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

[ericj23]

You still don't get it do you?

Your way of editing is a lot less flexible.

and you still don't read my posts

And if you must use automation you can affect them on another channel and make a folder track to rejoin them for the arrange page


your still not selling this to me even vaguely

cubases way of editing is almost as fast and flexible - and this is samplitudes big feature to convince this guy to lash out €450 for it

now if you were talking about elastic audio (cubase pitch measurement and correction tools are clumsy) or the included fx i might see your selling point but object orientated editing is not one of them

[cptgone]

And if you must use automation you can affect them on another channel and make a folder track to rejoin them for the arrange page


your still not selling this to me even vaguely
cubases way of editing is almost as fast and flexible

Not as fast, and very hard to keep an overview.

Take Jens' example: you can automate FX in and out to fit the vocals, but it's a real pain to keep track of what effect you used where.

[ericj23]

eh

you click on the affected area and right click to offline process history - this is difficult how ?


and if its in the folder track because its automated you just use the right and left arrow keys to select the appropriate part in the folder - then all the inserts sends etc are right in front of you or select show automation and it's there too

just admit that you are not convincing me and save the effort

[plastique]

Now, the dilemma is.....do I stick to what I know (and love might I add) in the form of Cubase, or do I venture out into the unknown and go down the Samplitude road?

i think it's a very good discussion and i like to throw in two more arguments .

if you did NOT find something which you can't do in your host (be it more ressource heavy or time consuming or not) i'd personally stay on the cubase route .
you can instantly start off making music and , which is important , still open and continue on working with your old songs .

if your adventurous and can afford to invest some time in re-composing your old tunes and learning new features i'd go the samplitude route .

[plastique]

eh

you click on the affected area and right click to offline process history - this is difficult how ?


and if its in the folder track because its automated you just use the right and left arrow keys to select the appropriate part in the folder - then all the inserts sends etc are right in front of you or select show automation and it's there too

just admit that you are not convincing me and save the effort

the point has been made that this is destructive editing (being able to undo or not) .

but still you can just use some fx busses instead to have the "bind fx to objects" kind of way . certainly , it's more cpu/disk intensive and needs soem time to create , but then again there are features like freeze/bounce etc. to get on .
it's hard to see time consumption as an argument , cause The Maestro first has to invest some serious days/weeks to get into the workflow of samplitude first .

ah well , not easy to make a decision on someone else's part

[ericj23]

the bit about folder tracks is about non destructuve (although its not in any way destructive) editing

and the fx buses are bound to the track - which is inside the folder - and it is no slower than applying the fx in samplitude - you click int he place you want the fx - choose the one you want - and then automate

but the bottom line is

samplitude will take time to learn and costs €450 more

why bother ? if cubase ain't broken for you the grass really is no greener - just maybe a slightly different shade

[Kraznet]

I'm a Samplitude V8 user now and I'm very happy with the decision .They have a very nice private User Forum in which the Developers (both Audio and Midi) reply to messages and take ideas onboard , these guys are dedicated . All the slight reservations I had about switching will be addressed and improved on in future updates .If you want to invest in an evolving Host with a smaller user base where your voice doesn't get lost in the crowd , I suggest you sign up - you won't regret it.

Kraznet

[Sielsynth]

Another Samplitude V8 convert here. Hi Kraznet, I've seen you over at the Samplitude forum. Nice to see we have some KVR members using SAM. I have been using Tracktion for almost two years and thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread and in many ways I still do. Nevertheless, as the complexity of my projects grew I found myself wanting to find easier ways to apply fx and do editing. Also I was using Audition for audio editing and decided I just wanted one package to do it all. Anyway, I tried Samplitude and fell in love. Now first disclaimer, it is no way near as easy to get going as it was with Tracktion. Tracktion remains the simplest most intuitive sequencer I have used to date. But having used Cubase, Sonar and most of the rest it didn't take me long to figure out how to get Samplitude going. Some of the more advanced features are amazing!!! As I read the manual and discover more features i am happy with my purchase.(I initially wished I had just waited for Tracktion2 ) After a solid weekend with Samplitude I am just about ready to use it in my studio. Most of the other producers I work with use Cubase and it was going to be my choice for compatibility, but hey, broadcast wave files took care of that. We will be mastering with Samplitude as soon as I figure out all the things I knew how to do in Audition. Anyway, I'm happy with Sam but I came from Tracktion which was in some ways easier and some ways more difficult to use. The midi editor is Sam V8 blows Tracktion's midi editor away. But of course I paid for it many times over . I felt that in the long run it would be worth it to learn Sams more advanced even if "cumbersome" features. So far I think I made the right choice.

[bmanic]

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...

Yes I know this but I meant that you can basically get the same end results but I'm sure you knew that and was just fishing.. and looks like you caught a few too!

Cheers!
bManic

[jens]

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...

Yes I know this but I meant that you can basically get the same end results but I'm sure you knew that and was just fishing.. and looks like you caught a few too!

Cheers!
bManic

[bmanic]

Oh btw. There is one old niggle I have with cubase/nuendo and it's that effects are ALWAYS ON and consume CPU even if you are not playing anything. Samplitude and Logic were first with this "smart plugin disable" thing (as it's called in FL Studio now). I for one can't understand why steinberg still insists on keeping the effects on at all time. It's a real waste of resources and gives the user a chance to use much more plugins in a Samplitude/Logic project before having to bounce/freeze.

Cheers!
bManic

[Kingston]

There is one old niggle I have with cubase/nuendo and it's that effects are ALWAYS ON and consume CPU even if you are not playing anything.

Yes it is absolutely terrible lapse of reason not to implement dynamic plugin/CPU allocation. It makes a 3.8ghz seem a lot less than it actually is. Not just that but everything stays on even if you stop playback! For example, once I turned on a lot of effects for a final song render, took me two minutes to get to the export screen because everything had slowed down to crawl!! GODDAMN!


As far as this object oriented fight talk here. Yes, fully object oriented editing is damn convenient, but it also clutters up the editing process to extremes. Suddenly you have a new and variable set of parameters for every single object. This kind of flexibility gets in the way of workflow and speed.

[popsych]

.........
samplitude will take time to learn and costs ?450 more

You'll never get to heaven if you're scares of getting high

why bother ? if cubase ain't broken for you the grass really is no greener....

I hate it when people say that. People are more capable of understanding things by comparison - (the comparisonics feature in samp is excellent too btw ). No light without dark, no good without evil and all that stuff . Samp e.g. may have a feature that SX lacks and :

a) he thinks such a thing is not possible
b) he can't think of it
c) he has been forced to a workaround and thinks that is the proper way.

There's nothing wrong in him trying a demo and seeing what it can do for him as i suggested right ?

And ericj23 if you can't see the obvious difference between what we are saying about objects then please stick to SX. Samp deserves better

[popsych]

As far as this object oriented fight talk here. Yes, fully object oriented editing is damn convenient, but it also clutters up the editing process to extremes. Suddenly you have a new and variable set of parameters for every single object. This kind of flexibility gets in the way of workflow and speed.

It does not in any way get in the way. The object editor is hidden until you show it. So if you don't want to work with a segment as an object just don't, it works track based. If you do it's only a click away

[popsych]

dbl post