Originally Posted by nativeaudio ➡️

I tried to read through the posts in this thread, and gave up after 20 pages - but I wonder: what happened to those of you who discussed these topic and considered switch from Cubase to Logic or from Logic to Cubase?

And - why is this thread in the Logic subforum?

Originally Posted by ohmicide ➡️

off the top of my head, Cubase lacks bendable automation (but it does have a a parabola tool and more intricate automation editing), pitch formant editing (Flex Time has it, VariAudio doesn't), a good buit-in sampler (Halion SE doesn't count), dockable windows (obviously)

Originally Posted by Clonkified ➡️

And....received Cubase 7 today. Here's some initial observations:

- Takes longer to boot up than Logic X (not just the first time). Like twice as long.
- UAD plugins seem to be working (no disabling bug - YIPPEE)
- Cubase's mixer IS better than Logic's IMO except for two issues so far: is there a key modifier to bypass an insert and is there a way to group tracks via selection without turning on Q-Link (like if I want to adjust two faders together)?
- They seem to have fixed the snap override issue I complained about. Once again, YIPPEE.
- The weird EuCon bug I had seems fixed too.
- I did a performance test with Massive in both - Cubase got 36 tracks, Logic X got 56 tracks. Both set to 128 buffer. I tried Cubase with ASIO guard on and off (no difference). I know Logic has a hybrid buffer, but so what? Pro Tools 11 matches Logic's performance (it's actually slightly better), so Steinberg should be able to get Cubase up to the same level.
- Once I switched between Cubase and Logic, it becomes very clear just how DARK Logic X's interface is. Like painfully dark. Surprisingly, I preferred Cubase here. It's not as pretty as Logic, but more usable.
- There still doesn't seem to be a way to temporarily switch to an eraser tool using a key modifier when editing automation. Have to either select and hit delete or switch between pencil and eraser. This takes 2x as long.
- Still no way to create a line of automation that you can trim up and down without affecting other automation (like if you're de-essing a vocal). Generally, the automation workflow is behind Pro Tools and Logic. Just not as fast.
- No way to drag warp markers on the arrange page. You have to use the sample editor. The problem with this is it makes it difficult to make warp changes IN RELATION to other tracks / waveforms (which tends to be important for doubled parts).
- Being able to draw in a volume envelope curve on a region pre-fader is great - however, it suffers from the workflow issue of automation. Also, it doesn't seem like it gives me an indication of the dB change I'm making or what each point represents...but bigger than that, there doesn't seem to be a way to delete a breakpoint once you create it?! I can't do it with the pencil and if I switch to another tool, the breakpoints aren't selectable! How's that for workflow!

Anyway, more exploration this weekend.

Originally Posted by Clonkified ➡️

Some more thoughts after writing and recording a quick song in Cubase 7 (and unlike some posters here, specific examples):

- Still enjoying the UI. Logic X is definitely too dark.
- The MIDI editor in Cubase is very nice - especially the ability to have multiple MIDI CC lanes open. Logic X STILL doesn't support this.
- The ability to search for plugins / VIs when you're inserting them is awesome! Great workflow feature.
- Chord track's chord assistant is pretty interesting for spurring some new ideas. I see this in the same vein as Drummer in terms of a songwriting / compositional tool. One deals with chords and one deals with the groove - both important when writing. Two bad they're not in the same program! Didn't find the chord track part of the whole thing very helpful though - was a bit wonky. But for generating ideas, it was cool for sure.
- I didn't see a way to select some tracks and "add to group channel" from the arrange window (I think you can do it in the mixer?). It seems I have to create a group channel and then assign each track to that channel (or use Q-Link to first link them, then assign, then unlink). Then I have to select all of those and put them in a folder track for organizational purposes. Logic X's summing tracks do this all in one single step very easily.
- I personally find Logic X's Flex Pitch much easier to work with on vocals than VariAudio (I couldn't seem to grab the target points to adjust the pitch curves for some reason - maybe a bug). The workflow IMO is superior and easier to use (includes gain). They did a great job with it.
- There doesn't seem to be a SINGLE tab on the inspector that shows what I consider the core aspects of a track - the I/O of the channel, the inserts, the sends, the fader & pan, solo / mute, record enable, and the VI if its an instrument track. These are spread throughout multiple tabs - I could keep multiple tabs open, but that takes up more real estate. The first tab is closest (without a full fader), so I use that most often (even though it seems to default to the channel tab when I create a new track).
- Media Bay is pretty sweet! Very easy to find stuff and drag & drop it in. Logic's file browser is pretty similar but without all the tagging / rating functionality (to be honest, I never use that stuff, but it is nice if you want it).
- Retrospective record is cool - Logic has it as well.
- Generally, Cubase forces users to actually switch between tools vs. having key modifiers / contextual hot spots. Not all the time, but a lot of the time - it is very frustrating from a workflow standpoint (but easily fixable by Steinberg). I mentioned some previously, but another one is why I can't just double click to add a note in the MIDI editor or hold down a key modifier and get a pencil tool without having to switch over to that tool completely.
- It's nice that I can actually modify the audio in lanes (fades, etc.). Logic X still doesn't allow this and it is very annoying.
- The CPU utilization difference becomes very apparent once you start composing. Definitely a lot more headroom in Logic X (as my test showed for my system).

