Is Mac better than PC for Cubase and other music stuff?
Gwydion Elderwyn
specific in what I'm asking.
I have been a PC user since the very first PC in 1981 - that's just the way
my career and my opportunities have gone. Consequently I'm very experienced
with PCs, DOS and Windows. I've always been able to keep things running,
despite Windows' "personality", but in the last six months I've experienced
such severe frustration with Cubase that for the first time I have seriously
considered whether I should switch to Mac.
I have VST5.1 (and yes, it's legal) running under XP, but prior to that I
ran 2K. The other critical tool in my arsenal is Reason. I have a few VSTs
I like but I could live without them if I had to.
The thing is, Cubase under Windows is just so unstable and tempremental. I
have had it crash in just about every way you can imagine - freezing,
vanishing, rebooting the machine, slowing to a crawl - etc, etc. I don't
even have to be doing anything complex - sometimes it will do this for the
first thing I do - opening rewire, or adding a vst instrument (no, it's not
specific to a certain instrument), etc. Other times it will seem OK for an
hour or so and then just totally lose the plot.
I have a modern machine, tons of memory, all the right drivers, a system
stripped to the bare essentials, plus I keep it in shape with registry
checkers, disk defrags and all those other lovely tools that, for Cubase,
appear to make no damn difference whatsoever.
Cakewalk will run all day and all night with no hiccups. So will Reason ...
Reaktor ... Rebirth ... Sound Forge ... Acid Pro ... it's only Cubase that
craps out on a regular basis.
Yet, from every direction I'm told that Cubase is the best and Cubase is the
choice of professionals etc etc. So I start to wonder - are these people
running it on Mac? Is that why they seem to think it's so wonderful when I
think it sucks? And why is it that Macs are often touted as the right
platform for music professionals, anyway?
Now, as I said right at the start, I don't want this to degenerate into a
general Mac vs. PC war. There's only two things I really do with my PC;
surf the net and make music. All I want to be able to do is run is Cubase
and Reason, plus read my email, newsgroups and surf the net. The only
special feature is I need an ultra-low latency sound card because I like to
play my instruments "live" when composing.
So ... should I go down the Mac path? If so, what model/processor/RAM?
What OS? I'd love to just buy the latest and greatest but I'm not rich -
I'm looking more for suggestions in the middle price bracket - serious, but
not professional level, if you like.
radiospace
<gwy...@elderwyn.com> wrote:
>The thing is, Cubase under Windows is just so unstable and tempremental.
>
>Cakewalk will run all day and all night with no hiccups.
>
>Yet, from every direction I'm told that Cubase is the best
Maybe you should use Cakewalk Sonar.
Gwydion Elderwyn
I tried Sonar, but it has two drawbacks;
* no Rewire support (fatal, I can't live without using Reason)
* no VST support (using adaptors is OK but has its own problems)
I *like* Cubase - the interface, the workflow, etc, all make sense to me.
It's just the crashing that's driving me mad.
Thanks,
Gwydion
Jaap
enough for me. I started using Cubase in the old days, just midi. It
was a simple verion but it did what I wanted it to do. Later I added
Saw and with these two programs I was able to work.
Recently I bought Cubasis 3.0, I thought it was time to get a piece of
software that could intergrate midi and audio. Ok, Cubasis isn't very
expensive but I regret buying it. It doesn't work. I have a audigy
soundcard with the right asio drivers but I can access them from the
menu. In this NG I see that I'm not the only one with this problem.
All I want is a simple working piece of software with midi and audio.
I am also thinking of a mac. In the old days I started with an Atari,
cubase with atari worked great. Now I hardly play music anymore
because I run into problems all the time. Making music usually end up
in trying to fix problems and frustration..
regards, Jaap
Gwydion Elderwyn
> problems all the time. Making music usually end up
> in trying to fix problems and frustration..
Yes, you got it exactly - it's a real inspiration killer :(
So ... it's not just Cubase? Cubasis is like this too? I guess, in a way,
that makes me feel a little better, but probably also takes me one step
closer to a Mac.
Hmm, downstairs I have one of those really old Macs that had the screen
built in and no hard drive. Will VST5.1 run on that ?? [Yes, I'm kidding]
Aphelion
>The thing is, Cubase under Windows is just so unstable and tempremental. I
>have had it crash in just about every way you can imagine - freezing,
>vanishing, rebooting the machine, slowing to a crawl - etc, etc. I don't
>even have to be doing anything complex - sometimes it will do this for the
>first thing I do - opening rewire, or adding a vst instrument (no, it's not
>specific to a certain instrument), etc. Other times it will seem OK for an
>hour or so and then just totally lose the plot.
Don't know what to say Gwydion, I run Cubase PC hour upon hour, day
upon day and it doesn't crash. I'm doing a "live" recording (jazz trio
w/vocalist) this coming Tuesday night. Did the same gig last month and
didn't have one single incident.
Using a stripped down version of WinME with 5.1
However, I'm not using Rewire/Reason or Reaktor.
From what I understand:
The preferred platform for Cubase/Nuendo is PC.
The preferred platform on MAC is Emagic's Logic Audio, and of course
Protools.
All other audio/MIDI sequencers fall behind these three industry
leaders.
Nuendo seems to be making some inroads, just heard an NPR special on
the like of John Coltrane, many audio clips, voiceovers & edits.
Nuendo was mentioned as the software of choice.
Ap
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Jaap
>built in and no hard drive. Will VST5.1 run on that ?? [Yes, I'm kidding]
I know you're kidding but believe me, I do miss my Atari with buildin
midi ports and software that worked. A dedicated system for music. The
frustration is that the only thing I want can't be that difficult,
but, one way or another, I can't seen to get a simple working system.
And yes, it does kill thie inspiration... (unfortunately) They keep on
addind more and more options and nice-to-haves but all I want is a
simpel system that does the job, even on a P3- 450 with 256 Mb.
