First of all, I can't speak for Von_Steyr but can assure you I'm not connected to any company.
I love S1 and make the switch since their first release (was coming from Cubase after a brief try with Ableton).
But S1 bad CPU optimization makes me consider to go back to Ableton (not Cubase because I hate dongles).
Seriously, I can't smoothly run S1 with more than 3 VSTi and 3 FX (need to bounce each instrument track to audio).
Okay, my 2 cores Pentium 987 @ 1.5GHz with 8GB RAM is not a rocket but it can handle at least 2 times more instruments and FX with Cubase or Reaper.
BTW, I'm not using ASIO4ALL but the latest ASIO driver for my RME Babyface set @ 2048 samples buffer size. My projects are always set to 48kHz / 32 bit Floating Point and S1 to 64 bit double precision.
S1 is a great DAW but its CPU optimization SUCKS. Really.
And that's not a simple (and acceptable) flaw but a deal breaker.

 

Last edited: Jun 11, 2016

f***, we were discovered : 10 cents commission for each post, how can we survive?

At last, hoping that someone understands the meaning, which I think is common to all the critics in this thread:

S1 is a great daw, the best as workflow and ease of use, (it's not a case that it was developed by the former head of the technical staff of cubase, and he is the man who pays us). I personally work with it for three years, and if I stop to 30 tracks with two or three plugins each everything runs smoothly: but try to put together fifty of them (like all professionals do) , and voila .... the flaws (all ...) jump out (and I haven't a low level PC, indeed, it is almost to the top of the power).
I'm waiting for an year to buy the license to go from 2.6 to 3, in the hope that they optimize the code to overcome the bad CPU management ..... unfortunately, at least till now, in vain.
So, for all complex projects, I'll have to go on with Reaper (10 cents at a time I was trying to buy Cubase, but now....), even if its workflow is for me a complete nightmare.......

 

@The Revenant what's the point of having an RME Babyface with a computer that needs to run it at 2048 buffer? Isn't that kind of a waste?

Serious question. I'm not trying to offend or poke fun.

 

the most stupid replies in the site, haha never buy Reaper, thanks for yours propaganda posters

 

No problem bro, I'm not offended at all and you're 1000% right: it's a big waste... but I have no choice than to go so far in buffer size, otherwise I can't even run only 2 Spire instances and 1 reverb. The truth is I must buy a more powerful laptop since my old one died and I'm using this one as a replacement. But powerful laptop or not, the fact remains the same: with the same laptop and same project/ASIO settings, I can run many more VST instances in Reaper or Cubase than in S1.
And it makes me angry because I LOVE S1 so much.

 

Yeah that does suck. I love S1 too. I've had a similar conversation, I think with Von Steyr, where I discussed how the CPU meter rises much more rapidly, with far less CPU intensive work, in S1. I once got an explanation on the Presonus forums about the meter being a reading of the most heavily taxed core, or thread, or something, and that it just looks like it's munching CPU. Guess that's not the case. Being that I just process recorded vocals in S1, it's not a big deal to me really as I haven't bumped up against its limits. But that definitely was unhappy news for me. Luckily I do all my VSTi work in Live.

 

^^This!
I just don't want to ditch S1 with the hopes that they will optimise it's sound engine as well as overhaul it for less on resources. Oh...and how much I like the mighty Reaper, I can't cope with it's workflow. Either S1 and if not then I will buy Cubase.

 

I love this approach
Each of us should draw lessons and encouragement from these words
m9cao, your statements describe you

 

Man for a Cubase FANBOY you do spend a lot of time in threads about other DAWs bashing them. My guess is your unhappy. Because if you were happy with Cubase you wouldn't waste one second bashing other daws.

 

Big Lebowski`s post from a few days ago.

Friend of mine made a little experiment according to CPU load with different DAWs in their latest versions (on Macbook Pro 2012, 2 GHz i7, 16 GB RAM, SSD HDD, OS X 10.9.5). As you can see - the CPU performance on Studio 1 3.2.2 is really really weak :-( I love that DAW - but it isn't for bigger projects (without using UAD cards etc). It was really simple audio session with one audio region with 4 plugins on it and few automations. Try to compare the CPU load of Studio One and Reaper (in other words "the worse one" vs "the best one" in this test). Come on Presonus - wake up! That's a shame.





