Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum
Forum Ringside => Guitars, Amps and Effects => Topic started by: Stevepage on December 02, 2011, 12:54:53 PM
-
I'm considering buying a decent recording program like Cubase 6 as what I'm using now isn't all the good. Great for starters but I can't create my own drum beats.
I know it's possible to create midi drum beats with Cubase 6 but is it possible with the Artist 6 ?
I had been considering buying more gear but there's not much point if I'm not using it to write and record my own songs.
-
I've been sucked into the Cakewalk/Roland world as it's what I've been using since Guitar Tracks V1. As far as I know, Cakewalk Sonar X1 is still the only DAW prog that's designed around using multiple cores effectively. That being said, I think a Reaper+Toontrack Superior would be the best money spent for the needs you listed.
-
Hi Steve,
I use Cubase Artist 6 & yes you can program MIDI drums (I use the Superior Drummer 2 plugin to generate the sounds). That's what I do when I'm demoing things. :)
-
That's just what I wanted to hear. Looks like I'll be buying this for christmas
-
Happy Cubase 6 (full version) user right here. It is an incredibly powerful, full-featured DAW. I think it sounds better than Pro Tools. It is surprisingly benign on your system resources. Combined with a UAD card, you can get stunning "in the box" results.
You can absolutely write drum parts (or any other instrumental part) with Cubase 6. I use Drumkit From Hell for the actual drum samples.
-
So the Toontrack software can provide real sounding drum samples that follow the midi drum tracks you create in the DAW as well as provide beats that you can drop into your sequencer? Though of course it's better to create your own beats rather than cut/paste and edit existing beats from Toontrack.
-
Yup, that's exactly what the Toontrack plugins do. The beats provided with their software are just MIDI patterns, so once you've dropped them in you & can still edit them to your hearts content.
-
I can't think of anything that Pro Tools 10 can't do, and do VERY well. Now that avid have released v10, you are no longer tied to a 'Pro Tools' interface, you can use anything. Having said that, the new Pro Tools/M Audio interfaces are very high spec with excellent pre amps on the 48v phantom channels : and you don't have to look far to find a 'bundle deal.
You also get a whole bunch of 'plug ins' with the basic software, including an excellent 'drum machine' with great sounding samples that will play your midi drum machine sounds or its own. Included are also software samplers, synthersisers, and studio effects for your recording and final mixes.
Its worth a look while your still shopping !
-
I can't think of anything that Pro Tools 10 can't do, and do VERY well. Now that avid have released v10, you are no longer tied to a 'Pro Tools' interface, you can use anything. Having said that, the new Pro Tools/M Audio interfaces are very high spec with excellent pre amps on the 48v phantom channels : and you don't have to look far to find a 'bundle deal.
You also get a whole bunch of 'plug ins' with the basic software, including an excellent 'drum machine' with great sounding samples that will play your midi drum machine sounds or its own. Included are also software samplers, synthersisers, and studio effects for your recording and final mixes.
Its worth a look while your still shopping !
Absolutely. Most of these companies have a trial version you can download for free -- it's a full version of the software with a limited use window.
-
Reaper user here. I even paid for it (which you can practically avoid if you want to, the trial is fully functioning and non time-limited).
I would thoroughly recommend trying it before you splash out any cash on a DAW first!
Roo
-
Reaper here. Also an audio engineer. Also have a (fully paid up) copy of sonar producer 7, that I choose to use reaper over.
I keep thinking about getting PT10 (when it was PT9 and all of a sudden I could use my RME and Focusrite interfaces with it), but the only real draw to me is easier collaberation with other studios/engineers etc.
Last time I used cubase is was SX3, so I'm quite out of date now on steinberg, but it was good, I liked it.
Given reapers power and efficiency, theres really no reason not to try it. At all.
Ben, I have to question the comment that cubase 'sounds better' than PT. All DAWs audio sounds identical: as good as your DACs, or more likely your room and monitors. You should know that mate ;). Unless you mean the on board effects are good, in which case, yes, they are/were good last I checked. Better than PT, I cant say. I tend to use voxengo, stillwell, cakewalk (will load in anything VST-using if sonar is installed), slate, etc etc.
