fitzj
You don't need all these features to make music. You end up spending more time learning how to use than making music.

Computer and software are not essential to PLAY music. But to MAKE music in a DAW, some features are essential

Jeff Evans

tenfoot
 
if you don't do much other than straightforward midi recording and basic editing, it does the job just fine.

How long have you been working with Studio One and how much midi editing have you actually done.  The above statement sounds like it may not be that long or you don't really know the full extent its midi capabilities yet.  The midi editing is not super advanced but it is far from basic as well.  Also working with something like the Transform Tool is not convoluted either.  Entering a whole lot of numbers and not actually seeing what it may look like is convoluted. Different point of view. 
 
I do a lot of work in both audio and midi and have got along rather fine in both areas. Not found any major areas lacking. Agreed it needs some more midi stuff for sure.  It's only 6 years old remember.  It's an actually pretty decent overall DAW for such a young age. 
 
The next major update (V4) might change a few minds.
 
There are few things that people don't know as well. With external hardware in Studio One midi timing is totally independent of the audio side of the program and how hard the audio side is working. Sonar was poor in this regard. Midi timing gets worse as the audio is working harder in Sonar. It always felt to me that the midi timing clock was related to the audio clock.  In this regard S1 is way ahead.  If you are really great player and can play really nicely in time to the click (or not, still without quantising that is e.g. very subtle timing) that playing is very well captured and played back. It's actually exceptional in this regard. There are a few big names that use it for this reason alone. Not everything is quantised. 
 
Also you can still jump tracks (e.g. different hardware synths on each track that is) while looping and recording without a hitch e.g. total gapless performance. New material just gets added in on the track you land on. Sonar cannot do this. This works with virtual instruments too if you have got the power to run several of them at once at super low latencies.  (16 sample buffer settings now available)
 
These are actually major midi considerations compared to perhaps minor editing features that may be lacking or often not needed. For me this is the real stuff that is super important. 
 
With a thunderbolt interface (on Mac) running latencies to well under 2mS, the same level of performance timing is also apparent in virtual instruments too. The actual timing resolution of midi data is super high in Studio One. Once again, important stuff. 
 
 
 

I have been working with midi professionally since 1986 Jeff, so I've done the odd hour or two and pretty much have my head around it:) It may be worth considering that others may have more complex midi requirements than you do before declaring their lack of knowledge because S1 isn't quite delivering what they need. Are you a teacher by any chance? Perhaps there is hidden functionality in Studio One that I am yet to find, but I have worked my way through the entire manual, so unless it is undocumented (which of course is entirely possible in this day and age!) I dont hold much hope of that.
 
No argument at all as to the quality of Studio One given its youth, though I believe development started in 2006, so it is a little older than 6. It's impressive youth/feature set balance is the reason I moved to it following the demise of Sonar.
 
If you have a complex external midi setup as you say, you will already be familiar with its limitations as far as instrument definitions/custom patch and controller names etc. I use midi to control multiple digital mixers and DMX controllers, which becomes a bit of a nightmare in S13.  It is also not possible to set up complex routing to virtual midi outputs in order to create universal setups that will recognise correct midi assignments irrespective of hardware further down the line. Not something your average user requires, but a huge time saver for many professionls who run multiple systems. In Studio one, it seems midi assisgments work on the system they were made on and no other, irrespective of identical virtual device setups under external device options on all systems. If you have a workaround for this, I would certainly love to hear it!
 
Its major shortfall in my opinion for custom midi editing is the absence of a midi event list (and it's filters), and something like either the logical editor in Cubase or the underated and somewhat neglected CAL functionality in Sonar. Fingers crossed this may be on the v4 radar.
 
No argument with the solidity of midi timing and audio engine in general. Pretty much the best I've seen (though Ableton Live is also pretty impressive in this regard, and midi timing was never better than using a midiquest paralell port interface under DOS way back in Cakelive! Unfortunately, that is all it did, then the changes to midi timing drivers in win 3.1 broke even that). Cubase, well, not so much:) 
 
So we are in agreement that S13 is indeed excellent. It is just our definitions of complex and simple midi functionality that vary. As much as I am enjoying it, I couldnt really give as full throated endorsement to Studio Ones current midi editing options as you do, though I am sure it will continue to improve as you say.
 
I truly hope you can say 'I told you so' when V4 is released, and I will happily eat my humble pie then:)

djwayne
You don't need all that junk...here's what I did within 4 days of getting Studio One, I got the faderport yesterday.....
 
https://soundcloud.com/djwayne2000/everybody-loves-somebody-sometime
 
just get busy making music....

