switching from PT to Cubase

[DT_bettinzana]

I'd like to be able to use the MIDI editor in full screen, but that means part of it is blocked by the DTouch window.

Is there a button or macro to do this?

follow up question: the macro library doesn't show up in the macro editor.
It looks all grey, empty and weird.

Hello,
send us an E-Mail for these requests. It is easier to use E-Mail for images exchange, etc ...
Send us two screenshots to better describe both these issues.

[~ufo~]

okidoki!

[clonewar]

Out of curiosity, why are you switching from PT to Cubase? I ask because I've thought many times about going the other way (Cubase/Nuendo to PT for mixing). It's mainly Avid's pricing/licensing policies that have kept me away. I also nice that Steinberg has a remote protocol that lets third party developers create deeply integrated control surfaces, while PT is still stuck with HUI.

[~ufo~]

Because Pro Tools has been plaguing me with bugs and CPU errors ever since PT11 was released.
Granted, PT11 was a complete rebuild/redesign of the thing from the ground up, so some growing pains were to be expected.
But that was four years ago.

I'm PT9-10 I used to record whole bands live together at 96k 64 sample buffer on my HD Native system with a few plugins running.
No problem, it was stable enough to do that. After a while, with some more taxing VIs or whatever, maybe I'd have to go to 128, but that would keep me safe. Of course in the mix stage, we'd go up. But tracking with low buffers, no problem at all.

Since PT11 it's become WAY more efficient in terms of CPU at higher buffers. And because of the new audio engine they finally could add track freeze etc. However, I'm plagued with CPU errors whilst recording at low buffers.

Moreover I'm developing into more of a composer than a band producer, so I'm using a lot more VIs that I used to.
I'm getting 'showstopper' CPU errors whilst composing with VIs, virtually independently of buffer settings.

Ive spent hundreds of hours over the last years sorting out these issues in one support case after the other and I've yet to see an actual fix to the majority of my reported bugs.
I was okay with their subscription idea, providing it allowed them to improve stability.
I've paid for two years worth of $400 subscription now (because I was lucky to have a grace period) and I'm left with a worse product than four years ago. Much more features, and welcomed ones at that, but almost unusably unstable to produce with.

So I told them to give my money back or at least let me continue my support plan (which expired yesterday going into a 30 day grace period) free of charge until they come up with a build that's AT LEAST equally stable as PT9-10 were (because they weren't free of issues either, but very workable).

My Avid rep is coming over after Musikmesse, for coffee, so we'll see what happens.

I don't want to leave PT because I know it very well, I built a castle worth of template, routing and workflow in there.
One of the things I like about it is that it's free in routing. It drives me nuts that neither cubase and studio one have such a simple thing as a channel and insist on dumbing down features to make it more accessible to the lay men. That's fine for a beginner or artist version, it is not acceptable in a pro version IMNSHO.

Another reason is that I don't see the right forward thinking attitude with them.
Studio One fairs better, Cubase a little behind that (which makes sense, they're dragging a legacy along, like PT).
They are still stuck with hardware controllers and the touch screen support they do is just dabbling with iPads.

We'll see what happens. Even though Cubase has many cool features, it still feels like a step back in terms of how I work.
DTouch would have to allow me to do some advanced macros to compensate for that. But it would overcomplicate my extensive routing matrix, which is never a good idea. It's nice and elegant in PT.

Studio One feels more forward thinking but it's a little too light to accommodate my mixing workflow.
Its multitouch workflow sucks bad, it just feels slapped on for bragging rights at this point.
They've got a macro bar but it's simplistic.
If there were DTouch for Studio One, I'd probably choose Studio One.

So there. If Avid would stop constantly letting me down, I'd pay the 400 (it's less minus VAT) a year subscription.
As it stands, I can't justify it. I told them too that the 1k 'opting back in' fee, they charge to reinstate your subscription after having let it expire will mean that I will never come back if I let it expire. I will have let it expire in the literal sense of the word.
I can understand their reasoning, but it's a sales tactic you can only justify when you have a sound product, which they have not, at least not to me. YMMV

Sorry for the rant, but you asked

[clonewar]

Because Pro Tools has been plaguing me with bugs and CPU errors ever since PT11 was released.
Granted, PT11 was a complete rebuild/redesign of the thing from the ground up, so some growing pains were to be expected.
But that was four years ago.