Shaquapa
last reboot under either ME or XP. Of the people I've directly worked with
that have had problems, those problems were in either in poorly written
drivers (soundcards usually), incorrect setup, or hardware conflicts.
I can speak to the stability issue with regards to O/S (I've used 98, 98SE,
ME, W2K and XP), soundcards (professional-Motu 1224, hobby-SB Live <stop
laughing>), midi interfaces (SB, the defunct Opcode SE8, Midex8) processors
(Athlon, P2, P3, P4), motherboards (ASUS, Abit, Supermicro, Micron, Compaq),
even the "evil" VIA chipsets. I've had the occasional crash that were
usually caused by me using beta/cutting edge drivers, and/or fixing things
that weren't broke as is my nature.
Since I seem to keep building different music stations, I might be of some
assistance in figuring out the cause of the instability.
Shaq
"Aphelion" <toofar@fromthesun> wrote in message
news:3c4a91c2...@news.dakotacom.net...
Jeez
Elderwyn" <gwy...@elderwyn.com> wrote:
> I know the sort of wars this can create so I'm going to try and be very
> specific in what I'm asking.
Ok. Here we go....
> I have been a PC user since the very first PC in 1981 - that's just the
> way my career and my opportunities have gone. Consequently I'm very
> experienced with PCs, DOS and Windows. I've always been able to keep
> things running, despite Windows' "personality", but in the last six
> months I've experienced such severe frustration with Cubase that for the
> first time I have seriously considered whether I should switch to Mac.
This is not neccesary. It is possible to set up a stable windows system
running Cubase and other audio software. I know because I've done it.
> The thing is, Cubase under Windows is just so unstable and tempremental.
> I have had it crash in just about every way you can imagine - freezing,
> vanishing, rebooting the machine, slowing to a crawl - etc, etc. I
> don't even have to be doing anything complex - sometimes it will do this
> for the first thing I do - opening rewire, or adding a vst instrument
> (no, it's not specific to a certain instrument), etc. Other times it
> will seem OK for an hour or so and then just totally lose the plot.
Yep. Sounds like your PC isn't optimised for audio. Wait - you said you
have optimised your PC? I don't think so. Read on.
> I have a modern machine, tons of memory, all the right drivers, a system
> stripped to the bare essentials, plus I keep it in shape with registry
> checkers, disk defrags and all those other lovely tools that, for
> Cubase, appear to make no damn difference whatsoever.
Ok. Start to see problems here. "Registry checkers, disk defrags, etc".
You do not need to run any "fixer" software on your PC. Under windows,
adding more software is only adding more software. It doesn't make it any
cleaner. It's like adding one kind of distortion to cover up another.
> Cakewalk will run all day and all night with no hiccups. So will Reason
> ... Reaktor ... Rebirth ... Sound Forge ... Acid Pro ... it's only
> Cubase that craps out on a regular basis.
Cubase does not suck up to windows as much as the others. Cakewalk and
Soundforge I know are designed to strictly keep within the windows
software design guidlines. Cubase often takes matters into its own
hands[1]. It doesn't "play it safe" so to speak. Thus there is more
potential for cubase to misbehave when its environment is not tightly
controlled.
> Yet, from every direction I'm told that Cubase is the best and Cubase is
> the choice of professionals etc etc. So I start to wonder - are these
> people running it on Mac? Is that why they seem to think it's so
> wonderful when I think it sucks? And why is it that Macs are often
> touted as the right platform for music professionals, anyway?
It's because in the old days (before windows 95) PC's were not used for
professional audio (or video, or anything else, really). This was because
the operating system was not robust enough or offer "advanced" features
such as real memory protection and multithreading. Thus,
professional-grade software wasn't possible. I'm not sure if Mac was much
better, or if it was just marketing, but most of the professional
applications were developed for Mac first. I haven't used Mac's, so I
don't know much about them or their history.
> Now, as I said right at the start, I don't want this to degenerate into
> a general Mac vs. PC war. There's only two things I really do with my
> PC; surf the net and make music.
Ok. Stop right there. "Surf the net" and "make music" don't go together on
windows. I don't know about mac, but I know they don't go together on
windows. It's not just the network connection, but all the added software
that goes along with it. Web browser. Email client. News reader. TCP/IP
layer. Complications. It can work (almost), but it really is asking for
trouble. Do you expect large pro mixing consoles to have web browsers
built in? Do you expect outboard reverbs to check your mail too? Not in
the real world. Dedicate your PC to audio, and you will notice
considerable improvement in performance.
> All I want to be able to do is run is Cubase and Reason, plus read my
> email, newsgroups and surf the net.
I think this is unreasonable. You are expecting too much from your
computer. PC's aren't perfect yet.
> The
> only special feature is I need an ultra-low latency sound card because I
> like to play my instruments "live" when composing.
After all that, this one's just a walk in the park!
> So ... should I go down the Mac path?
Depending on how you value your time, you may get better results by doing
a perfectly clean install of windows on your audio PC and ONLY INSTALL THE
AUDIO SOFTWARE YOU WILL USE! Get hold of another computer (doesn't have to
be high powered, I use an AMD 333) as a separate computer for internet,
email, everything else.
If that's unreasonable (and it is for some people). Maybe you should buy a
Mac.
> If so, what model/processor/RAM?
whatever you can afford, I guess. Just keep in mind that you can't compare
clock speeds between macs and PC's. Disk and memory size are comparable
though.
> What OS?
No idea. I'm not a Mac person. I've heard OS9 is stable, and has drivers
for everything, but don't listen to me.
> I'd love to just buy the latest and greatest but I'm not rich - I'm
> looking more for suggestions in the middle price bracket - serious, but
> not professional level, if you like.
Yep. Same here. Either spend with your wallet, or your time and brains.
I apologise if I was too harsh. It's 11pm and I'm tired. Sorry.
Forever,
Kim.
[1] ASIO drivers are a good example of this. Steinberg developed a new
audio interface driver specification because the default windows MME spec
was not sufficient (in Steinbergs view) for professional audio.
