Yes. Control Room was mentioned above but not a lot of detail.
You either need Control Room or you do not need Control Room. The issue is that IMO many (especially non-cubase users) don’t understand what Control Room even is and how it can be very advantageous. Once you understand and use it, it’s hard to go without. There are many tutorials about Control Room. It may separate casual users from every day users.
Huge when using room correction software. But then again, if you know or remember that you have to disable the room correction software every time for a render, maybe you don’t really need it.
However considering other Control Room features and functions, it is irreplaceable for me too.
I agree - Even as a user that doesn’t need monitor busses, one that records and produces completely solo, the ‘Listen’ function coupled with the aforementioned correction and room emulation benefits alone make it worth the entrance fee.
Samplers are the least CPU intensive devices in a DAW.
No, the difference in CPU performance between Live & Cubase (or in general - creative vs. traditional DAWs) is the audio engine architecture, mainly single- vs. double-buffered respectively. With all the pros & cons of either.
I have the same experience with Live being hard to work with, and also the look and feel is somewhere between awful and uninspiring to be polite.
Cubase has super precise audio / midi editing, good workflow, helpful features, but more importantly it has never gotten in the way of making music for me. That said I see pros using all the major DAWS.
I’d suggest to check out some of Dom’s Cubase feature videos, there is a great one on complex time warping with the time warp tool https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzPMZyWib94 to get a sense of more advanced features.
This is soo subjective, though - I find Live’s GUI clean & efficient in terms of how it presents info & uses available space, especially on a single screen. And it’s very well designed and consistent, which cannot be said of Cubase in many places.
It’s very subjective, and yet it still looks drab and boring.
If you find “clean and efficient” inspiring maybe you’ll have a different experience with it, but I’m more of a visual person so I don’t have a taste for it.
I’m similar, therefore I feel most inspired by Reason, where it’s very easy for me to start and play with ideas.
But Live is good for just work. Its “drab and boring” looks get out of the way and allow to focus. With the right theme - default light, in my case - it feels like a blank canvas.
Again, it’s all very personal / subjective though.
Sure, but from my perspective he might as well be dead now - I don’t know what he’s up to nowadays, what’s the direction Steinberg - and Yamaha - think about for Cubase, what - if any - values the company wants to promote / support (I’m not talking about politics), etc.
But also I can fully appreciate that these things might be completely irrelevant for others.
Me, I’m happy to support - financially, by involving with community, by beta-testing, etc. - a company that I feel close personal relationship with.
Looking at there behaviour since buying Steinberg in 2004 (26 years now !!!)
In a 1/4 of a century they have kept the Nuendo & Cubase products separate from each other, seeing a clear distinction between Audio for music and Audio for Post-Production.
Rebranded all Steinberg Hardware to Yamaha, clearly showcasing that Steinberg need to focus on Software, the Hardware will all be Yamaha branded, showing a commitment to the long term vision of hardware and software working side by side, not competing against each other.
Yamaha are heavily invested in there own AI division, which will only benefit Steinberg in the long term.
Finance wise, Yamahas music side of the company, has a revenue of roughly $3 billion a year and makes about $250 million profit, so I don’t think Steinberg is a project that was purchased for $$$ incentives, unlike most other DAW’s who are all owned by finance groups.
Most DAW’s are also going through catastrophic finance issues and are being rapidly altered to adjust to the oncoming AI onslaught (which is going to turn audio on its head)
Reason was just sold to AI mastering company LANDR, Studio One has been rebranded by its finance owners as FENDER studio Pro, according to underground sources Ableton is pushing to bring AI into its future version.
Steinberg is owned by people who are in the business of Audio and they make lots of $$$, a lot of other DAWS are owned by banks and boardrooms !!!
The future battle for Steinberg is
SUNO AI Studio is going to slowly try to become like a DAW.
Steinberg should slowly add features that exist in SUNO to its already established DAW.
