Where is Cubase 12.5 or 13? [Update: It's here C13 is released!]

[dellboy]

ROUTING - You can now set instrument tracks/racks/sampler return channels as inputs for audio tracks, as well as FX and group channels.

Does that mean that it's finally possible to record a VST instruments output?

This is possible since Cubase SX1 - in 2002.

Tell me. How do you do it?

And, ESPECIALLY, tell me how you do it in Cubase Artist and Elements.

It can be done in Cubase Pro, although its horribly convoluted and I always have to remind myself how its done. I am not sure if its possible in Artist and Elements though. In contrast, in Studio One, its as easy as right click and select.

[chk071]

ROUTING - You can now set instrument tracks/racks/sampler return channels as inputs for audio tracks, as well as FX and group channels.

Does that mean that it's finally possible to record a VST instruments output?

This is possible since Cubase SX1 - in 2002.

Tell me. How do you do it?

And, ESPECIALLY, tell me how you do it in Cubase Artist and Elements.

It can be done in Cubase Pro, although its horribly convoluted and I always have to remind myself how its done. I am not sure if its possible in Artist and Elements though. In contrast, in Studio One, its as easy as right click and select.

Exactly. As far as I found out: In Cubase Pro: So far only doable with group busses, and in Artist and Elements not possible at all.

[jancivil]

Here's what you do if you have Cubase Pro: Establish a group bus and an audio channel to record to and enable record there. Assign the output of your VSTi to the group bus instead of to the basic "Stereo Ouput" aka Master out. Now make the input of that Audio channel the group (instead of from the basic "Stereo Input"). Record.

[Scotty]

The routing through groups workaround is effective but if you have several vsti to bounce that way it creates a lot of additional channels to have to manage . The leaked (if true) direct record function is going to be a big plus for me and almost reason enough on its own to justify upgrading from Cubase 12.

[dellboy]

Here's what you do if you have the Pro v.: Establish a group bus and an audio channel to record to and enable record there. Assign the output of your VSTi to the group bus instead of to the basic "Stereo Ouput" aka Master out. Now make the input of that Audio channel the group (instead of from the basic "Stereo Input"). Record.

Yes, its doable, but lets hope that Cubase 13 makes it as easy as in Studio One - and on all versions, not just Pro. In Studio One you just right click an audio track and select your chosen VST and hit record.

[Scotty]

Agreed, Prov V gets it right.

Here's what you do if you have the Pro v.: Establish a group bus and an audio channel to record to and enable record there. Assign the output of your VSTi to the group bus instead of to the basic "Stereo Ouput" aka Master out. Now make the input of that Audio channel the group (instead of from the basic "Stereo Input"). Record.

Yes, its doable, but lets hope that Cubase 13 makes it as easy as in Studio One - and on all versions, not just Pro. In Studio One you just right click an audio track and select your chosen VST and hit record.

[jancivil]

First time I learned this, I was on SX2. I was are you f**king kidding me?

It's fine for the one thing I'll do but if it's a long list of things, well I'm glad it isn't, for me. Albeit the fact that these articulations (actually EG and FEG) I worked so long to get exactly as I wanted was captured accurately recording the VSTi and completely lost in 6 consecutive renders may lead to doing more. I think the last time I *had* to do it (because a whole thing was missing in every render) was 2011, 2012. A lot of stuff is a bit hinky in a certain % of renders due to Round Robin and other humanize tricks in sample instruments and what-not, but this was never going to render. You might think Real-Time render would but it isn't magic for this.

[kritikon]

I'm seriously not trying to troll or anything, just curious as to what use this direct recording of VSTi output is. I don't see how rendering a VSTi is any different to recording it live. Automation etc can be recorded with rendering, and randomness from modulation FX etc is going to be equally so with live or rendering. What do you guys do that makes live recording of an output important? I suspect I'm being dense but just can't think of anything...

[Sahul]

For me, it's more immediate recording to a track. Also quicker. That's all. The results are similar. By the way, there are interesting third-party alternatives to accomplish this, such as Rolling Sampler.

