Search found 23 matches

Return

[FR] My alternative project view [jpg]

My alternative project view, not perfect but interesting IMO.

I think I've seen this before in another DAW ;)
by Tomek
Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:51 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Score: how to get rid of transpose text?

(I can't really help at the moment.. I'm pretty sure I've seen that myself, but I cannot remember in what circumstances.. anyways, it was before Cubase 7.5).
I've just tried a mock-up of what you describe (including having bar handles visible etc.), and I don't get that text here.

EDIT.. just seen Steve's post.. was about to say the same thing ;).

Would it be possible to post the .cpr.. see what it looks like here?
by vic_france
Sun Dec 29, 2013 3:05 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Chord (track) Chord editor: Add enharmonic shifting drop

Some kind of switch might be helpful, but note that you can type the chord in by hitting the tab key, and Cubase will spell the symbol accordingly, within the limits of what Cubase knows. (also note that if you hit tab again, a new chord will be added and selected for editing.)
by SteveInChicago
Sun Jan 05, 2014 4:09 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: USB madness (a plea for a software dongle)

USB, I've often experienced a dead eLicense dongle (i.e. inactive) when the program hangs on exit.

Sounds to me like a faulty dongle (or a bad usb chip, unlikely if you get it on a few machines). Could Steinberg have had a bad batch of dongles leading to some users having the crash on exit problem? I'd swap your present one out and see. I've never seen the problem and my dongle's over ten years old. Maybe it's the new short ones.

Dirty connections, I clean all PCI and USB contacts every 3 years and have managed to revive most of the PCI/USB cards plugs that I have believed to be faulty, there are 15 years since the USB key was introduced therefore a number of old keys around that have seriusly oxidising contacts
by Reiknir
Thu Jan 16, 2014 5:13 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: [POLL] Are you using media bay ?

The first few times I tried using MB... I had to search for... THE SEARCH FIELD. Why couldn't they just do like everyone else: have a clearly labelled search field with a [search] button?

SB just -insists- on lots of cryptic/hidden/inconsistent/ambiguous visual doodads. And that MATTERS. You've got a UI that's about as complex as flying a 747... literally -hundreds- of lights/switches/etc. Why make it -harder-? Just use standard conventions. Why make people learn -your- new UI paradigm? It's what a teacher of mine once called 'arrogant design'. You place your 'vision' over what users will immediately grasp.
by suntower
Wed Aug 13, 2014 7:19 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Anyone using a touchscreen with C7.5?

i'm using a touscreen as a second screen and assign the mixer to it.
works like a charm and makes a big difference in workflow.
watch out for certain types of touchscreens (as the one i bought :-) ) for live because depending on the type of touch screen you will use they can be very sensitive to environmental interaction :-)
(fly on the screen issue with certain types of touchscreens, interaction with laser, interaction with smokemachines, ...°

look here for more info: http://www.eizo.com/global/library/basics/basic_understanding_of_touch_panel/

and here (a bit strange site-layout but reasonable good info) : http://www.dmccoltd.com/english/museum/touchscreens/technologies/FeaturesInfrared.asp

kind regards
R.
by roel
Fri Mar 07, 2014 11:38 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Anyone using a touchscreen with C7.5?

I have three Dell ST2340T 23.5" touchscreens, though I have disconnected the one in the studio since I got Cubase iC Pro for our Samsung Note 3s. I still might use it to mirror the Note showing the time location, so I can read it without my reading glasses when doing YouTubes, though it doesn't need touch for that.

Cubase makes NO concessions to touch at all, in that like any other Windows program on a touchscreen, touch is basically the same as clicking with a mouse. There are no gestures, and no multi-touch support, so you cannot do things like manually multi-channel mix on-the-fly!

The other thing is that Cubase does not have touch-friendly versions of controls, so things like scrub, which would be just as useful as hardware controllers if the controls were the same size as on them, is even more fiddly than the tiny controls are to use with a mouse.

That being said, it is easier to just reach out and touch a control when your hands are full with an instrument, than reach for a mouse.