Overall, Cubase 7 has a lot of functionality, which is nice. I like Mix Console personally. While Cubase does have some nice workflow advantages, overall, I still feel Logic is the winner in that department FOR ME. Also, when it comes to performance on my Mac, Logic still wins hands down - although Cubase is a lot better than it used to be. Also, in terms of the "superior" audio engine, I didn't notice a difference compared to Logic in the scenarios I came across. Cubase stops audio at the same points Logic, etc. do (inserting plugin while playback is happening, etc.).

Originally Posted by nativeaudio ➡️

I know it has been 2-3 years since you wrote this, but: since you know both Cubase and Logic well, could you possibly sum up what you think the main pros and cons between Cubase and Logic are today?

Originally Posted by smoovemode ➡️

I'll throw in my two cents.

I'm a hardcore Cubase 8.5 user and I will tell you that Logic is easier to use. It has less features than Cubase but is still very powerful and professional. If you need a Daw, strictly for mixing/editing I believe Cubase has the edge. But, for composing/mixing Logic X is hard to beat and it's easier to get around in.

Originally Posted by nativeaudio ➡️

Thanks, smoovemode! I'm curious about your reasoning behind this conclusion, because in terms and mixing/editing, I'm quite happy with Logic - while Cubase - as far as I can see - is A LOT more focused on features for composers. I mentioned some stuff Cubase has which Logic doesn't here, but the things that interest me the most are features which are "music oriented" - in the sense that they are designed in order to deal with editing the musical aspects of a song (which for me, at least to some degree involves using the score editor). I'm not into EDM or Hip-Hop, so the many loops and synth sounds in Logic doesn't interest me much, and I use Kontakt, not EXS (because the libraries I need the most aren't available in EXS format), so it would be really interesting to hear which composing features you think are better in Logic than in Cubase?

Originally Posted by smoovemode ➡️

you brought up a good point. But, only if you really need those features do they come into play. The workflow in Logic is much smoother to me.

Originally Posted by classictunz ➡️

Logic captures midi data a little better than Cubase. What you play in Logic is what you get! Cubase sometimes mess things up causing me to re-record it and play it better. Logic doesn't give me blank regions when going slightly pass the recorded bars.

I definitely prefer mixing in Cubase though. I can grab and swipe away plugins I don't want from inserts. I can make plugins chains and store them for detailed use. Cubase does smooth audio how Logic does smooth midi.

Hit record in Cubase change tracks while recording without having to hit the little arm button! Just hit record and go up and down back and forth and Cubase tracks without a hiccup!

Logic is a PITA for tracking, it's just slow and clumsy with destructive mistakes like erasing takes. Cubase keeps everything and it has never been an issue concerning HDD space.

I simply get better music when I make it in Logic, but I get much less frustration and mix faster with Cubase.

Logic Loopd really help me, but if I'm using Maschine or Komplete 10 it doesn't matter which daw I use even though Logic is a little tighter with midi.

Plus Logic has the paint brush to draw in though trap drums! You can do it in Cubase but there's a few extra steps and a little harder to accomplish.

Native, those things add up and can really slow you down when there's extra mouse clicks and cross screen movements. I'm not crazy about learning a million key comments or modifiers either.