[Serhii Kot]

I'm seriously not trying to troll or anything, just curious as to what use this direct recording of VSTi output is. I don't see how rendering a VSTi is any different to recording it live. Automation etc can be recorded with rendering, and randomness from modulation FX etc is going to be equally so with live or rendering. What do you guys do that makes live recording of an output important? I suspect I'm being dense but just can't think of anything...

I put Shaperbox and live record while switching presets. In the end I get many transitions and glitches to spice up particular instrument part.

[chk071]

I'm seriously not trying to troll or anything, just curious as to what use this direct recording of VSTi output is. I don't see how rendering a VSTi is any different to recording it live. Automation etc can be recorded with rendering, and randomness from modulation FX etc is going to be equally so with live or rendering. What do you guys do that makes live recording of an output important? I suspect I'm being dense but just can't think of anything...

Mostly I used it to record something to present if afterwards, e.g. when I noticed a bug in a soft synth, and wanted to report it to the developer. Fastest thing to do IMO.

[EnGee]

I'm seriously not trying to troll or anything, just curious as to what use this direct recording of VSTi output is. I don't see how rendering a VSTi is any different to recording it live. Automation etc can be recorded with rendering, and randomness from modulation FX etc is going to be equally so with live or rendering. What do you guys do that makes live recording of an output important? I suspect I'm being dense but just can't think of anything...

I have never used a VSTi direct audio recording. I don't see a special need for it, but of course I used direct audio recording from my hardware instruments, and that is easy in every DAW.

I like to record Midi first so editing is easy. I only render/bounce to audio before mixing (sometimes!).

[jancivil]

I'm seriously not trying to troll or anything, just curious as to what use this direct recording of VSTi output is. I don't see how rendering a VSTi is any different to recording it live.

Well, it _is_ a different process. I have done it twice in order to "print" something fairly complex happening that wasn't captured in _any_ render, regardless. The first time was I had an effect happening with a chain of things in Kore 2, primarily Guitar Rig and the whole effect was simply absent in renders whether I took the buffering way down or pushed it to maximum 2048 samples or did real-time. No diff. I recorded that through the Group bus method and there it was (albeit there was variance here from take to take as well).
The other was a couple days ago with a pretty complex patch in something called Geosonics 2, a Sonic Couture Kontakt instrument with three channels (cf. oscillators) essentially, utilizing Kontakt's filters and SC's EG/FEG they do in pretty much everything of theirs, with [potentiation acc'ding to:] velocity (and pitch) ie., more velocity = envelope more pronounced.
So it was a confluence of things giving me a very particular effect (just like a guitar with a palm mute, then the filters' resonance follows a certain way). Six renders (2 were 'render in place' just to check) and every one was this failure to capture this effect (and other things not as pronounced/obvious), but once recorded onto the audio track I've the immediate truth. I don't even vaguely know how to say what a render does vs what this direct capture does but clearly it's potentially this different.

Besides this, if we have something eg., in Reaktor such as Space Drone or Metaphysical Function, which does not do a regular vi from MIDI note-ons etc but self-generates its audio, there is no way I know of to get it in yer track except for this method. I've probably used Space Drone twice, so a handful of events have occurred here that absolutely called for this.

This kind of thing [eg., from the Geosonics patch] is exactly why I render prior to 'master' export. Mostly it's randomness in sample-based vis (& I may resort to this more now I think about it) rather than something as complex as these chains.

[Scotty]

Anything that has generative or some aspect of randomness is one case where recording the VSTi into audio is beneficial. You can monitor the bounce easily in real-time and cancel recording as soon as something doesn’t work to your satisfaction. Also there some situations where a bounce fails to render the audio properly as Jancivil has also experienced. Freezing doesn’t give you the audio file to further manipulate and freezing is not ideal for working with multiple outputs.

[kritikon]

Freezing, yeah it's pretty rubbish in Cubase. I tried it and quickly removed it from my list of things to use in Cubase. That thing of not recording some FX on rendering - weird. I've not experienced it, but def sounds like some kind of bug and I see why live record is then useful, thnx. And the generative stuff makes sense - not my scene, so it didn't occur to me.