Aida Sound Users Forum

Hi,

I'm currently on PTHD.
I might switch to Cubase Pro at the end of the month.
I have some questions about routing.

In PT I use a template that has extensive routing and busing, like really extensive. It's pretty much a complicated Broadcast facility in the box.
I'm a bit unclear about busing in Cubase.

Could I have, for example:
twenty sets of paralel buses, each feeding eight consecutive serial buses, summed to a stereo bus at the end which will also go to several generations of serial stereo buses and will be matrixed out to a few other buses?
Will I be able to send sample accurate sidechain sends from a previous generation of serial bus to the next?

This is paramount for my workflow and production system.
Thanks.

Not sure if you're aware but Steinberg have made a 30 day trial available for Cubase 9 - for a routing matrix like you require I'd certainly give it a trial to be sure!

Thanks, I'm trying elements since pro and artist seem te require a e-licenser dongle to even demo.

Ah damn, yeah I wondered about that after I'd posted actually - pretty stupid on Steinbergs part as not many people have an eLicencer unless they have VEP etc. already.

If you send me the exact spec of what you're trying to route via pm/email I'll give it a try for you.

BTW, not sure if you're aware but Steinberg have announced Nuendo 8 is on the way & they've done away with the NEK so all the Cubase functions will be rolled into Nuendo as standard. If you're on HD (like I was) you might find the extra stuff Nuendo brings a bit more appealing than Cubase. Depends how much post you do really but it's certainly more equivalent to HD than Cubase.

Anyway, by all means shoot me over what you're after & I'll try setting it up in Cubase Pro for you.

Thanks,

I'll probably invest in an e-licenser just to be able to test everything I need.
I think the main problem here is that elements doesn't allow you to pick an output bus as an input on a track or group track.

I'm a bit confused about the routing anyway.
How would you set up a subgroup channel that you want to output to another bus?
In elements, the FX channels do not allow you to output the channel to a group, so I can not have a WET subgroup fed by both the drum group and the drum FX channels. Nor do the FX channels have sends. Is this different in Pro etc?
I've now tried to use an audio track, an FX track and a group channel as a subgroup, and with all of them I run into a problem.

Another unrelated thing I'm running into is this:
In Pro Tools I use track show/hide markers which also launch window configurations.
What this means is that when I move from say my drums track show/hide marker to my bass marker, the plugins I had open in the drums one close and the plugins I had open in the bass one when I closed it, reopen.
This is important to my workflow. I've found track visibility configurations in cubase elements, but it's very basic (the plugins don't follow).
Does pro and/or DTouch help make this possible?

~ufo~ wrote:Hi,

I'm currently on PTHD.
I might switch to Cubase Pro at the end of the month.
I have some questions about routing.

In PT I use a template that has extensive routing and busing, like really extensive. It's pretty much a complicated Broadcast facility in the box.
I'm a bit unclear about busing in Cubase.

Could I have, for example:
twenty sets of paralel buses, each feeding eight consecutive serial buses, summed to a stereo bus at the end which will also go to several generations of serial stereo buses and will be matrixed out to a few other buses?
Will I be able to send sample accurate sidechain sends from a previous generation of serial bus to the next?

This is paramount for my workflow and production system.
Thanks.

I think you'll be able to create your routing setup in Cubase. Every audio track in Cubase has eight Send slots (pre or post fader with level control) and eight Direct Routing slots (post fader). Sends and Direct Outs can be fed to FX/Group channels, and each FX/Group channel has one Direct Output and eight Send slots, which can feed further FX/Groups, etc.

~ufo~ wrote: Another unrelated thing I'm running into is this:
In Pro Tools I use track show/hide markers which also launch window configurations.
What this means is that when I move from say my drums track show/hide marker to my bass marker, the plugins I had open in the drums one close and the plugins I had open in the bass one when I closed it, reopen.
This is important to my workflow. I've found track visibility configurations in cubase elements, but it's very basic (the plugins don't follow).
Does pro and/or DTouch help make this possible?

I don't know if you'll be able to replicate this workflow in Cubase, plugin windows aren't tied to markers or visibility configurations. Cubase does have Workspaces, but off the top of my head I don't know if they'll recall specific plugin windows. I'll check that later and let you know the results. If they do recall plugin windows then you might get close because you could tie recalling specific visibility configurations, markers, and workspaces to a Cubase macro, which can be assigned to a key command. One thing to keep in mind is that right now DTouch doesn't support Cubase workspaces, but it looks like that restriction is going to be removed soon.

I you do get an eLicenser to trial Cubase I agree with chazC and would recommend getting the Nuendo trial too. I've recently moved to Nuendo from Cubase, mainly for its additional automation features, specifically Preview automation. I'm not sure if you use it in PTHD, but now that I've gotten used to it I can't imagine working without it.

Thanks,


I think it's a nice workflow to replicate in Cubase, if it cant do it on it's own, maybe DTouch can step in to help.
It doesn't need to be triggered by a marker of course, a key command is fine, that's how I launch it.

To me, it only makes sense that if you recall the drum visibility setup, that the plugins you had ope n last time you were on it, also open.
What's the use of quickly being able to show and hide tracks via presets, if you constantly have to manually open and close floating windows?
Not only does the protools way do that, but you can set it to recall track heights, zoom settings etc. It's quite nice.
Especially when you navigate huge sessions.

Regarding Nuendo. I'll do the trial, but there's little chance I'll be buying it soon, if only for lack of budget.
I don't use automation preview currently, although I've seen it's powerful.
But the post thing is a good point. I do plan to get more into that in my migration away from being a studio towards a composer, with a studio, focused on synch and scoring. I've already received hints from potential collaborators that they'd be interested in any post services I could offer too. So Nuendo could be interesting in the long run.
Of course, I can use PT12HD into perpetuity too. I'll be okay.

Yeah sorry, I was trying to get into the studio over the weekend to give all these things a try for you to 100% confirm but time has evaded me!

As I recall, FX & Group channels are now identical in Cubase Pro, the lack of sends must be a version limitation.

Window configurations in Cubase aren't as global as Pro Tools as far as I'm aware - no plugin follow, it's purely track visibility. Obviously, if such things can be controlled by key commands and/or menu commands a macro could be constructed in DTouch to achieve this.

As clonewar states, you'll pretty much have to predominantly use sends to achieve your routing (as opposed to multiple outputs like you'd use in PT) but it should be possible (can't garauntee the sample accuracy without testing though but give me a few days & I'll try to replicate if you like but yes, in theory it should be feasible).

Also, and a pet peeve of mine, is that in Cubase you cannot route a send back into itself - I do this a lot in Pro Tools when doing sound design & on delay channels; instead of using the feedback/repeat function of the delay plug in I like to route the signal back into itself - it gives me a lot more creative options with multiple plugins. In Cubase I have to use multiple FX channels to achieve a similar workflow.

Having said all of that, I'd still rather pursue the Steinberg route than give Avid any more of my money... YMMV.

Thanks,

Yeah I've noticed that Steinberg seems to 'sensor' routing options, perhaps in an attempt to make it fool proof.
But since I'm a pro, I too would like to be able to send a channel back to itself, for the same reasons.
I expect you just create a dummy second FX channel and send its output back to the first, right?