Cubase:



Pro Tools:



Logic:



Reaper:

 

How is raw scientific data bashing?Constructive criticism,ever heard of it?Guess not,because you are being a fanboy not me...and regarding Cubase,theres a lot of stuff to dislike about Steinberg and i will be the first one to point them out,im not married to cubendo,what the fuck do i care if someone likes or dislikes it,im just bringing my observations to the discussion.

 

No offense but your computer specs are the issue here not Studio One. 1.5ghz and 8gb of ram? Both of those directly relate to the amount of VSTs/FX you can run. for $500 you can get a PC that is 10X better than what you got now. That is where I would invest your money.

 

lol you called me a Fanboy lol Ok Cubase Fanboy listen your simply unhappy that's why you bash stuff you don't even use. Simple fix just go outside, get some fresh air and live life a little bit. It will be ok you use cubase no reason to waste time bashing another daw.

 

It 'amazing ..... it seems that people have forgotten the meaning of "constructive criticism". Every argument becomes an opportunity to bring up a kind of belonging, as if there was a discussion between fans of two football clubs.
Is this a sign of the times or just something that has to do with the intellectual capacity?

 

My Pc is a I7/4770, 36 Gb Ram, Main board Asus Z87, sw equipped for an only DAW use....RME fireface UCX.....and see above my experience about Studio One (wich, I repeat, I love.....)
And please, let's stop suggesting not to use stuff we are unhappy with, this is not the case: we are simply discussing about an unfortunate downside of a product that we would like better

 

My computer is not a power horse, indeed, but please tell me why, with the same computer and settings, I'm able to run at least 3 x more VSTs in Reaper than in S1 without any sound disruption?

 

I guess it might depending on your room temperature.

It can NEVER be due to Studio One. S1 is a great DAW with a really nice GUI (for beta testers) ...

 

I really really have no interest in getting into the middle of a pointless DAW argument, but I'm super interested in actual, repeatable testing. It'd be awesome if more people actively tested and posted results. As a disclaimer, S1 is my main DAW.

Here's my test: I put Massive on a track with a 16 bar MIDI loop playing 2 octave triads, added FabFilter Pro-Q2 to it, added Valhalla Room behind that, added FabFilter Pro L to the master bus, configured all options for max possible performance, set my buffer size to 2048, then duplicated the track over and over until it finally overtaxed the system. Resulting # of tracks:

Ableton - 31
Reaper - 35
Studio One - 12.

Yes, 12. I will continue using S1 since the workflow is so insanely good and I rarely hit CPU issues. I'd already moved to using Reaper for mixing due to the invisible plugin instance limit S1 has that was already mentioned in this thread. Other than those, I've not hit any snags in S1, so the benefits outweigh the issues FOR ME. I will say, though, that I expected S1 to lose this test...but not by this much. It's actually pretty shocking just how bad S1 got its ass handed to it here. It's not a trivial difference at all, it's the 3x+ difference other people reported above. I thought that was just fanboy DAW warrioring and dismissed it, but it's accurate. S1's performance is mind bogglingly bad.

Edit - my system specs: i7 @ 3.4ghz, 8gb RAM, running on SSD

 

I did some extensive tests a month or two ago, comparing S1 and Reaper, because I was on the fence, I mean I've been using S1 for 3 years but last year I started to use Reaper due to GUI issues in S1 v3 (discussed on various forums a year ago). So I tested similar projects, containing 5-6 virtual analogs (Roland Plugouts, Diva, Monark etc.) and some usual FX. Both projects had the same MIDI data etc.

The result: Reaper is 2 - 2.5 times more efficient than S1 v3. That was the nail in the coffin - I finally moved to Reaper.

(My systems: i7, 16 GB RAM, RME UCX and i5, 8 GB RAM, M-Audio Fast Track Ultra)

 

I sincerely hope a guy from Presonus passes by here and read this thread...