Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

General discussions on songwriting, mixing, music business and other music related topics.
User avatar
jonwright
Junior Member
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:33 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by jonwright » Sun Dec 09, 2018 5:26 pm

mitchiemasha wrote:
Sun Dec 09, 2018 3:04 pm
Jon... I'm going to come and sit in your studio and tell you reasons another studio's better... but not personally, in front of your most prised customers, to them, not to you. It's just not very courteous is it.

We can all make feature requests... and if we have an issue with support, make a complaint.

Everyone goes on about workflow improvements (which yes, are great) yet any time those improvements could of saved... wasted on forums.
I'm not quite sure why you've picked on me specifically, I was contributing my part to a thread on how Cubase could be improved by adopting at certain features of Studio One. I don't see how that's discourteous at all? I would (and do) suggest in other DAW's forums about how they could adopt features from Cubase.

My experience with Steinberg support has been pretty awful (either 6 weeks to respond with an answer that had nothing to do with my question, or another time no answer at all), if it hadn't been I wouldn't need to say anything.
www.jonathanwrightmusic.com
Cubase 10.0.30, Mac OS 10.15.2

User avatar
nshtain
Junior Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 8:08 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by nshtain » Sun Dec 09, 2018 6:37 pm

My experience with Steinberg support has been pretty awful (either 6 weeks to respond with an answer that had nothing to do with my question, or another time no answer at all), if it hadn't been I wouldn't need to say anything.
Same here
| iMac 5k i7 | OS X 10.14.6 | Cubase 10.5 | Genelec 8040a | Sennheiser HD650 | RME Babyface Pro |

Rhino
Member
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 5:20 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Rhino » Sun Dec 09, 2018 7:10 pm

S1's single most killer feature for me is its perfect HW controller mapping, plugin specific - this is professional, totally pragmatic thinking !
I'm not so happy with some other "easy" features, which effectively end up more like dumbing down, just try to do some comping to see what I mean - this kind of simplification would not suit Cubase at all.

Rhino
When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.
(George R.R. Martin)

Funkybot
Member
Posts: 298
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2018 2:08 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Funkybot » Sun Dec 09, 2018 8:20 pm

Rhino wrote:
Sun Dec 09, 2018 7:10 pm
S1's single most killer feature for me is its perfect HW controller mapping, plugin specific - this is professional, totally pragmatic thinking !
Something like this is at the absolute top of my Cubase wishlist. People may not realize how useful this is, but if Steinberg implemented something like S1's remote control, it will blow people's minds. It's like Quick Controls on steroids and so much more effective. Any automation parameter can be mapped to any hardware and those mappings get recalled. Seems so basic.


Funkybot
Member
Posts: 298
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2018 2:08 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Funkybot » Mon Dec 10, 2018 2:44 am

jjjooonnn wrote:
Sun Dec 09, 2018 10:57 pm
Top of my wishlist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-1lX7LURC4&t=4m55s
The Studio One Pattern Editor is very under-developed IMO. It's missing functionality like: note ties, transpose (how do you miss those two in the initial requirements phase), colorizing notes by velocity, and there's no ability to launch and trigger patterns via MIDI...

I'm not saying a basic step sequencer wouldn't be nice in Cubase, but I hope they'd build it better than Studio One's first attempt.

Niles
Member
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 9:41 am

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Niles » Mon Dec 10, 2018 10:51 am

