SX 3 vs. Logic 7

[Sascha Franck]

Pretty harsh words about a program you obviously do not know enough.

Believe me, I do know it well enough to justify my comments...

SX has three (3) independent mixer views. You can open 3 mixers and set them to show different contents. One can show only midi chanels, the other audio chanels and the third vst chanels. Where is your problem?

The mixer isn't configurable. The items are hideable, but that doesn't qualify for "customizeability" at all.

If you have for example battery as your drum module, don't activate 16 channels if you don't need so much.

I have it set to 2 stereo and 8 mono outs. Doesn't matter though.
Let's say I set it up, only using a basic stereo kit. Fine. I'm gonna hide all unused channels. Later on I may want to use an additional out. What I'll have to do is to unhide all channels (which might result in a WHOLE f**king lot of channels, assuming I may also use some further multiout instruments), scroll to the Battery channel in question, set it to "unhideable" and hide the rest again. This procedure has to be done numerous times during some compositional process.

What is so configurable in logics mixer and what do you have to do in logic to create a aux channel.

I can put my mixer objects ANYWHERE I like them - ANYWHERE! It doesn't follow my arrange order, it'll follow MY PERSONAL preference. In case I want a mixer following my arrange track order I would use the track mixer, but believe me, I never do so, because I prefer a mixer layout that I design by my own.
Regarding Aux channels, I just copy any object in my mixer, set it to an unused Aux channel and there we go.
Again, I can place that Aux channel wherever I like.

apart from all that, there's no option to show both inserts and sends on audio channels in SX. Lame again. There's no option to switch of the EQ view once you edit your channel settings. In case you don't use the internal EQ - what is it supposed to do there?
In case you have a nice mixer screen set up in SX, say, mixer 1 on top, mixer 2 below and expand mixer 1 to show some EQs, inserts, sends or whatever, then collapse it again, it won't return to the original position.
In Logic I can even go as far to design a channel strip sized mixer nicely following my arrange selections (since L6 it's build in), should I ever work on a single monitor - automatically taking me to the audio object settings, rather than displaying the (usually not needed) MIDI channel settings, which is what SX will do. In addition, you can't even acess all important settings by ONE channel strip (inserts, sends, EQs), but will have to activate these settings individuall in inspector.
There's not even an option to have the SX audio mixer follow your arrange selection once you deal with virtual instruments. It'll again take you to the MIDI settings (which ONLY makes sense in case you're dealing with multitimbral instruments). So once you have MIDI disabled in your audio mixer, the only way to get to the virtual instrument's channel is by scrolling manually.

Would that happen to be enough prove of the absolute lack of SX's mixer configurability?
I could most likely continue with some further flaws, but in case you really want to argue with someone about SX's mixer you'd better look for someone else - apart from the fact that I actually DO know the possibilities pretty well, there's lots of rather essential things which just make it completely suck, the non-configurability being my absolute No.1.
I won't even start mentioning that I find it ugly as hell - because that's strictly some personal opinion.

[popsych]

Come on ttoz i think you've beem outside the logic world too long. Logic's preset system is far superior that SX in all but one respect.

are you serious? since when can logic's next and previous preset key commands work on anything other than the inbuilt logic plugins?

as far as sx, you see the patch in the midi view, in the vsti view, and can scroll presets on ANY instrument or effect simply with the up/down arrow keys.

1st . They work with any .pst saved patches. Have it working with Vanguard,z3ta and imposcar so that proves just how much you cared for logic.
2nd . I would rather have the organized folder structure that is present all the time at the click of a button, namely the logic way of presets, than having to browse load fxp files. I mean just imagine trying to handle presets in numbers like those in ES2 in cubase. The plugins that do (e.g albino 2) use inbuilt preset managers to handle it gracefully.

[mojkarma]

Sascha, maybe you convinced me about logic's mixer. Now, just be so kind and explain to me how will I compensate latency on aux and bus channels.

[meister eder]

Now, just be so kind and explain to me how will I compensate latency on aux and bus channels.

