Cubase Studio 4 vs. Cubase 4

[docman]

Upgrading from LE...Which one to get?

Not using surround sound now, but who knows?
More plug ins, but are they good ones?
Media Bay and control room feature..not sure if I need it or not...
Want to be able to burn MP3s

Is it worth the extra $200?

Feature comparison here:

Feature Comparison :: Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH

and more detailed one here:
http://www.steinberg.net/fileadmin/r...son_071022.pdf


penny for your thoughts...

[brandondrury]

Want to be able to burn MP3s

You can do this with Windows cd burning software and Razorlame.

The big reason to upgrade is increased track counts, increased inserts, and increased virtual instruments.

I don't have Cubase 4, but I do use Cubase SX3 (the big boy from about a year ago). The included plugins are very useful in many situations. I use quite a bit of 3rd party plugins too, but I only consider my 3rd party plugins "different' and not necessary superior.

Not using surround sound now, but who knows?

"Who knows" means it is a non factor. It sounds cool, but I've had SX3 1.5 years now and I'm nowhere near doing a surround mix.

Media Bay and control room feature..not sure if I need it or not...

Useful, but not the selling point of the upgrade.


Brandon

[docman]

Thanks man.

I saved $200 and ordered Cubase Studio 4 the other day. It does almost everything Cubase 4 does. I'll be able to spend the extra dough on sample software!

[brandondrury]

I saved $200 and ordered Cubase Studio 4 the other day. It does almost everything Cubase 4 does. I'll be able to spend the extra dough on sample software!

In regard to sample software, you may do very well with an actual sampler, but just keep in mind that the big sample libraries have their own sampler included in most cases. For example, I own Quantum Hardcore XP bass and it came with it's on Kompakt (which is the "lightweight" version of Kontakt). While Kontakt offers more in the way of processing and manipulation of the samples, I've not found a need for that yet. Usually when I use samples, I want it to sound fairly real so I don't need to play with envelopes and such.

Brandon

[docman]

I actually meant sample libraries rather than a true sampler. I'm still trying to figure out what to get in that regard, but I am considering Kontakt and Kompakt. I'm still researching it.

I want sounds that are pretty good out of the box.

[brandondrury]

I actually meant sample libraries rather than a true sampler. I'm still trying to figure out what to get in that regard, but I am considering Kontakt and Kompakt. I'm still researching it.

Well, Kontakt and Kompakt do come with included samples, but they are more general and not what I would call "comprehensive". While a rocker dude like myself can use the strings just fine in Kontakt, a real orchestra dude would not be happy.

It's not necessarily about sound quality. It's about the ability to pull off musical stuff. For example, I don't think there are any bass slides in the Kontakt 2 samples. There are no "down / up" samples either. However, my Quantum XP bass samples have both and a whole lot more. They just go into more depth and increase your musical options.

I want sounds that are pretty good out of the box.

For the most part, that's the entire point to samples. However "sounds good" means different things. I think a person would have to look pretty far to find samples that didn't sound great (although "sounds great" is also subjective). Every sample I've ever recorded is well recorded although it may not be right for a given song.

Because I don't do weird processing with my samples and the kind of libraries that I buy will have their own dedicated player anyway, I really don't have a whole lot of need for Kontakt. There is no sound quality difference betweent he Kontakt and Kompakt players, you just have less options with the Kompakt player. (Which is fine by me).

I'd make a list of all the needs you have in your samples.

For me it would go like this:
1) Ultra real drums with ultra flexibility and the abilty to adjust bleed within the instruments. (DFH Superior handles this)

2) Real bass samples that allow me to do up/down strumming, slides, and other various nuances. (Quantum XP bass handles this)

3) Dumbed down orchestra stuff. I don't need anything complicated. (Konakt and Kompakt handle this [I have both from when I bought Komplete 3] )

4) A bunch of misc samples that may not be that elaborate. (Handled by Kontakt and Kompakt)

This is basically what I have. If / when I get around to upgrading, I'd probably get a little fancier with the orchestra samples as I'd like to have more tampanis and things of that sort.

Brandon

[docman]

Thanks for the info Brandon!

My list would go like this:

1) Acoustic drums with an easy interface and a good loop library. EZDrummer fits the bill for me. I just got it and really like it. So far I only feel limited by my patience in sequencing. I plan to get the Latin Percussion and Drum Kit From Hell expansion libraries for it.

2) A few good acoustic piano electric piano and organ sounds. This is so I can start experimenting with adding piano and organ to my "classic rock / progressive rock" songs. I'm not a keyboard or a piano player, so I don't need a vast library of sounds, just a few good ones to start.

3) String sounds: The 2 things I see myself doing is 1) Adding chord patches to rock songs and 2) Having the occasional solo cello or solo violin part within the context of a rock song. For the latter, I want to be able to play a MIDI controller and have a beautiful real cello or violin sound. This will likely require samples with tremelo, slides, etc.,

4) Eventually I'll want some horn sounds but this is last on my list. I don't expect to be able to replicate a brass section with my MIDI controller anytime soon (although that would be pretty cool!)

5) Currently I have no need for synth sounds that you would hear in techno / hip hop or electronica.

6) I have no need for electric bass samples. I like playing my bass.

Based on these needs, what would you suggest?

[Riggs77]

is the upgrade to Cubase Studio 4 in you guys opinion worth spending the $400 as opposed to sticking w/ Cubase SE ? Do you think there is a difference in sound quality by switching to a more expensive program? Thus far I have been happy with using SE but I have noticed a considerable difference in the quality of the recordings when I compare my mix to a friends mix who is using SX3 and as I said me using SE. Yes his does sound a whole lot better, could this be the program? And we are both using Presonus Firepod's w/ SM57's and CAD Trion 8000 mics. Since we did the comparison I have upgraded from the FP10 to the Firestudio as well I am just waiting the arrival of Studio 4 so that we can then compare once again.

[brandondrury]

Do you think there is a difference in sound quality by switching to a more expensive program?

Definitely not. I'd expect the cheapest software in the world to sound the same as the most expensive.

The difference is in features. If you find you can't do something in the cheap stuff, the more expensive stuff probably has it covered.

Thus far I have been happy with using SE but I have noticed a considerable difference in the quality of the recordings when I compare my mix to a friends mix who is using SX3 and as I said me using SE.

I'm positive this isn't the software. There is some other link in the chain. Probably skill level of the engineer or access to better instruments / musicians.

Brandon

[mike1964]

docman - for orchestral samples try Edirol, then EastWest Symphonic, then Miroslav Philharmonic depending on budget. Edirol is probably the cheapest but sounds great especially when you get a few tracks going.