smapmap wrote:
Fri Dec 07, 2018 5:01 pm
When I select an arrange part, Studio One automatically places cycle markers in place. Thank you!! When you move the arranger part everything moves with it. No cutting required.
Arranger.PNG
For the purpose of arrangement I personally think Cubase's Arranger playlist runs circles around Studio One's destructive Arranger track. Simply because you can try different arrangements, easily reuse (parts of) sections without needing to actually duplicate, it's non destructive unless you Flatten and the options are way more powerful than what can be done in Studio One with the arrangement. The only thing the arrangement track in Studio One is useful for, is dragging a section of the song from A to B without needing to select all items in the section range. But a KC for Select > In loop works too in Cubase.
Also Cubase's alternative on Loop follows selection is Cycle follows range selection, which basically does the same, but a tad less elegant.
Funkybot wrote:
Sun Dec 09, 2018 8:20 pm
Rhino wrote:
Sun Dec 09, 2018 7:10 pm
S1's single most killer feature for me is its perfect HW controller mapping, plugin specific - this is professional, totally pragmatic thinking !
Something like this is at the absolute top of my Cubase wishlist. People may not realize how useful this is, but if Steinberg implemented something like S1's remote control, it will blow people's minds. It's like Quick Controls on steroids and so much more effective. Any automation parameter can be mapped to any hardware and those mappings get recalled. Seems so basic.
Yes, Control Link is an absolute killer feature. It's more than only mapping external controls to VST parameters. It's a layer between incoming MIDI and automation and therefor it's possible to record automation directly in MIDI parts just like you traditionally would do with MIDI controller data. Any VST parameter that is exposed to the automation system can be temporary or permanently linked to your external controller(s) and recorded in parts. Next to that you can simply drag any VST parameter directly to the musical editor controller lane for manual edits. Since automation data is sample accurate now in Studio One version 4, it's super powerful and a joy to work with compared to Steinberg's Quick Control solution (not sure if I can call it a solution even).
Funkybot wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 2:44 am
The Studio One Pattern Editor is very under-developed IMO. It's missing functionality like: note ties, transpose (how do you miss those two in the initial requirements phase), colorizing notes by velocity, and there's no ability to launch and trigger patterns via MIDI...
Agree. It can't be really taken serious without the aforementioned features, but also the lack of basic things like delay or shift for kit pieces and steps is a big miss. No way to become Funky with that mr. Bot. ;) Not even talking about the general concept of how patterns are incorporated. Generally the power of patterns is that one can trigger them in a non linear fashion (Note-FX pattern player would have been much better for that).
Unfortunately the Patterns are illustrative for how PreSonus develops things lately. They sketch out nice ideas, but don't go really in depth to make them useful to seasoned musicians and producers, let alone stand out to the rest. Stuff like Arranger track, Low Latency Instruments, Chord track, Patterns, Drum editor, Note-FX, Mix-FX etc. all sound nice in the testimonials by all those Grammy nominated cool guys and girls, but in practice, when you work with them, they all are a bit.... meh.
Funkybot wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 2:44 am
I'm not saying a basic step sequencer wouldn't be nice in Cubase, but I hope they'd build it better than Studio One's first attempt.
Steinberg's first attempt (MIDI Inserts | Beat Designer) isn't a great one either. :)

Rhino
Member
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 5:20 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Rhino » Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:32 pm

hello Niles,
great to see you chime in !
yours and Lawrence's workflow centric posts always were the highlights for me, over @ Presonus.
cheers,
Rhino
When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.
(George R.R. Martin)

User avatar
mozizo
Senior Member
Posts: 1687
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by mozizo » Wed Dec 12, 2018 11:25 am

Funkybot wrote:
Sun Dec 09, 2018 8:20 pm
Rhino wrote:
Sun Dec 09, 2018 7:10 pm
S1's single most killer feature for me is its perfect HW controller mapping, plugin specific - this is professional, totally pragmatic thinking !
Something like this is at the absolute top of my Cubase wishlist. People may not realize how useful this is, but if Steinberg implemented something like S1's remote control, it will blow people's minds. It's like Quick Controls on steroids and so much more effective. Any automation parameter can be mapped to any hardware and those mappings get recalled. Seems so basic.
wow.. thats how a controller should be used,just saw a movie on S1 control link,needs some work to do to assign HW to plugins parameter,and you can control your plugins so easily when in focus.
cubase Pro 9.5 64bit ,halion 6 GA4 HS2,HSO,Dark planet,neosoul keys.
Sony vaioF13 i7 CPU win10 redstone 64bit 8gb
Steinberg MR816csx ,MR816x ,UR44 ,CC121
Motif es6-Kawai Mp4-Korg PA4X-MOXF8
cubasis,cubase ic pro

