Cakewalk Vrs. Cubase

[Dr Teeth]

Which program do you think is best for beginner and why? also could you list diferences between cubase and cubasis?

[-]

I'd have to say Cakewalk is probably the better choice for the beginner, solely for the fact that Cakewalk has multiple undo and Cubase does not.

[Master Zap]

Cakewalk any day of the week.

 

I had a horrible encounter with Cubase for a few months (made my creativity ZERO) coz I *needed* softsynths, and prior to SONAR, cakewalk couldn't do 'em....

 

...now I have sonar, I am in heaven, and Cubase is sitting nicely in the trashcan.

 

/Z

[Gus Lozada]

Since you are asking "best for beginners", Edgar, I could suggest firmly going for Cakewalk. It is very easy and powerful enough to get professional results.

 

I use it all the time.

 

When I need to use a VST PlugIn (Orange Vocoder or Model-E), then I go to CUBASE, record the audio output and go back to cake or ACID for the final Mix.

 

------------------

Gustavo G Lozada

 

Moderador de:

MusicPlayer.com/NuestroForo

"La voz en Español en Música y Tecnología"

 

GusTraX @yahoo.com

[scottk184cs.com]

Master Zap -

 

I've got Pro Audio 9 and am thinking about upgrading to Sonar. How does it work for you? Any thoughts?

 

Thanks,

Scott

[Alndln]

If you need VST capabilities in Cakewalk just get the VST-DX Adapter from FX-Pansion($60.00).Cubase has even experienced users still pulling their hair out,while Pro Audio 9.03 is probably the simplest bug free audio/midi program Iv'e seen on either platform.You'll also have the option to upgrade to Sonar in the near future as well which has built in virtual instrument support,built in looping capabilities and more.

[Master Zap]

The first SONAR versions had some quirks, there are still one or two quirks, but in general I'm happy.

 

And the VST thingy from fxpansion works GREAT... but you need SONAR to runn the virtual VST *INSTRUMENTS*... you CAN do all the EFFECTS plugin in 9 as well tho... (and there is a roundabout way to get instruments to run in cake 9 via a virtual MIDI loopback software but it works very badly, go for SONAR)

 

/Z

[Rod S]

Cakewalk. Interface is familiar to windows users, and stuff is where you expect it to be. I have a version of Cubasis VST and it basically bogged down my creativity as well. Not intuitive at all. Cakewalk always felt 'confortable' from the beginning. I was recording on cakewalk on the same day I installed it. I've heard good things about the VST wrapper programs.

[stratman_dup1]

I'd have to agree with the general consensus that Cakewalk is easier to use for the begginer, And being a relatively new begginer I can say that from experience http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif But don't get down if you get Cakewalk and still feel like pulling your hair out sometimes, none of these programs are *easy* to use.

 

I've tried the demo versions of Logic and Cubase, and my new soundcard came with a copy of Micro Logic which I played around with. But for me Cakewalk is just very intuitive to use, I still had to do some work but I could generally figure out how to do things with it. And the user groups on the net really help for the things I can't figure out on my own. Even after quit a bit of reaserching I still couldn't figure out how to do relatively basic things with Cubase or Logic.

 

My .02, your mileage may vary.

Phil.

[stratman_dup1]

I'd have to agree with the general consensus that Cakewalk is easier to use for the begginer, And being a relatively new begginer I can say that from experience http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif But don't get down if you get Cakewalk and still feel like pulling your hair out sometimes, none of these programs are *easy* to use.

 

I've tried the demo versions of Logic and Cubase, and my new soundcard came with a copy of Micro Logic which I played around with. But for me Cakewalk is just very intuitive to use, I still had to do some work but I could generally figure out how to do things with it. And the user groups on the net really help for the things I can't figure out on my own. Even after quit a bit of reaserching I still couldn't figure out how to do relatively basic things with Cubase or Logic.

 

My .02, your mileage may vary.

Phil.