I suspect that unless OSX goes touch, Cubase may be hamstrung, because Windows versions, if taking advantage of the opportunity to have more touch options (gestures and versions of controls), could really depart from the common code base to more than SB may be comfortable with.


Oh, and ignore those -- who don't have touchscreens -- that display huge paranoia about Cubase turning into a giant iPad DAW. Touch is really just another way to interact with Cubase, and like any other input medium, there are situations for which it is good, and others for which it is poor, but it would be helped a lot if SB catered more for touch.

Search the forums for other threads about touch.
by Patanjali
Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:18 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Benefit of recording 32-bit audio?

In fact, it's a common myth that 24 bit "sounds better" than 16 bit. 24 bit simply allows for more headroom so engineers can record incoming signals at lower levels and still have a nice signal-to-noise ratio. Previously, with older 16-bit methods, you'd have to ride the signal pretty high and risk "digital clipping." I point this out, as this prevailing myth is likely what lead the OP to ask his question in the first place. Cheers.
This is the absolutely most common myth when it comes to Digital Audio. Equally frustrating every time this topic shows up.

My background on the topic is among things like, sitting in with Tomas Lund and TC. Electronic in seminar about Digital Audio, Converters, Bit Rates and Sample Rates, Limiting and the Loudness War etc. In addition, I have a formal education in sound technical engineering (mid to late 90's) and thousands of pages read on the topic (Lavry, Aldrich +++).

The hardest part is to tell this as simple as possible, so I will try a go on the Bit Rate and Dithering part first:

Higher bit depth gives greater precision in the amplitude domain = WRONG. 1st big misunderstanding across the internet.

As easy explained as possible:

0 dBFS in 24 bit = 0dBFS in 16 bit, No difference there.

1 bit = 6dB of Dynamic range.

16 bit x 6 = 96 dB of dynamic range (from 0 dBFS to -96 dBFS)

24 bit x 6 = 144 dB of Dynamic range (from 0 dBFS to -144 dBFS)

Try to think from the top and downwards. You have to think from the top and downwards.

The signal recorded in the top 96 dB range is exactly the same.

At -96 dBFS is were the difference comes in to play:

When your signal drops below -96 dB, the 16 bit will chop off the signal (the last bit will shut down).
The 24 bit signal has 48 dB's of dynamic range left (for reverb-tail and other low level signals).

Here is also when Dithering comes into play:

When reducing the bitdepth to 16 bit from 24 bit, the dithering process will add some low level noise in the range that our hearing is least sensitive.
This is so to be able to keep the 16th bit (from top down) "open" as long as possible, to keep as much of reverb-tails and other low level details as possible (explained in the esiest way i could).

Conclusion:
If your signal has a Dynamic range of anything less than 96 dB's and is located in the top 96 dB range, the recorded signal will be exactly the same.

The biggest misunderstanding is that the 24 bit scale has lesser "space" between measuring points (i.e.better). This is simply not true.
1 bit has only two values, on or off (1 or 0). Do the math and learn to think from the top and downwards.

That was the BIT part.
2x2x2x2x2......... should be such an easy math. Don't make it harder than it is.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to the 32-bit part: As all audio and real time processing (calculations - it's just math) is executed in the 32-bit floating point realm, it doesn't matter what Bit Size your source files are.

The only advantage of recording 32- bit files comes to play if you are doing a LOT of offline processing (post recording). That will make sure that rounding errors, after the offline processing/calculations, are "added" to the files at a level way way below human hearing.

My challenge to people who are gonna discuss Digital Audio (without wasting time, beleiving in Internet Myths), is to read all you can from reliable sources (google Nika Aldrich and Dan Lavry first). Listen to developers at big name Audio equipment manufacturers, not their marketing departement.

I will leave you with the best (and simplest) Digital Audio Myth breaking video there is (from bigger nerds than me):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM&feature=youtu.be

Happy myth busting.
by iBM
Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:36 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Benefit of recording 32-bit audio?

