Most is correct but that is bullshit.

I have cubase and like i wrote i use more and more s1 isntead of cubase.
Audio editing is in studio one the most easy to do task comnparedto any daw i ever used. And I have used or tried them all.
You need an workaround with at least 2 tracks to make a prefx volume automation. But it is possible.

 

Curious ..
May i ask you what benefits / features S1 has over Reaper for you, regarding audio editing ?

 

The benefit of studio one is that it is super easy to use right from the start. The gui is simply great. The feeling if you zoom for example is awesome right from the start. (you ask for reaper i know but adaptive snaping comes to my mind if i compare it to my loved cubase)

As i started using S1 i did not even have to configure it in anyway to make it fit my workflow. Cause it is really intuitive. The "smarter tool" that came with 3.2 was a game changer for me. I know i can do this with reaper - sws. And protools got this for a long time. But presonus made the use and feel of this tool better than Avid. And made this work right out of the box. in reaper you have to configure it if you want such a feature.
But it took me a good amount of time to configure it.
There is nothing you can do in s1 editing that you cant do in reaper. But you can do everything without configuring anything, right of the box, super intuitive, with a nice looking gui that have a great feeling.

I guess it is the stock intuitive gui why I love to pick s1 at the moment when it comes to editing audio.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Aug 19, 2017

Mostly what @mozee said. It depends what u want outta ur DAW. If it's anything at all related to MIDI & manipulation of it, then Cubendo is where it's at. It's incredibly deep, though, but that's the main thing I prefer about it compared to other DAWs. Reaper's pretty good and is lightweight and does quite a lot of things "better" / maybe more logically. But nothing really has the kinda "complete control of everything everywhere" approach to MIDI data. Which can be a bit messy & fiddly in terms of workflow; I mean there's usually 5 different ways to do the same thing in Cubendo. But jesus. Nothing else has anything like the input controller et al. Let alone the features other ppl have mentioned...

 

Maybe i was exaggerating a bit with the "for those who cant afford cubase" remark.

TW, I agree with you, studio one is well designed, has a lot of smart little things that feel intuitive, like double clicking a track in the arrange view selects that track in the mixer, drag and drop fx etc. And a lot of people find it comfortable to look at and so on.


But still if basic audio editing functions involves workarounds then the intuitiveness is gone all of a sudden.

Being able to draw volume directly on the waveform (as in reaper, pro tools, cubase, samplitude) with visual feedback from the waveform, makes these daws more appropriate for audio editing work than S1. Its just alot faster with the visual feedback. Say you have an hour of dialogue and want to even out levels, I wouldn't consider S1 because of this. Or if you want to make a vocal performance smooth before using a compressor.

Hopefully this will get implemented into S1 too someday.

 

Last edited: Aug 20, 2017

i was thinking too in past changing the daw or upgrade to 9 ,but i think its senseless to change it u only loose time to learn a new daw, i use cubase now for 8 years and i learned it that time how it works, it dont have anything what i need but there are alot of vst that maximize ur workflows in cubase
started with cubase 4 to 5 and then 6.5 but now i still use 5
when i was bored i tried fl studio or protools, but how i said u only loose time to learn a new daw
i think u can do good music everywhere it s not ur daw

 

True but it's built into reaper and Cubase 9 Only 64 bit

 

What do you mean by performance swiftness/snappiness. How long docks/windows take to open etc? The speed such applications function in such respect is very much down to the the power of the system it's on most the time. I can understand though if you have only used it on a low end computer it won't be as 'swift/snappy' as lower resource app like Reaper or Live for example, so yes, if it may be something to consider if you have a budget system. However, cubase has very very useful performance functions for when you are pushing your CPU such as ASIO guard and Constrain Delay Compensation, which are invaluable IMO for anyone using lots of tracks and CPU intensive instruments and inserts etc.

Reaper, like Live, doesn't have such functionality so any microseconds you think you are saving in UI responsiveness is meaningless when you have the issue of all your instruments being super laggy and not being able to even play the project due to high CPU usage.

Reaper is a great DAW but the answer to your question is that the reason people spend 450 euros on Cubase is because it can do everything Reaper can and lots lots more, some of which is very very useful.

Only if someone didn't need that more advanced and efficient functionality in their DAW would your question be valid.

 

@DogWiz - I'm talking resource usage the way entire software is coded, it's really a complex matter to explain, you can search for countless threads explaining/comparing DAWs resource usage (cpu/ram) and latency,
obviously a rock-solid hardware and OS environment is crucial, me, I had to configure my rig as OSX hackintosh afterall, because Windows simply couldn't provide headroom and flawless operation I need, that said ASIO becomes completely obsolete for me as well since OSX is using own efficient audio management solution,
for reference, here's a track I did about half year ago, 60FX in total (of which 9 are virtual instruments, acoustic drums are played by me, recorded by 10 inputs or so), cpu usage didn't go over 22% with buffer at 128 in Reaper, using RME HDSPe AIO,


people are spending 450 euros on DAW but then they kill its advantages buying 150 euros interface or 700 euro computer, that's balance most people around are refusing to accept...