--
Ignorance is never out of style. It was in fashion yesterday, it is the
rage today, and it will set the pace tomorrow.
-- Franklin K. Dane
Gwydion Elderwyn
> You do not need to run any "fixer" software on your PC. Under windows,
> adding more software is only adding more software. It doesn't make it any
> cleaner. It's like adding one kind of distortion to cover up another.
Have you ever scanned a Windows registry? It's usually full of invalid
references, pointers to things which are no longer installed, and so on.
These do make the system more unstable. Unless of course you never install
and uninstall software - but I can't say that I know anyone who installs
everything once and then never changes their system.
> Cubase does not suck up to windows as much as the others. Cakewalk and
> Soundforge I know are designed to strictly keep within the windows
> software design guidlines. Cubase often takes matters into its own
> hands[1]. It doesn't "play it safe" so to speak. Thus there is more
> potential for cubase to misbehave when its environment is not tightly
> controlled.
Now that's very interesting ... as an ex-programmer I know all about how
much trouble you can get in by straying too far from the "safe" path ...
without wanting to sound rude, what's your source for that information? If
true, it would explain a lot.
> It's because in the old days (before windows 95) PC's were not used for
> professional audio (or video, or anything else, really). This was because
> the operating system was not robust enough or offer "advanced" features
> such as real memory protection and multithreading. Thus,
> professional-grade software wasn't possible. I'm not sure if Mac was much
> better, or if it was just marketing, but most of the professional
> applications were developed for Mac first. I haven't used Mac's, so I
> don't know much about them or their history.
That makes sense - they're not necessarily better, they were just there
first.
> Ok. Stop right there. "Surf the net" and "make music" don't go together on
> windows. I don't know about mac, but I know they don't go together on
> windows. It's not just the network connection, but all the added software
> that goes along with it. Web browser. Email client. News reader. TCP/IP
> layer. Complications. It can work (almost), but it really is asking for
> trouble.
But then, why do Cakewalk, Reason, Reaktor, Acid, Sound Forge, and dozens of
other applications work fine? Perhaps it comes back to what you said about
Cubase not "sucking up" to Windows.
> Dedicate your PC to audio, and you will notice
> considerable improvement in performance.
Hmm ... have you ever tried removing internet explorer and so on from
Windows? I'm not even sure it's possible, especially with 2K and XP.
> I apologise if I was too harsh. It's 11pm and I'm tired. Sorry.
Nah, I never takes these things personally, so don't worry about that! I
prefer spirited debate to nauseating politeness any day :)
Thanks for taking the time to post.
Peace,
Gwydion
Laurence Payne
your machine doesn't like Cubase.
One possibility suggests itself. I don't know if other music
programs do this, but Cubase continually streams data to the sound
card even when there is nothing to play. The cpu never goes into idle
mode, the software cooling routines included in many operating systems
never kick in. If your machine is on the edge of overheating, Cubase
will push it over. And your symptoms are the classic ones of
overheating.
In Audio/System you could see if 'Enable Audio only during Play' made
any difference. And try taking the case off your computer and
pointing a table fan at the works, cleaning the fluff out of the cpu
heatsink, looking at airflow in the case - all the usual things.
Laurence Payne
There's plenty of power in today's computers to run just about
whatever you like alongside a music system. I still run a little wary
of installing games, but apart from that I don't think there's any
need to go on trotting out 5-year-old advice ;-)
Did you tell us what machine you have, what soundcard? If you try to
push latency too low you'll indeed get audio glitches, maybe even
grind to a halt. But not what you're describing.
I'm a little worried about these 'registry checkers'. There's a
system checkup program in Norton which is almost guaranteed to destroy
your system if you blindly say 'yes' to everything it offers. And the
'stripped down system'. Really not necessary, and so easy to strip
out something needed. There's also the possibility of destructive
IRQ sharing under ACPI in Windows XP. But I would expect these to
cause problems in other audio applications. My money's still on the
overheating.
Gwydion Elderwyn
with Reason, several VST instruments, a few effects, and even my hardware
controller (Bitstream Pro).
What did I change, you ask?
I removed the systray icon for my network connection (you know, the one that
shows network activity).
Since then, it's been great. Even though I had email running. Even though
I loaded IE to look at something. Even though I alt-tabbed around several
times (this used to be a real killer).
Maybe just threatening to get a Mac made my system sit up and take notice ;)
Or maybe it's a case of once you take it to the technician, the fault goes
away ... either way, it will be interesting to see if it lasts.
I'll keep you informed. Surely it can't be that simple????? (But I hope it
is)
HarryJ
I also have and use Cubase with win2000 and 98SE on an Athlon @800
HarryJ
"Jaap" <riemens...@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:3c4a9108...@news.cablewanadoo.nl...
HarryJ
"Jeez" <ipda...@yahoo.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:Cey28.3644$cS1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Jete Software Inc.
I am in almost the exact same situation that you are in. I am currently
running a PC and all that I want is to have Reason, Cubase and Finale running.
I have just gotten my copy of Cubase and have run into some problems with
it. I resolved some of the problems by switching from Windows 98 to Windows
2000, but I know that I am still just scratching the surface in terms of
problems. I am still in the process of learning Cubase, so I haven't even
begun to attempt to push it.
But I would still be very relucant to go the Mac route. The Mac has its own
set of very serious potential problems. The chief one being OMS and the fact
that it is an orphaned system (Opcode is dead). Everything on a Mac is
dependent on OMS running correctly. I would stay away from the MAc until
MIDI support is built into OS X and everything (Reason, Cubase, ...) is
available as Carbonized software (runs natively on OS X).
Sorry that this isn't very helpful advice.
Norman
Jete Software Inc.
>
>Ok. Start to see problems here. "Registry checkers, disk defrags, etc".
>You do not need to run any "fixer" software on your PC. Under windows,
>adding more software is only adding more software. It doesn't make it any
>cleaner. It's like adding one kind of distortion to cover up another.
This is bullshit. You did the right thing, it does make your system cleaner.