If your A/D convertor in your interface is 24bit and as such can only deliver 24bit digital data, what is the use of padding the signal with nothing when storing it in your computer? Cubase already works internally on 32bit float, regardless of what the bit depth of your recordings is.
Do any of you know if there are interfaces available that convert at 32bit?
Jan
32 bit floating adds NO more bits to 24 bit integers. In fact, below 0db, there is NO practical difference.

The ONLY advantage of 32 bit floating is that it is impervious to overloads, which helps DAWs cope with a wider range of users as gain staging is not as critical.
by Patanjali
Thu Mar 27, 2014 4:26 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Score & Midi Guitar Questions

Aloha guys,

I have always used Roland pitch to voltage convertors. GR50/GR33/GR55.

In order for me to 'ride this bucking bronco' (using this method) several things work for me.

1- Use MIDI 'Mono Mode'
This basically turns your ax into six separate MIDI streams with six diff 'bend rates'.
Record each on a separate MIDI channel and track in Cubase.

2-Use appropriate 'bend rate' settings.
Most keyboards/sound modules/synth plugs etc come with
bend rates set to +- 2. This is not good for MIDI guitar use.
Bend Rates need to be set to at least +- 12. (My GR 55 uses +- 24)
Thank you Warren Sirota.

3- I don't want to hit this one too hard.
IMHO to really use MIDI guitar properly you have to be a 'killer' player.
There is no other way around this.
For simple lines or pads, OK not a lot of chops are needed.
But to really play this thang, clean MIDI 'Note on' and 'Note off' info is required.

Ironically players of the two styles of guit playing that work well with a MIDI guitar
(classical and jazz) have the least interest in sounding like other instruments. Ha!

4-Scoring.
Once the performance (and editing is done) I often merge
the six MIDI streams into one and scoring happens as normal.

I only score for live musicians/choirs etc so once the work
is printed (and unless changes are needed),
I usually never go back into that project in Cubase again.

Tip:
5-Really get to know the 'List Editor' and the 'Logical Editor'.
These are your friends when it come to using MIDI guitar.

Example: I truly believe Steiny put the 'Delete Short Notes' preset
in Cubase just for MIDI guitarists. It is a Godsend when using MIDI guitar.

A lil story from another post:
http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=209&t=12388&hilit=+midi+guitar

BTW here is a kool lil MIDI guitar trick.
Using Mono Mode, playing a nylon string guitar patch in Cubase with six different sound modules each routed to
one speaker in a 5.1 sound system.
If you sit in the middle of all the speakers and play, the perspective is like you are right in the sound hole
of the guitar.

Try that keyboardist! :)

Good Luck!
{'-'}
by curteye
Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:53 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: How to insert one of the new synths into a program?

a quick search in the mediabay will learn you that for every engine in halion there is an init preset provided.
in the middle of the mediabay there is a small grey (or blue) field. this is the search field.
type in init and there you go.

kind regards,
R.
by roel
Fri Apr 04, 2014 12:10 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Can you Change the Tuning of Cubase?

Kontakt sampler (through 3rd party software, and Windows only )
Once again Steve doesn't know what he's rambling about. Kontakt has always been cross-platform Win and Mac.

Also take a look at the Micro Tuner MIDI effect. Page 169 in the "Plug-in Reference" PDF.

:oops: Steve is one of the helpful and with lot of knowledge in cubase ,daws and music in general in this forum. Also he is one of the polite and kind man in here, maybe you"svenne" wrote it in rush ,but it is insulting somehow and Embarrassing !!!
by mozizo
Tue Jun 03, 2014 9:47 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Supreme Requests

Any modern musician will like to walk into a real-world recording studio and see a nice big analog mixing desk, like a Neve or SSL or Trident etc, right? So, we are simply asking for this to be built-in, integrated as part of Cubase; who would take issue with such a request? This is the holy grail, the ideal scenario, this would be the pinnacle of modern DAWs to offer us such a working space with the sound of 'real' big-name analog mixing desks and master-bus compressors and tape saturation etc, and i'm not the only one that feels this way, apparently Cakewalk agree, Sonar X3 has provided this in their DAW.

