Hallo I’m a forum newby, I would like to choose cubase 7.5 'couse looks great, how is the performance under OSX? I’ve used Logic and Protools, and Cubase 6 in the past. Thanks for suggestions.
My configuration is Mac Pro 3.3 quad core and 16Gb ram with OSX Maveriks.
Welcome! There are many threads about this on the forum, so please use search.
… is better on PC… 
Aloha j,
Works great here.
IMHO
Hands down the best Cubase version ever released by Steinberg.
If ever you were going to get onboard, now is a good time.
Keeping in mind that no DAW is perfect, what Steve posted above is ‘must do’ advice.
{‘-’}
I use both Cubase 7.5, PT11 and sometimes Logic X.
Cubase 7.5 is quite stable.
Performance (CPU, Latency) is comparable to Logic X and seems to deal better than PT11 with virtual instruments.
The only thing is that Cubase takes lots more time to load a session than Logic.
Otherwise,
Even if Cubase still perform better on PC, It is not a major argument for me. I run really large orchestral sample libraries with lots of plugins without glitches and reasonable latency. I wouldn’t have switch to Cubase if I didn’t need better tools to work with Orchestral libraries (expression map, note exp, and more) and the new instrument tracks is really great.
What makes the most difference is the CPU power, Drive speed (SSD) and RAM. All DAW is performing great on my computer.
I took time to read the posts, seems to be some problems with Native Instruments, I use a lot of Kontakt instances and synths of course like Battery, Massive and their compression plugs. I’ve tried Cubase 7.5 at friend’s studio yesterday, and saw some graphic problems, cpu spikes and very sloooow time to load the projects under OSX, but the software looks great more than protools. Yes reply to Bfred, I use orchestra Play libraries and Komplete Ultimate stuff. Thanks for suggestion I will upgrade my Elements version soon.
That is soooo kooool to read!
Right on!
‘That’s the way to do it’. (old ham radio talk)
{‘-’}
Hey. FWIW I use Kontakt pretty extensively and have only run into problems if I forget that each Kontakt instance is run on a single CPU, so “load balancing” the number of instruments on each instance (and paying attention to make sure I’m not asking too much from my 7200RPM drives) is essential. A machine with lots of cores and SSDs would be a dream.
Other than that (which applies to any DAW really) C7.5 on the mac is a fantastic release, so much so that I find myself using other DAWs a lot less.
Go for it!
What buffer are you running? I’m in somewhat of a transition myself and use LPX quite a bit. C7.5 is great but I sure do miss the dual buffer. Normally I run at 256 which is fine for a bit but it doesn’t take long to hit the max. 512 is decent but then I can just start to detect the latency…maybe I’d get used to it. I do run a PC slave for some Play instruments but am curious what other doing large sample libraries are running?
Speaking of Play…
I have had a lot of problems with Play. It seems like there is some sort of memory leak or something as it starts out fine but as the session goes on the performance gets flaky…lots of break up, slow response, missed/stuck notes. This happens only with the Play instances, everything el;se in the session is fine.
I believe I’ve updated to the latest version of Play also.
YMMV.
I just want to butt in to say, make sure you have Constrain Delay Compensation turned on if you are having latency when you play VST instruments.
Great advice.
This tip should be a ‘sticky’.
{‘-’}
ok my friend will left me install the C7.5 on my mac this weekend I will let you know my impression…
Yes but that will only affect things if you have some FX plugins that create their own latency. VI’s like Knotakt don’t. I was only asking not because there I a problem, but just curious what others find tolerable in a large orchestral template.
I recently did a comparison between Cubase 7.5, Logic X and DP 8 to see how they ran on my new MacBook Pro. In each case I loaded 19 instruments from the Kontakt 5 orchestral library into 4 instances of Kontakt (one per orchestral section) and used IK-Multimedia CSR as a send effect (I switched the Kontakt reverbs off). With a series of sustained chords played by all instruments, and using a buffer size of 1024 to give a fair comparison with Logic, I got the following figures for CPU%:-
Logic X 24
Cubase 7.5 33
DP 8 42
I was surprised at the DP 8 performance, but don’t know it well enough to see if this could be improved. The figures did confirm my feeling that Logic Pro was using less CPU with VIs, but not enough to compensate for the loss of expression maps and all the other features Cubase has.
Hi,
Thank you for doing this test, interesting stuff.
However, in my opinion i do miss some data, concerning the differnce between Cubase en Logic.
For example:
So bottom line for me is that these points should be important too in your comparison.
This is a valid question when the test if for measuring the DAW´s in high-latency(mixing) operation. From what I´ve recently learned, Logics buffers are as follows - Process buffer range size (Small = 1032, Medium = 2056, Large = 4104). So if having buffer range in Logic at medium you should have 2048 buffer in cubase.
Small=512, medium = 1024, large = 2056
Cubase 7.5 live on stage or in the studio 
Excellent for me. Rock solid. No issues. From installation to feel. I’m not sure why some users are having issues but its flawless on my MBP… As solid as any apple app… No issues with NI plugins.
I can honestly say that I’ve used cubase 6.5 on both windows and mac prior to updating to cubase 7. Cubase 6.5 perform better on a MacBook Pro. Also OSX is friendlier for musicians. For example you can connect your devices after starting cubase which is one of the things you can’t do with PC.