>
>Ok. Stop right there. "Surf the net" and "make music" don't go together on
>windows. I don't know about mac, but I know they don't go together on
>windows. It's not just the network connection, but all the added software
>that goes along with it. Web browser. Email client. News reader. TCP/IP
>layer. Complications. It can work (almost), but it really is asking for
>trouble. Do you expect large pro mixing consoles to have web browsers
>built in? Do you expect outboard reverbs to check your mail too? Not in
>the real world. Dedicate your PC to audio, and you will notice
>considerable improvement in performance.
Bullshit. One has nothing to do with the other. Granted you don't want to
be surfing the web while you are recording audio, but otherwise they don't
have anything to do with one another. The TCP/IP layer is completely separate
from your audio drivers. Your request is quite reasonable and should be
easily attainable.
Norman
Marc Jacquier
"HarryJ" <harr...@aol.com> a écrit dans le message news:
h5B28.4502$Qc6.1...@news1.rdc2.pa.home.com...
> I still use the Arari with C-Lab Creator/Notator and love it.
> I also have and use Cubase with win2000 and 98SE on an Athlon @800
>
> HarryJ
>
>
> "Jaap" <riemens...@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
> news:3c4a9108...@news.cablewanadoo.nl...
> > >Hmm, downstairs I have one of those really old Macs that had the screen
> > >built in and no hard drive. Will VST5.1 run on that ?? [Yes, I'm
> kidding]
> >
If I plug the tape storage jack output to my desk, shall I get a good DAW?
;-)
Marc
Wes Taggart
of the stuff that you have described in your above posts while Cubase is
active, you may run into problems. Though the machine can do alot at once,
there are still stumbling blocks. I can't burn a CD and check my email. If I
do, the CD is viewed as bad. If I don't, the CD burns fine.
So you may have stumbled on to the issue at hand. Don't try to check your
email, instant messages, etc.... while recording. Get offline, record,
finish, and then check your email. Or do as suggested by jeez, get another
box. Dedicate one to your recording, one to your personal stuff.
Wes
"Gwydion Elderwyn" <gwy...@elderwyn.com> wrote in message
news:3c4ac641$0$27113$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Jim Johnson
> specific in what I'm asking.
I'm a Windows developer, so I'm way biased.. but Cubae does have a reputation
for instability on the PC. It's not due to the PC per se; ity's becasue Cubase
was ported to the PC from the Atari ST, and Steinberg simply did a bad job of
it.
From what I've heard, Nuendo is a complete rewrite of the Steinberg sequencer,
and is quite stable on the PC. You should probably look into it.
--
Jim Johnson
Metaphoric Software
-------------------
Makers of Techno Toys
Software for Electronic Music
http://www.technotoys.com
in...@technotoys.com
Lina och Niall
"Jaap" <riemens...@wanadoo.nl> skrev i meddelandet
news:3c4a8b44...@news.cablewanadoo.nl...
> Recently I bought Cubasis 3.0, I thought it was time to get a piece of
> software that could intergrate midi and audio. Ok, Cubasis isn't very
> expensive but I regret buying it. It doesn't work. I have a audigy
> soundcard with the right asio drivers but I can access them from the
> menu. In this NG I see that I'm not the only one with this problem.
I think these other people got Cubasis bundled with their SBLive! card then
upgraded to Audigy. I would be surprised if there was a real problem getting
a "shop" version of Cubasis to run with an audigy - they are virtually made
for each other.
Laurence Payne
And you could use it to keep your coffee warm :-)
Laurence Payne
*during* an audio recording session? Now, if Windows XP had decided
to put his modem on the same IRQ as the soundcard, and/or it was a
crappy software modem. I can see that giving a few problems :-)
Laurence Payne
Laurence Payne
Creative cards with Cubasis are the same as with Cubase.
aescul...@hotmail.com
a bit of trouble with loading the drivers for it correctly.) But the
probs start, in my opinion, when i try to get protools up and running.
Now that doesn't go very well...
Vicky
TA@spamlineone.net Ne
And Gwydion - why switch to XP, anyone with an ounce of sense can see that
this is where the problem lies.. Sigh. If you have your finger firmly on the
pulse, why buy a Beta operating system with no drivers?
Neil
Jaap
>upgraded to Audigy. I would be surprised if there was a real problem getting
>a "shop" version of Cubasis to run with an audigy - they are virtually made
>for each other.
>
There was no version of cubasis included with this card. If I'm
correct, the version that is included in some models is Cubasis 2.0.
Is this correct?
Where could I get a copy of Cubasis that is included with some Audigy
cards? Maybe swap with my Cubasis VST 3 that I recently bought?
regards, Jaap.
Gwydion Elderwyn
> stuff running *during* an audio recording session?
No, I didn't - that was the first thing that went in the elimination process
:)
Gwydion Elderwyn
> can see that this is where the problem lies.. Sigh. If you have your
> finger firmly on the pulse, why buy a Beta operating system with
> no drivers?
No drivers? Not on my planet, friend!
I have XP drivers for everything I use - otherwise I wouldn't have upgraded.
And XP is way, way more stable that 2K was. I turned off all the fancy
interface features, they just suck up CPU cycles) and apart from my Cubase
woes it's been great.
In addition, it automatically recognised my printer, scanner, digital
camera, video card, and so on - all with built-in drivers. Now to my mind,
this has got to be a good thing - the more third party drivers you need to
install, the more problems you might have. In fact, the only third party
drivers I had to install were my sound card (Egosys Waveterminal 2496) and
my MIDI interface (Roland UA-100).
Gwydion Elderwyn
own
> set of very serious potential problems. The chief one being OMS and the
fact
> that it is an orphaned system (Opcode is dead). Everything on a Mac is
> dependent on OMS running correctly. I would stay away from the MAc until
> MIDI support is built into OS X and everything (Reason, Cubase, ...) is
> available as Carbonized software (runs natively on OS X).
> Sorry that this isn't very helpful advice.
On the contrary, that's very helpful advice :) Thanks.