[Anderton]

Stratman is right, these programs are complicated. Probably the reason why Cakewalk gets high marks here is because it's easy to learn the most important functions, but also lets you drill deeper as you become more capable. But setting up the computer, sound card, drivers, etc. can be a hair-pulling experience, even for fairly experienced types, regardless of the software you use.

 

What's intuitive, of course, varies from person to person. I was raised on Cubase, and got into trouble with Cakewalk sometimes when I'd hit a key command that I was used to using in Cubase, but didn't work with Cakewalk.

 

I think the point about Cakewalk being a good choice for Windows people is extremely valid. If you're into Windows, it will make sense because it follows those protocols. Cubase on the Mac I personally find quite intuitive, maybe for similar reasons.

 

Some other differences: Cubase can do Rex files, and Sonar can do Acid-like "groove" clips. In fact, if you're not too much into MIDI, your best introduction might be one of the "Acid Junior" programs. You get to work with loops, hard disk recordings, sound cards, and all that sort of thing in a VERY easy to use and inexpensive environment. Once you have those elements mastered, you'll likely find it easy to get into either Sonar or Cubase, and you'll be able to make a more informed decision.

[Jose Cobelas]

Please define beginner.

 

JoseC.

[Master Zap]

Frankly, I think people who "dont use MIDI" and are "only into Loops" should be shot on sight, or at least be disqualified from calling themselves "musicians" until proven otherwise somehow. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

 

Ok, all kidding aside... seriously. There is some sever shit being produced by idiots throwing three E-Jay loops together thinking they are master producers. There is also some severly brilliant work being done (Ye Olde "Fatboy" to name one) but c'mon, are you really a musician if you are not the one making the "Music" (i.e. the Notes). Even Norman "Fatboy" himself has the opinion that he isn't really a musician in that sense.

 

/Z

[Ralf]

Is Sonar essentially ProAudio 10 but with a new name on account of all the new features? or will there be a ProAudio 10 comming out? How is volume, pan, and fx automation in Sonar?

 

Ralf

[Dylan]

Hi Ralf,

 

Actually, Sonar was written from the ground up as a new product and is not just a Pro Audio upgrade with a new name. From what I've heard, Sonar is replacing Pro Audio and there will be no 10 version. The automation in Sonar is great, and even better are effects that support automation. I'd agree that Pro Audio and Sonar are somewhat easier to learn than Cubase or Logic, but that shouldn't stop you from at least trying these products as they are very powerful. One of the things that hinders Cakewalk products at this time is their file management scheme for storing audio. I really don't like the way this works, so I usually end up bouncing all of my audio tracks to disk and then mixing in Vegas. If you are looking at an audio-only sequencer then you might check out Vegas as well as it's not only the easiest of all audio apps to learn and use (IMHO), but it also works like a charm.

 

-Dylan

 

Originally posted by Ralf:

Is Sonar essentially ProAudio 10 but with a new name on account of all the new features? or will there be a ProAudio 10 comming out? How is volume, pan, and fx automation in Sonar?

 

Ralf

[Ralf]

thanks for the reply http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

[Anderton]

Ralf, I second pretty much everything Dylan has to say. I can tell you for sure there will be no PA10. Sonar is the start of a new line.

 

I like the automation as well. I have the Peavey StudioMix which is a fabulous moving fader package, and Sonar supports it. These are getting hard to find, so if this interests you, better start looking now.

 

The audio data management is weird, for compatibility with the real world it is a good idea to bounce the audio tracks and export them, then save the MIDI stuff as an SMF. That way you can always import the audio into Logic, Cubase, Pro Tools, or whatever if you end up working elsewhere.

 

All best,

 

Craig

[gtrmac]

I'm gonna go against the tide and say get Cubase. The program is working great now that they've done some major bug fixing. I don't think it's hard to learn any of these programs so why not learn one that professional musicians and producers use. I would suggest Logic but I honestly do find Logic more difficult than Cubase. You do not need to know all the advanced features of a program to use it. I got Cubase about two years ago and I was able to make music with it immediately. Learn as you go and take it as far as you need. I think Cubase with the VST instrument capability is an incredible tool. Check out www.cubase.net sometime and ask some questions from some users there too. Whatever you do RTFM!