Niles
Member
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 9:41 am

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Niles » Wed Dec 12, 2018 8:30 pm

Rhino wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:32 pm
yours and Lawrence's workflow centric posts always were the highlights for me, over @ Presonus.
Thanks Rhino!
I'm glad more users with Studio One experience plead for something similar as Control Link in Cubase. It's hard to convince Cubase users who use the traditional Generic Remote method how brilliant and powerful Control Link is compared to what they use now. ;)

cparmerlee
Member
Posts: 673
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:32 pm
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by cparmerlee » Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:17 pm

Here's a video that describes the Control Link in detail
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MG76UEQqcuI
Dorico 3, Cubase 10.5, Windows 10, Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 audio i/f
http://sonocrafters.com/

Rhino
Member
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 5:20 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Rhino » Thu Dec 13, 2018 9:04 am

Niles wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 8:30 pm
Rhino wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:32 pm
yours and Lawrence's workflow centric posts always were the highlights for me, over @ Presonus.
Thanks Rhino!
I'm glad more users with Studio One experience plead for something similar as Control Link in Cubase. It's hard to convince Cubase users who use the traditional Generic Remote method how brilliant and powerful Control Link is compared to what they use now. ;)
I'm sure it would be possible to marry Control Link's general concept with those Generic Remote features that add extra functionality.
off the top of my head, one huge GR advantage atm is its independence of window focus, which could be implemented as a checkbox in the mapping dialog.
There are certain scenarios where this would be preferable to plugin specific mapping.
but all in all, a modern mapping system would certainly look spectacular in the next "what's new" video. 8-)
just make it work with both VST2 & 3, like in S1 :!:
Rhino
When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.
(George R.R. Martin)

Funkybot
Member
Posts: 298
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2018 2:08 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Funkybot » Thu Dec 13, 2018 1:23 pm

Rhino wrote:
Thu Dec 13, 2018 9:04 am
Niles wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 8:30 pm
Rhino wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:32 pm
yours and Lawrence's workflow centric posts always were the highlights for me, over @ Presonus.
Thanks Rhino!
I'm glad more users with Studio One experience plead for something similar as Control Link in Cubase. It's hard to convince Cubase users who use the traditional Generic Remote method how brilliant and powerful Control Link is compared to what they use now. ;)
I'm sure it would be possible to marry Control Link's general concept with those Generic Remote features that add extra functionality.
off the top of my head, one huge GR advantage atm is its independence of window focus, which could be implemented as a checkbox in the mapping dialog.
There are certain scenarios where this would be preferable to plugin specific mapping.
but all in all, a modern mapping system would certainly look spectacular in the next "what's new" video. 8-)
just make it work with both VST2 & 3, like in S1 :!:
Rhino
Control Link already has a Global Focus mode in addition to the Plug-in Focus mode. But yeah, totally agree that this could be built on top of the Generic Remote with some tweaks. Would be a killer addition to Cubase.

Rhino
Member
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 5:20 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Rhino » Thu Dec 13, 2018 7:16 pm

Funkybot wrote:
Thu Dec 13, 2018 1:23 pm
Control Link already has a Global Focus mode in addition to the Plug-in Focus mode. But yeah, totally agree that this could be built on top of the Generic Remote with some tweaks. Would be a killer addition to Cubase.
you're right about that, I forgot, my bad.
I've only been using S1 as sketch pad on the home PC for a while, but during the year I tried so hard to fathom out Reaper and S1 as potential Cubase replacements, S1's Control Link and Reaper's incredible action system were the two killer features that impressed me most.
I was this close to switching to S1 permanently, what held me back were 3 intolerable gotchas :
  • the lack of a drum editor - I use this a lot
  • misdesigned macro undo, undoing step by step individually :roll:
  • most of all, the messed-up comping- and lanes concept, totally bananas :twisted:
so in this lose-lose situation I went back to Cubase and learned to use AHK to repair the faulty window focus system, mostly successful, but an awful lot of work, which should not be necessary in a host with "Pro" in the name.
but I still watch S1 from the sidelines, ready to re-evaluate.
1 out of 3 has since been fixed, the missing drum editor ...
ymmv,
Rhino
When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.
(George R.R. Martin)

