Cubase upgrade?

Discussion in 'Mixing & Song Critique' started by Kurt Foster, Feb 4, 2004.

  1. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Well-Known Member

    Jul 2, 2002
    77 Sunset Lane.
    I am currently running Cubase VST 5.1 on my DAW. It does everything I need and runs all the tracks with effects and plugs I can use but is beginning to have some compatibility issues in terms of being able to interface with newer products like control surfaces being released.

    I record to 24/44.1 at the moment and I don't feel a compelling need to increase the sample or bit rates and I am very happy with the tools provided in Cubase VST 5.1. I find the stock plugs do pretty much all that I need and I haven't found any reason to go out and purchase any cards like the UAD or the TC Electronics. So the question is is there any reason I should consider an upgrade to SX 2.0 or should I just keep beating this horse until it dies?
  2. David French

    David French Well-Known Member

    Jun 19, 2002
    I use SX 2.0 and I wouldn't trade it for the world. I never used 5.1 so it's hard for me to compare, but i'm sure SX has some features that you would appreciate:
    • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">the look is elegant
    • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">it does surround (if you're into that)
    • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">it has FX return channels (good for someone who's used to working on a large format console)
    • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">most everything can be customized (like in/out buses)
    • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">it has latency compensation (don't know if you use plugs that require this)
    • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">the mixer is killer (phase and input gain are handy)
    <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> That's all I can think of right now, and there are probably things I don't even know to say since i'm not sure what 5.1 has or doesn't have. I'd say that if you use your DAW a lot (i know you have all kinds of other cool toys), you should consider upgrading. Like I said, I love SX to death. The only gripe I have is with the damn sheet music display, which is so damn bad it's unuseable. Anyway, think about it.

    p.s. it was fun to give you advice for a change! :D
  3. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Well-Known Member

    Jul 2, 2002
    77 Sunset Lane.
    Thanks David ... I'm curious, how do the effects returns work .. are they routed through the converters, therefore needing muliple channels of conversion?
  4. David French

    David French Well-Known Member

    Jun 19, 2002
    The FX return channels I was talking about are for plugins only and are just there so that you can control/automate the volume, pan, EQ, and output channels of an effect, instead of the return just floating back to your main bus like it does in 5.1. As for working with outboard gear, you can assign any of your hardware outputs to one of the eight FX sends on any channel. Then you could make a return for it by connecting the output of your outboard piece to the input of another channel. I don't see how this could be accomplished without going through more DA/AD conversion, unless of course you had an outboard effect woith digital I/O. Maybe I missed the point. I hope this is what you were getting at, Kurt. :cool:
  5. not a steinberg user myself...

    In response to the initial post I think it depends on a couple of things.

    Are you Mac based? If so I would have to suggest switching to Logic if you are a heavy midi user. Steinberg still hasn't optimized the code for the mac although they do say it's coming.

    There are also reports of really bad midi timing issues if you use large templates or a ton of midi devices (templates greater than 50 instruments I believe).

    The audio is vastly improved over cubase vst though, so if you are mostly audio based and are on PC I would upgrade for sure. As far as support for external controllers don't get your hopes too high with Cubase or Nuendo. They have some real issues there. They have stated that they will not develop the mackie universal control protocol any further than it is now. Instead they are working on their own proprietary format and expecting third parties (aka, makie) to write the support.

    As of right now you cannot control pan with any controller known to man with 2.x. Go figure.

    They dumped it from the generic remote when upgrading from 1.x (as well as ditching track input meters... ?!?). These things will probably not make it back into 2.x as 3.x is in the works now.

    other software companies have meters working on the MC and support for up to three extenders. Steinberg is way behind in this and it may be due to an internal plumbing problem inherent in the program (as steinberg has admitted is the case with track input metering). 3.x will be a whole new ballgame and probably be as buggy as most Steinberg software in the beginning.

    If you are on PC you might download a demo of Samplitude and see if you can hang with learning a new system. The thinking is indeed different and not the proper workflow for the way everyone thinks. The midi is improving quite a bit, so if this is important to you I would suggest waiting until samplitude 8.x and cubase/nuendo 3.x are out and compare.

  6. willymac

    willymac Guest

    Hi Kurt, SX2.0 is a fine application. It's quite a step in the right direction in right dierection in my opinion. I understand your standpoint of 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' Cubase5.1, but you'll find SX has all the features you're used to and more. I was convinced to purchase it after checking out a "trial" version. The Audio engine is greatly improved sonically. What is "High Quailty EQ" anyway? It is a tad more CPU hungry, but well worth it.
    Yes, FX returns work quite like returns on and analog board, but much more flexible. If you have the I/O, your can use external processing. Or use them like output strips for you virtual effects.
    The forum will have much more info to help you decide.
    Some of the big push points for SX were the revised multi-channel record method, latency compensation (on groups as well), and the TRUE TAPE (or magneto) function. Using a drawmer1960 and soundeluxeu195 at 32bit I all i think I'll ever need. Some complain of loss of midi functionality vs. 5.1, but I use it all just fine. The Control surface issue is touchy. I would check the hardware forum for specific issues. I use the Houston control, and like it, but it could be alot better. Many of the functions don't work, but it does what i bought it for.
    Glad I could help the might Kurt Foster (we're not worthy)!
    P.S I still say rap (rap music) IS music.. so there. :s:
  7. random logic

    random logic Guest

    i am a cubase user for almost 13 years now, from 1.0 on atari till sx2.0 on mac. i am still using 5.1 because of really bad support for mac os x by steinberg. when sx 1 came out i didnt want to upgrade, because sx had a lot of bugs, it was totally redesigned and i couldnt afford the time to learn the program and work on unstable daw.later, i was using artists pc with sx 1 for two months in a studio. i learned the program,it worked great, so i ordered the upgrade to sx 2. i started to work on some stuff with many problems caused by bugs in the unstable program. i went back to 5.1, sx 2 was unusable for serious work. so me and my studio partner decided to buy logic 6. we installed it and it works without any problems since. after two months of working on three programs, i found out that logic offers much more in terms of creativity, versatility and routing. the possibilities of mixer, plugins and software instruments are awesome. in a way, i am feeling weird, swithching to logic after all this years with cubase, but after learning just the surface of the program, i have to change . its just so logical. ;)
  8. gdoubleyou

    gdoubleyou Well-Known Member

    Mar 19, 2003
    Kirkland WA
    Home Page:
    I switched my Mac license to PC, and moved my PC to my songwriting partners place.

    Sadly Steinberg is no longer competitive on Mac, the quality is just not there.

    SX PC does not equal SX mac, the user experience is much better on PC.

    They seem to be more focused on plugins now. :td:
  • AT5047

    The New AT5047 Premier Studio Microphone Purity Transformed

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice