After logic 11

especially as a logic user, I have been waiting for years, v11 could have been a version that could leave cubase behind, but from what I see cubase deserves a great appreciation.
apple saw that the pro area was taken over by cubase on the bece producer side and pro tools on the movie and post side and prepared logic 11 not for the pro area, but for the remaining areas. the pro area belongs to cubase and pro tools. almost half of the features in cubase are not yet in logic and years have passed, even after about 5 years, apple has not added these features.
Professionals are officially freaking out and many famous producer hard logic users are now switching back to cubase.

You offer all the beauties to all musicians every 2 years, you are the real professionals. steinberg team :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:

3 Likes

Except in Cubase, I can’t create a chord in a chord track that is only a Root and 5th without a 3rd. I can do that in Logic 11’s new chord track. And I can also do that in Dorico. Please Cubase, this is not so beautiful…

cubase gave the chord track 5 years ago and has been developing it for 5 years, it can drag from audio to cord track , the chord track in logic is an awful gui, including the view, and you have to manually cut out areas that are incredibly ridiculous to use and even wear extra glasses to see those chords, there is an 80% difference between the way it is now and the way it is in cubase, logic will fix it if you wait 10 years. no one has that kind of time.

But Cubase can’t do Root 5th chords, so can’t represent a lot of music. Hey, I use Cubase, I just can’t use the chord track in any of my songs that have Power chords, no third chords, whatever you want to call them. And I usually have a moment or two in most of my songs where this happens… Given the choice of small font versus not being able to represent existing music, I choose the former.

Two notes a chord doth not make.
Pedantically speaking. So Cubase is correct.

3 Likes

I think I’ll trust the music theory chops of the Dorico scoring team versus the Cubase engineering team. The Dorico team regards it as a chord.

They would be wrong. They may allow you to do it with 2, but a chord is 3 notes. And yes, I know that if you ask practically anyone they will say a chord is 2 or more notes. They would be wrong, too.
This doesn’t mean that I think Cubase shouldn’t allow 2-note “chords”, just that it’s incorrect music theory.
I doesn’t make the rules, I just break 'em!

Whether a dyad or triad is the minimum number of notes to define a chord is very debatable, not fact. I don’t know for certain either way, and I’ve taken 8 semesters of music theory at Juilliard. In the Jazz theory classes they do teach a dyad as a chord. In classical it is more ambiguous, but doesn’t really matter because harmonic analysis is done with figured bass, and with figured bass you can omit the 3rd by crossing it out, and that definitely does occur in classical. I have had to do it during analysis, so it’s not like the classical composers said I can’t do this.

But if it makes you feel better, Cubase can rename the Chord Track to the Harmony Track.