I know several and everyone I learn I do appreciate but I like to leave one have free for Maschine or keys.

if you guys are unhappy with Logic or Cubase you should throw in Maschine to add to your stress!

I love the Maschine package it self, but the sequencer has so many things that needs to be updated! The scene idea the have is great but by default it's not smart.

You create a new group in the same scene(4-8 bar loop) and Maschibe treats it as a new midi channel(which it is) with the new sounds you loaded on it. And it gives you a 1 bar loop by default!

So you much manually change that everytime! To change it, you much first loaded the sound, then mouse click in the piano roll area, then extent it from one bar to desired bar! If you don't what ever you record will loops after one bar!

That's a great feature when needed but Maschine should allow me to do that when I need to do it!

With Logic you do a 1 bar loop then just grab the right upper part of the region and copy or extend it. You can also hit option+ R to repeat.

With Cubase you hold option and drag the upper corner to duplicate a region or control K to repeat. In this case Logic wins hands down.

They all go back and forth it with composing its Logic then Cubase then some where at the very bottom it's Maschine!

Originally Posted by nativeaudio ➡️

Yes, the overall workflow is better - but this isn't true when working with Kontakt/libraries which needs CC automation or articulation control.



Again: agree... that's often true. But after probably thousand of key strokes and mouse clicks in Logic, over a period of many months, I couldn't get things done with my main sampler (Kontakt) which I - as a total Cubase novice - could learn how to use and actually start to use in less than two hours.



Yes and no. More features for the sake of having more features of course has no meaning as such. The - without any discussion - most thing for me is to be able to do what I want to do without having my attention distracted from the process of making music, and from the focus on the musical idea/"feeling"/inspiration etc. And this is where I feel Logic has a main limitation: It's OK if you record some chords via MIDI, and record a melody, and start to mix the whole thing when you're happy* - but there are many bumps in the road if you diver deeper into the music making process.

*That's how I used to work for many years. Luckily, this has changed - because there's something which may happen to music when one starts to look at the composition process not only as "recorded improvisations with some minor edits" but something which may also involve a different approach; an approach which actually may have some similarities with how an architect works.

I believe that in order to develop as a composer/music maker, one needs to challenge oneself, because we all have habits and patterns which actually limits us. I actually think that many good composers - even some very good ones - often simply make pale copies of their own work (or others work, in worst case). So in general, I don't think better EQs or better compressors is what the world needs now, it's better songs. Better compositions.


On a good day, I think all music makers are capable of music which transcends musical "styles". :-) But while I've never written or performed a classical piece (I've worked with almost all other styles), I think there's a lot to learn (for almost all contemporary music makers) from classical music. Maybe something is wrong with me :-) ...but IMO, 95% of the music which is played on radio is rather boring; it's not very original either. And unfortunately, I think DAW makers (and particularly Apple's) strong focus on making it easy, for people who know very little about music, to come up with professional sounding tracks is part of the reason why there are so many tracks out there with some outworn chord progressions and a melody which I feel have been "written" a thousand times before. Or no melody at all.

Originally Posted by smoovemode ➡️

If you have specific needs that one DAW addresses and the other doesn't, I can understand that.

Originally Posted by nativeaudio ➡️

Hi, there's another aspect to this as well, namely the fact (?) that many composer, including well educated/trained classical composers, tend to create copies of music they already have created (or, of course, music which others have created). So it's not only about being a Logic users which daily miss some features Cubase/Sibelius have (features which, btw, aren't only relevant for classical music or use of orchestral libraries), but about missing features which no other DAW has.

One main problem with designing a DAW is that most/many DAWs are designed by people who aren't involved full time in composing. I'm sure many coders and product designers can play/improvise and produce tracks, but IMO Logic is mainly missing out on the kind of features/functionality that an average EMD artist or songwriters who know 7 chords will even think of.

If working with musical ideas above a very simple level, or work with advanced orchestral libraries (involving proper control over articulations and user friendly CC automation), Logic does get in way a lot. So much, that I'm sure it actively contributes to media being filled by a lot more "simple" tunes that it would have been if Logic would have focused more on composition oriented features. (And btw, I have nothing against "simple" songs!).



It certainly does, and this has IMO been going on for a while. Do you think this has anything to do with that DAWs often are being designed by and for people who probably never had created (or want to create) music more complex than simple pop songs with 5-6 chords?

