I've come back to music after many years and have been using an old copy of Cubase. I'm old school and I'm happy working linearly although I've created some nice tracks with Maschine.
I've had problems with (my very old) Cubase when saving songs in .wav format using external instruments (Kontakt) and was debating whether or not to upgrade to Cubase Artist 9 or try Ableton Standard as they have a discount on at the moment.
I guess everyone will have their own opinions but I'd be grateful for any thoughts or comments vis a vis the two.
Cubase Artist or Ableton Standard?
-
- KVRian
- 1286 posts since 7 Dec, 2013 from Earth
For Cubase there is no trial currently, but I expect it to be released soon. But since you've been using an old copy of Cubase, you're already quite familiar with the workflow. I've been using Cubase since the Atari days (early 90's) and I can tell you that the basic workflow is still the same these days.
As for Ableton, you can download the trial version here: https://www.ableton.com/en/trial/
As for Ableton, you can download the trial version here: https://www.ableton.com/en/trial/
-
- KVRAF
- 4812 posts since 21 Jan, 2008 from oO
or check out Bitwig maybe, basically a combination of Cubase and Ableton. Has a nice arrangement view with inspector on the left, and can be used combined with the clip launcher. So best of both worlds and more imo. Also quite affordable in the marketplace.
Personally i switched from cubase to bitwig, because i never really enjoed ableton (especially it's arrangement view).
Free demo available here: https://www.bitwig.com/en/download.html
Personally i switched from cubase to bitwig, because i never really enjoed ableton (especially it's arrangement view).
Free demo available here: https://www.bitwig.com/en/download.html
JamWide - a cross-platform Ninjam client for DAWs
-
- KVRAF
- 9150 posts since 7 Oct, 2005
For me (I'm mostly Cubase user over the past 15 years), the cons and pros of both are:
1. Cubase Artist (I have 8.5 and will upgrade to Artist/Pro 9 when there is a discount):
Pros:
- The same shortcuts and workflow as Cubase SX1! Some minor changes, but mostly the same!
- Can be non-linear (little bit) with Arranger track.
- Chords track and in general nice helper for chord progression.
- Great GUI colours and contrast. Very clear fonts and highlighting.
- Has fantastic two synths Retrologue 2 and Padshop. Retrologue 2 is more than great. I love it
- You can audition midi patterns (drums especially) in both its original tempo or Project's tempo within the MediaBay.
Cons:
- USB dongle means it will work just on one computer at a time.
- Basic score editor (the same as in Elements, limited and small size)
- Limited tracks (I think they are 32 instruments and 64 audio/midi). For me to be honest, I don't exceed even 16 instruments, so it depends on your usage.
- Not bad CPU usage, but in my case I needed to disable Asio Guard and I'm just using the plugins that I'm sure they don't cause Cubase to freeze ...etc.
2. Live 9 (I have the intro now, but I did had the Standard before):
Pros:
- Session View is great have several ideas to be recorded and tested.
- Has some great effects plugins like the EQ (can be viewed very big) and the Glue compressor is great.
- Tons of great tutorials available, so learning new techniques are always fresh (Especially for EDM and Dance music in general).
- Can be installed/used on more than one computer, no dongle needed and the key license can be downloaded offline.
- unlimited tracks
Cons:
- The fonts and GUI are not as clear as in Cubase
- It needs some time to get used to its Arrangement view.
- No mixer as in Cubase.
- Missing some tools (like customizable Drums editor, Step sequencer, ..etc)
I still prefer Cubase overall but it is refreshing sometimes opening Live and make one or two songs with it! So, maybe you can have the two, especially that Live can be ReWired as slave to Cubase.
1. Cubase Artist (I have 8.5 and will upgrade to Artist/Pro 9 when there is a discount):
Pros:
- The same shortcuts and workflow as Cubase SX1! Some minor changes, but mostly the same!
- Can be non-linear (little bit) with Arranger track.
- Chords track and in general nice helper for chord progression.
- Great GUI colours and contrast. Very clear fonts and highlighting.
- Has fantastic two synths Retrologue 2 and Padshop. Retrologue 2 is more than great. I love it
- You can audition midi patterns (drums especially) in both its original tempo or Project's tempo within the MediaBay.
Cons:
- USB dongle means it will work just on one computer at a time.
- Basic score editor (the same as in Elements, limited and small size)
- Limited tracks (I think they are 32 instruments and 64 audio/midi). For me to be honest, I don't exceed even 16 instruments, so it depends on your usage.
- Not bad CPU usage, but in my case I needed to disable Asio Guard and I'm just using the plugins that I'm sure they don't cause Cubase to freeze ...etc.
