| Author
|
Ableton vs Cubase
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 19:44
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-11-01 18:30, brasirc wrote:
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..
|
|
I must say that in my experience age of software usually does not correlate to it's stability.
The deciding factor there is the development practices of the company and the quality of the developers.
Ableton have been very stable even since it was a very new software, but Steinberg have for sure for a long period in the past been guilty of pushing out new features before they made sure the software was stable enough.
I still hear people complaining about bugs sometimes, so even if they might have improved somewhat they do keep introducing new bugs when they introduce new features.
And it's true that age of software many times means more features, but that's not something that is only positive.
It's very common that software that was once very good and usable turns in to a horrible mess due to adding too much features when trying to please every customers wish, commonly referred to as bloat.
There is already many Ableton users that think they are adding far too many features. I think they have a nice balance myself, but I for sure would be disappointed if they tried to be another Cubase or Sonar by adding every possible feature that anyone cold wish for in a DAW.
The leanness is one of the major features of Live that I would not like to have to be without.
  (``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
makus
Overdream
Started Topics :
82
Posts :
3087
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 20:22
|
hey, Spin, could you please provide more info on those Cubase bugs you are alking about? i'm just curious what bugs could give birth to such a distrust to the software developers?
www.overdreamstudio.com |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 21:17
|
My experiences was mainly with instability and some really wierd behaviour like channels randomly drifting around in correlation to each other, which robbed me of lot's of time to repair arrangements.
Also a lot of stuff used to simply be really badly implemented.
Everything got lot's of clicks if you didn't apply fades to the snippets, and the fades was screwing up sometimes and you had to go back and redo them.
The sound of the mixer was really bad and the included EQ was by far the worst I ever heard.
I also remember a telling moment when there was a version that even the Steinberg representatives could not manage to run satisfactory when coming to a shop I worked in to make a demo.
They had to resort to a cracked version where the crackers had reverse engineered the application and in the process fixed the bug 
This is all years ago like I said...somewhere on Cubase 4, but my impression is still that it's not really a rock solid software, even if it might have improved.
Just quickly searching here I came by a few threads...for example:
http://forum.isratrance.com/cubase-bounce-prob/
http://forum.isratrance.com/another-cubase-problem/
http://forum.isratrance.com/q-cubase-4/page2/
Obviously there is many people that is happy with the software, but that was the case back at version 4 as well, and to me it just seemed like a company with no quality asssurance whatsoever back then.
And I still don't get the impression that cubase receive a lot of praise for being solid, rather the opposite, and I don't really feel like even trying and have another period in my life sitting tearing my hair trying to rescue a track from being dragged down into the deep bottomless pits of Steinbergs buggy code
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....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 21:36
|
|
yes...one thing that made me fall in love with ableton was the undo memory recovery, and how you can bring back the whole project, just as it was before the crash...one if my biggest flaws for sure is to never save whatever im working on...i always leave saving for last....i know i shouldnt...but i always do it =p so Live has already saved my ass a few times...and more times to come...
un-fucking-believable |
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 23:18
|
about the "intuitive"
With that I don't mean its intuitive to use (that surly depends on the person) but I mean the approach to compose and produce in ableton is more an intuitive one. its more a drag and drop loop and arrange and play around kind of working. its not so much of control as in cubase. where there is less control there is more room for intuition.
For me personaly the learning curve of ableton is not very "intuitive". it was a pain for me to use it firstly. cubase I just understood "intuitivly" but as mentioned thats not what I'm talking about.
I ment "intuitive" in a more, well, as much one can say something like that, "objective" way.
Just as writing a song by writing the notes on a piece of paper will be accepted by a majority of people as "less intuitive" than just playing the guitar and try out till you got a song.
Just like this example cubases workflow is more like writing the notes on a piece of paper and ableton is more like just playing around till it sounds right.
I believe thats pretty "objective" since I would guess that about 60-70% of the musicians would consider the latter way of working a more intuitive one. (sure the remaining 30% will make a lot of noise here now )
All assuming the premise that a person has learned to use either of the programs.
Got me?
Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Nov 1, 2007 23:19
|
btw.
cubase has an auto save function. keeps as many backups as you wish, saves in intervals as you wish.
And I have to say that the latest cracked SX3 was probably the most stable audiosoftware I have ever used (EQs suck mixer sounds nice IMHO). Now I have the original cubase 4 (EQs nice - mixer same) (on independent systems) and it is surly the most buggy and unreliable audio software I have EVER used.
I'm trying out V4.1; seems a major improvement. REALLY nice features been added. But haven't the time for real testing at the moment. but giving steinberg another chance. cubase 4 officialy was a katastrophe. just check the user forums. but if they get it on the level of stability as the did with SX3 it will be incredibly cool! Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Nov 2, 2007 00:07
|
@Subconsciousmind
Isn't that frustring though?
You pay for a software, there comes a new version, you pay to upgrade to that and....oops you cannot work properly anymore.
You revert and is left with a feeling that you are using an outdated software, especially since Steinberg usually anyway is somewhat behind in features compared to other DAW's.
Why do they bother to release something that is not working properly?
I do like to deal with companies that seem to care about their customers and that I feel I can trust that if they say this is a stable release and not a beta I can expect it to behave like one.
Basically what they are doing is having people pay to do their beta testing...and personally for me to even consider doing that the software would have to have something extremly exceptional to offer.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Nov 2, 2007 01:12
|
subconsciousmind, I think you mean that Ableton is more performance based. As with with any instrument or performance based tool, you still need to go through the learning steps to be able to get that performance out of it.
I'm closer to the other 30% camp but no need to make much noise about that.
