| Author
|
Cubase SX against Nuendo 2.0.
|
Solar Plexus - Zirrex
Started Topics :
6
Posts :
9
Posted : Aug 30, 2003 01:22
|
What it is better to choose if you write a trance music, Cubase SX 1.03 (2.0) or Nuendo 2.0?
And why?
Thank.
 
Andrey Alexandrov
ZIRREX - Psychedelic & Goa Trance
Russia, Moscow
www.zirrex.ru |
|
|
|
cannedguppy
Started Topics :
3
Posts :
11
Posted : Aug 30, 2003 11:17
|
go for cubase 1.06 it got more bug fixes
|
|
|
|
Anak
Anakoluth
Started Topics :
108
Posts :
2395
Posted : Aug 30, 2003 12:04
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Aug 30, 2003 16:28
|
Wait wait wait.....
You're not doing anything while you're waiting 
|
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Sep 4, 2003 13:59
|
I would recommend cubase because of more midifunctions resp. midiplugins like arpeg, quantizer, delay etc..
But I don't know if they have been added in nuendo 2.0
I like the design of cubase more... 
I think both are great anyway, with cubase you can do all you want for sure.
Nuendo maybe offers more professionality concerning audiorecording (I don't know, I just assume)...
Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
Solar Plexus - Zirrex
Started Topics :
6
Posts :
9
Posted : Sep 6, 2003 12:47
|
NU 2 on the interface became as CU SX and it is even better. More convenient and competently. But there are problems with work.  When Upgrate up to version 2.0.1 problems began less, but all the same I work while in CU SX though pulls on NU. |
|
|
|
Jeto
Jeto
Started Topics :
258
Posts :
3252
Posted : Sep 7, 2003 12:32
|
|
Well... Nuendo has better audio processing but Cubase SX 2.0 is going to have the same audio processing.. besides that some few diffrences in appearance... |
|
|
|
bilbobagginz
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
399
Posted : Sep 9, 2003 20:13
|
you are ask a... not the best question... :
if you work with real synth and effects only,
and you don't need a hell of a sequencer,
and you also use a real multi track mixing desk...
then NU will be better.
on the other hand: if you work with softsynths only, and all the way play with the fx, and the virtual MIDI with VSTi's then you don't need Nuendo, since it is limited in this direction.
so this is a matter of your work style and not your musical style.
[note: therefore i am not intending to answer you ]
and of course, the "limits" are also possible to break through: today's limits were yesterdays infinities.
and i can't say 3-4 years back sound was worse.
so, if you know only how to work with nuendo and know it good, then stick to it!
it doesn't matter how you did it, as long as it is good.
boom,
M.
|
|
|
|
René
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
5
Posted : Sep 17, 2003 14:11
|
Hi,
Just an update for u guys!!
Theres nothing SX haves that Nuendo dosen't!! It's the other way around!!
Nuendo 64 VSTi's...... SX 32!!
Nuendo 6 Fxchannels with 8 sends each...... SX 8 Fx sends!!!
Nuendo has unlimited BUS Routing possibilitys.... SX very limited.
Etc....Etc....Etc
As for SX2 will have the same audio engine..... I think not.... Why would Steinberg shoot Nuendo in the foot??
So when push comes to shove..... Nuendo is the one for you if you already have experience with DAW.... and you need a complicated setup with limitless routing..................
If you want "Plug'n Play" go for SX it is almost ready for production right out of the box!!!
And for all you Mac guys outthere.... Nuendo2 is way better than Logic 6!!!!
 )
R |
|
|
|
Anak
Anakoluth
Started Topics :
108
Posts :
2395
Posted : Sep 17, 2003 17:29
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Oct 2, 2003 22:01
|
|
solipt1c
Soliptic
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
349
Posted : Oct 3, 2003 05:37
|
SX does have things that n1 doesnt have... but nuendo users kicked up a fuss (pointing out rather reasonably that having paid 2-3 times more they'd expect "everything, plus...") and steinberg now agreed that n2 will be exactly that.
from lurking on the steinberg forums n2 doesnt seem very usuable yet. i dl'ed 2.01 anyway, didnt bother trying it tho, my housemate tried to get it worked and totally failed... think i'll stick with 1.62 until 2.1 comes out.
in fact i'm not convinced about n2 at all... some of the changes seem a step backwards for me (eg, full PDC isnt much concern, but having it implemented means a lot of negative side-effects... replacing the send window with fx channels is pointless, if i wanted to work like that i can do it already with group channels... generic remote no longer works... etc, etc)
i'd rather they sorted stupid things like being able to re-order inserts... but hell... i dont have any right to argue ;-)
http://www.dartrecordings.co.uk/ |
|
|
|
