Brando


Freddie - no disrespect but that screenshot is frickin' hideous. (Eye of the beholder, I guess).

I have to agree too. X2's mixer may not be the most attractive but it doesn't give me nightmares. 

Freddie H


Stop bashing the guy.
If it push someone to leave a platform like SONAR for another DAW it must be something that he or she feels that something important is missing? There are many functions and professional features still missing in SONAR X2 that do exist in Cubase. And important new feature continue to grow.

I'm very open minded and have work with Cubase, Logic, SONAR and Pro Tools for many years so I do understand what professional potential he sees in Cubase 7. just check the mixer function in large projects. Another is that it let me record and do a vocal session with an Artist in a studio in LA working in my studio located in Europe in realtime with no latency. Also new Bulletproof ASIO-Guard + VST3 ability

I strongly consider to join him in Cubase land...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfCWPHBqf_Q

http://www.steinberg.net/en/products/cubase/whats_new.html?et_cid=22&et_lid=67

The new mixers adds some very nice functionalities - though it looks ugly and un-Steinberg-ish. 

Bear in mind though that Cubase had a lot to do to catch up w/ others - certainly not in terms of features but in terms of ergonomics. Someone coming from another platform may not find those new things all that revolutionary. 


I'm curious about the remote recording stuff, though, at the same time, the person you are collaborating w/ needs to own the rest of the recording gear and to be able to operate it - mic, preamp, audio interface and a proper room to record in if it's a live instrument or vocals. Or then to perform in a real studio - where in most case, the studio computers aren't connected to the internet.

Looks pretty good to me. They've given Cubendo a facelift.

I don't get how you can collaborate over the internet in real time- what about ping?

Avid going out of business, Logic moving into the shadows, "new code" daws years  behind feature wise;  I always knew it would come down to a battle between two Japanese monsters Godzilla and Mothra, Roland and Yamaha :)


Good luck on your quest for a better DAW than X2 anniedog.

 I always  step back and scratch my head whenever anyone says they are having serious issues with X2 emphasis on X2. I must be one of the luckiest son of a guns ever because recording at 24/48 into many tracks on an older quad core machine and zero, thats right, zero problems. 

 If this is a question of comfort with the GUI then this is certainly subjective.Features are also highly subjective. If you don't like it there are more but none are perfect and many are far worse that X2. The bug fixes I see posted are usually very minor.

  I decided years ago to use a PC DAW that stays current and works well. Like someone else said already any problems I have ever had that related to pops or clicks were ALWAYS the result of either my hardware or my interface,never the software. 
 
  I am symathetic of anyone who experiences problems with their DAW. I'm sure it can be frustrating attempting to get it working and sometimes I think users look for a solution, and sometimes that solution is another DAW. I hope it works out for him. I would suggest looking at the interface settings/ latencies/ drivers before jumping ship if you like everything else about X2.

  I'm sure at times there are people over at the Cubase forum also frustrated and thinking about jumping to Sonar X2. I agree that pops and clicks likely will remain on the new DAW...it never ends does it?

I like Cubase,( I  have LE came with the Tascam)  always have, It has one feature Sonar does not have and that is a full on wave editor for tracks. But I stay with Sonar because it works better for me with 95% of the funtions and ---it cost me a lot of money! 


Changing DAW's will most likely not change your life ,,, it will just take your money, money you could have spent on a nice piece of outboard! :)

. Objective benchmarks do seem to support the claim that Cubase is more efficient than SONAR bitflipper ^

 


Hi Bitflipper !  I work in a studio with a bunch of other composers ,where pretty much all of them are on Cubase 6.5 ... 

Before buying a bunch of HP Z400 6-core Xeon workstations, I got my hands on one, and tested what to expect in terms of power,compared to our previous workstation.  So I installed X1 and Cubase 6.5 on the same machine, and ran a comparable session inside it, using the same audiocard, ASIO driver etc... 

Tests were clearly showing quite clearly that Sonar has LOTS more CPU+RAM headroom than Cubase, it's not even a joke... Both 64 bit versions were installed, along with NI Kontakt, Spectrasonics stuff ... (the typical stuff we use) ...  Sonar CPU action was very low- and stable, even while playing ridiculous amount of polyphony of multiple instances of Omnisphere. the RAM however was being used a lot, but even beyond 4-6gb of RAM being used, I felt it was 2-3 times more that what we usually do in a typical project. it still was stable and responsive, and glitch-free. so I stopped there.  

 Cubase on the other hand, was running much lower on RAM, (loading the exact same sound presets and samples, and Kontakt/Spectasonics being configured the same, loading the same VST plugins). However, it was CPU spiking like crazy, glitching, stuttering, clicking all over the place, eventually, at about 1.5-2gb of RAM, it would often lag and crash for no apparent reason (even running all 64 bit). My Cubase friends were thinking that I would have hacked my test, but didn't....

 I'm not saying this is typical Cubase behavior, but for me (as a former Cubase user), I certainly wouldn't agree that Cubendo is "more efficient", and I'm not even talking about workflow and ergonomics, and mixing/MIDI/editing feature set.  Every tried to listen to a (wet-only) AUX track on Cubase?? :S

Cheers ! 

 V

(edited for wierd page layout)

Well - I am using 3 main DAW's (Sonar X1, Live 8 and Cubase 6.5) at this moment, and I think every one has it's strong and weak points. I going to upgrade to X2 within a few weeks, but also going to upgrade to Cubase 7 in December and Live 9 in the start of next year (yes - Ableton has announced the next version of Live too).

But - I am not going to make a hard "switch" to any of these platforms. I just use them side by side. I do not think "jumping" to another platform and abandon your "old" platform is very productive. A DAW is just a toolbox, and the choice of my toolbox depends on the job that has to be done.  I do not have a "special" bound with any platform, but like X1 (soon to be X2) enough to enjoy working with it. Sometimes however things are a bit more easy to do on a platform like Cubase or Live, and -as I said- I do not hesitate to use the best tool for the job that has to be done. Most times it can be done using Sonar, but in other occasions (and other locations) I just use another tool - that's all

I really like what I have seen from X2 so far, but I also like the new layout of Cubase 7 , and I am curious what Live 9 is going to bring.

As for bugs . Well to be honest - I never used a DAW that was 100% bugfree. Some DAW's have strange design quirks, some have strange bugs, some have problems with specific hardware. All DAW's somtimes have strange or erroneous behavior, but in almost all of the cases there is a acceptable work-around. That's how things work in practice.

  I am afraid if the op really makes a "full jump" to another platform he looses the goodies of the platform he left behind. I rather use the goodies I want to use at a particular moment, and not limit limit myself because I have "abandoned" the platform that was offering me that goodies. 

But hey - I have always been a bit strange guy I guess...

Must be a bunch of Southerners on this forum ~

Y'all take forever to say goodbye!!!  

I'm curious. What are some of the differences between Nuendo and Cubase... I mean aside from the massive price gap?

For the first time i have seen the new Cubase channel strip.It 's the worst graphics that i've ever seen.It's strange that no one says anything because Sonar's users are always very critical on this topic. The Sonar GUI in comparison is extraordinary.