I'm PT9-10 I used to record whole bands live together at 96k 64 sample buffer on my HD Native system with a few plugins running.
No problem, it was stable enough to do that. After a while, with some more taxing VIs or whatever, maybe I'd have to go to 128, but that would keep me safe. Of course in the mix stage, we'd go up. But tracking with low buffers, no problem at all.

Since PT11 it's become WAY more efficient in terms of CPU at higher buffers. And because of the new audio engine they finally could add track freeze etc. However, I'm plagued with CPU errors whilst recording at low buffers.

Moreover I'm developing into more of a composer than a band producer, so I'm using a lot more VIs that I used to.
I'm getting 'showstopper' CPU errors whilst composing with VIs, virtually independently of buffer settings.

I've read a lot about CPU errors in PT 12 at the DUC. Do you only get them at low latencies? What about mixing at 1024 or higher? If I ever moved to PT it would be mainly for mixing, I'd still use Cubase or Logic for composing/production.

Ive spent hundreds of hours over the last years sorting out these issues in one support case after the other and I've yet to see an actual fix to the majority of my reported bugs.
I was okay with their subscription idea, providing it allowed them to improve stability.
I've paid for two years worth of $400 subscription now (because I was lucky to have a grace period) and I'm left with a worse product than four years ago. Much more features, and welcomed ones at that, but almost unusably unstable to produce with.

So I told them to give my money back or at least let me continue my support plan (which expired yesterday going into a 30 day grace period) free of charge until they come up with a build that's AT LEAST equally stable as PT9-10 were (because they weren't free of issues either, but very workable).

My Avid rep is coming over after Musikmesse, for coffee, so we'll see what happens.

I'd be interested to know if anything fruitful comes out of your meeting with the Avid rep.

I don't want to leave PT because I know it very well, I built a castle worth of template, routing and workflow in there.
One of the things I like about it is that it's free in routing. It drives me nuts that neither cubase and studio one have such a simple thing as a channel and insist on dumbing down features to make it more accessible to the lay men. That's fine for a beginner or artist version, it is not acceptable in a pro version IMNSHO.

What exactly is a channel in PT? Is it like a bus in Logic, basically a 'wire' that connects a track output to a track input, but it's not a track itself?

Cubase and Nuendo are very deep, and I've always been able to find a way to do what I need, but my routing needs and template aren't nearly as complex as yours. My complaints around Cubendo are really more to do with the poor (IMO) user interface, the lack of a proper 'smart' mouse editing tool, and the way they handle external FX inserts.

Another reason is that I don't see the right forward thinking attitude with them.
Studio One fairs better, Cubase a little behind that (which makes sense, they're dragging a legacy along, like PT).
They are still stuck with hardware controllers and the touch screen support they do is just dabbling with iPads.

We'll see what happens. Even though Cubase has many cool features, it still feels like a step back in terms of how I work.
DTouch would have to allow me to do some advanced macros to compensate for that. But it would overcomplicate my extensive routing matrix, which is never a good idea. It's nice and elegant in PT.

Studio One feels more forward thinking but it's a little too light to accommodate my mixing workflow.
Its multitouch workflow sucks bad, it just feels slapped on for bragging rights at this point.
They've got a macro bar but it's simplistic.
If there were DTouch for Studio One, I'd probably choose Studio One.

I like Studio One and have been using it some on my Mac lately. They've taken some cues from PT with the editing interface. I use a lot of external outboard gear and I think that S1 has the best external insert workflow, the Pipeline plugin is great.