Niles
Member
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 9:41 am

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Niles » Thu Dec 13, 2018 10:43 pm

Rhino wrote:
Thu Dec 13, 2018 7:16 pm
1 out of 3 has since been fixed, the missing drum editor ...
I was not impressed by the Studio One drum editor. I wonder what you think of it.

Rhino
Member
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 5:20 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Rhino » Fri Dec 14, 2018 10:54 am

Niles wrote:
Thu Dec 13, 2018 10:43 pm
Rhino wrote:
Thu Dec 13, 2018 7:16 pm
1 out of 3 has since been fixed, the missing drum editor ...
I was not impressed by the Studio One drum editor. I wonder what you think of it.
only going by videos (still @ 3.5) - but that's my impression, as well.
so what - it's a start, long overdue ...
afaics it still lacks lots of refinement, e.g. no individual grid per note, you can make the lanes higher but the note name font remains painfully small, and so on.
does it read drm ?
does the tool have modifiers like in Cubase ?
maybe an option, but can you colour all notes in a lane instead of velocity coding ?
or, even better, apply a very light colour overlay to every lane, based on the header ?
I'm a sucker for quick overview ...

could be just me, but I enjoy Toontrack's Superior 3 drum editor a lot - mostly on par with Cubase already, for my needs at least.
pretty impressive for a 1st try ! :geek:
their "folder per drum" concept is pure genius :
closed, you see all HiHat events (e.g.) on a single lane - quick overview.
but open the folder, and you have all individual HiHat lanes, still neatly grouped together, but separately editable.
that's what I call a real workflow advantage ! 8-)

imho, ymmv,
Rhino
When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.
(George R.R. Martin)

Niles
Member
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 9:41 am

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Niles » Sun Dec 16, 2018 5:27 pm

Rhino wrote:
Fri Dec 14, 2018 10:54 am
afaics it still lacks lots of refinement, e.g. no individual grid per note,
Yeah, huge miss when creating a drum editor. :shock:
Rhino wrote:
Fri Dec 14, 2018 10:54 am
does it read drm ?
No.
Rhino wrote:
Fri Dec 14, 2018 10:54 am
does the tool have modifiers like in Cubase ?
Not sure what you mean. But it has basic start, length, end, pitch, velocity modifiers like the traditional Melodic editor.
Rhino wrote:
Fri Dec 14, 2018 10:54 am
maybe an option, but can you colour all notes in a lane instead of velocity coding ?
Yes, you can color by pitch.
Rhino wrote:
Fri Dec 14, 2018 10:54 am
or, even better, apply a very light colour overlay to every lane, based on the header ?
No, they didn't managed to do that.

Rhino
Member
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 5:20 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Rhino » Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:50 am

thanks for all that info, Niles !
Niles wrote:
Sun Dec 16, 2018 5:27 pm
Rhino wrote:
Fri Dec 14, 2018 10:54 am
does the tool have modifiers like in Cubase ?
Not sure what you mean. But it has basic start, length, end, pitch, velocity modifiers like the traditional Melodic editor.
I was talking about the temporary tool modifiers - one of Cubase's best features imho.
mind you, not nearly enough yet, but at least we got (arrow tool active) :
- alt > drum stick (up/down = velocity while inserting)
- alt+shift > copy
- ctrl > restrict movement to y-axis, even without snap engaged
probably forgot something, not at the DAW atm
for nudging or changing pitch/instrument I use KCs, of course.
in the project window we have more tool modifiers - still lots of room for smart tool improvement (e.g. with the comp tool - no delete ? seriously ?)
Niles wrote:
Sun Dec 16, 2018 5:27 pm
But it has basic start, length, end, pitch, velocity modifiers like the traditional Melodic editor.
except for velocity changes "at the note", which I would indeed like to have in Cubase too (not only while inserting), I don't see much use for these with drum events atm, which are fixed pitch, one shots by definition, am I missing something ?