• 

[Sascha Franck]

Sascha, maybe you convinced me about logic's mixer. Now, just be so kind and explain to me how will I compensate latency on aux and bus channels.

I might agree that this is a major left out (nothing that important for what I'm doing, but yes, I DO agree it should be there for a whole number of reasons).
But anyways, we all know there's nothing to explain, compensate or whatever - it's just not possible.

On the other hand, without licking Emapples as at all (they certainly don't deserve THAT anymore), I would take almost any bet that Logic users will see latency compensation on auxes and busses rather sooner that later.
I'm pretty much sure that market pressure (Sonar 4, SX 3, Live 4, Samplitude forced them a bit to rush out L7 (sigh, just as usual...).
In the past IMO Emagic has been doing rather well with intermediate updates. And they're certainly aware regarding the importance of full PDC.

[scandipandy]

Sascha, maybe you convinced me about logic's mixer. Now, just be so kind and explain to me how will I compensate latency on aux and bus channels.

Sorry to jump in but I just have an oppinion here...

Since Logic have such a modular routing capabilities (sidechain, aux feedback and so on) like real mixers, the latency is more complex to compute then in cubase. In cubase the sounds always travels in one direction. Like an inverted noncyclic tree structure all ending up in the master bus (audio out). That kind of latency compensation is easy to compute. In logic and some other apps, the aux bus can be routed to other aux, including itself.

So how can you have a latency compensation on a aux bus that feeds itself with sound, lets say an aux bus that recurivly feed itself 100000 times... some says it cant be done since its a noncomputable i.e. the stop problem.

You may ask, why feed sound to itself... but thats just another trick to do some cool stuff like delay with your choise of VST/AU/RTAS/DX on every feedback tap, you cant do that in cubase.

[jon9091]

I'm pretty tired of both Logic and Cubase. I'm tired of them both having long standing bugs that *never* get fixed. And they both just seem to pile more and more crap on a wobbly foundation. I've just ordered Digital Performer 4.5. At least there will be a new set of un-fixed long standing bugs to find

[aMUSEd]

If I hadn't already decided on a new PC (which I need more for graphics than music) then I would be getting a MAC and Logic - it is a work of art. I get a lump in my throat just looking at pictures of Sculpture. And I will miss the environment having got used to it - only Energy XT comes close to the flexibility of Logic.

[mojkarma]

So how can you have a latency compensation on a aux bus that feeds itself with sound, lets say an aux bus that recurivly feed itself 100000 times... some says it cant be done since its a noncomputable i.e. the stop problem

Before somebody gets me wrong. I'm not here to defend cubase or whatever. I work with cubase and I like its workflow pretty much. I'm waiting for my new imac that I had a chance to get from my company and I'm considering to move to logic. Even then I will still love cubase as a program that served me very well. My question is serious: is it more important to do some fancy effects by routing the aux channels where ever you like, or is it more important to get clean effect signal flow without delays. I would prefer the last one.

[Sascha Franck]

I would eventually agree with mojkarma in preferring PDC over "re-routability".
A possible solution though, for a more or less modular host such as Logic, might be to offer two classes of objects, latency compensated busses/auxes and non compensated ones.

Anyways, apart from the fact that the idea of re-feeding stuff into itself might offer some creative possibilities, you should keep in mind that your songs most likely won't sound the same on another system, with another soundcard, maybe even during mixing - just when doing anything requiring a different buffer size.
Maybe not that much important of an issue, but once you'd load, say, an older song into a newer system not even running at the same buffer sizes anymore, it'd sound all different. Unless you bounced the resulting effect down that is.

I'd say the majority of Logic users would defenitely prefer PDC over 100% free routability.

[scandipandy]

So how can you have a latency compensation on a aux bus that feeds itself with sound, lets say an aux bus that recurivly feed itself 100000 times... some says it cant be done since its a noncomputable i.e. the stop problem

[..]is it more important to do some fancy effects by routing the aux channels where ever you like, or is it more important to get clean effect signal flow without delays. I would prefer the last one.