 

Actually, as often with Reaper, there is a script that adds this functionality to reaper. The way this works is you tag the plugins that are causing latency and then use the script (by button or keycommand) to bypass the FX that are tagged. You can even have different groups of plugins tagged differently so you can bypass all reverb plugins, all EQs etc (if you have tagged them correctly). This cannot be done in Cubase.

So on the positive side, reaper can expands on this functionality that is based off cubase (logic can also do constrain delay compensation).

But it is of course a lot easier to just use cubase then mess with scripts.

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=154742

Actually, there are a lot of things that cubase can't do that reaper can. No DAW has it all.

For example
- Reaper has CD mastering functions. You can burn DDPs and insert ISRC codes.
- you can run current reaper from a usb stick on any computer even on old win XP
- scripting functionality
- ripple edit not possible in cubase
- you have a crossfade editor similar to samplitude in reaper
- you can have several projects open at the same time in different tabs and just copy paste parts from one project to another.
once you try this you never want to go back.
- you can have projects in projects
- cubase only has eight plugin slots, reaper has as many as you want
- reaper can show waveforms as spectrograms peaks OR as regular waveforms colored by frequency content. Very helpful stuff if you want to work fast editing
- spectral editing is on its way
-you can add automation, FX and even FX automation per item. the fx then get unloaded when not playing.

I'm sure there is more but these are the ones from the top of my head.

cheers

 

It's quite clear by reading your example list that you really don't know Cubase very well........

 

Last edited: Aug 21, 2017

I'm not sure this will help you, depending of how you do music. One absolutely unique feature in Magix Samplitude and Sequoia is that you can select multiple tracks and edit them in staff/Score view at the same time. That's very useful to see how rhythmic and melodic parts of your song are completing or clashing.
I wonder why Magix don't even mention this in the description.

 

Not really getting what you mean. But audio automation is one of the strength from studio one. In my opinion. Since 3,2 it is super easy. Like i said 3.2 was a game changer for me and S1.
It is super easy and intuitive watch if you are interested.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Aug 21, 2017

Then please enlighten me, I don't want to spread misinformation, so whats wrong in my list?

 

Thanks for the video, cool, I didn't know you could have the automation inline with the audio like that, like in logic. And yes impressive and easy automation capabilities. Feels really smooth drawing with the pencil tool.

But we are talking about two different things here;

A.
Post insert volume fader automation
-affects all items on the track
-no visual update of waveform display
-comes after compressors and other plugins

B.
Pre insert volume automation (doesn't affect volume fader)
-only affects the specific item on the track
-visual update of waveform diplay
-comes before compressors and other plugins

heres a video of what I mean in cubase

@ 2:20 minutes the section stars

If you don't need this then S1 is fine I'm not trying to bash anyones daw of choice here.

 

1. Cubase has the best Mackie Control Support on the PC platform (Apple Logics MCU support is even better).
2. You have a dedicated Control Room Mixer
3. You have a feature for every case, in fact it's got features I will never use

 

Got you "item - obbject or what ever your daw calls it" insert effects and automation.
And pre fader automation.

Dont need both often. Prefader automation i do in every daw with 2 tracks. I am used to do it this way. Item based processing is something I never saw a reason to use it. Ii is probably good to have. I was impressed by the idea as samplitube implemeted that. But i actually never used it - the feature not samplitube.

We probably got a different workflow. My steps are tracking - editing - mixing -master.
So editing is really only checking volumes, melodyne, quantizing, setting up additional samples, etc
Just setting up my tracks in the best possible way for mixing.

thats what this thread is about! Bash all daws for not having all the same features !!!

 

Last edited by a moderator: Aug 21, 2017

Can you please elaborate? I'm also interested in counterarguments to his points.
Thanks.

 

its simply impossible to talk to people who dont work on a professional level with Cubase.
Its just funny watching all the wannbe bedroom producers with their stolen DAW and VST efx pretending to know anything.
If i crack C9 and anyone can use it free from tomorrow, what will happen? All the S1, Reaper, Bitwig, Ableton, FL and so on Fanboys change soon and their opinion on Cubase will change in less than a year.
Guys, Cubase is for the ones who really wanna make recpords sooner or later, if you come to any professional Studio in CentralEurope there is no Reaper or FL and the soundengineer doesnt start learning a new DAW for you.

BTW would some Reaperfanbois pls show me a reaperproject (video) with like 5 Omnisphere running in Multimode(each 8 channels active) and CPU Performancemeter shows more than 35% and its not Crackling???
The Performance Meter CPU showing in reaper is not accurate. 30% is max, u cant use Reaper until 80%.
Or i missed a special "button", i use Reaper mostly as a backupsolution,so my knowledge isnt that good, and i wont waste my time learn more ReaperNerd workarounds for things that Cubase does easily for me.
this is the only time i speak out, but its time someone tells the truth abt the keyboardwarriors with their stolen "toys".
Apology to any legit owner of stuff. But i think u understand why i am a bit pissed abt the stupid comments on Cubase.
And now let the downvoting start!!!!

 

Last post is funny...

Talking about yourself huh?

There is no cubase either. If I meet other local studio engineers and owners in my area (I live in central europe) I am the exoctic guy with cubase. Most of the studios I know in my area run logic or protools.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Aug 22, 2017