Originally Posted by MusiKLover ➡️

Add Ableton and their Push 2 to the mix and we can really jam out. From my persepcetive, Logic + Ableton might be the best of all worlds, but I can see a case being made for DP too. Ableton is well known for its Audio editing capabilties, and thus a perfect complement to Logic's MIDI engine.

Originally Posted by smoovemode ➡️

today's music has anything to do with the DAWs. However, I believe it's the other way around.

Originally Posted by nativeaudio ➡️

Of course DAW development is influenced by what kind of music most people make. But I simply think that music development and DAW development mutually influences each other. If a DAW has lots of features for people who make clip/loop based music, but lack functionality for people who are into other ways of making music, the DAW will in contribute to even more people making eg loop based music.

Besides, people who can't play an instrument (other than at a very basic level) and/or know nothing about harmony will already find it easer to assemble a bunch of pre-produced grooves and add some very simple, commonly used or even pre-made chord progressions over these loops/clips.

So, if a DAW makes a process which already is simpler than something which eg requires some knowledge about harmony even simpler than it already is, it will most likely contribute to even more such tracks being produced. And while I like all kinds of music, I already think there's too much conformity in the music business. Therefore, I'm happy whenever someone (including DAW makers) contribute to less conformity and more variety.

Originally Posted by classictunz ➡️

Funny you say that because it's very true! And the people that care about music don't really buy it because the new stuff isn't worth the time. So I listen to oldies but goodies 90% of the time.

Originally Posted by smoovemode ➡️

people who actually buy music don't care much about "music". I know it sounds strange but what I'm saying is that they care more about who's making it (is he or she cute) than if it was well composed or written.

Originally Posted by nativeaudio ➡️

Sure, the pop (etc) music industry is superficial in many ways. And I don't expect Logic to write Chopin preludes or play Jarrett solos for me. But what I used to like about Apple, is that they were thinking "different". Jobs used to quoted Henry Ford ("If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses"), and IMO, Ford's view can be transferred to the music market: people shouldn't always be given what they already know they want, but provide something new, refreshing, original. But the way the Logic product designers plan updates, they keep making Logic easier to use for most users (which is brilliant, of course), but they don't make Logic easier to use for many of those who think different (within or outside the hyper-commercial market). So IMO it's not about amateur vs pro. or commercial vs non-commercial, but simply about...making sense.

Why can't we trust that Logic's score editor always show all the notes you just recorded? (Because it doesn't handle accidentals well). Why can't Logic show a simple E major triad, (one the most used chord in commercial music) correctly - even after 2-3 decades of development? Why are they waiting so long with implementing something like Cubase's expression maps? *Lots of * people use orchestral samples, even in plain commercial pop music. But articulation control, an essential part of making/faking orchestral is still in it's childhood in Logic, come 7 years after it was implemented. Why can't I, if I get a good idea when working on a song or just improvise, store that (single or multitrack, MIDI or audio) as an ide in some kind of pool which is accessible from within all songs (without having to save each idea as a separate song which you may not even be able to open in future versions of Logic)? Why can't I simply edit a MIDI note in a piano chord in any editor, and optionally hear all the other notes in that chord as I try different pitches for the one I'm editing?



The features/improvements I mentioned above are basic features which would be welcomed by all kinds of musicians, beginners or oldies.


Apple can afford - and have the talent to - make a DAW which is both nuanced based in simple. They're just not as interested in this as they are in recruiting Pro Tools and GarageBand users.

Originally Posted by nativeaudio ➡️

The features/improvements I mentioned above are basic features which would be welcomed by all kinds of musicians, beginners or oldies.


Apple can afford - and have the talent to - make a DAW which is both nuanced based in simple. They're just not as interested in this as they are in recruiting Pro Tools and GarageBand users.

Originally Posted by nativeaudio ➡️

Or rather... they may be as "nuanced based" (to refer to that slightly vague term again) as Cubase in many areas, but certainly not in some areas which are important for certain kind of tasks which (tasks which both noobs and pros need, across a variety of musical styles).

Originally Posted by Deleted fa7843c ➡️

There's always the possibility that Apple could make a rather bold move and outright takeover financially floundering AVID Technology.