 
I suspect the OP uses all of those things to create their music, or they would not have asked.
If someone wanted to write a symphony you wouldn't tell them to forget all that junk and hand them a Banjo. Horses for courses and all that:)

Hello, I'm sorry to irritate. I do not want to cause a war. Between the software
I just offered to follow the experience during use. Those software To guide
I did not intend to move over Studio One badly. I've been using Version 1 -3.5 and still use it.
But over the past 2 years I've been using Sonar Platinum more because I like to learn. I was shocked.
Sonar Platinum is out of development, so I hope it will be for those who want to switch to other software.

Jeff Evans
Can be done in Studio One as well. CC data appears in the automation lanes. Each CC data will have its own lane. What you do is select the transform tool and then you do operations on that CC data. Like compressing down to values or ranges. Moving it all up or down etc. Making it all one value etc.. Its more of a visual thing in Studio One. 
 
There is a scale to the left and the lane can be expanded to various heights as well for more detail. In fact the transform tool is seriously powerful and can do all manner of things that Sonar can not even approach by just entering values. Because of the visual nature of what you are doing. Hard to explain until you see it in action.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnNrgME9POY
 
It applies to all data. Note information and all CC values too. You can view any number of CC lanes at once or individually. People's perception of Studio One's lesser midi capabilities is often misguided. 

 
Thanks Jeff. You know we have it already in Sonar? Besides it wouldn't allow me to swap one CC# series to another... or would it?
 

anydmusic

whitealbum
Chris.r!
So, i made a big list with all answers to all your questions for Sonar/Cubase 9.5 Pro.
But, it is not possible to save this here (don't know why!)
 
If you are interested, please send me PM with your email adress.

That's a shame as I'm sure many would find it useful.

 
Hi whitealbum, I'll drop you PM with my email and try to put it here for the public if it's ok.
 

djwayne
You don't need all that junk...here's what I did within 4 days of getting Studio One, I got the faderport yesterday.....
 
https://soundcloud.com/djwayne2000/everybody-loves-somebody-sometime
 
just get busy making music....

Thanks for your help djwayne. I agree with you regarding making some music. The reason I created this thread is not about it though, it's about accomplish a task, possibly in a quickest way, when I get an order from my client ;)

azslow3
I am not an expert, but there is a list and so I will go throw it. For REAPER.
I put my comments directly into quotas, for readability.
 
I start from the features which have better implementation in REAPER(...)

MIDI effects (mfx)
CAL

 
EEL2/Lua/Python/C++. For MIDI, audio and the DAW behavior. Build-in editor for scripts.
Scripts can work as "one time processor" (CAL direction) or as FX processors (MFX direction).
Big set of (M)FX scripts is bundled. Huge set is in SWS extension (almost standard to have in Reaper). And most users publish there own...
 
 
Different (better or worse is subjective)

Snap To/Snap By switch - I have not found snap by. But setting snap offset is a bit easier then in Sonar, so I compensate with it (and I have found that less error prone).

 
Thanks azslow3! This is a kind of amazing response I'd like to see here more also for other DAWs. Keep'em coming!
 
Looks like (M)FX and CAL involves some script programming knowledge in Reaper. I don't know any script language, when I need to use CAL, I simply use scripts already made by others and tweat them eventually. Using mfx plugins is even more simple, does Reaper use mfx plugins?
 
And could you elaborate a little more on Snap offset in Reaper?
 
Appreciated.

chris.r
Looks like (M)FX and CAL involves some script programming knowledge in Reaper. I don't know any script language, when I need to use CAL, I simply use scripts already made by others and tweat them eventually. Using mfx plugins is even more simple, does Reaper use mfx plugins?

CAL is the language of scripting supported in Sonar. There is no CAL in Reaper. But there are scripts in other languages (EEL2, Lua and Python).
There is no dedicated MFX in Reaper, unlike Sonar, it support accepted since long time by most DAWs MIDI processing within VST and using scripts written in mentioned languages.
Reaper has active knowledgeable script writers, so you do not have to write your own script in case you do not want / do not know how to do this.
 

And could you elaborate a little more on Snap offset in Reaper?