They call it the "Pro Channel" and it's built into Sonar as the central component of the mixing console, offering THREE emulations of famed big name classic analog mixing desks, and they even add emulations of classic hardware EQs, compressors and tape saturation as part of the package; surely this should be the aim for the best modern DAW scenario, to have such options 'built-in', meaning we never need to go to a real-world expensive recoding studio again just to get 'That sound'.
The Slate-Digital emulations are authentic, but they are 'plugins', i'm requesting that we have these algorithms built-in to Cubase's mixer as if we have three very expensive analog mixing desks at our disposal, this would be real nice to have.
What you are describing is precisely a 'niche' DAW. What you get what you add this kind of things you lose somewhere else. There are other DAW's that are already dedicated to such tasks, I don't think it is right for Cubase.

There is no comparison between real studio desks and a DAW, that is a apples to oranges comparison and any real Pro will recognize the attributes of every single piece of gear or software and know what each one is good for. Any piece of gear no matter how good or how bad is more or less exceptional at one particular thing. DAW that support 3rd parties are good at being extremely versatile, because of what 3rd parties have to offer.

Anyways, Cubase already has some emulation built in and I'm sure they will expand on that in the future but already so many users do NOT use the built in emulation in favor of customized plugins and workflow.

I wouldn't mind some more filter eq options myself but I don't want the whole Mix Console to be configured for the 'built-in' options.
by beerbong
Sat Jun 07, 2014 10:38 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Supreme Requests

Cubase already has all the capabilities any producer could ever need or want! There is nowhere to proceed from here on in except to provide more and better quality plugins and maybe some 'minor' tweaks to the interface. Tell me who is going to pay a significant upgrade price just for an interface tweak? Exactly what 'practical' feature is Cubase missing? None! The logical conclusion from here is simply to provide more plugins and of higher quality, or else why should anyone lay-down more money for any future upgrade of Cubase?

Cubase lacking bounce-in-place is simply unforgivable! For crying-out-loud, it's 2014, what's going on over there Steinberg????? I do bounce-in-place every day in Presonus Studio One!

Hmmm ... :?

I'll crawl back under the bridge now.

:mrgreen:
by Scab Pickens
Tue Jun 10, 2014 2:40 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Multiple Arranger Tracks

While I can see that it might be easier to build different Arrangements, having a separate Arranger Track (or at least, have "Versions" of the current one) for each arrangement, it is still possible to do so, even if the individual Arrangement Parts overlap, just by creating multiple Arranger Chains .
by vic_france
Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:40 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: SSD for project files - worthwhile?

I recently migrated to a new PC with an SSD system disk. Being able to boot up so fast is great, but it makes me notice even more how long it takes to open a Cubase project. I'm thinking of getting another small SSD to store just a few "currently in progress" projects. So a question for anyone with experience on this front - Is this a worthwhile thing to do, or will I not see that dramatic an improvement?
Time to load Cubase is dependent upon the OS drive transfer rate. If you leave all you VST plugins on the OS drive as well, the scanning of those will also be dependent upon that drive.

Cubase itself does not appear to load up complete files at startup, except perhaps for the small image files so that it can display the waveforms. The audio files themselves will probably not be loaded at all, but just the blocks immediately required once playing. Seek and transfer times of the project drive will play a big part in responsiveness when dealing with lots of tracks.

MIDI is included in the project file, which is small enough to be fully loaded.