 

------------------

Mac Bowne

G-Clef Acoustics Ltd.

Osaka, Japan

My Music: www.javamusic.com/freedomland

[Dylan]

Here are the major strengths and weaknesses of both programs that I've observed:

 

Cakewalk Pro's:

 

-Easy to learn.

-Works well with a modest audio card/MIDI interface.

-Is not dependant on having low latency drivers.

-Performs well with a modest computer.

-Confines to Windows standards in application layout.

-Good support from company and online newsgroup

-Logical copy protection (serial # and CD key).

-A single mixing environment for both MIDI and audio.

-No need to adjust MIDI to Audio delay. Very tight timing.

 

Cakewalk Con's:

-Uses a quirky file management system for storing and archiving audio.

-Input monitoring/effects processing in Sonar requires solid WDM drivers and a very fast CPU.

-Included effects in Pro Audio 9 are very basic and most users will need to purchase additional plug-ins. Sonar includes a much improved selection of plug-ins.

-Mixing in realtime with plug-ins can cause a brief pause in the audio playback while adjusting parameters.

-Does not integrate well or at all with other Cakewalk products (besides their Direct-X plug-ins).

-No VST effect of instrument support with a third-party adapter.

 

Cubase Pro's:

 

-Excellent integration with other Steinberg products.

-ASIO is a mature driver format support by almost every major audio hardware vendor.

-Low latency operation is possible on a very modest computer.

-VST effects/instrument support.

-Rewire and REX support

-Excellent included effects.

-UV 22 dithering

-Slick GUI

-Logical file system method.

-Mixing in realtime is very smooth.

 

Cubase Con's:

 

-Requires a solid ASIO driver in order to achieve low latency operation. Does not fully utilize features with other driver formats (MME and DirectX).

-Has a separate mixer for MIDI and audio.

-Dongle key copy protection.

-User must adjust MIDI to Audio delay settings to have correct sync between the two.

-Too many Menu's and Windows to work with. Lots of screen space is required.

-Outstanding bugs in version 5 still effect many users.

 

Of course these are just my onions and are in now way facts by any means.

 

-Dylan

[Jose Cobelas]

Originally posted by gtrmac@hotmail.com:

I don't think it's hard to learn any of these programs so why not learn one that professional musicians and producers use.

 

The P-word! My pet peeve! Why on Earth sooner or later somebody says that?

The box of e-Jay studio says something like "Professional recording software". I read a review in (I think PC World) stating that the SoundBlaster Live! 5.1. is suited for "professional video editing". Even products for cleaning your toilet are getting that tag!

 

The original question was "Which program do you think is best for beginner and why? ". Repeat, please: B-E-G-I-N-N-E-R. What do the professional thing has to do with it? That´s why I asked what he meant with "beginner".

 

And are you considered a professional based on your work, or the sequencer that you use? Why do the advocates of the Otto & Fritz combo of sequencers keep on insulting those many music professionals that use Cakewalk, DP, StudioVision, or whatever?

 

I am not a professional musician or producer, but I make a living as ERP software consultant, and your reply is the most UNPRO piece of advice possible, sorry. If I said to a customer "You must buy this to manage your factory because this is what Boeing uses" without ANY previous research on his particular problems, I would be fired on the spot.

 

Regards,

 

JoseC.

[GD]

Hi,

 

I have been a Cakewalk user since the early days of Cake4DOS version 2.

I have owned numerous versions up to the present.

 

I've looked at Cubase more than once, but never made the switch for one very important reason that any Windows/Sequencer newbie needs to keep in mind: Cubase is *not* following Microsoft guidelines for applications.

What does this mean to you and I?

