After all the problems with Cubase, all the versions…time to look for a DAW.
What will be the best place to start demoing? I mean from which DAW.
I know there is few of them and do not wanna mention names but which one
can be closest to Cubase workflow but without all the Performance problems
such as the biggest one being Cubase not being able to utilize the processor.
That’s quite an interesting question to ask on a Steinberg forum.
I have a pretty similar setup to yours, by the look of it. Cubase runs very nicely indeed on my system. Cubase 8 and 8.5. One obvious difference is the difference in our operating systems. However, I don’t expect that you would pay any particular attention to me making these comments, given that as you say Cubase has never run well for you.
So why would you pay attention to any comments I made about another DAW?
You know there are a limited number of DAWS; you clearly need to try them out yourself. There would appear to be no point in you listening to the comments of any Cubase use who has had a positive experience of Cubase, because that would obviously raise the possibility that any positive comments they have about another DAW would not be replicated on your system.
Good luck if you really are in the market for another DAW.
I think one thing that would be quite important to consider would be the type of work you do/type of music you make. For example do you have to be compatible with other studios, do you use more midi than audio, do you own a lot of VST´s…that sort of stuff.
I´m also very happy with Cubase, sorry that it´s not happening for you.
I am very SAD to leave Cubase…the ONLY reason is its VST performance and utilization of the processor. I do not have any other complains really besides that. Yes, i own a lot of plugins, over 15 000$, a lot of them NFR. I use heavy plugins and many tracks. I have a Monster Setup yet Cubase can not utilize the power of that Setup. I have 2 Processors which combined are running 30-40% of their Performance while Performance in Cubase is Maxed and that’s it. This is not something i come up with or an isolated case. 99% of the users i know and the users here on the forum acknowledge this problem. I am on Cubase since 1997, almost 20 years but the last few versions a really bad performance wise. To wait for another update/upgrade? I don’t know, is it worth the money. My Cubase cost me well over 2000$ since i first started. Plectru, yes your comments matter. What comments do not matter are comments of FanBoys who do not KNOW ANYTHING about Cubase except turning it on and shutting it off and then claim Cubase runs nice for them. Let them try running 60 tracks with 200 plugins, on 2 networked computers, thru VEPro, Cuda and Nebula Server…we will see then how much they actually know about it. It is just frustrating that because of few FanBoys Steinberg ignores power users. Yes, i am very sad to not be working on Cubase but i still need to do work, that is how i make my living. I won’t throw it under the bus completely but tonight i am demoing something and i think i am in Heaven…we will see. Let’s see, maybe we’ll talk again after few months, they usually BAN me even though i do not bash anyone or anything. I can completely support with proves anything i say here, with Audio Files, Midi Files, Images, Benchmark Tests, all kinds of things.
If someone thought i was crazy, here is what I and Hundreds of other users deal with, there is 2 images attached and you judge. It is the same exact Plugins and same exact Audio Files. All the plugins and everything i tried to do in the DEMO DAW works perfect, the Performance was the only thing that i needed to know. I am not being stupid, i love Steinberg but just look at the images below. I will open a ticket with Support and ask them to show me how to get with Cubase what i got on the other picture. Fair Enough.
Its a simple Set up. I open ^%$#@!% first. 2 Monark Instances, on one 2 Nebula CUDA Instances with Reverbs
on the other 2 Nebula Reverb Instances with Reverbs. 1 Nebula Instance with Tape Loaded on one Monark.
1 Murano on the Master. Played small MIDI and took the Screen Shot. Now, take that same exact thing and
apply it to Cubase, that’s how i did it for both.
The things is i am on PC otherwise i would not even ask a question here. Yes, Cubase is good for MIDI but i do everything ITB and that needs a lot of CPU power which Cubase limits us so there is no other solution. I don’t know much about Reaper but what i am testing now its like heaven.
Headlands, you are right, there is still no better DAW then Cubase…but i spent 3 grant, same like you, found the hard way that was just a waste of money ONLY because of Cubase. I don’t know, i am thinking of giving it some more chance but i know Stiny will come up with another paid Upgrade where its even worst…as of now i can switch to another DAW and get 100% discount when i buy it based on switching to them.