Jeez
> references, pointers to things which are no longer installed, and so on.
> These do make the system more unstable.
I know this. I know what a mess the registry can get into. I used to scan
it manually with regedit because I never trusted those automatic tools.
> Unless of course you never
> install and uninstall software - but I can't say that I know anyone who
> installs everything once and then never changes their system.
That's the whole idea. Set it up so it works - THEN FREEZE IT! Don't
install any new software, don't mess around with drivers, etc. It might
take a few goes to figure out the best order for installing drivers,
software, etc... but it's definately worth it. My PC's been frozen for
about a year and it works almost flawlessly.
> Now that's very interesting ... as an ex-programmer I know all about how
> much trouble you can get in by straying too far from the "safe" path ...
> without wanting to sound rude, what's your source for that information?
> If true, it would explain a lot.
I don't have any inside information. It's just my own observations and
reasoning. Steinberg seem to be int the game of rewriting everything
themselves. Take the interface for example. That's not a standard windows
interface with standard right-click menus, pull-down menus, toolbars, etc.
Yes they're there, but not as we know it. Same with the inspector, all the
edit windows, the key shortcuts (and mouse key modifiers), even the colour
scheme[1]. And let's not even start with the VST mixer. Another example is
the way Cubase handles hardware. Audio, in particular, is handled by
Steinberg's own proprietry driver system. Nothing to do with windows.
If you've ever used Cakewalk (not Sonar) you'll know what I mean.
Cakewalk's a perfect example of a piece of audio software that does
everything by the book. DirectX audio, standards windows toolbars,
dialogue box design, menus, right-click options, mouse key modifiers. By
comparison, Cubase is almost its own operating system.
> But then, why do Cakewalk, Reason, Reaktor, Acid, Sound Forge, and
> dozens of other applications work fine? Perhaps it comes back to what
> you said about Cubase not "sucking up" to Windows.
I don't know about Reason or Acid, but I would expect Cakewalk and Sound
Forge to work under more poorly-maintained windows systems, simply because
of their conformity to standard windows programming/design principals.
> Hmm ... have you ever tried removing internet explorer and so on from
> Windows? I'm not even sure it's possible, especially with 2K and XP.
I'm using windows 98, and while I haven't *removed* IE, i certainly don't
use it. In fact, I think it's still version 3! I don't think it can be
removed completely, but there are ways to prevent it interfering with the
operation of your system.
> Nah, I never takes these things personally, so don't worry about that! I
> prefer spirited debate to nauseating politeness any day :)
>
> Thanks for taking the time to post.
No problem.
Forever,
Kim
[1] The colour scheme is my pet hate with cubase. Personally, I think the
dark-grey colour scheme is damn ugly, and it really annoys me that I can't
change it. Damn thing's probably hard-coded.
Jeez
<l...@laurencedeletethispayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Internet use will not cause the massive instability he describes.
> There's plenty of power in today's computers to run just about whatever
> you like alongside a music system. I still run a little wary of
> installing games, but apart from that I don't think there's any need to
> go on trotting out 5-year-old advice ;-)
You are mistaken. It's not about having enough hardware power to run it
all. It's about the design of the operatins system, and its less-than
perfect way of protecting programs from each other.
Forever,
Kim.
Jeez
<je...@dgs.dgsys.com> wrote:
> This is bullshit.
Do you have a windows PC running Cubase and other audio software, plus
internet software, etc? Is it stable?
I understand what you're saying - logically, it *shouldn't* be like that,
but Windows isn't logical sometimes - and it's better to realise that and
work around it, rather than complain about advice which (I agree) woudn't
have to be given if everything worked how it really should.
If you want logical, run Unix. My "everything else" computer (email,
news, etc) is running Linux.
Forever,
Kim.
Laurence Payne
And I've had several :-)
Tony Evans
Elderwyn" <gwy...@elderwyn.com> wrote:
> I know the sort of wars this can create so I'm going to try and be very
> specific in what I'm asking.
>
> I have been a PC user since the very first PC in 1981 - that's just the way
> my career and my opportunities have gone. Consequently I'm very experienced
> with PCs, DOS and Windows. I've always been able to keep things running,
> despite Windows' "personality", but in the last six months I've experienced
> such severe frustration with Cubase that for the first time I have seriously
> considered whether I should switch to Mac.
>
> [deleted]
>
> Now, as I said right at the start, I don't want this to degenerate into a
> general Mac vs. PC war. There's only two things I really do with my PC;
> surf the net and make music. All I want to be able to do is run is Cubase
> and Reason, plus read my email, newsgroups and surf the net. The only
> special feature is I need an ultra-low latency sound card because I like to
> play my instruments "live" when composing.
>
> So ... should I go down the Mac path? If so, what model/processor/RAM?
> What OS? I'd love to just buy the latest and greatest but I'm not rich -
> I'm looking more for suggestions in the middle price bracket - serious, but
> not professional level, if you like.
The Mac vs. PC holy war has generated tons of propaganda and falsehoods on
both sides of the fence. There are Mac users who think PC users are
easily-led sheep, while there are PC users who think Mac people are
blinder-wearing cultists. The truth is that both platforms are equally
viable, neither one is going to go away any time soon, and which one to
use pretty much comes down to a matter of personal preference. I
personally prefer the Mac, but there are plenty of good reasons for people
to prefer PCs.
Right now everything is in a flux in the Mac world because of the switch
from the "classic" MacOS to Mac OSX. All of the major MIDI/audio software
developers are rewriting their software to run under OSX, but not much has
been released yet. However, Mac OSX seems to be a very powerful, stable,
and robust OS, and once the software situation has been straightened out,
the Mac OSX platform will make a great basis for audio workstations IMHO.
I don't use Cubase on the Mac - I use MOTU's Digital Performer as my
primary midi/audio software. However, I've heard stories from Mac-using
friends of mine who run Cubase that while it is a fine software package,
it has some stability problems - more so than with Logic Audio or Digital
Performer. This is all with the old MacOS, and everything may change once
OSX versions have been released.