The Cubase user interface is terrible. Text labels on buttons are not centered; menu accelerators are not properly justified; they've replaced standard controls such as tabs with their own button controls; custom visual controls are poorly designed.

 

Because of this, it does not look or feel professional, it reminds me of the inexpensive apps originally on the Amiga and Atari. Cubase would require an entire new UI before I would consider it. Same goes for the rest of Steinberg's and even Emagic's products (SoundDiver, etc.).

Their UI layout reasons are for Mac/PC compatability. But you don't see this with many other company's cross-platform applications.

 

Anyone who classifies themselves as a beginner will find Cakewalk *much* easier to get around in and to use.

 

David

 

 

------------------

Li'l Chips Systems

www.lilchips.com

Roland and Cakewalk resources

Roland Peer-Newsgroups at news://news.lilchips.com

[Dr Teeth]

Could you explain me what that of cakewalk has bad file managment. See peopple I need one solution but i would like the best thing for less. The price of cakewlak is a month income for a regular person here in Guatemala. If I have to have another program to mix, Why it sould be better than cubase?

[gtrmac]

David, I don't think you've looked at Cubase recently.

JoseC, The point is that if professionals who are using software for commercial productions and under demanding studio conditions accept a product as a standard it says a lot about the product. Features, reliability, and the ability to work with others because of general acceptance mean a lot. Either way you have to learn something and I think that with the possible exception of Logic they are all the same. I've used Performer, Protools, Sonic Solutions, Wavelab, and Nuendo, professionally by the way.

 

------------------

Mac Bowne

G-Clef Acoustics Ltd.

Osaka, Japan

My Music: www.javamusic.com/freedomland

 

This message has been edited by gtrmac@hotmail.com on 07-01-2001 at 01:12 AM

[Anderton]

Given as a con for Cakewalk: <<-No VST effect of instrument support with a third-party adapter.>>

 

Actually, you can do this. I run VST instruments and processors inside of Sonar all the time, using VST-DX adapter.

[Guest]

Originally posted by LatinMusic:

Could you explain me what that of cakewalk has bad file managment. See peopple I need one solution but i would like the best thing for less. The price of cakewlak is a month income for a regular person here in Guatemala. If I have to have another program to mix, Why it sould be better than cubase?

 

Here's the deal on WAV files and Cakewalk: Cakewalk defaults to saving all the WAV files for every project in the same folder, with file names like: wen46c67as.wav

The easiest way to get around this is to save your work as a .BUN file once at the end of each session. Also, get a utility called CWAF.exe - it stands for CakeWalk Audio Finder, and it is great for handling cakes WAV file management when a file comes up missing or your drive is full of old WAVs from old projects and you want to find out what is safe to erase.

 

I don't understand your comment about needing another program to do mixes - I guess it depends on your recording setup, but Cakewalk can do mixes OK. Perhaps I misunderstood...

 

We (Tangent) use 3 or 4 different hardware synths and record the midi into Cakewalk, and also record multiple mono and stereo audio tracks (vocals, drums, bass, acoustic guitars). Since we have only a 2 channel soundcard, we use Cakewalks mixer console window to mix the WAV audio down to stereo within the PC, then the soundcard output is fed to an external mixer.

 

The mixer combines the sound card output (the WAV submix) with the 6 or 8 channels of the hardware synth audio to produce a stereo mix. This is fed back into the soundcard, and is recorded right back into Cakewalk as a stereo WAV file, then exported to the hard disk for mastering.

 

This all sounds complex but really isn't that bad. It could be a lot simpler if we got an 8-in, 8-out sound card so all the midi-driven synths could be fed in and recorded as WAV files one time. Then we could mix everything down within Cakewalk using the 'bounce to track' command, or using the console mix window. Ah well, maybe when they get a little less expensive we'll pick one up....

 

Philbo

Tangent Music

[Master Zap]

Tangent - may I suggest an alternate setup?