summing it up, I would not love S1's current drum editor, but it would not keep me from switching anymore.
so from my "top 3 S1 no-no list" - one down, two to go (comping, macro undo).
that said, I would much prefer Steinberg implementing "control link" functionality, fixing focus, workspaces and missing KCs, rather than S1 playing catch up - subjective, I know ...
cheers,
Rhino
When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.
(George R.R. Martin)

Niles
Member
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 9:41 am

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Niles » Mon Dec 17, 2018 12:07 pm

Rhino wrote:
Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:50 am
that said, I would much prefer Steinberg implementing "control link" functionality, fixing focus, workspaces and missing KCs, rather than S1 playing catch up - subjective, I know ...
I hear you loud and clear. For the actual composing I'm still in Cubase. Missing showstoppers for me are Retrospective record, local undo per event and MIDI sends.

Rhino
Member
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 5:20 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Rhino » Wed Dec 19, 2018 1:29 am

Niles wrote:
Mon Dec 17, 2018 12:07 pm
Rhino wrote:
Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:50 am
that said, I would much prefer Steinberg implementing "control link" functionality, fixing focus, workspaces and missing KCs, rather than S1 playing catch up - subjective, I know ...
I hear you loud and clear. For the actual composing I'm still in Cubase. Missing showstoppers for me are Retrospective record, local undo per event and MIDI sends.
yup, makes total sense.
Rhino
When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.
(George R.R. Martin)

User avatar
mozizo
Senior Member
Posts: 1687
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by mozizo » Thu Dec 20, 2018 3:43 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzrEeWNVVgE
this guy made some scripting for controlling plugins with "regular"midi controllers.
wish cubase had built in controller capabilities like that',not every musician/producer is a computer scientist
cubase Pro 9.5 64bit ,halion 6 GA4 HS2,HSO,Dark planet,neosoul keys.
Sony vaioF13 i7 CPU win10 redstone 64bit 8gb
Steinberg MR816csx ,MR816x ,UR44 ,CC121
Motif es6-Kawai Mp4-Korg PA4X-MOXF8
cubasis,cubase ic pro

Rhino
Member
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 5:20 am
Contact:

Re: Why I love Studio One's workflow and UI decisions - what Steinberg could do better

Post by Rhino » Thu Dec 20, 2018 8:23 pm

mozizo wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 3:43 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzrEeWNVVgE
this guy made some scripting for controlling plugins with "regular"midi controllers.
wish cubase had built in controller capabilities like that',not every musician/producer is a computer scientist
thanks for this, talking about a mad genius ... :ugeek:
but even if he gave you his scripts and you had the same hardware, it would require way too much thinking in everyday use.
that guy lives and breathes in Mackie/HUI protocol, unless you reach that level yourself, it will always feel awkward in use.
hell, even controlling plugins with the original Mackie Control is a pain ... :roll:
the beauty of S1's Control Link is that after you mapped your plugin(s) once, it becomes totally transparent in use.
wysiwyg, you always control what you see on the screen, reach for the knobs and tweak away.
VST2, VST3 - doesn't matter, everything works the same.
that is brilliant design.
ymmv, but I doubt it,
lol,
Rhino

btw, I have cooked up my personal solution, using Generic Remote, a 3rd party subhost and a bit of AHK - serves me well, but it's way too specific and convoluted to set up to be of much use for anybody else, unfortunately.
this is pure native host functionality, it needs to be part of the program to help everybody.
When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.
(George R.R. Martin)

Post Reply

Return to “Steinberg Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: SoundAvenue and 5 guests