KVR Audio

Patrick de Caumette · Post by **Patrick de Caumette** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:15 pm

SJ_Digriz wrote:All this stuff about "I put it back on the shelf" is major Bullshit.

Anyone who does this for a living and ditches a known stable version of anything for a new version "on the fly" is crazy.

SX-2 and SX-3 can be on the same computer at the same time without a problem. You should be WORKING in 2 and TESTING in 3 until you know it works. You should use that concept with EVERY application if you are charging people money for your work.

Blaming the Borgz for the millions of Mobo, Audio Card, Video Card, Memory Module, Chipset etc.. combinations is also beyond ignorant.

For your general information, I do run SX2.2 and SX3 on the same computer.

Don't forget to take your medication...

diverdee · Post by **diverdee** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:15 pm

CUBARSE SUXORS LOL OMG FLOOTYPOOPS KIKCKS ITS ARSE ROFLMAO (thought i'd get it in first to amuse myself - i'm at work & i'm bored

Patrick de Caumette · Post by **Patrick de Caumette** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:17 pm

UltraJv wrote:This topic starts with 3Gb then talks about 2GB. It seems some plugins dont like anything above 2GB. Its also worth checking your motherboard manual to see if it properley supports 2.5GB.
http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopi ... hlight=2gb

Thanks UltraJV, I'll look into it this afternoon.

SJ_Digriz · Post by **SJ_Digriz** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:18 pm

Patrick de Caumette wrote:For your general information, I do run SX2.2 and SX3 on the same computer.
Don't forget to take your medication...

Re-read your first post and then talk about needing medication. You talk about having clients breathing down your neck etc...Also, you talked aobut shelving the program. Neither thing is required.

mauseoleum · Post by **mauseoleum** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:29 pm

flashgame wrote:it is true worst?? I want to know..

who farted in bush aerobics - buns?

griels · Post by **griels** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:32 pm

SJ_Digriz wrote:
Patrick de Caumette wrote:For your general information, I do run SX2.2 and SX3 on the same computer.
Don't forget to take your medication...
Re-read your first post and then talk about needing medication. You talk about having clients breathing down your neck etc...Also, you talked aobut shelving the program. Neither thing is required.

Nice bedside manner SJ

Patrick is AFAIK a very nice guy who does some serious audio work. He wouldn't be the first to complain about SX3's bugginess. Personally, I'm very happy with it, although there has been the odd glitch here and there (and I wouldn't have invested so soon in SX3 had there not been a cheap upgrade offer).

SJ_Digriz · Post by **SJ_Digriz** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:47 pm

griels wrote:
SJ_Digriz wrote:
Patrick de Caumette wrote:For your general information, I do run SX2.2 and SX3 on the same computer.
Don't forget to take your medication...
Re-read your first post and then talk about needing medication. You talk about having clients breathing down your neck etc...Also, you talked aobut shelving the program. Neither thing is required.
Nice bedside manner SJ

Patrick is AFAIK a very nice guy who does some serious audio work. He wouldn't be the first to complain about SX3's bugginess. Personally, I'm very happy with it, although there has been the odd glitch here and there (and I wouldn't have invested so soon in SX3 had there not been a cheap upgrade offer).

I have no problem with Patrick at all. I have a problem with posts that are pointless. I actually would have been ok with "man I just can't seem to get SX-3 to run without poofing. Here are my specs..."

But, rants with no basis get under my skin.

I've been guilty of pointless rants myself. I have been summarily flogged publicly as well hehehe

griels · Post by **griels** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:02 pm

SJ_Digriz wrote: I have no problem with Patrick at all. I have a problem with posts that are pointless. I actually would have been ok with "man I just can't seem to get SX-3 to run without poofing. Here are my specs..."

I wouldn't say it was pointless... Patrick was frustrated with SX3's stability on his machine and presumably wanted to garner some support from fellow sufferers, or perhaps simply to gain the attention of Steinberg. He did list some specs, although not in detail. Although it seems that there had not been an in depth consultation with Steinberg regarding his problems (if that is an easy thing to elicit), as the thread uncovered some technical aspects which Patrick was yet to examine.

SJ_Digriz wrote:
But, rants with no basis get under my skin.

Yeah, I agree there.. My heart sunk when I read the thread title, especially as SX3 is my favourite sequencer.

SJ_Digriz wrote: I've been guilty of pointless rants myself. I have been summarily flogged publicly as well hehehe

Ah, I hadn't noticed

rickschwar · Post by **rickschwar** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:42 pm

I'm glad to hear that some others are able to use 3.0. I've had so many problems, I've stopped using it.

Fortunately 2.x is still rock solid on my machine. I'll try again after the next major update comes out however.

waveriderarts · Post by **waveriderarts** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:54 pm

Patrick de Caumette wrote: 3.0 is shelved. I am staying with 2.2 until Steinberg gets their act together.

Whatever the reason, I got ripped off, spending money that Steinberg pocketed and never delivered on their promise of a great version.

I couldn't care less about all the extra features. Give me a stable DAW!

I'll give it a few extra months and if nothing changes, I am switching.

Yes I agree. A lot of big names do deliver bad stuff, and Steinberg is the #1 offender, what a price they charge just to go along with them , and each new version brings its share of trouble.....

But there ain't that many solutions.....

I love what is happening on the vst front, but with DAW/sequencers it is a very very bad situation currently...

.

Sascha Franck · Post by **Sascha Franck** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:18 pm

waveriderarts wrote: I love what is happening on the vst front, but with DAW/sequencers it is a very very bad situation currently...

I need to somewhat agree. Since Emagic f**ked their Windows users there's not all that much competition anymore.
OK, there's Sonar, but that's about it (don't even bother to notice Tracktion, it's great but not there at all yet).
Yeah, there's Samplitude as well, but in case you need to be compatible to the largest possible amount of users (which is something important for me) it's almost pointless (the same goes for Sonar, at least where I live).

As soon as you walk into some music store over here, what you'll find is a PC running Cubase (and probably Reason in addition) or a Mac running Logic. The same goes for studios.
Not exactly much of a choice...

drinelli · Post by **drinelli** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:55 pm

Cubase SX is not a stable host on my pc either, but for the first, I have tried a host like Traction ( all though it seems a lot more stable ) it also feels very primitive compared to Cubase, I simply can not make the things I want with it.

Secondly I have now more plug ins
than I ever had before on one machine, so that might be the reason for any unstabilyties,
thirdly my pc is older than it ever have been before, a very common aspect by the way

which also could be the fault.

And last but not least I learnt to live with it. It is sad but true.

UltraJv · Post by **UltraJv** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:58 pm

Bad plugins are a big cause of instability. Having lots of them almost guarantees problems.

mauseoleum · Post by **mauseoleum** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:31 pm

PC running Cubase (and probably Reason in addition) or a Mac running Logic.

now that's cute - but if you drop *Cubase (and probably* + *in addition)* out of it, THEN it becomes deep.

erm ... sortof like right v.s. left brian ...

OMU · Post by **OMU** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:11 pm

UltraJv wrote:A bad workman always blames his tools....

keep this for yourself, boy

do you even know this man

Cubase SX3 drives me nuts