I dont, but thats just a matter of how you and I differ in the way we make/mix music, not to say any of them are better, just different. I have some tricks that defines my "own" style and it cant be done without sidechaining and aux bus feedback. Its not fancy, just the good old pre-DAW mixer tricks.

BUT I always bounce each track (and aux) before mixing to avoid the latency problems. It works for me and I stay with it until VST 3 will be released in 2010 .

I guess an option in logic to turn compensations on/off (for legacy import etc) would merge best of two worlds.

[stag]

See, ttoz, different people, different mindsets.
I DEFENITELY prefer the Logic way of implementing multiple outs (you need to select the instrument in question as a multiout instrument, set up an aux object and define the input) over SX's bloated way of instant mixer mess ups! Yes, you can hide channels you don't use, but ONCE you need them back, you gotta unhide EVERYTHING and scroll around like mad, just to find the channel you want to deal with, make it unhideable and hide the rest again - what an enormous amount of clueless bullshit (let alone the fact that the SX mixer isn't configurable at all).

is that so??? on the drum map of cubase i can assign any midi event to different drum machines or multi input sampler.
the mixer views on SX are fully editable and can be recalled by shortcuts and yes it´s configurable but i don´t even care cause the track view is more than enough to me to do the most of the tasks a feature that the lads at logic have copied on L6 so i heard.

the engine it´s less efficient well just because there is a lot more running under the hood EG full PDC.
you are comparing to SX a piece of crap that even doesn´t have offline processing and claim to be the best.... IN YOUR DREAMS PAL

[machinesworking]

I use Cubase SX2 so that you know but if i didn't consider it as giving in to blackmail i would be the proud owner of a dual g5 2.5 ghz machine running logic 7.1 beating the pants out of my current solution .

Come to the dark side Luke!

(I've been waiting for a good reason to use that emoticon! )

i don´t even care cause the track view is more than enough to me to do the most of the tasks a feature that the lads at logic have copied on L6 so i heard.
the engine it´s less efficient well just because there is a lot more running under the hood EG full PDC.
you are comparing to SX a piece of crap that even doesn´t have offline processing and claim to be the best....

Stag if you don't know both programs well, then why comment? makes you look like a zealot.

[Sascha Franck]

the mixer views on SX are fully editable and can be recalled by shortcuts and yes it´s configurable but i don´t even care cause the track view is more than enough to me to do the most of the tasks a feature that the lads at logic have copied on L6 so i heard.

A) Read my other post and you'll clearly see how much "un-configurable" the SX mixer is. And it's nothing new either, not even among Cubase enthusiats.

B) The socalled channel strip in SX is a laugh, compared to what is possible in Logic (and which was possible AGES before Cubase even had it, just that you had to create your channel strip manually by using a floating mixer window). Come on, you can't even see sends, EQs and inserts at one time - wtf? Clicking madness, nothing else.

Don't get me wrong, I seriously wish it was any different as I HAVE to work with SX for quite a number of reasons... it just isn't.

In addition, the Cubase mixer is wasting an incredible amount of space.
Examples (on a 17" running at 1280x1024)
Logic: 20 mixer channels in one row, all showing 2 active inserts and 3 active sends. Enough space to place another 20 below.
Cubase: 15 mixer channels in one row. No sends/EQs/whatever shown at all so I could place another mixer below. In case I want anything else to be shown (as said, EQs, etc), no further mixer would fit below.

As said before: Proveable shite.

[Arksun]

LOL

Wow, what a pathetic thread.

I think it can be summed up by saying "mines bigger than yours, my dad's got a bigger car than yours, my apples better than your pear"

Jeesus. Honestly, what is the friggen point,trying to convince each other that 'your' sequencer is better than theirs, when ALL the top sequencers now are extremely powerful, just with very different interfaces.

And thank god they are different, because you know what that means, that means we have CHOICE!. Because WE, the PRODUCERS are all different and work differently. Thus we CHOOSE which works best for us.

So everyone get out of their prams and concentrate on getting the best out of their choice for a change by filling the world with sweet music

Arksun
Proud user of Cubase, equally as proud of my friends that use Logic, Sonar, Fruity, Reason etc etc etc to make great music.