of the best partnerships in this business, who knows. I hope so anyway.

Having said this, if you are not happy with Cubase and aren't a hardcore midi user then Samplitude is a good choice. Audio editing and mastering is second to none, IMHO. The FX is as good as the best out there, so you won't have to go and spend extra $ on third-party plug-ins.
Cheers.

ericj23 · Post by **ericj23** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:07 pm

"Could you please explain why should object orientated be so important and unique and why does this make samplitude so special"

my sentiments entirely - being able to apply differnet effcts to objects on the same track and move them around - its like having lots of cubase tracks in a folder - how amazing ! NOT

i think that should be my point made simply enough for all to understand

Forever Sun · Post by **Forever Sun** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:15 pm

ericj23 wrote:
mojkarma wrote: Could you please explain why should object orientated be so important and unique and why does this make samplitude so special.

my sentiments entirely - being able to apply differnet effcts to objects on the same track and move them around - its like having lots of cubase tracks in a folder - how amazing ! NOT

i think that should be my point made simply enough for all to understand

You should really go and read up about this feature properly. For your convenience :http://www.samplitude.com/de/sam_FE.htm.

ericj23 · Post by **ericj23** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:21 pm

i just did - and it is exactly as i described ie already in cubase
- you split your audio up - you drag it to seperate tracks - cubase makes them automatically - you edit each part differently - different routings, fx, automation - offline or on
- you put them all in a folder track

exactly the same

maybe not as quick - but not a whole lot off it

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT ?

cptgone · Post by **cptgone** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:24 pm

Forever Sun wrote:http://www.samplitude.com/de/sam_FE.htm

"As an enhancement to the traditional concept of mixer-supported editing of complete tracks, all versions offer countless possibilities for direct real-time sample editing. Recorded audio tracks can thus be cut into as many objects as you wish.
Every object can be edited with individual fades and effects, such as Equalizer, Timestretching, Pitchshifting or plugins. Samplitude also offers Aux-Sends on the object level, the well-known linearphase mastering effects, and a widely variable signal flow."

I take it this "object editing" is non-destructive, just like VST automation? Sounds like a wonderful feature.

cptgone · Post by **cptgone** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:28 pm

ericj23 wrote:i just did - and it is exaclty as i described ie already in cubase
- you split your audio up - you drag it to seperate tracks - cubase makes them automtically - you edit each part differently - different routings, fx, automation offline or on
- you put them all in a folder track

exactly the same

maybe not as quick - but not a whole lot off it

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT ?

It's more system resource efficient.
It keeps the mixer screen clear.
Ease of use.
Etc.

jens · Post by **jens** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:33 pm

cptgone wrote: I take it this "object editing" is non-destructive, just like VST automation? Sounds like a wonderful feature.

yep - it is non-destructive

(while we're at it: Tracktion is object-orientated as well

)

Also midi-tracks are objects - in Samplitude 8 these can have properties such as bpm, time-signature, volume, transposition, fade in/out etc. - all non-destructive and you can create a new object simply but copying another one or cutting a part out of it.

and another thing: that midi-editing isn't good/advanced in Samplitude isn't true in the least anymore for V8 - as I said: it's fantastic now!

Forever Sun · Post by **Forever Sun** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:36 pm

ericj23 wrote:i just did - and it is exactly as i described ie already in cubase
- you split your audio up - you drag it to seperate tracks - cubase makes them automatically - you edit each part differently - different routings, fx, automation - offline or on
- you put them all in a folder track

exactly the same

maybe not as quick - but not a whole lot off it

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT ?

I don't use Cubase, so, are you describing that in order to achive the object editing in Samplitude, you would need to cut and drag chunks of your audio across different tracks ?

If this is so, then, the answer to your last question is: it is important as it saves you resources and TIME.
For pro audio work, these are important at least to me.

Samplitude 8 or Cubase SX3? Your opinions please...