Luckily these days you can rewire Ableton, FL or Project 5 to Cubase, Sonar or whatever to get the best of both worlds.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
ThiagoNAKA
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
104
Posts :
1047
Posted : Nov 2, 2007 01:13
|
Interesting thoughts!
subconsciousmind thoughts about both softwares is pretty like the way I see it. Also about stability, the last cracked version of SX3 is indeed very nice.  But I heard also some opinions about the cracked version being stable, while the original one not so much.
I also agree with Spindrift when talking about companies. When u start buying some orginal softwares, u start caring much more about this things! 
I use Cubase Sx 3, so I can´t say about the excusive features from Cubase 4.
My particular experience showed me that Cubase is much better if u want to use a lot the "sample editing". Cutting, duplicating, time strechting, fxing(and no need to bounce), it´s all easier at Cubase.
In other hand Ableton has this "intuitive" way of making music(not intuitive use). Using the "mixer view" for sequencing can be pretty easy and fun! BUT, u need the loops from the song.
So, imho, if u have lot of experience in making loops(not only drums, but all of them, like kick, bass, synths, etc) and no need for fix many things while sequencing, Ableton maybe is the program for u. Even Cubase being easier for handle single shots sample, Ableton provide u the tools for making the loops before sequencing the music.
Now, if u are like me, that change MANY things during the sequencing, so I guess Cubase is better. The precision and easy-way of handling samples is very nice.
Someone can discuss about the sound-engine. Hummm.... Honestly I don´t think it´s matter so much. subconsciousmind does not like native Cubase Sx 3 Eq. Ok, I must agree with him, as I use only vst plugs for eq. BUT, I have a track made with the native eq that sounds very very good(we´ve used only Waves TrueVerb and Ohmboyz Delay from fx-vst folder)!!! And I say this cause I made it with a very known producer, with my sample base, and no pre-made presets from him. All from scracht, and it sounds perfect for me. Way better than many of the tracks I made alone after this one. Also ppl complain about FL a lot. Atropa is an example that FL can make good sounds! Althought most of top studios work with Pro Tools also for the sound, imho it depends more about you and your ears....
LOADING... |
|
|
|
Suloo
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
87
Posts :
2822
Posted : Nov 2, 2007 01:16
|
Hello,
so my suggestion about cubase is actualy a good one..for me its very stabil..and if you have a look in the cubase forum..most of the people who got serious problems with stability or whatever are in 90% pc users with a foulty setup..
maybe live can deal with it in a better way..perhaps..
so i use a macbook..and cubase 4 runs like a charme for me..problems with stability quite often dues to cracked software synths or similar..so there are way more aspects that can cause crashes..ok ableton live is very stabil for sure,but honestly i cannot make a real comparison..cause when it comes to work with synths and midi i`ve never used ableton..but the intuivity on how to use live for live is the most advanced in my opinion...but cubase is on a kind of that way too...
after the new update 4.1 you can use arrange tracks...and set kind of markers in your arrange and set up a playlist that way...so until now you cannot trigger them with a midikeyboard..but you can do it in sequel,so it will not take that long until its possible in cubase..then live is not needed anymore for intuitive livesets..
and by the way logic 7 was bughell as well...all that breaks(cpu overloaded) logic does just playing your arrange or recording something..has the result that so many studios moved to cubase or protools..
and now with the sidechain in cubase its even more powerfull than ever..timestreching in cubase is way better then in logic for example..i don`t know about logic 8..
cubase got free routing now etc..so i think its not going down in the future..
ok..maybe live is more stabil..but if you warp your clips for example it sounds a bit different..due to this granular synthesis shit...thats something in what ableton has to develop..
the eq`s and generaly the new vst3 plugins are good in cubase..ok..in logic there are way more plugins..
actualy none of the sequencers out there are bugfree..would be cool if all te companies glue together and create the mega hyper sequencer from hell..
-------......-------...-..-..-..-.-.-.-.- |
|
|
|
Seppa
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
485
Posted : Nov 2, 2007 01:21
|
Quote:
| also remember a telling moment when there was a version that even the Steinberg representatives could not manage to run satisfactory when coming to a shop I worked in to make a demo.
They had to resort to a cracked version where the crackers had reverse engineered the application and in the process fixed the bug |
|
Absolutly true. I remember a friend of mine got the cubase 3 and switches to the cracked version after seeing that the cracked version was way more stable. In other words the protection in cubase 3 was the cause to many bugs.
In the end you are better off with a crack version of cubase 3 than the original...
lol |
|
|
|
piXan
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
107
Posts :
807
Posted : Nov 2, 2007 06:27
|
|
piXan
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
107
Posts :
807
Posted : Nov 2, 2007 06:34
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Nov 2, 2007 06:42
|
|
I cant stand the midi latency cubase bug, where the recording begins offset by random amounts. Piece of crap software if u ask me. |
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Nov 2, 2007 10:50
|
@Spindrift. Yes ist VERY frustrating. And I was very close to completely switch to sonar. But the thing with cubase is... I’m using it for so long. It so much like I would do a program. The workflow is so me... instrumenttracks, external-effects and instruments incluson, now with 4.1 free routing and also realsidchaining has become so easy... they bought me again... :-( featurewise for my taste they are unbeaten. things like the midibug are solveable when setting it up right.
Steinberg, the support, their attitude really is questionable and I understand everybody who refuses to cope with that.
@undertow. Sure, ableton is more performance based. Also you are right, as I said already, first you have to learn how to use it. Just as you have to learn to play the guitar before you can Jam. But once you learned ableton its really nice to jam with it.
I think its good to bring up sonar here, since this is certainly worth looking at. Especially if you can’t decide between the other too and are not yet used to one ort he other. Ist certainly not as „jamy“ as ableton but surly as good as cubase.
Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
