Cubase - CPU-eating VSTs

[brandy]

we both prefer Nuendo!! Can't we just leave it at that?

ok!

i am out...

 

[Glenn Fricker]

On the subject of DAW's, I'm pretty close to moving to SawStudio, which there was a thread on about a month ago. It ain't pretty, but it sounds great!

There's some really nice user-created skins out there for it now.

Another feature it has that I really like is the "auto track FX bypass" which will automatically turn off your plugins during blank spaces, thereby freeing up the CPU even more. I can run about 300% more plugs in SS than I could in Sonar.

 

[smrtaz]

My Windows 3.1 system crashes all the time.
I think Windows sucks.

My Apple 2e isn't stable,
I think Apple sucks too.

Get it?!

I think we should at least compare the latest versions to the latest versions.
Giving opinions on old versions that aren't sold anymore doesn't benefit anyone!

I agree, Cubase SX3 & Nuendo 3 are quite solid and I prefer them BOTH to Pro-Fools.
Now that Yamaha owns Steinberg I'm expecting even better things.

 

[Ermz]

Maybe someone can shed some light on this for me... I've never understood why alot of engineers have a very condescending outlook on Cubase, or Steinberg products in general. Is there anything quantifiably inferior about them, most particularily in comparison to 'tools?

 

[Razorjack]

Maybe someone can shed some light on this for me... I've never understood why alot of engineers have a very condescending outlook on Cubase, or Steinberg products in general. Is there anything quantifiably inferior about them, most particularily in comparison to 'tools?

I have been using Cubase for around 5yrs now, and it has caused so many problems it really isn't funny (data corruption, wipeing an iLok etc). I also know of engineers who use, and swear by, Nuendo/Cubase and have very rarely come near the same problems as me (most of which have been bugs in Steingberg's floating-point maths or Windows problems).

The big difference for most people though is the user interface, Cubase and Nuendo are easy to use and you can get to work with them instantly. But mastering them, like anything, takes time. Pro Tools on the other hand requires a little more thought but, in my experience, when the user has a basic knowledge it allows for a much smoother work-flow than other systems.

Every engineer has a different system they prefer. I'm currently happy enough with Nuendo 2 for my own projects (mostly EBM so there's lots of MIDI programming involved), but when actually engineering for bands I prefer PT.

At the end of the day people can tell you "this is better than this, don't use this, use this, this is identical to this..." but if you are ever going to make our own sounds you need to get out there and try everything first hand.

Whatever you do though, make sure you make music!! Using whatever software and hardware YOU want to. Hell, if you want to use a Minidisk-based 4-track that's fine. As long as some noise gets recorded!!

Edit: Engineers look down on Cubase because it is 'teh ghey'

 

[Hopkins-WitchfinderGeneral]

Nice summation.

 

[Ermz]

Thanks for taking the time to put that up. Up to this point, Cubase hasn't failed me, so I think I'm going got stick with it and its various incarnations (maybe move onto SX 3) until I feel it gets limiting in any way.

For next year I have to learn 'tools for the academy I study at, where it runs on a Dual-CPU G5 and 2 HD interfaces, so I suppose I'll get the best of that world and see whether it suits.

Cheers.

 

[Ermz]

Just another question guys.

Sometimes I notice that the fade-ins on Cubase don't seem to work... when you actually visually drag that little blue arrow toward the center. On a project I'm working on at the moment, fading out seem to work fine but fading in doesn't.... is there some weird parameter overriding the fade-ins or something?

Help appreciated, because I'm really stumped here.

 

[Carrier Flux]

Sends is the best way to go.
I usually have a long rev, short rev and a multitap delay on FX channels and send what I want to have the effect there

But as far eating CPU, The C4 on my guitar group eats _alot_ of power for some reason. Btw. A quick question, you who use the C4 setting for guitars, do you smack it on a group channel or on the induvidual guitars?

I'm assuming you mean Waves C4? I use it on vocals, guitars, drums etc. It's super CPU intensive yeah, so you're not the only one who has to keep its use to a minimum. I always mix to stems/subgroups in my DAW and apply one instance of C4 to a stereo mix of the guitars etc. I can only get away with comfortably running 2-4 instances of C4 since my CPU is a 1.5 gig athlon XP. It's probably my favorite pluggin btw I'm just fascinated by the concept of multi-band compression.

 

[Brett - K A L I S I A]

Just another question guys.

Sometimes I notice that the fade-ins on Cubase don't seem to work... when you actually visually drag that little blue arrow toward the center. On a project I'm working on at the moment, fading out seem to work fine but fading in doesn't.... is there some weird parameter overriding the fade-ins or something?

Help appreciated, because I'm really stumped here.

No idea, never had this problem... Maybe it's the project's automatic fades preferences that interferes, but that's weird... Don't see any other possible reason...

 

[Ermz]

That's what I thought, Brett, but altering or disabling the auto-fades settings was fruitless. Thanks anyway though.