Cubase SL and SX diferences

[endserenading81]

The new Cubase SL looks pretty awesome. The demo is intuitive. I have the old VST, been thinking about upgrading. If I don't work with surround sound and scoring, am I pretty golden with the SL?
Thanks,
Rob

 

[DDev]

I think you'll be happy with SL. I got my copy 2 or 3 months ago and have been very pleased with it. I didn't need the surround mixing functions, and I don't do any scoring, either (in fact very little midi), so for the audio stuff I do it has been great.

Darryl.....

 

[xstatic]

If you have been using Cubase VST 5.x and lower, than the move to SL, SX, or SE will leave more than golden, but platinum They really aren't even similar in features, but there are definately things you will recognize. The new Cubases have added TONS of features over the old VST versions. Not to mention newer versions of ASIO and VST itself.

 

[mmistudent]

If you have been using Cubase VST 5.x and lower, than the move to SL, SX, or SE will leave more than golden, but platinum They really aren't even similar in features, but there are definately things you will recognize. The new Cubases have added TONS of features over the old VST versions. Not to mention newer versions of ASIO and VST itself.

I agree... I was blown away by Cubase SX after using VST 5.1 for so long.

 

[tsphillips]

How about the Cubase LE that ships with the Aardvark 4 imput card and box?

Anyone know HOW limited it is compared to the full blown Cubase?

 

[ecktronic]

CUBASE sx

Cubase SX is not that great to be frank. It is trying to be Pro tools but failing at it. It has some bugs in it. I cant seem to find an EQ section for MIDI. fair enough i can do it in XGEdit, but there should be an eq section. Limited effects also. It does have good automation though which is one of the few things i found good about changing from V5 to SX. It is still a really good programme but i think it could have been made alot better. Pro tools is the way forward, but it is just far too expensive.

 

[xstatic]

I fail to see how SX fails when compared to pro tools. Can you please expound? I really don't do much midi, so the midi EQ thing is out of my grasp. I never really saw the need for a midi EQ since I can EQ the output of whatever midi plug I am using.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Cubase SX is not that great to be frank.

I'll have to disagree.... the interface is excellent, the sound quality is excellent (ie - the processing algorithms are good), and it's efficient with resources (SX 2, in particular).... about it's only failing is the overabundance of useless "gimmicky" plug-ins, but since it's recording s/w, NOT plug-in S/W, it's understandable. (ie, you don't expect effects on a quality multitrack recorder - that's what outboard is for!)

Cubase is considered a top-notch piece of recording S/W by many, including me..........

 

[zook250]

I had cubase on my 1040st, so doesnt that make protools wanting to be cubase?

 

[xstatic]

Also, what is it that Pro Tools does that Cubase does not?