I’m rather new to Cubase, and I love it. I currently have a trial version of Cubase Elements 7.
I’m a live sound engineer, and I have 16 channels of beautiful ADAT running through my PC before it hits the mixing desk.
I used to use Sony Acid just for recording purposes, but now I’ve switched to Cubase it’s a dream.
I have been requested a number of times to do live recordings (realtime - not post mastered) and, recently I have been asked to do a live audio stream.
This is easily done with Cubase for record/stream, and hardware desk for mixing the room, however, I want to switch over fully digital.
I have tried the obvious things, and I have searched the forum, and all I can find is people asking advice about a single instance of Cubase running across multiple monitors.
What I would like to do is, run two instances of Cubase - one on each monitor, so that I can have two individual audio mixes. Anyone who has tried to record the output to a PA, will know it definitely takes two separate mixes to achieve this.
Both instances of Cubase would need to share the ADAT resources.
I hope to stick with Elements, as its nice and simple to use, but lots of awesome features.
Can anyone give some advice on this please?
Thanks,
Glenn
You would need (full) Cubase for multiple mixer windows, but you’d also get features like Control Room which would make such a setup easier. There’s a learning curve but what you want to do is not trivial, either. However it’s all doable with one instance of Cubase.
That would probably work. The ASIO driver supports quite a lot, as the card is a RME Hammerfall HDSP 9652.
I did try clicking buttons, but I couldn’t see a way to open multiple mixers, (I may have chosen the wrong word “mixer” as the view I have been using has a sidebar on the left to insert FX and EQ etc per track, and on the right hand side is each audio track - this is the window that can record)
I do apologise if I have confused things, but I’ve only used Cubase Elements once, I’m very new to it. (It was really easy to setup,1st set was mixed on the analogue desk, second set I just used Cubase, and nobody could tell the difference!)
It would probably help if I installed it on my laptop at home so that I can investigate, but I’m stuck in dev mode on linux
My main goal of this thread is to find out if the software is physically capable of what I would like to achieve.
Thanks
[EDIT] @robw (hopefully I can add replies soon without waiting for a moderator lol)
Multiple mixers are a breeze to set up in the full fat versions of Cubase, But I think your issue here is that Cubase Elements only supports one mixer view.
you could of course build two seperate mixes by using a pre-fade send to a new channel, routed to a new output buss, for each mic/ line channel, then reorder the mixer channels to opposite ends of the MixConsole using the the left and right zone functions, but it’s not quite as elegant!
Thinking about this, the OP can achieve what is needed even with Cubase Elements 7 by routing each input to two tracks simultaneously. The important point is that one input channel can be routed to multiple tracks.
Let’s say there are 16 input channels: route each of the 16 input channels to to a set of 16 tracks and route their outputs to a single stereo group track, then do the same to a second set of 16 input channels but route their outputs to a stereo output.
The first set of 16 channels can have a recording mix set up and the output can go to disk in realtime as a stereo audio file by inserting the free Voxengo Recorder VST plugin in the group channel they’re routed to. The recording is started and stopped by the button on the Voxengo Recorder, and there’s no need to even activate the transport within Cubase, although it would make sense to capture the multi-track as well for subsequent processing.
The second set of 16 channels can have the live mix set up and go via the stereo output to the PA system.
As Cubase Elements 7 only has one mixer window, it does mean having to use 32 track channel faders plus the group channel and output faders all in one window, but not bad for $100 software.
