Author
|
Ableton vs Cubase
|
Jerry
Started Topics :
2
Posts :
32
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 14:05
|
Coming from the tracker scene (started of with fasttracker in 1995) I have tried many trackers since fasttracker became just too old to run on the latest operating systems and eventually i went for buzz (http://www.buzzmachines.com) as it felt very familiar to what i was used to but it was a lot more dynamic than these old trackers.
Unfortunately the buzz project also died, even tho it still meets my requirements apart from a rather buggy environment i have decided to switch to something more stable. Some friends adviced me ableton and i picked it up. I am at the point where i can do most things i want but before i totally hook myself to ableton i would like your advice on using Cubase. I tried Cubase long ago but it was at that moment way too unstable and complicated (talking 2000-2002 period here).
Recently i checked the "Andi Vax - Mixing Secrets" video and it seems that Cubase also changed majorly over the years so i would like your advice, preferably from people who have experience with both.. Are there significant advantages to use one over the other or is it just 2 different ways that both lead to Rome (aka, both are fine, it's just what you are used to).
Please don't make this a this sucks and this rules thread, try to give arguments on why you think certain aspects are better in either of these programs.
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 14:11
|
What about Psycle?
|
|
|
Jerry
Started Topics :
2
Posts :
32
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 14:13
|
didn't try that yet.. url?
|
|
|
makus
Overdream
Started Topics :
82
Posts :
3087
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 14:24
|
why dont just try Cubase and decide whats more convinient to you?
i believe there can be a bunch of personal pluses and minuses for each piece of software.
 
www.overdreamstudio.com |
|
|
vipal
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
123
Posts :
1397
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 14:38
|
opinions differ. cubase is generally considered good for studio-producing, ableton best for live-sets, although some people like ableton also in the studio. sx3 is probably the most used program here. worth to give it a try first i would say. i think its works easy. |
|
|
Get-a-fix
Getafix
Started Topics :
147
Posts :
1441
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 14:47
|
Another vote for cubase.
There's plenty of books & video tutorials around that'll have you up & running in no time.
Ableton is good but it has certain limitations, like a proper mixer. If you feel you can't do without it you can still rewire it to cubase.
  http://www.soundcloud.com/getafixmusic |
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 14:49
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 15:53
|
analytical, logical, mainly timeline orientated, rather unlimited functionality - cubase
intuitive, creative, mainly loop orientated, a bit limited functionality - ableton
  Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
makus
Overdream
Started Topics :
82
Posts :
3087
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 16:05
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-11-01 15:53, subconsciousmind wrote:
intuitive - ableton
|
|
why everyone says so? for me its absolutely not. i installed abletone twice and havent got any idea how to make a sound from its synths. f*ck me im retarded!
 
www.overdreamstudio.com |
|
|
Get-a-fix
Getafix
Started Topics :
147
Posts :
1441
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 16:16
|
^^
Hehehe same here, for me Cubase & FL studio are the most intuitive sequencers.
Someone said the same for Sonar but i couldn't do anything with it. I guess it depends from person to person.
  http://www.soundcloud.com/getafixmusic |
|
|
PoM
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
162
Posts :
8087
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 16:24
|
last time i used it ,ableton was not very good for audio tracks /audio editing (you can t fade a audio clip for example )and i never get a sound as good as in cubase when producing tracks on it,cubase is better for serious production , ableton is better for live maybe. |
|
|
makus
Overdream
Started Topics :
82
Posts :
3087
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 16:56
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-11-01 16:16, Get-a-fix wrote:
I guess it depends from person to person.
|
|
yeah, right, +1
 
www.overdreamstudio.com |
|
|
Dharma Lab
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
342
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 17:45
|
If you'd prefer to just get your ideas into the computer as quickly as possible, or often view software as a level in between you & your music, or get frustrated often with software, then I would suggest Ableton, especially if you work with primarily audio files only.
If you prefer to spend time tweaking to get things just right, prefer flexibility above speed, or dislike feeling pigeon holed, then I think CuBase is the way to go. CuBase is still vastly superior in Midi IMHO.
There is no rule to say you have to use only one DAW. Some folks use both. In the end, you'll have to try them both to really decide, but perhaps this will help you decide which one to try first.
Intuitive is one of those subject terms, so take it with a grain of salt.
  Keep The Faith,
Christian K. |
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 18:01
|
I haven't used Cubase for many years so I can't make a direct comparasion.
It came to a point where I had it with their buggy releases and I just feel I cannot trust them anymore.
To get back into Cubase would be like getting back with a girfriend who cheated on you with your best friends several times....there just comes a point when you cannot regain trust, and Steinberg is past that for me.
And I never really been a fan of their interface to start with, and been more of a emagic fan already since the old notator days.
But after Logic discontinued on the PC I did try out Sonar and Abelton.
Sonar is a nice stable sequencer without a doubt with very good sound and some very nice functionality, but somehow not very intuitive to work with for me.
I cannot really put the finger on what it is that bothers me, but it was the same when I was using cakewalk as a MIDI sequencer.
It does the job very well and generally seems like a very stable and well written piece of software but even after using it for a while and being fairly fluent in how to work it I just don't feel we get along.
Ableton is just so cleaverly designed in so many ways and have many features I have now grown accustomed to so I cannot imagine that I will switch to another sequencer any time soon.
It does lack some functionality that Sonar or Cubase has, but that's mostly stuff I never or very rarely would use.
For example I don't do a lot of crossfading between tracks, and on the rare occasion I need to do it it's hardly a difficult or tedious task to do manually.
If you make more housey/clubbey stuff the lack or proper shuffle functionality would be a major setback, but for trance I think global shuffle doesn't work at all. And to manually make shuffle on a single track is not difficult.
On the other hand the pattern based arrangement is something I really missed since the old notator days, and that feature really saves a lot of time for me at least.
I like doing little slides with differnt parameters on different notes, and the way that's implemented in ableton also saves me a lot of time, and the fact that you when you assign an external controller it will scale the values you have drawn is simply awsome.
Effect and instrument racks is great for creating complex effect configurations and certainly very useful also in the a studio environment.
It's super stable but of course like any sequencer when you load it with a lot of plugs it might crash.
The beauty with Ableton is that it seems pretty much impossible to loose data since it will recover your
work from the undo history which is just genious.
The downsides IMO is that it's very heavy on CPU usage and the sound is not very good.
I mostly mix on my Scope card to avoid the sound quality issue, but Live 7 is coming out soon and that has a reworked engine using 64bit precision and that has reportedly improved matters if you like to mix in Live.
  (``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
brasirc
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
299
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 18:30
|
well..most of the points listed on the thread are indeed true...
one way i see it tho...is that cubase has been around for longer then Live...so now it is quite a complete software, with many bugs fixes and updates thru, and a legion of fans supporting it..
the Live Boom came out a few years ago...and year after year, Ableton been updating it....if a few years ago you would never change cubase for live...nowadays it is considerable....with Live 7 comming now...and newer versions to come in the future...i belive Live has put itself neck to neck to cubase standarts, and it will prolly get even better, prolly getting stronger and more popular then cubase in a near future...
so in the end it all comes down to your way of working, and your taste...
but you gotta admit that Live is the "new cool kid on the block" and that cubase is starting to look like the old "smart but boring" brother =p
  un-fucking-believable |
|
|