As far as what Mac to buy, I'd hold off for a while before making
decisions - the newly-released G4 iMac has clock speeds that approach the
G4 towers, and Apple can't afford to let this situation last very long.
The buzz is that Apple is planning on soon releasing G4 towers that will
exceed 1 gHz. When that happens, the current G4 towers (which are still
very, very fast) that remain in the sales pipeline will probably be
discounted. Also, check out sources for used, older G4 macs - they can be
had for not much money these days. At any rate, I would buy the most
powerful Mac I could stretch for. For OSX, I would recommend nothing less
than a medium-to-fast G4 - you *can* run OSX on a G3, but I wouldn't want
to try to do heavy-duty audio on it.
If you buy a Mac from an online catalog store or from the AppleStore,
stick with the bare minimum of RAM - you can get RAM far cheaper from
3rd-party vendors, and it's really easy to install. For OSX amd audio
software, I would want at least 256 MB of RAM, and, as always, the more
RAM the better. Load up on the RAM while it's still relatively cheap, and
don't be fooled into thinking that Mac PC133 RAM is more expensive than PC
RAM - it's all the same stuff.
Tony Evans
Gwydion Elderwyn
the Mac too - I had not heard that before - but it makes me feel better. It
must come down to individual machines and configurations, then, not just
Cubase-PC being an inferior port.
Thanks,
Gwydion
Aphelion
It's not a port.....
Cubase 5.xx is developed on, and for the PC.
Also released before the Mac version.
You machine or software has a configuration problem or a hardware
incompatibility.
I've had Cubase up and running a couple of days, gone online several
times, running Netscape, Agent and Eudora, it's solid here.
Ap
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Gwydion Elderwyn
> Cubase 5.xx is developed on, and for the PC.
> Also released before the Mac version.
Yes, but was on Atari much earlier; that's what I was referring to :)
Aphelion
hehe... an Atari port.
I think a Steinberg sequencer was also available for Commodore 64.
Passport "Master Tracks" was.
Laurence Payne
code from earlier versions. The original version was for the Atari,
who's 6800 processor was closer to the Mac than the PC. Whether the
PC team had their version (of Cubase 2,3 or 5) ready sooner than the
Mac team really has very little to do with the price of fish :-)
Laurence Payne
ST.
Marc Jacquier
"Laurence Payne" <l...@laurenceDELETETHISpayne.freeserve.co.uk> a écrit dans
le message news: 161o4uc8009ui4gpq...@4ax.com...
> Was PRO16 the Commodore version? I came in with Pro24 on the Atari
> ST.
>
(for atari as well) of pro24
Marc
Richard Smol
"radiospace" <tvREMO...@hottmail.com> wrote in message news:3c4a8dcb...@nntp.we.mediaone.net...
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2002 20:24:24 +1100, "Gwydion Elderwyn"
> <gwy...@elderwyn.com> wrote:
>
>
> >The thing is, Cubase under Windows is just so unstable and tempremental.
> >
> >Cakewalk will run all day and all night with no hiccups.
> >
> >Yet, from every direction I'm told that Cubase is the best
>
> Maybe you should use Cakewalk Sonar.
It's only too bad Sonar doesn't support VST instruments...
Greetz,
RS
Bjorn Borud
|
| So ... should I go down the Mac path? If so, what model/processor/RAM?
| What OS? I'd love to just buy the latest and greatest but I'm not rich -
| I'm looking more for suggestions in the middle price bracket - serious, but
| not professional level, if you like.
just out of curiosity, did you have any trouble before you changed to
Windows XP?
-Bjørn
Bjorn Borud
|
| I have XP drivers for everything I use - otherwise I wouldn't have
| upgraded.
"upgrade"? so far I have not heard anything about Windows XP
indicating that it constitutes an "upgrade". on the contrary, I think
the whole XP deal smells rather funny.
I usually advise people against "upgrading". if it works: stick with
it.
-Bjørn
Graham R
If you're using ProTools Free - then it's very dependent on your
computer - RAM, CPU speed, bus speed and hard drive. THe faster the
better. If you're running a hardware ProTools system, that takes a lot
of the load off the host Mac. I've found my ProTools/Digi 001 to be very
stable in the short time I've owned it. Cubase locks up if the phase of
the moon is wrong, or the shirt I'm wearing is the wrong colour. :-(
--
Graham R.
The application "Brain" has unexpectedly quit because an error occurred.
Gwydion Elderwyn
> you changed to Windows XP?
Yes, Win2K was much worse ... and don't even get me started on Win98 or
WinME.
Paulo Gomes
else to add to it, in fact I'm nobody compared to some of the folks here
with a much deeper knowledgement than I do about hardware and software,
still with all this lack of knowledgement (Is this the correct word?) I've
always been able to run cubase (Rewiered or not) VST'is,, etc, etc, preety
stable and to tell you the truth I don't have any crash, blue screen or
whatever anoying things on my PC. Just as an experience try opening MSCONFIG
and on the Startup folder disable everything, I mean everything including
systray, symtray and all those things that are supposed to do something (I
don't know what as I've got them all off). Once again, I meant everything,
not a single thing checked. Just for the record I'm using the "Damn" VIA
chipset, still I don't know what makes it so damn.
Paulo Gomes
Gwydion Elderwyn <gwy...@elderwyn.com> wrote in message
news:3c4a8cc7$0$27110$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> I know the sort of wars this can create so I'm going to try and be very
> specific in what I'm asking.
>
> I have been a PC user since the very first PC in 1981 - that's just the
way
> my career and my opportunities have gone. Consequently I'm very
experienced
> with PCs, DOS and Windows. I've always been able to keep things running,
> despite Windows' "personality", but in the last six months I've
experienced
> such severe frustration with Cubase that for the first time I have
seriously
> considered whether I should switch to Mac.
>
> I have VST5.1 (and yes, it's legal) running under XP, but prior to that I
> ran 2K. The other critical tool in my arsenal is Reason. I have a few
VSTs
> I like but I could live without them if I had to.