 

If you just pass the stuff that comes from cake's stereo out through the mixer (no fx or twiddling) you can do this instead:

 

Reverse everything - put your monitor speakers on your soundcards "OUT". Put the mixers "out" in soundcards "in". Make sure you turn up the soundcard "In" so it is heard through the soundcards "out" at unity gain.

 

That way, anything that comes through the mixer will be heard through the speakers. Also, anything the computer plays will also be heard. (and you gained two inputs on your mixed, woo hoo http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

 

Now work as before: Do midi which goes to synths, via mixer, into the input. Do also audio tracks, which you lay beside the MIDI tracks as before.

 

To do a final mix, you do one of two things:

 

a) The "Stereo record" way

 

Make a stereo track in Cake. RECORD on this track the stereo out from your mixer. (= all MIDI synths, with effects and all).

 

Now you can just bounce it all to a mix or do "export audio" and you have the complete mix. You now have the joy of total recall for the mix EXCEPT that all the synths come as one bundled stereo package you cant untangle.

 

b) The "one track at a time" way

 

If you want to be picky, just solo the midi track for one synth, turn off all effects (if you want to), record that track into one in cakewalk. Repeat for all hardware synth tracks. Mix COMPLETELY inside cakewalk (with the joy of total recall of the WHOLE THING for the day you want to remix - but you might run out of CPU power this way if your computer cant handle all the needed FX/tracks)

 

/Z

[Hippie]

Originally posted by LatinMusic:

Could you explain me what that of cakewalk has bad file managment. See peopple I need one solution but i would like the best thing for less. The price of cakewlak is a month income for a regular person here in Guatemala. If I have to have another program to mix, Why it sould be better than cubase?

 

I would not say Cakewalk uses a "bad" file mgmt. It is just a proprietary file mgmt. system, designed to conserve disk space, etc. If you stay in the Cakewalk realm, you are all set. (Even if you later decide to export to another program(s), you do have options). If you are looking for "one" solution, than exporting files should not be an issue. Also, Cakewalk offers good discounts for existing customers that want to upgrade to the newer releases.

 

-Hippie

[Dylan]

D'oh! I know this. What I meant to say was "No VST effect of instrument support withOUT a third-party adapter.

 

-Dylan

 

Originally posted by Anderton:

Given as a con for Cakewalk: <<-No VST effect of instrument support with a third-party adapter.>>

 

Actually, you can do this. I run VST instruments and processors inside of Sonar all the time, using VST-DX adapter.

[Anderton]

<>

 

My audio tracks usually end up with little pieces of audio and lots of gaps in between. If I need to work with a different program, I export each track in such a way that it goes from the beginning of the tune to the end. Then it's easy just to bring the entire track into a different program.

 

My favorite way of dealing with media is the way Acid does it. You can save just the file that points to all the pieces of audio, or you can do a "save all media" that collects whatever you use in your project into a single folder, filled with standard format files. Cakewalk's BUN file approach saves on space, of course, but it's compatible only with Cakewalk...nothing else can read this type of file.

 

I'd LOVE to see a BUN-to-real-world converter that breaks down a BUN file into the WAV files that make it up.

[Dylan]

Originally posted by Anderton:

My favorite way of dealing with media is the way Acid does it. You can save just the file that points to all the pieces of audio, or you can do a "save all media" that collects whatever you use in your project into a single folder, filled with standard format files.

 

Mine too. Vegas has the exact type of file management and I have yet to find a better system.

 

Originally posted by Anderton:

Cakewalk's BUN file approach saves on space, of course, but it's compatible only with Cakewalk...nothing else can read this type of file.

 

Actually, their method requires twice as much disk space as others, since you need both the wavedata folder and the bun file for backup. Sure, this method works, but it's far from eloquont. If your project has tons of tracks, then having to bounce each one down manually is a real PITA. An automated way of doing this would be a very nice feature to have added.

 

This message has been edited by Dylan Walters on 07-02-2001 at 11:09 AM