Producers around the world

Cubase
#1

Producers around the world

I just watched the video advertising on the Steinberg website.

So these producers are very satisfied with:
mix console, vari audio, plugins, EQ,all midi systems, chord track, vst instruments, video engine, user interface, padshop, sound quality, how it’s easy and powerful

and You know what ?
Not ONE word about working with AUDIO FILES, how it’s easy, fast, intuintive and significantly accelerated their workflow.

A few years ago it would be truth. But today, IMO working with audio files is the Achilles heel of Cubase, compared to other DAW on the market such as PT, Sonar X3.

Is working with audio files not importent for producers ? I think it 's very important , if not the most important.

So, Steiny. There is a big market area, which is for you to get. It is at your fingertips. Just give them same or better workflow with audio files.
Not new plugins, new instruments, better midi expression, score editor, etc… It’s all ok and thanks for that but not essential.
Cubase is a masterpiece when it comes to MIDI and VST instruments, but still lags behind in the field of working with audio files and automation.

just my thoughts, :wink:
Peace!

#2

What´s wrong with how cubase lets you work with audio files? I think its pretty great for audio editing…but I come from Logic :slight_smile:

#3

+2
{’-’}

#4

nothing is wrong, It’s not the point

just a bit outdated, look at S1, Sonar x3, PT workflow.

in short:

  • Fast bouncing tracks, bounce in place
  • Smart audio editing (smart tool), mouse with modifiers
  • Fast triming tool for automation (I know there’s a ninja macro but …)
  • Viewing inserts and sends on each track in project window (like in PT)
  • Same with in / out / gain / pan
  • Working with automation, coping, viewing, quantization, moving nodes, etc…
#5

Yes, just pretty great. :slight_smile:

#6

Better at MIDI one thinks but audio makes constant improvements over the product cycles.

#7

You must be using a different program if you think MIDI and score are getting more attention than audio. I sure hope Steinberg focuses more attention to them (and thankfully they have started to, as the Sibelius team acquisition shows), because they can really differentiate themselves through that from all the audio-heavy software out there.

#8

Major +1000000000000000000000000000000000
{’-’}

#9

Look a the topic: Producers (not composers) around the world. :slight_smile:

#10

Hmm, I’am using Digital AUDIO Workstation and I do not want the program changed in The complete software for writing, playing, printing and publishing music notation. (quote from Sibelius website). :wink:

#11

maybe hes talking about the focus by Ableton on audio. Cubase isnt there yet in that department…

#12

Certainly I wouldn’t want Cubase to lose its DAW features, as the whole point of a multipurpose music program is being able to do as much as possible in one environment. But I do feel Steinberg’s strength is in their more genre agnostic approach compared to some of the competitors, and I hope they continue to foster it.

Nothing wrong with adding more audio features, I’ll of course use them myself as well – we all need to wear our producer hats on most, if not all, projects these days.

#13

I use both Pro Tools 10 and Cubase 7 at the studio. I am using Cubase since C5, and it improves a lot since then in the audio department.
Only two things that I would like to see in Cubase, that are really helpful in PT were the Playlists and the Smart Tool (actually, some of its functions…), and Cubase 7.5 already have the Track Versions, which seems similar to the playlists of PT. So, the next move could be the Smart Tool. It could be better, as all of them DAWs could, but I don’t thing Steinberg is far behind the competition is this area, and it is obvious it keeps improving. Take the mix console as an example: it is second to none.
Regards,
Martin

#14

Opening with a Key Command and closing with the mouse, not very user friendly I think.

#15

If you want to get a job DONE audio file handling is fine. However, if you just want to play around with the audio files all day trying to polish toids then Cubase is maybe not for you.
The end game is MUSIC. Nobody notices or cares about how clever the processing is. So the drummer can play the four types of paradiddle? So you’ve corrected his timing to the nth degree and the singers tuning from horse’s ass to angels? The listener rarely notices.
I don’t think it bothers the majority of users.

#16

It sounds like you are talking about amateurs users :wink:

However, if you just want to play around with the audio files all day trying to polish toids then Cubase is maybe not for you

and that’s about pro users :astonished:


The end game is MUSIC. Nobody notices or cares about how clever the processing is. So the drummer can play the four types of paradiddle? So you’ve corrected his timing to the nth degree and the singers tuning from horse’s ass to angels? The listener rarely notices> .

I agree

I don’t think it bothers the majority of users.

because only a few of them knows what kind of tools are missing to make audio polished much quicker :slight_smile:

#17

Personally I’m not a big fan of audio loops or drag and drop style. I prefer working with vst instruments. Cubase 7.5 has everything I need and much more. As for audio editing cubase has done a great job…

#18

Thats strange, I open and close the mixer with the same KC

#19

I definitely agree with the original post. Working with audio in Cubase could be frustrating:

  • no stereo -> 2 mono conversion (and viceversa)
  • batch export is very limited (no insert bypass, no automatic mono preservation, etc…)
  • render inserts missing (alias bounce in place)
  • global insert bypass
  • …
#20