My Cubase trial ran out before I knew I had it... can somebody pitch Cubase to me?

[crimsonhawk47]

I recently switched to PC and I don't want to use Pro Tools for composition so I've been doing a trial of different DAWS. FL wasn't working for what I want to do (Audio recording is a pain in the ass) and my Ableton trial was good but ran out before I could do EVERYTHING I wanted to test.

So I apologize that this is basically another DAW shootout thread, but let me tell you what I'm looking for.

I want to make looped music and work with rhythm based tracks, but I also am going to be making really dynamic stuff. Evolving tracks. Basically, I'm doing a lot of experimental music.

I had the cubase trial and didnt know it, so now I can't see the features people are talking about.

Now there are lots of threads on ableton vs cubase, but here's my problem with those threads.

1) When people talk about some of the advanced features like vst expression and key editing, I have a really hard time comprehending it without using it myself. For me, Music goes as far as loading up vst's and loading samples from my library. But it sounds like Cubase has features I didn't even know existed. Same with Ableton.

2) Most people don't know what they are talking about anyway

3) I feel like a hybrid when I want to make ambient tracks and rhythm tracks, and people haven't addressed that in those topics.

I also have Pro Tools, and I wonder if Cubase is just like re-buying Pro Tools. But I just find Pro Tools to be a pain in the ass and I've never liked its workflow. I keep it around for mixing and for the fact that it's a universal language when I go to studios.

At the time of writing this, I am downloading the reason trial and the studio one trial and looking at tutorials to get a feel for their workflow.

 

[sswmastering]

Reason is going to be a really good choice for you if you want to have all of the tools you need in one package especially for creating music. Studio One is ok but if you want a really solid daw without having to invest too much money I would highly recommend Reaper. It does everything you could possibly imagine for music production and once again it is incredibly cheap and has very few limitations. The demo never expires so you can try it out for as long as you like but if you like it please buy it and support the developers.

 

[crimsonhawk47]

I didnt think about looking at reaper, though money isnt really a problem.

I have to go to bed so I'm diving into reason tomorrow, but for the first 30 minutes I was using it, it just felt kind of clunky. I don't know if it's the interface, but something isn't jelling with me and I'm going to see if it's because there are features I don't know about.

I'm also looking at cubase tutorial videos just to get a feel for it. So far, I am leaning to ableton. It's not the best for dynamic songs but it can be done.

 

[bandcoach]

are you looking to use notation or just play stuff in via a controller

if the latter then use reason

if the former then cubase will offer you more scope (as will protools to some extent)

I have all four daws mentioned and use each for their particular niches but prefer
cubase for notation based stuff,
reason for any sort of hands on manipulation of synths,
pro-tools because you need to speak the language and
ableton because my son is using it for a few course assessments - I may get to play with it once the current semester is finished

 

[crimsonhawk47]

are you looking to use notation or just play stuff in via a controller

if the latter then use reason

if the former then cubase will offer you more scope (as will protools to some extent)

I have all four daws mentioned and use each for their particular niches but prefer
cubase for notation based stuff,
reason for any sort of hands on manipulation of synths,
pro-tools because you need to speak the language and
ableton because my son is using it for a few course assessments - I may get to play with it once the current semester is finished

I highly doubt I will even touch notation in cubase (if I'm understanding that just literally means writing notation and I'm not missing an important side effect of the notation feature cubase offers).

I'll poke at Reason today. I think you'll really like ableton as far as a sketch pad goes. Definitely not something I would use to start and finish a song, which is kind of a problem because I pick DAW's for workflow and there's nothing streamlined about using multiple DAW's to me.

Edit: The type of recording I'll be doing is live percussion, but not drums. Vocals, full verses and also just ideas. I need to be able to record a vocal idea quickly. Also Guitar.

 

[bandcoach]

notation in cubase (and other daws that specialise in it) can be tied back to midi interpretation of articulation marks and dynamic markings

- i.e. when playing back you can have the program interpret your dynamics continuously so that even though you insert all notation at the one velocity (64 is a useful value for mf) it will play back at ppp or ff or a gradual increase or decrease in intensity (crescendo/decrescendo).

Having an accent (>) or a marcato (very strong accent ^) or staccato (shortened .) being interpreted for you rather than having to edit individual velocity values across several instrument parts is a far more convenient way of working.

 

[crimsonhawk47]

notation in cubase (and other daws that specialise in it) can be tied back to midi interpretation of articulation marks and dynamic markings

- i.e. when playing back you can have the program interpret your dynamics continuously so that even though you insert all notation at the one velocity (64 is a useful value for mf) it will play back at ppp or ff or a gradual increase or decrease in intensity (crescendo/decrescendo).

Having an accent (>) or a marcato (very strong accent ^) or staccato (shortened .) being interpreted for you rather than having to edit individual velocity values across several instrument parts is a far more convenient way of working.

Ya. That's what someone was bringing up that I didn't quite understand. Can you use dynamics on midi and not have to look at a notation sheet?

I'm going through reason videos now on Groove. I don't know if the rack extensions are going to be better or worse in the long run. I do like the idea that I can't graphically see anything anymore and have to focus on sound.

 

[bandcoach]

Ya. That's what someone was bringing up that I didn't quite understand. Can you use dynamics on midi and not have to look at a notation sheet?

the dynamic manipulation is only available as notation - crescendos, dynamic markings and articulations are all part of notation and the cubase implementation has them firmly tied to notation of note events

I'm going through reason videos now on Groove. I don't know if the rack extensions are going to be better or worse in the long run. I do like the idea that I can't graphically see anything any more and have to focus on sound.

I'm not sure what you mean here - the whole interface is based on graphic representations of your music and your parameter manipulation - their automation clipping is awesome and you can have any visualisation of the signal that you want just using standard modules - I can send you a combinator that I use as a stereo spectrum viewer and also a decent M/S processor combinator as well to play with

 

[crimsonhawk47]

the dynamic manipulation is only available as notation - crescendos, dynamic markings and articulations are all part of notation and the cubase implementation has them firmly tied to notation of note events



I'm not sure what you mean here - the whole interface is based on graphic representations of your music and your parameter manipulation - their automation clipping is awesome and you can have any visualisation of the signal that you want just using standard modules - I can send you a combinator that I use as a stereo spectrum viewer and also a decent M/S processor combinator as well to play with

Maybe shying away from notation is just a sign I need to be more comfortable with it. I'm sure there are lots of producers who don't ever mess with notaton, but the worst that can happen is I learn more. Even if I did get the cubase trial again though, the elements version is missing a lot of the Cubase selling points, and to do a trial of the full version I need to go get a bongle.

I have yet to see a rack that represents anything other than level metering or gain reduction metering. I was more referring to spectrum information or more complex compression graphics like the Fruity Limiter, which allows you to see how attack and release are affecting the shape of the compressor. I'm still in the basics though, so I appreciate the combinator offer and I might take you up on it later.

 

[crimsonhawk47]

I think the VST thing is a deal breaker for Reason.

I understand that I can route native instruments plugins through with the external midi, but I was hoping to find a workflow that would be fast. Even with a template, I Don't find it fast to have to route a different program into reason, or rewire reason into a different program.

Edit: And usually the only arguments against having vst support is rewire or the fact that reason already has great sounds. I have komplete ultimate, so I don't want to throw near 1000 dollars down the toilet just for Reason Sounds. Rewire seems a little ass backwards.

 

[crimsonhawk47]

I guess we can call this resolved. I just went to guitar center today and got the dongle to get the Cubase Pro trial. Still have no idea between Ableton or Cubase, but at least I can extensively test it on my studio comp now.