Sonar (for audio clips) and Reaper (for any item) have "Snap offset". When set, moving clips in "Snap to" mode will snap not the beginning of the clip, but specified point in the clip. So once you have defined such points, it is possible to use "Snap to" keeping the offset.
In Sonar, you can set the offset by positioning "Now time" and selecting "Set Snap offset to Now time" in the clip context menu.
In Reaper, you can drag left lower corner of the item. If snap is on, it swill snap during that movement.
 
 

Thanks tenfoot for your response.  Yes instrument definitions come up quite often.  For me personally I don't use them or care for them.  I personally find using the same sounds in the same locations as boring and not very smart. (the great Edgar Froese from Tangerine Dream also said the same.)  In all my hardware synths I rarely use the same sounds anyway.  I have got many thousands of sounds for synths like the Roland JD800, not just the standard 64 that are in there.  So its best to audition them in my opinion and find the sounds one is after.  Or edit them, or better still make new sounds for every project that you do.  Even just finding a factory preset, maybe doing an edit on it and just using it as is.  Most synths in fact will retain the sound and edit even after switch off and back on again the next day.  Instrument definitions cannot cope with that.
 
Studio One can still send bank and program changes if you want to do sound switching in the middle of the music. Or though these days it is not so required.  One should also be converting midi to audio anyway at some point too.
 
I also have a Yamaha digital mixer and there is a mode where it transmits midi data as the surface controls are moved.  Studio One does still records this data and it can be edited etc and it plays it back too into the mixer again hence it follows that data.  I don't do it that often actually but I did test it and it all works.  So from that point of view that can be done too.
 
Please don't believe the manual!  The manual is poorly written and many features are not documented at all.  The manual is not a good indicator of what Studio One can do.  They don't seem to be too worried about keeping it fully up to date either.  A much better option are the training videos that either third party people like Groove 3 or Presonus themselves do and also Studio One Expert offer.  That is another thing too.  Not many DAW's have such a detailed and in depth 3rd party site such as Studio One Expert.  The Groove 3 video on Recording and Editing Midi will really open your eyes.
 
I agree there are some things that need to be improved such as SYSEX handling too.  The event list is handy but somehow I have lived without it for a long time.  I just prefer editing visually in the PRV view much more.  Maybe that is the reason they have left it out.  There is a third party app that someone has developed that not only includes the event list but adds a ton of extra midi features.  It is easily installed.  I believe it is very stable and reliable too. 
 
Ableton has got a great midi engine I agree too.  Jean Michelle Jarre uses Ableton and he must do it for a reason and I suspect it has something to do with the timing solidity.  Hardware sequencers from the past are hard to beat in areas like that.  The basic engine of StudioOne is as you say very very good. 
 
I run a Steinberg Midex 8 midi interface with 8 ports.  Each synth is on its own port for me.  I also run the USB connection to that form a separate PCI card in my computer as well.  It is totally on its own there.  That might explain why midi timing is so fast and solid for me.
 
You may be able to convert one CC data lane to another.  It might be possible to create a new lane with a new CC value and cut and paste the data from one CC lane to another. Have not tried that one yet.
 
Tha Macro abilities of Studio One are also way better than the CAL scripts in Sonar.  They are way too hard in my opinion.  Creating macros in Studio One is a breeze.  That is a really powerful feature of Studio One.  There are tons of them already done as well you can freely download from the Presonus exchange.  Another thing that is rather unique to Studio One. 

these threads........
 
LOL
 
i read more about the stuff a daw can do, that the user cannot figure out how to do (despite a million sources)....
 
than what they really cannot do.
 
maybe i'm out of the loop here....
 
i use a daw............. any daw.....
as a glorified tape machine.
 
the only thing i currently 'trigger' with midi data, is superior drummer, and my keys.
and usually, i can find really good sounding keyboard sounds using standard plugins...
 
so, i don't know,
sounds like a lot of folks have made it so hard on themselves to simply record 'music', that they've gone round the bend.
 
 

Jeff Evans
Tha Macro abilities of Studio One are also way better than the CAL scripts in Sonar.  They are way too hard in my opinion.  Creating macros in Studio One is a breeze.  That is a really powerful feature of Studio One.  There are tons of them already done as well you can freely download from the Presonus exchange.  Another thing that is rather unique to Studio One.

Can you add any reference to that?
From what I can google, Macros in Studio One have 2 meanings, one is surface like control panel and another is a sequence of commands to execute. I mean both have almost nothing to do with CAL (CAL is a scripting language with partial access to DAW internals, f.e. MIDI events, so not a sequence of Sonar commands).