Korn's new album...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris Shaeffer
  • Start date Start date
All right, this might be the perfect time/place to ask this:

Can we REALLY expect to get a (near) professional result from Cubase? Has anyone here/does anyone here know of someone who has done a commercial quality project in Cubase VST? What I'm finding is that 1) the e.q. is hard to manipulate, and isn't quite as "surgical" as it should be 2) Cubase will freeze up indiscriminately, sometimes at the worst possible time.

The computer seems readily able to handle all the FX, eq, and tracks I throw at it.

The variables for this equation (a particular (but typical) song):

Cubase VST/32 5
Power MAC G4 (733 MHz/512 MB)
12-16 audio tracks, eq on each, a few FX throughout
2-4 midi tracks

(EQ is the largest concern; 4-band parametric sounds like it would work well, but in practice so far it's tied me in knots :p)

If there are some good examples done on VST/32 out there, commercial or some of your own mp3s... care to give me a listen?


Thanks.


Chad
 
My feeling is that it isn't the SOFTWARE that determines whether you can get pro-ish results or not...

There are SO many factors that go into how a recording sounds- human ears are pretty darned sensative things!! The recording medium is just one element that goes into a good recording.

Give me all the best recroding stuff and set it up here in my bedroom and I'll get an amazingly clean recording of all the same things that I'm recording with my mid-grade stuff: the room sound, the background noise of traffic, etc. I do what I can to minimize it, but its still there for the amazing human ear to hear.

Then there is the factor of how well you know your equiptment. The "pros" that make the music that we compare our recordings to know their stuff pretty darned well. If you spent that much time earning your living with Cubase you would know how to get more professional sounding recordings out of it, too.

I can hear the difference in mics, preamps, and effects- but I've never heard any difference between multitracking programs.

Take care,
Chris
 
Chris Shaeffer said:
My feeling is that it isn't the SOFTWARE that determines whether you can get pro-ish results or not...

There are SO many factors that go into how a recording sounds- human ears are pretty darned sensative things!!
Click to expand...

So you're saying I _shouldn't_ throw this "Golden Ears" program in the dumpster? ;)

I can hear the difference in mics, preamps, and effects- but I've never heard any difference between multitracking programs.
Click to expand...

Good point. The question was more one of the number of options available, and a specific question about the EQs Cubase uses. Also, it would be interesting to see just what's been accomplished with this (possibly perceived) lesser DAW package in comparison to "pro" stuff :p

Your point is that "I can get there in a Ferrari, or on a trike."

Thanks for the (sorta) vote of confidence though, Chris. :D Now, to learn how to drive this "trike" :p :D


:eek: :(

Chad
 
link broken

"The requested URL was not found on this server.":confused:


Chad
 
well cubase SX is nuendo with new features and good mid(something nuendo doesn't have) i have Sx i love i still use nuendo some but not everyday anymore....
i know a lot of big studios that dropped pro tools for nuendo.. how many are gonna drop pro tools or nuendo for SX?
Nuendo 2 will be out this fall
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top