They still have this?! Well it always seemed more like a design problem than a bug, so I probably should’ve guessed it’s still there.
Another similar Logic quirk, which was extremely embarassing to me once, I discovered while delivering accidentally out of sync files to an album mixing session. See, Logic adds the PDC buffer’s worth of silence to the start of the export. Why it does that, I have no idea, but it does (or at least did ten years ago, I sure hope this has been fixed by now). Even though I set the locators exactly to where the reference Pro Tools track was at, the synths I had programmed to the piece were off exactly by the PDC buffer compared to the audio that came directly from PT. I remember testing this immediately with Cubase out of frustration, and sure enough, Cubase’s export lined up perfectly with the reference track…
Not to harp on Logic too much though. Along the years I’ve just come to the conclusion that these small paper cuts exist in some form in all DAWs. So what’s most important is that you know and your thinking lines up with your chosen program incredibly well, and thus you know how to navigate your way around any pitfalls.
But to bring this back to the original topic, there’s just no way to claim that Cubase isn’t up there in terms of scoring features. It’s clearly one of the best, and subjectively for many, the best. Some people and Steinberg themselves name-drop HZ with Cubase often and that’s obviously a great reference, but I think the true test of a DAW is how well those of us without large teams can work extremely efficiently and spend the least amount of time on tasks that have nothing to do with music. And I think again there Cubase absolutely shines.
Logic is great too in its own ways, so if some people are choosing it, go for it. I think, however, some of them might be checking out the views over here after a while!
How can you say Cubase is the best DAW when stuff like this happens:
I certainly wish Cubase didn’t failed drawing simple faders…
Cubase was easy to break. Changing buffer sizes changed where the automation happened! From 64 sample buffer to 1024 sample buffer changed it by about 588 samples, or 12 milliseconds!
That’s a lot!
That’s not all either. Notice that the fade changes as well. The shorter buffer size has a quick fade, and the longer buffer size has a longer fade. This is the exact same automation. I placed 2 points as close as possible to each other for a 0dB to -inf automation drop.
We’re out of the territory of different DAWs sounding different completely now. The same DAW can’t even sound the same!
I did not find any settings that alleviated this behaviour. Changing buffer sizes always changed automation.
It’s incredible that you don’t understand what i mean…
it’s not about thousands of thousands mixer channels - it’s about all the pro features that you can found in Cubase’s Mix Console. None of that can be found in Logic’s rudimentary Mixer. Fact.
Have a look:
I have never said the opposite anywhere…
I am a former hardcore Logic X user. But Cubase is the better choice for film composing and sound design, feature wise.
But I like to repeat myself:
the best DAW for the job is the one you know best.
!
Thanks for that reference. Of the 20 differences, I knew about 5 that I use regularly. There were another 8 or 10 that I probably wouldn’t use. But there were 4 or 5 I had no idea, and I can really use them. The big gem in there for me is the combined panning feature. I have been using a Waves plug-in for that. It is sooooooo much easier to do it right in the mixer. There may be a few times I’ll still want to go to the Waves plug, but I’ll use this feature a lot.
No I understand. I also prefer Cubase for scoring for media and love it but it feels like you are over bashing Logic. You can not even accept that someone can like it’s GUI which is a personal thing. It is a highly capable DAW used by professionals and amateurs everyday just like SO, DP, Live or FL Studio. In ‘‘your view’’ pattern sequencer and Clip based production is child stuff so you stamp Logic as being a toy which is far from the truth.
Also you are approaching film scoring from a single point of view. For that type of blockbuster scoring yes Cubase has advantages. Especially big budget composers who work 24/7 and prefer instant access to all sounds but as I said not everybody works that way or need extended mixer features or visibility agent or sound design, (which I think Logic is not behind at all, check Charlie Clouser’s scores) when composing.
Both are great DAWs missing features compared to each other. I can make a comparison list like yours in favor of Logic against Cubase in a second
but I do not know any kind of music or film score that can exclusively done by one DAW only.
I am a film composer who made that move, and jumped ship from Pro Tools back in 2015. Why did I choose Cubase and not Logic, for my fresh new start? Because, as much as I love Apple products, how certain could I be that they deeply care about Logic or its development? Apple makes money from selling iPhones. Logic would be an afterthought in the big scheme of things. But Steinberg? They make Cubase, and that is their main focus. Which company do I trust more to actually care about the software that would be depending on every day? There really was only one logical (!) choice.
After 5 years with Cubase Pro and now with version 10.5 I am happy happy. I see people complaining about a lack of new features – coming from Pro Tools, hearing that is almost comical. To me there has been more major improvements to Cubase the 5 years I’ve been using it, than the last 10 years of Pro Tools. And, as other people here point out, you can customise and mold the program to make it fit your needs. You don’t HAVE to dig into all of that stuff (I have only scratched the surface of Macros and PLE myself), but once you do, you start to see how incredibly advanced this piece of software is.
The only thing that I still find more intuitive in Pro Tools is its incredibly fast-paced audio editing (tabbing to transients, splitting, nudging, crossfading, all that ninja editing stuff). I miss that a bit. But not enough to pain myself with a two-DAW workflow when Cubase delivers so well on everything else.
YES! Dorico is incredible. It is a so much more clever program than Sibelius that it is mindboggling. I think Dorico is starting to make a real impression on composers, and we will see more people making the switch. I was completely sold from day one.
I guess, one of the many good reasons Steinie switched to dongleless, and gave up the security over increasingly declining popularity.
ive never seen anybody produce with Cubase in real life…and i know a lot of people in the industry.
Seen some videos of a few hardstyle producers, but ive never met actual people in one of the many, many big studios i have worked.
Pirating is bad, but it also helps pushing popularity obviously.
Since Cubase went uncrackable, it slowly faded to the background.
Maybe a rent to own on Splice etc could also help, like Studio One.
howeverrrrr
I have seen many many movie composers (no music producers) of big companies on youtube who produce with Cubase.
And the fact that anybody can find a pirated 12 pro version, will help getting the young kids into scoring with Cubase, and finally schools will flip.
The macbooks you need for big scores are way too expensive for beginning students, specially in upcoming countries (China, Bollywood etc).
In Holland a general macbook M1 with a big of space is around 4000 euro, which is crazy for students who cant even afford a 3rd hand bike.
