Cubase SX 2.0 or Pro Tools?

[Matt McCubase]

I hear a lot of people talking about protools vs. sonar, but not too many of them seem to talk about cubase. I want to know about the features of cubase vs. the entry level PTLE systems. My friend Jon is going to school right now and told me to start on cubase b/c it was better than sonar. Well i went out and bought Cubase SX 2.0 and got me a St. Audio ADC&DAC2000 that samples at 24bit res. and up to 96kHz. Now he tells me to scrap the St. Audio and cubase and get digi001 or 002. Is this really worth it.

[The Seifer]

dude what if your name was Matt McProTools

[blisstiful]

No NO NO, cubase is far more powerful than any digi BS far better
quality way more features none of the digi products even come close sx also does 192khz the only real setback is you have to buy your owm i\o and have an computer that will alow you to use it to full potential

[Matt McCubase]

I have an Athlon XP 2200, 512meg of ram. 40 gig hard drive with an 80 gig on the way. What is a good interface to couple with that system and be better off than with a digi. And what are some of the features t hat SX has that PTLE doesnt.

[blisstiful]

besides the freeze fuction that allows you to permanantly save an plugin to you vocal or whatever as if it was recorded that way to not use cpu power or the extreme band width or 6.1 surrond with surr plugins or overall better sound quality all the channels with dynamics and eq standerd per channel, tape saturation that is forreal deal holyfield any of your motu i/o will have far better converter than a digi what ever

[blisstiful]

Originally posted by blisstiful you should get it also you can run it on that computer itll be a breeze
besides the freeze fuction that allows you to permanantly save an plugin to you vocal or whatever as if it was recorded that way to not use cpu power or the extreme band width or 6.1 surrond with surr plugins or overall better sound quality all the channels with dynamics and eq standerd per channel, tape saturation that is forreal deal holyfield any of your motu i/o will have far better converter than a digi what ever

[SPINSTERWUN]

Matt McCubase, what is your budget?????

[Matt McCubase]

well i already have sx 2 and waves, and autotune, and a handful of other great plugs. I have a really cheap St, Audio c-port. The thing is ok, it records pretty clearly, but i think that would like to have have something a little better. Anyway, im not sure what that you be. But my budget is not tight at all. I could afford to spend 2-3000 dollars more in the next year.

[blisstiful]

You got it then I dont know about those i/o's but your set up to have million dollar recordings with good mic pres and i/o nothin can stop you compare to your digi buddies the differance is night & day

[doubledogdare]

I'm curiuos about the 'tape saturation', I remember seeing something like this on older Cubase versions, but not in SX 2.0. Is it there in some form I can't find?

[Matt McCubase]

Tape saturation is in cubase sx 2.0

[blisstiful]

magneto plug in then freeze it to make it permanent works the same as true tape

[EleKtriKaz]

I have an Aardvark Direct Pro Q10 that I use in conjunction with Cubase SX, and I like the pairing a lot. I think Cubase is just as good as Pro Tools, it's a matter of what you get comfortable using and how well you can use it. The Aardvark is great 24/96, 8 xlr inputs and 8 1/4" inputs, midi, spdif.

[xstatic]

Take a look at the RME line. Far fewer compatibilty issues than the MOTU products, and in my opinion sounds better than the MOTU hardware. A little bit spendier, but not a whole lot. Plus, MOTU's tech support leaves ALOT to be desired. I am not really sure about RME's tech support because in then two years since I switched from MOTU to RME I have never had to call them

[biotek]

Originally Posted by xstatic

Take a look at the RME line. Far fewer compatibilty issues than the MOTU products, and in my opinion sounds better than the MOTU hardware. A little bit spendier, but not a whole lot. Plus, MOTU's tech support leaves ALOT to be desired. I am not really sure about RME's tech support because in then two years since I switched from MOTU to RME I have never had to call them

i agree... RME is the shiznet... i'm using the multiface with nuendo and it's fantastic...

pro fools just isn't worth it anymore

[xstatic]

I am actually using an RME 9652 with an external 24 track hard disc recorder. So far I prefer this to any soundcard setup I have used yet. I don't actually record anything to the HD recorder, but I leave all 24 tracks in input monitor mode. I run the 3 ADAT optical ports to the 3 ADAT optical inputs on my RME and actually do all of my recording in Nuendo. Then I run the 24 analog TRS outputs from the HD recorder to 24 tape inputs on my analog console. What this does is a few things. In this configuration, my HD recorder acts as a splitter. I get a latency free copy of each used inout at my console, while sending the ADAT optical signal of the same tracks to my RME card for Nuendo. This also means the HD recorder is my D/A and A/D converter. I like it for a few different reasons. First, NO latency (well technically there would have to be some, but my bet is that its well under a microsecond and undetectable to anything except really high end testing gear), second, I don't have to run any sort of seperate applet (like MOTU's cue mix) so its easier and quicker to route things. Also, I have the freedom to dump a project to the HD recorder and add tracks at a remote location without having to haul around my whole CPU, monitor, etc...

I do however monitor reverbs on aux sends through Nuendo though while I am tracking. Basically, I create a new channel in Nuendo that is setup to recieve an aux send from my console (i.e. aux 5 from the console routes to input 23 on the HD recorder, to a channel labeled rev 1 in Nuendo setup to record from channel 23 on the ADAT optical bank). Then i go into the channel strip for the rev 1 channel in Nuendo, activate the input monitor button, and pull the channel output fader down to inf. Then i go to the channel aux send for the rev 1 channel in Nuendo and load whatever reverb I want into aux 1, make the send prefade, and dial up a good level. That way I have access to any effect in Nuendo that I might put on an aux send in a traditional analog setup (typically just reverb and delay, maybe a chorus or a flange for certain things). There is a latency involved during this situation, but for a time based effect like reverb or delay, i have never had anyone notice. Since my delay is only 6 ms, I can just live with it, or adjust all delay and reverb times by 6 ms. For some singers, i actually let them monitor both the latency delayed track through Nuendo and the dry track on the console because it gives a vocal doubler effect that some singers really like to hear in their headphones while they are laying tracks down.

Sorry about the long post, I didn't start this reply with all this in mind, but I have met a lot of Cubase and Nuendo users who weren't aware that things could be done this way.