2. Live 9 (I have the intro now, but I did had the Standard before):
Pros:
- Session View is great have several ideas to be recorded and tested.
- Has some great effects plugins like the EQ (can be viewed very big) and the Glue compressor is great.
- Tons of great tutorials available, so learning new techniques are always fresh (Especially for EDM and Dance music in general).
- Can be installed/used on more than one computer, no dongle needed and the key license can be downloaded offline.
- unlimited tracks
Cons:
- The fonts and GUI are not as clear as in Cubase
- It needs some time to get used to its Arrangement view.
- No mixer as in Cubase.
- Missing some tools (like customizable Drums editor, Step sequencer, ..etc)
I still prefer Cubase overall but it is refreshing sometimes opening Live and make one or two songs with it! So, maybe you can have the two, especially that Live can be ReWired as slave to Cubase.
Using: Cubase Pro 15, Bitwig 5, Tascam US-4x4HR, MODX6, DM12D, LaunchKey 49, Yamaha guitar(Pacifica 612v) and bass (BB234) and some virtual instruments and synths.
-
- KVRer
- Topic Starter
- 18 posts since 14 Feb, 2016 from UK
Hi EnGee - many thanks for that very comprehensive comparison, very kind. Clear fonts and GUI are a plus as I have problems with my eyes. (Had a look at the BitWig page but the GUI looks a bit clunky to me.) So probably edging towards Cubase. I can always dip into Maschine for pattern-based recording.
Can I ask if you've had any problems with poor quality .wav files (compared to the original playback) when you mixdown a piece?
Thanks again.
Can I ask if you've had any problems with poor quality .wav files (compared to the original playback) when you mixdown a piece?
Thanks again.
-
- KVRAF
- 9150 posts since 7 Oct, 2005
That depends on mixing skill. Unfortunately, I suck at mixing especially when a lot of drums are there! But, I have learnt that the less sounds (especially drums), the clearer the mixdown. So, for me, I believe that the poor quality of the mixdown is because of our poor skill at mixing. I don't think it is because of the host really because when I mix few sounds, it is clear and almost the same as played in the host.IanT wrote:Hi EnGee - many thanks for that very comprehensive comparison, very kind. Clear fonts and GUI are a plus as I have problems with my eyes. (Had a look at the BitWig page but the GUI looks a bit clunky to me.) So probably edging towards Cubase. I can always dip into Maschine for pattern-based recording.
Can I ask if you've had any problems with poor quality .wav files (compared to the original playback) when you mixdown a piece?
Thanks again.
Anyway, you can render to audio tracks and then use them in another DAW (like Reaper or Live demo) and then mix them. I doubt will be any difference in the results.
Is that what you are asking about?
Using: Cubase Pro 15, Bitwig 5, Tascam US-4x4HR, MODX6, DM12D, LaunchKey 49, Yamaha guitar(Pacifica 612v) and bass (BB234) and some virtual instruments and synths.
-
- KVRer
- Topic Starter
- 18 posts since 14 Feb, 2016 from UK
Er, I don't think so 
I created a piece in Cubase that used several instruments in Kontakt. Playback sounded fine but when I saved it (it's sort of what I call a mixdown, hence probable confusion) as a .wav file - no mixer twiddling or anything, just saving/exporting the whole piece as a .wav file - the quality was terrible. Low volume and very muddy.
I assumed the system would just route the audio output to a .wav file - which is what I want - but it lost so much quality in the process. It's not rocket science so was wondering if this was a problem with my early Cubase or not.
I created a piece in Cubase that used several instruments in Kontakt. Playback sounded fine but when I saved it (it's sort of what I call a mixdown, hence probable confusion) as a .wav file - no mixer twiddling or anything, just saving/exporting the whole piece as a .wav file - the quality was terrible. Low volume and very muddy.
I assumed the system would just route the audio output to a .wav file - which is what I want - but it lost so much quality in the process. It's not rocket science so was wondering if this was a problem with my early Cubase or not.
-
- KVRAF
- 9150 posts since 7 Oct, 2005
Using: Cubase Pro 15, Bitwig 5, Tascam US-4x4HR, MODX6, DM12D, LaunchKey 49, Yamaha guitar(Pacifica 612v) and bass (BB234) and some virtual instruments and synths.
-
- KVRer
- Topic Starter
- 18 posts since 14 Feb, 2016 from UK
Hi EnGee - yeah, but I don't think that's the thing. It's not about creating a non-muddy mix, it's simply about capturing the original audio output - as directed through the, er, audio output sockets, as an audio file. Technically, all they have to do is to route the audio output to a audio file.