>
> The thing is, Cubase under Windows is just so unstable and tempremental.
I
> have had it crash in just about every way you can imagine - freezing,
> vanishing, rebooting the machine, slowing to a crawl - etc, etc. I don't
> even have to be doing anything complex - sometimes it will do this for the
> first thing I do - opening rewire, or adding a vst instrument (no, it's
not
> specific to a certain instrument), etc. Other times it will seem OK for
an
> hour or so and then just totally lose the plot.
>
> I have a modern machine, tons of memory, all the right drivers, a system
> stripped to the bare essentials, plus I keep it in shape with registry
> checkers, disk defrags and all those other lovely tools that, for Cubase,
> appear to make no damn difference whatsoever.
>
> Cakewalk will run all day and all night with no hiccups. So will Reason
...
> Reaktor ... Rebirth ... Sound Forge ... Acid Pro ... it's only Cubase that
> craps out on a regular basis.
>
> Yet, from every direction I'm told that Cubase is the best and Cubase is
the
> choice of professionals etc etc. So I start to wonder - are these people
> running it on Mac? Is that why they seem to think it's so wonderful when
I
> think it sucks? And why is it that Macs are often touted as the right
> platform for music professionals, anyway?
>
> Now, as I said right at the start, I don't want this to degenerate into a
> general Mac vs. PC war. There's only two things I really do with my PC;
> surf the net and make music. All I want to be able to do is run is Cubase
> and Reason, plus read my email, newsgroups and surf the net. The only
> special feature is I need an ultra-low latency sound card because I like
to
> play my instruments "live" when composing.
>
Laurence Payne
Squarlids
OMS then you will find it very good for your own midi configs unlike cubase
Logic Audio has these midi drivers built-in and with the stability of the mac
hardware and OS you can't go wrong
Reu Temporal Nexus Records
http://tempora...@macunlimited.net
Jon Drukman
>I know you're kidding but believe me, I do miss my Atari with buildin
>midi ports and software that worked. A dedicated system for music. The
>frustration is that the only thing I want can't be that difficult,
>but, one way or another, I can't seen to get a simple working system.
>And yes, it does kill thie inspiration... (unfortunately) They keep on
>addind more and more options and nice-to-haves but all I want is a
>simpel system that does the job, even on a P3- 450 with 256 Mb.
This thread makes me sad. I have really good luck with computers,
so maybe I can help out.
Here's what I just bought a few months ago - it is really fast, and
extremely stable. I can even surf the net/read email while running
Cubase in the background!
Athlon XP 1800+
512M DDR RAM
Asus A7V266-E motherboard
GeForce2 MX video card
RME Audio DIGI9652 audio card (digital only - you need an external DAC)
Midiman USB Midisport 2x2
I transplanted the two IBM 7200RPM deskstars from my old computer
(bought before IBM's drives began to be plagued with problems).
Running Windows XP I have no problems with Cubase, Reason, Live, Acid,
you name it. I even installed in ACPI mode which is supposed to be the
kiss of death for audio but I haven't noticed any problems.
-jsd-
Grant Horsnell
no end of trouble getting the audio to work.
Switched to Logic a few months ago ... no more problems.
Mark Robinson
I also have to disagree with you here. I've been running my older PIII 550Mhz system with Cubase and a network with IE 5
installed without any sort of problems. I also have three other computers networked together such that they can share files,
printers and a DSL modem for net access. I don't try to browse the net while mixing 24 tracks of audio (it might well work,
but I've never tried). Having net access is becoming essential these days. I sure wouldn't want to use "Sneaker Net" to get
driver and software updates. If you only have one computer, how would you deal with the lack of internet access? If I was in
a pro environment with multiple DAW's working on related projects, I would want to be able to share files via a network.
It is very difficult to troubleshoot these types of problems. There is no "silver bullet" that will fix things. Some people
have very smooth integration experiences and others have no end of troubles. It could be anything from bad drives, program
bugs, flaky RAM, or motherboard chipset problems. The list is almost endless. In general, I agree with you that you shouldn't
needlessly install software and hardware onto your system. The notion that running an network or IE will kill any chance of
having a stable configuration is just not so.
My advise to Gwydion is to try and isolate the problem in a logical manner. Do a clean system install and then only install
Cubase and the audio card drivers. Live with this for a bit and make sure it is stable. Do what you need to in order to get a
stable system with this configuration first (e.g. update drivers, change RAM motherboards, CPU's heating). Now add one new
software or hardware component and make sure it is not causing new grief. If you proceed slowly and in a logical manner, you
should be able to get things under control. Do you really need to use XP and/or Win2K? In the case of XP, its still very early
and I would expects it to take some time for things to get under control. Win98, with all of its warts, is still probably the
best current PC based OS for DAW work.
Mark Robinson
Jeez <ipda...@yahoo.com.nospam> wrote in message news:YeJ28.4571$cS1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Fat Cat Music
new computer Athelon 1.2 GHz. I was able to record 32+ tracks, some of them
are stereo so we are talking about 42 or more on both machine. I'm using
Yamaha DSP Factory, 512M RAM. I am able to work 18 hours a day for a week
without a crash, so that's what I call stability. And I run internet on the
same machine too.
I have friends who use VST on Mac and they have more crashes than you can
imagine so I think yes, VST definitely works better on PC, and Atari too.
A lot of time I'm having trouble and need to use ghost to reinstall the
whole system because I try to test run other sequencer on the computer. Like
2 days ago I installed Sonar to get a feel of the programme, then VST acted
erractically; the VST performance was shooting like mad and the audio
playback started jittering. Now I have an installation log standby so if
something goes wrong I can track it down easily.
IMHO maybe you should uninstall some sequencer programmes from you machine
and try to fine tune the computer to run VST first, then backup your system
before you start messing with other programme.
Henry
"Laurence Payne" <l...@laurenceDELETETHISpayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
message news:l4iq4ukf6jqbkgadb...@4ax.com...