We have been all SSD for the last few years, but when I got tired of keeping only current projects on the projects drive, and SSDs were now cheaper, I went for a Samsung 250GB 840 EVO to store them all on a dedicated drive, along the VST(i) dlls, rather than a common data drive, which is now a smaller SATA II drive holding less timing-dependant stuff like documents, etc.
by Patanjali
Sat Jul 05, 2014 5:04 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Essential EDM plugins

Threads like this make me weep for the future of humanity.
by JMCecil
Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:03 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Instrument Note Range Indication

However after looking at the manual I don't see how to set this up. Can I buy a vowel? :?
A couple of things to set up..
1) Preferences>Scores>Editing. Make sure that the bottom item, "Hide Notes beyond Limits" is un checked.
While in Preferences, you might also like to visit Scores>Colors for Additional Meanings, and customize the color for "Hidden Notes" ;).
2) If the MIDI/Instrument track in question doesn't already have a Part on it, create one (you can delete it later, if you need to).
Open the Part in the Score Editor, then open the Score Settings dialog>Staff pane>Options subpane, and set Low and High Note limits, at the bottom of the pane. Hit "Apply".
by vic_france
Thu Jul 31, 2014 7:32 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Programming groups in key editor

But why not let the Quantize Setup dialog do all that for you? (it's really very easy ;) )...
Let's take two examples, using quintolets..
Open the Quantize Panel (or the Quantize pane in the MIDi Editor's Inspector)

1) 5 beats in a bar of 4/4..
Set Grid to "1/1"
Set Tuplet to "5"
Done! :)

2) Quarter-note subdivided into quintolets..
Set Grid to "1/4"
Set Tuplet to "5"
Done! :)

.. and you can even use the "Randomize" function in that same panel ;).
by vic_france
Tue Aug 12, 2014 12:35 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: How to inhibit display of keyswitch text in Score Editor

I'm using an Expression Map with a bunch of Key-switches setup as different text articulations. When I open the part in the Score Editor I see the articulation text each time it is used. Is there anyway to hide this text since it has no real meaning in the score (they are just changing vowel sounds on a VSTi)? I realize I can select each bit of the text and hide it using the score menu, but that would become tedious busy-work real fast. I'm hoping there is something akin to "Hide Pedal Markers" in Score Settings - but I can't find anything.
The best I can think of is to Color Expression Map events, in Preferences>Scores>"Colors for Additional Meanings", and set it to white (not ideal, if you are using one of the "patterned" paper styles, but certainly less obtrusive ;) )

When creating an expression map I accidentally left some set to Attribute instead of Direction. Later I tried to delete those articulation instances in the Key editor. But every time I deleted the articulation the note it was attached to also go deleted. I got out of it by reverting on my project. But for the future I'm curious how to remove the association between an Attribute Articulation and a note.
Strangely enough, instead of using the Eraser tool (which, as you have noticed, deletes the note along with the Attribute), just click a 2nd time on the Attribute, using the Pencil tool again.)
by vic_france
Fri Aug 15, 2014 12:55 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Please update the Audio-engine to x64bit double precisio

The mathematics in this video is ridiculous.

All this guy demonstrates is how easy it is to conflate floating point inaccuracies to confuse the audience with his marketing talk.

I'm all for getting the best stuff, etc... but double precision mixing is not necessary. Let me explain why:

1. If a 24 bit recording is converted to 32 bit float, which is a meaningful and very well understood operation, the fraction part is 23 bits PLUS one bit of sign, which gives us 138 dB of SNR
2. If (and I suspect that those errors really matter, because there is also reconstructive surgery aka "low pass filtering" at the end of the DAC chain involved) an additional error of, say, 12 dB (and the video only speaks of 6 dB of error!) is introduced, it still doesn't matter, because a) we will never use signals that loud in real life without having our ear drums rupture and b) should we do that because we go crazy, we can still dither

I, therefore, call double precision mixing pointless. Seriously, I'm all for the best in sound and the most creative music and all that, but from a mathematical point of view, there is no point whatsoever in going that crazy.

If the SONAR mixer sounds better (which I can't check myself), I believe it has to do with additional processing, NOT with the bit depth.
by TheNavigator
Thu Jul 17, 2014 3:12 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Articulations not playing correct when exporting audio

Do you have the 'Real Time' option set for Export Audio? Whatever you have it set as, try the other option. I seem to recall having a similar issue and switching from one to the other did the trick. It was counter-intuitive, but it worked.
by suntower
Tue Sep 16, 2014 6:01 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic