switch from studio one to cubase 12

[_leras]

Nevertheless I wonder why the "normal" DAWs are so restricted in terms of midi plugins respectively the use of 3rd party ones...

Just a guess, but I'd say it's because those things are stupid and nobody who actually pays for their software would use them.

I mean Reason with their player devices, Ableton with their stock and M4l devices and the latest Bitwig additions showcase how incredible powerful this stuff is and with a good developer very easy to use for anybody...

You say powerful, I say a waste of developer resources that could be put into other things. Honestly, I cannot think of a single thing I would use a MIDI plugin for and I've been doing this for a very long time.

But the "major" platforms ...they give a shit on this and continue with their incredible cumbersome routing workarounds which give mostly more trouble than that they actually add some benefit...

That's probably because most of their customers don't care.

You might be surprised at how many people want things like improved step sequencers, arpeggiators, or chord tools. Or even just random quirky things. You might not feel the need for them but it doesn't mean they're not useful.

And you might think you don't need them, or wouldn't use them, but if you had Bitwig, I'm sure you'd also be using their built in lfos and other modulators to add movement to parts of some of your sounds. It's just too easy to not do so.

You might be right though that supporting 3rd party midi tools probably isn't a high priority as not everyone needs it. But I also expect it's pretty hard to code that type of thing unless planned for from the start...

[BONES]

Do you honestly think that if those things were as popular as you think they are that every DAW wouldn't have them? There is a whole world of production beyond electronic music that DAWs like Cubase and Studio One clearly see as more important to their customers. If the other side of it was such a lucrative market, you'd think they'd at least spin off a new product to cater to it, wouldn't they? Yet they seem perfectly happy to leave it to Ableton and Bitwig. Doesn't that tell you anything?

[greententacle]

After a few days of testing cubase 12, i have to say studio one is much snappier and faster, at least in this win10 setup.

[Trensharo]

Do you honestly think that if those things were as popular as you think they are that every DAW wouldn't have them? There is a whole world of production beyond electronic music that DAWs like Cubase and Studio One clearly see as more important to their customers. If the other side of it was such a lucrative market, you'd think they'd at least spin off a new product to cater to it, wouldn't they? Yet they seem perfectly happy to leave it to Ableton and Bitwig. Doesn't that tell you anything?

Your whole existence on this forum is filled with saying something doesn't matter to you and then proceeding to argue with other users because they don't agree with you.

Thankfully, I can rid myself of having to see this... but wow.

Also, Cubase is used quite a bit by producers of Electronic Music. In Europe, it's used at a higher rate than in North America. We have to be careful not to allow native market conditions to bias our view on these types of things. The world is much bigger than how far we can see, outside.

In the amateur market, Studio One is used quite a bit for Electronic Music. In fact, I don't think it would be as successful as it is without sales to users within that market segment.

One reason why a developer may not see reason to prioritize things like a Step Sequencer or Arpeggiator is the fact that the market is already served with suitable 3rd party tools that can fill that gap. That allows them to deprioritize them and prioritize things that actually need to be addressed due to not efficiently usable workarounds within the DAW.

Examples: Video Support, Ambisonics, MIDI Remote/Control Surface Support, Control Room, etc.

I don't agree that Cubase 12 is less snappy or faster than Studio One (5.5 Pro). I actually think Cubase is more stable, as I got a ton more plug-in crashes in Studio One than in Cubase. I have never had Cubase 11 crash on me, and I had it since release day, either.

Personally, once Cubase dropped the dongle, I dropped Studio One. I do think Cubase is the superior product, easily. It just costs more (and had hardware protection, until very recently), and that's is a relevant advantage in Studio One's favor.

[chk071]

Also, Cubase is used quite a bit by producers of Electronic Music. In Europe, it's used at a higher rate than in North America. We have to be careful not to allow native market conditions to bias our view on these types of things. The world is much bigger than how far we can see, outside.

In the amateur market, Studio One is used quite a bit for Electronic Music. In fact, I don't think it would be as successful as it is without sales to users within that market segment.

How do you know all that?

[Trensharo]

Also, Cubase is used quite a bit by producers of Electronic Music. In Europe, it's used at a higher rate than in North America. We have to be careful not to allow native market conditions to bias our view on these types of things. The world is much bigger than how far we can see, outside.

In the amateur market, Studio One is used quite a bit for Electronic Music. In fact, I don't think it would be as successful as it is without sales to users within that market segment.

How do you know all that?

There are a number of fairly competent (being modest) Pro Producers who use Cubase. Insinuating that Steinberg basically ignores this market, when they literally feature some of them on their own YouTube Channel (and have introduced features and plug-ins aimed at this market segment) goes beyond ignorance and into the realm of [intentional] intellectual dishonesty.

Additionally, while Ableton is dominant in the EDM space, other DAWs do see use. DAWs like Cubase have weird usage shares in this market segment, so how "used" they seem to you depends on how you are examining marketshare.

In North America, it will see less usage than it does in Europe, for example. Same with DAWs like Samplitude Pro X, which are actually used quite a bit in some European markets, even though almost no one uses it for EDM in North America (it's used primarily for Recording, Mixing, Mastering, here... basically like Pro Tools). If you are making statements on market share by projecting what you see in a specific market, it can bias your observation wildly one way or the other...

Kind of like the people who say "lol, no one uses iMessage here" while Apple has 40%+ market share in another country where millions of people use it.

