Cubasis needs a far better EQ.
The 2 frequency shelving eq we have now is not cutting it.
Cubasis needs a far better EQ.
It’s the DJ EQ from Cubase. The only difference is that you cannot
boost or cut the mid band. This “EQ” is a joke… Can’t believe it!
Controlling the mid frequencies is best done by adjusting the lows and highs in the opposite direction and using the track’s gain (volume) fader, e.g. to increase the mids, reduce both the highs and lows and increase the track’s volume.
For more precise frequency control I’d recommend using the filter additionally.
For more precise control I’d recommend a real EQ.
All these work arounds are just a waste of time when
you transfer the Cubasis-project to Cubase. And a filter is
still a filter and not an EQ. Bad enough that you cannot automate
Thanks for your suggestions. But real talk:
The EQ is not an EQ and it doesn’t even have a mid band
which cannot be reasonable as other apps do have a real EQ.
…they have to give us the real thing we bought, not a bass/treble plugin…do not waste your time trying to excuse bad Steinberg work and app…use other apps that have the features you need: Meteor, BM2, that have a good eq, automation, wist and a lot of other things too, even if cheaper in price…Cubasis is only a very expensive toy, may be targeted to children (but not for pro users).
Thanks for the tip!
This may be a hardware “issue”, the ARM in the iPad has quite a powerful processor as far as the integer processor is concerned (normal CPU) but the numerical co-processor and in particular DSP portion/extensions of the processor are weak, very weak in comparison with PC processors, this may force the designers to keep signal processing that may get used on every track as simple as possible simply so that people do not run out of processing power.
No no hardware problem, that’s bull. I use Auria also and the eq’s on that app are only comparable to a full blown Neve desk! And these are available on 48 tracks, 8 subgroups and the master.
And that are only the eq’s. You get the compressor/lim/gate systems on all these tracks too! And these are also very high quality units. Oh and all in 24bit audio too compared to Cubasis 16bit engine. Cubasis effects and eq’s are a toy compared to that. Now Auria and Cubasis cost about the same so there’s no excuse for it. Cubasis should have been priced the same as Garageband, no more. Steinberg has to ante up the game considerably to impress me at least.
That depend on how its implemented, its not all the same math and cubasis is doing quite a bit more than Aurio, if you are not noticing it and see Cubasis as some sort of garageband level app that in itself explains a lot
What’s it doing more is midi, thats it.
The audio and fx side is a toy compared to Auria and that even is an understatement.
And the rompler functions of Cubasis are rudimentary at best.
Midi is nothing cpu and memory wise.
My old 512KB ram Atari from 1985 with Steinberg pro 24 had more midi functions than Cubasis now.
It even had a full score module. Yes i’am an old fart i know
I’m a pro sound engineer who has worked with virtually every daw there is and was.
I even used steinberg’s pro 12, the first midi sequencer they made.
It’s not the hardware that’s the problem, Steinberg taking the easy route and cashing in is.
Cubasis as it stands now is not worth more than 10 bucks at the most.
I know what you’re talking about, melts6.
But let’s give it a chance. Maybe it’ll be worth the money in a while.
Rome wasn’t built in a day. Patience!