Jeez
<mark...@verizon.net> wrote:
> If you only have one computer, how would you deal with the lack of
> internet access?
My compromise is that my music computer is networked with my other
computers. I use my non-music computer for email, internet, etc. If I
need a patch or something, I can download it from my non-music computer
(where I'm sitting now) and accessing it from the network.
Regarding internet apps and music living on the same computer - I guess
you're just lucky. I know my setup works for me.
Forever,
Kim.
--
Look! Before our very eyes, the future is becoming the past.
Laurence Payne
computers :-)
Elson
"Gwydion Elderwyn" <gwy...@elderwyn.com> wrote in message
news:3c4a8cc7$0$27110$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> The thing is, Cubase under Windows is just so unstable and tempremental.
I
> have had it crash in just about every way you can imagine - freezing,
> vanishing, rebooting the machine, slowing to a crawl - etc, etc.
Cubase under Mac also crashes. The UK dance group Groove Armada even
mentioned in an interview that they're tired of Cubase's instability (on a
Mac) and are thinking of going to Logic.
Remember what "CUBASE" stands for:
Crashing is Usual Business As Sequencer Executes.
And also remember what "VST" stands for:
Very Stable...Temporarily! :)
You have three options:
If you want to stay on Windows, get with SONAR. I know you have some minor
issues with it, but I heard Rewire support is coming in a future update (now
that Propellerheads is no longer aligned with Steinberg). As for the VST
adaptor thing, I hardly realize I even have an adaptor! SONAR is very stable
for Windows because it was made for Windows.
If you wanna go Mac, consider Digital Performer. Like SONAR, it was made
native for its own OS. Digital Performer is very solid running under MacOS.
Cubase, as well as logic were both originally written for Atari ST, then
ported to other OSes.
If you REALLY love Cubase, get an old Atari ST. :) Of course, you can't
really use audio on that one, but Cubase for Atari ST is the most stable
Cubase you can find!
Elson
"Aphelion" <toofar@fromthesun> wrote in message
news:3c4a91c2...@news.dakotacom.net...
> All other audio/MIDI sequencers fall behind these three industry
> leaders.
Who died and made you an authority? Truth is, as far as stability, the best
Windows sequencer/DAW is Cakewalk SONAR and the best Mac sequencer/DAW is
MOTU Digital Performer. Unlike Cubase or Logic, both these programs are
native to their respective OSes and never needed to be ported over.
Elson
"Jim Johnson" <ja...@technotoys.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.16b48d7a1...@news.callatg.com...
> > I know the sort of wars this can create so I'm going to try and be very
> > specific in what I'm asking.
>
reputation
> for instability on the PC. It's not due to the PC per se; ity's becasue
Cubase
> was ported to the PC from the Atari ST, and Steinberg simply did a bad job
of
> it.
Actually, Cubase was ported from the Atari ST to Mac, THEN ported to
Windows! So it's a 3rd-generation software port.
Aphelion
>"Gwydion Elderwyn" <gwy...@elderwyn.com> wrote in message
>news:3c4a8cc7$0$27110$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
>> The thing is, Cubase under Windows is just so unstable and tempremental.
>I
>> have had it crash in just about every way you can imagine - freezing,
>> vanishing, rebooting the machine, slowing to a crawl - etc, etc.
>
>Cubase under Mac also crashes. The UK dance group Groove Armada even
>mentioned in an interview that they're tired of Cubase's instability (on a
>Mac) and are thinking of going to Logic.
>
>Remember what "CUBASE" stands for:
>Crashing is Usual Business As Sequencer Executes.
>
>And also remember what "VST" stands for:
>Very Stable...Temporarily! :)
Not here, (on PC).
I had a four hour recording session Tuesday night (all audio) and
Cubase was brilliant, never crashed.... take after take,
punch-ins...etc...etc. It was solid enough to be invisible and allowed
me to play guitar as well as engineer. I messed up a couple of times
and saved a song using a wrong named and over wrote a file. No problem
because Cubase keeps all the audio files, it was easy to rebuild.
I notice most everyone that has major problems seem to mention rewire,
perhaps the problems lie in that direction.
Locsmándi Bence
Brilliant!
Bence
"Jeez" <ipda...@yahoo.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:2CI38.4357$Ni2....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Tanner Simon
MacOS 9.2.2, the most stabile operatingsystem I've ever worked (TOS, DOS,
3.11, OS2, MacOS since 7.5 and Windows 2000).
With a PC you have always problems to configure things (I hate .dll's). A
MacOS is more human. Don't have tonns of cryptic extensions and so on. Every
thin more clear. In the electronic Studio we work also with Mac. In the
office we have one PC. In America most Studio have Mac's.
Greetings
"Jeez" <ipda...@yahoo.com.nospam> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:YeJ28.4571$cS1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> In article <ssfl4us1o5b6ndf01...@4ax.com>, "Laurence Payne"
> <l...@laurencedeletethispayne.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Internet use will not cause the massive instability he describes.
> > There's plenty of power in today's computers to run just about whatever
> > you like alongside a music system. I still run a little wary of
> > installing games, but apart from that I don't think there's any need to
> > go on trotting out 5-year-old advice ;-)
>
> You are mistaken. It's not about having enough hardware power to run it
> all. It's about the design of the operatins system, and its less-than
> perfect way of protecting programs from each other.
>
> Forever,
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Kim.
>
> --
> Ignorance is never out of style. It was in fashion yesterday, it is the
> rage today, and it will set the pace tomorrow.
> -- Franklin K. Dane
synthuser
> In America most Studio have Mac's.
I use both platforms.
Joe American
--
"I don’t think that CORRUPTED MONARCHY would be a good thing
to play in a retail store even for wild clothing, and certainly
not in a restaurant no matter how unusual the food would be."
- Hannah M.G. Shapero
http://www.sonic.net/~bnsdias/page5.html
http://www.windandwire.com/bertrom_cabot_jr.htm