Also, visiting European markets and working in/seeing the market conditions there first-hand is useful for making these types of observations

Lots of people coming into the market are getting Studio One for EDM Production. Studio One has seen good adoption due to very nice hardware bundles (the Artist SKU is stronger than most down-market SKUs for other DAWs, and the hardware is cheap and [,in some cases,] fairly fundamental (e.g. Audio Interfaces)). It's also heavily evangelized by the user base. I actually think they top REAPER users, at this juncture. It's a fairly competent generalist option that won't burden you with feature deficiencies due to market bias (as could possibly happen with DAWs like Pro Tools, Ableton Live, FL Studio, Maschine 2, MPC, etc.).

It is not a bad option, I just think Cubase is stronger... and it should be, given it has had a 2 decade head start. That's the benefit of being early in development, and maintaining good development cadence over a long period of time.

It also helps that Audio isn't like video. There is less of a "need" for people to standardize on one solution - though some corners of the market certainly do that (postproduction, etc.).

[BONES]

Your whole existence on this forum is filled with saying something doesn't matter to you and then proceeding to argue with other users because they don't agree with you.

I'm just pointing out reality, reality that some of you are too self-absorbed to see and/or understand. At lleast I have teh awareness ot understand the difference between what I want and what the rest of the worlld might want. e.g. I don't use Bitwig becaus eI get that it' snot made for the way I work and, therefore, unlikely to fix problems I have with it. OTOH, you guys think tha teverythign should be exactly what you want/need it to be, seemingly in the belief that becaus eyou want it, everyone els emust want it to. I assume that's becaus eyou generally live you life so close to teh centre of the bell curve that you simply aren't used to the fact that not everyone wants all the sam ethings you do.

In a way I kind of envy you because I've spent pretty much my whole life so far from the centre of the curve that it is almost a rare and precious thing to find somethign that seems made to fulfill my needs. But you guys take it for granted that the world works just like that. You don't know how lucky you are.

Also, Cubase is used quite a bit by producers of Electronic Music.

Really? What the f**k do you think I was using it for? Opera?

In the amateur market, Studio One is used quite a bit for Electronic Music. In fact, I don't think it would be as successful as it is without sales to users within that market segment.

I don't think any of them would be but so what? There are plenty of amateur guitarists who want to record their songs just as much as we do.

One reason why a developer may not see reason to prioritize things like a Step Sequencer or Arpeggiator is the fact that the market is already served with suitable 3rd party tools that can fill that gap.

Or maybe, and here's a thought, maybe they understand that the stonkin' great sequencer at the heart of their product can do all that shit and nobody actually needs an arp or a step sequencer ? As I said, just a thought.

I actually think Cubase is more stable, as I got a ton more plug-in crashes in Studio One than in Cubase.

My experience is that both are very stable, but I lost work in Cubase once, that's never happened in S1. S1 only ever seems to crash when loading or closing a song. I have never had it crash while I'm working, not even once. OTOH, on the rare occasions Cubase crashed, it was usually when I was in the middle of something.

Personally, once Cubase dropped the dongle, I dropped Studio One.

I like the donglee bcause it meant I could have Cubase installed on 10 different macines and it would work wherever the dongle happened to be. That meant I could isntall it on my massive workstation at the office if I wanted to. That said, I haven't run into any activation issues with S1 so far.

I do think Cubase is the superior product, easily.

You're probably right but I'm not so up myself, or insecure, that I feel I need to be using the superior product. I'm happy using the one that gets me the best results with the least effort and, for me, that's definitely Studio One.

[Trensharo]

I already said I'm not going to see that... Weird that I still get notifications for it.

[jamcat]

I already said I'm not going to see that... Weird that I still get notifications for it.

Totally irrelevant comment to the discussion at hand. Blocked!

[greententacle]

om Shanti om

[pixel85]

Since Steinberg is adding features directed at EDM market to Cubase (Squasher etc), it's obvious that Steinberg doesn't care about EDM market and has different priorities.
Guys, it can't be more logical than that

[pixel85]

I already said I'm not going to see that... Weird that I still get notifications for it.

Totally irrelevant comment to the discussion at hand. Double Blocked!

Totally irrelevant comment to the discussion at hand. Blocked!

[jamcat]

BLOOOOOCKED!!!1!

[pixel85]

You're soOooOOooo blocked that you're now 6th member of New Kids On The Block!

[hotmitts]

iam thinking about switching to cubase, due to the lack of midi fx (namely a lfo) in studio one.
i just need a simple way to modulate lets say a reverb size.
is it worth switching to cubase just for that, and what pain is waiting for me?

Did you already checked other options?

Both VCV Rack and Voltage Modular can load VST plugins, at least VCV Rack can modulate any parameter of the plugin. Obviously not just with an LFO, also with envelopes, sequencers, whatever.


vcv-rack-fx-softube.jpg

There seems to be a free version of this...

https://store.cherryaudio.com/bundles/v ... ar-nucleus

If I were me, which I am, but I was in your shoes (whatever kind of shoes they are) ( Mine are loafers) I would use this free thing rather than changing DAW.
I've just been learning my way around Studio One after using Reason... it seems to be quite easy to get around in and that's worth its weight in dubloons. It seems to have everything I hoped.
Actually mentioning Reason, that's another possibility, get a cheap license transfer on KVR sell and buy. You can automate everything with everything else, and then some.