Aside from anything else, if youre new to the DAW world, then its best to start with whatevers most readily available, since capabilities of DAWs tend to differ in often quite peripheral features. The basic cabilities of tracking, editing, comping, effect treatment, automation, tempo mapping, time-shifting, midi programming, routing, bussing etc etc etc are all there in each, and I feel that its more valuable for a first time user to learn these capabilities in whatevers comes easiest to hand (or comes easiest to the wallet), while trying to get time on as many as possible and making your choice based on your preference of how one does certain things over another, rather than what one can do that another cant. Most of your time is going to be spent doing certain main activities, which will vary depending on how you intend to work and what you intend to record, and getting something that does them in a fashion you agree with is more important than getting something that has some snazzy feature you like the look of but only use once every 6 moths.
To make that decision effectively as a neophyte, you can cut your teeth on any of them, just to learn what to look for in all of them.
For example, I can use superior drummer 2 (which I often do) in either sonar or reaper. I much prefer how reaper does it. The result is the same, the quality is the same, the capabilities are very nearly the same, the difference is the process (part of whats often called 'workflow' and is really a very big deal).
-
The only reason I was hanging onto the Roland/Cakewalk dynasty was their multi-core/thread capabilities but, from what I've been reading elsewhere tonite, Reaper isn't that far behind and it's a major focal point for the next release. Certainly interested in what's next, especially for the price.
-
As someone who knows nothing about the subject - I have a very old version of Guitar Tracks Pro but never got anywhere with it! - I'm just reading this thread as an interested observer.
But MDV's post strikes me as very useful and sensible advice.
-
Well said MDV. I really like Reaper and it'll do what you're after, Steve. Although you will need some kind of drum VSTi like EZDrummer or SD2. Reaper's not the greatest for electronic music IMO (I think Logic wins in that regard) but it's perfect for me and my amateur home recording/production!
-
I've used Cubase since it came on two floppy disks for the Atari 520 and I've never felt inclined to use anything else
-
Ben, I have to question the comment that cubase 'sounds better' than PT. All DAWs audio sounds identical: as good as your DACs, or more likely your room and monitors. You should know that mate ;).
Don't agree.
-
Its not really a matter of opinion. All DAWs noise floor is set by dacs, all of them are linear, uncolouring, and 32 if not 64 bit floating point makes playback of the same sound file the same in each. Effects are another matter, and workflow another yet again, preference or percieved superiority in either of which I do feel are matters of opinion and perfectly good reasons to choose one DAW over another and not expect anyone to question your decision (any more than choosing a les paul or strat).
But playing back the same raw file, they are the same.
Some did a study. The most interesting part to me is this
"Of those who did not complete the test successfully, over 60% could not tell when 2 sound files were exactly the same."
I took the test: I 'failed' it, in that I couldnt tell when it was reaper or PT (I did get it right when they were the same untreated file though)
http://www.airusersblog.com/home-page/2010/8/6/pro-tools-v-reaper-sound-test-the-results.html
The test http://www.proprofs.com/quiz-school/story.php?title=reaper-v-pro-tools-sound-test
Please note this is not a 'my DAW is better than yours' post or a 'Use reaper its just as good as protools/cubase 6/logic/sonar/studio one/etc etc' post. Maybe it is for me, but isnt for you. Substitute any DAW names in the place of PT and reaper, and the point is the same: I think the most important reason for choosing a DAW is that it does your bread and butter work in a fashion you like and has functions and capabilities you will make good use of and satisfies your needs, not because of a belief in its innate playback sound quality, which I think (and whatever evidence there is supports) is just psychoacoustics, expectation bias, or some other vagary of circumstance or perception.
Not having a go at you, just have to state that point as clearly as I can, for steves consideration agaist the view that one DAW does sound better than another (which is suprisingly common), since I somewhere between strongly believe and know it to be true, it would be remis of me not to :)
-
+1 +1 +1
Was going to comment on this in my first post on this subject.
Anyway, now it has been commented on by an expert :D
So you don't need my 2 bobs worth !!! 8)
-
Cheers
Ben has considerable relevent experience and expertise too, y'know, though, but :)