Steinberg will probably ban me from here for this Thread as they usually do, it is ok, it will probably push me and help me move easier…but i still beg someone to prove me wrong and convince me i should stay, i can not split from Cubase but i need to make money too. Its really a shame on Steinberg that they just blew out some features which none are working properly while leaving a crippled engine in Cubase. And yes i am angry, i should be able to explress my self on here about competitors product if its done with decency like i did it. I am from America, i can buy a product and go to another store with another product and claim a cheaper price. I don’t know how it works in Germany. But i better stop writing cuz i know how to lose it sometimes. I just wanted someone to prove me wrong, not sarcastically but i really want Cubase to work, its just not there…and i’ve been using it for almost 20 years.
I had a tough summer with Cubase 8x , after barely completing a project on an older PC I updated to the haswell system tried an asus x99 PC with your same processor and was appalled at the terrible performance, no gain , Including USB connectivity issues…the PC I have now in my specs is working better with 8.10 and is performing just good enough , so far about up to 80% at the most on asio meter but in comparison to previous PC updates like generation 2 i7 to generation 3 for example, not the gain in performance I am acustom to with lesser PCs.
So I wonder if your problems became worse with the x99 system?
Also Cubase provides in my opinion the best midi tools and interface and I am able to run 24 stereo in and out at a much lower cost point than pro tools rig…so I won’t be changing daws now , but really need to see some performance and stability gains this year with updates. Just like Microsoft , let’s skip to Cubase 10 and get it right for the customer ( experience ) .
Hey Alexis, its not the plugins, its not only me, its tons of people with the same problem. I tried removing ALL of my plugins except Steinberg and its still the same…yes, i meant 32 Bit Word Bit, not System. 32 Bit Projects. Its just hard for me to grasp the fact why is it so hard for people to accept the fact that Cubase is not CPU efficient since few versions back.
Hi Basari, thanks, wow, no plug-ins but DAW stock, that is I guess the definitive exclusion of a 3rd-party plug-in based problem!
Sorry I can’t help personally, I’m way down the food chain in terms of project complexity. I wonder if someone like Scan (in UK) or ADK (in US) has a troubleshooting-for-hire service … maybe in the end that might be more valuable to you when considering the time spent to learn a new DAW.
Pete Kaine is the Scan guy, and he can be contacted over at SOS forums; “ADKChris” can be contacted over at the Gearslutz forums.
Studio One right?
I’m a Studio One user too. Studio One is a great nifty DAW to get things done. But beware if you rely on MIDI, make sure to do some extensive testing because there are some long standing issues in the MIDI department (MIDI isn’t high priority at PreSonus). Also keep in mind that the start of a project in Studio One feels lightning fast, but as soon as you have to go in depth (conditional editing, proper MIDI tools, Arranger Track etc. etc.), you will instantly lose all the time you’ve gained at the start of the project compared to Cubase.
So again, Studio One absolutely is a great DAW, but you will have to sacrifice a lot when entirely switching as a Cubase power user!
Yes Niles, S1. I know nothing can substitute Cubase. I use it really long and know the thing.
I don’t know…maybe another update/upgrade will fix something…o have no clue what to do.
I tried many things, i really have a monster and complex setup. I use Cubase then the plugins
come from 4 different things. 1. Vepro on the main computer, Vepro on a Server, Nebula on
the main computer Nebula on the Server, Cuda on the main computer Cuda on the server so
i get CPU juice from many places…but still, Cubase can not utilize even the main Processor.
I completely get what you’re saying and am pretty much in the same boat. I have a reasonably powerful machine (but don’t build projects on the same scale as you) all the various latency monitors check my PC out as fine (and always have done) and yet I “redline” my PC with reasonably simple projects 20-30 audio tracks + plugins and a few VSTs regardless of buffer settings.
I have invested a great deal of money in Steinberg over the years and am beginning to lose patience. I have tried building the same project in Harrison Mixbus 3, same number of tracks, exported MIDI driving the same VSTs and the same plug-ins - result? PC ticking along hardly sweating playing essentially the same project. There is something deeply wrong with Cubase - my gut feeling is this issue was introduced with ASIO guard (whether you use it or not) and has got worse with every release since 7. If you’re lucky enough for it to work for you great - don’t touch anything!