I was excited when V3 was announced with native touchscreen support, and it's definitely improved with the subsequent releases, but overall I'm not happy with it either. For mixing it works ok, swiping the mixer and menus/browsers to move around works well. Plugin control is good of course, but the faders 'feel' terrible compared to DTouch faders, and if you touch and hold a fader for a second without moving it S1 thinks that you want to move the track so when you move the faders you end up dragging the track around instead. Makes it impossible to do automation rides because I like to have my finger on the fader ahead of time to get ready for the fader ride. And while swiping in the edit screen works well to move it around, pinch to zoom is erradic, and actually trying to edit anything is horrible (you have to press and hold for a second to let S1 know that you want to edit and then start making your move).

Also, compared to Cubase external control surface support in S1 is very poor. They've released their own Faderport 8, but it's too small and lacks the features that I'd need in a hardware control surface (waaaay too much menu diving and reusing of controls). I feel like they added touchscreen support as a way to 'get out' of having to provide better proper control surface support.

Really, my biggest issue is that I can't stand running my DAW in Windows, and I'm hoping that we see DTouch Cubase for Mac at some point. PT has always supposedly had excellent Mac support and it's one of the reasons that I've considered it.

This past week I spent a lot of time just trying to get my Windows 10 rig working correctly after some MS updates broke my ASIO drivers. And even after installing updates I was working and out of nowhere Windows disabled the entire screen, literally shadowed everything in the background and put a message about updates in the middle of the screen that I couldn't clear without acknowledging, which took me straight to the Control Panel, where I have automatic updates disabled.

I think MS has gone down a disgusting path with Windows 10 and I'm not interested in using it to make music. I'm a professional Windows developer and systems engineer so there's no doubt that frustrations that I face at work are helping to shape my opinion, but I just don't want to have to spend so much time disabling Windows services and processes to just have MS turn them back on or rename them (to break scripts) with the next update. And don't get me started on telemetry. As a user you really never have the power to turn that off at the OS level. Apple is far from perfect, but at least they're a consumer electronics company and have much tighter privacy policies than MS or google, their main goal to sell you hardware.

So there. If Avid would stop constantly letting me down, I'd pay the 400 (it's less minus VAT) a year subscription.
As it stands, I can't justify it. I told them too that the 1k 'opting back in' fee, they charge to reinstate your subscription after having let it expire will mean that I will never come back if I let it expire. I will have let it expire in the literal sense of the word.
I can understand their reasoning, but it's a sales tactic you can only justify when you have a sound product, which they have not, at least not to me. YMMV

Sorry for the rant, but you asked

I think the fee to opt back in if your subscription lapses is horrible. Since they allow buying PT HD software by itself now I can pick up PT 12 HD brand new for under $1000, which will come with a year of support and updates. So basically if you let your subscription lapse you end up having to pay the same as buying it brand new again...WTF??

If I were to get PT 12 HD I'd also get an HD Native card to use with my Symphony I/O.. But now they'll get me for $299 for a Digilink license.. It seems like Avid is constantly just trying to find way to bleed a little more $$ from their customers, and it's held me at bay.

BTW.. have you ever given Reaper a try? There's no touchscreen control for it, but it supposedly has the best low latency performance of any DAW, and has completely free routing. I've never gotten past it's interface, but I do know that it's fully customizable, you can even write scripts to add buttons and functionality directly to the interaface, they expose a lot of under the hood stuff through an API.

Thanks for sharing those details, and sorry for my ranting too!

[~ufo~]

I've read a lot about CPU errors in PT 12 at the DUC. Do you only get them at low latencies? What about mixing at 1024 or higher? If I ever moved to PT it would be mainly for mixing, I'd still use Cubase or Logic for composing/production.

I get them when recording without plugins at 96k 64 buffer and even 128, I'm not alone either. PT 9-10 was solid for this, PT11-12 isn't.
I get them too when I'm composing with say Kontakt, FM8 or Monark pretty much regardless of buffer.
While mixing it sometimes happens and then the CPU goes nuts, which usually means that it's one plugin that's gone nuts and is maxing out a core. That means that you either have to find the plug, de- and reactivate it, or relaunch the session.
It would be nice if Pro Tools would at least indicate which plugin is going nuts.

I'd be interested to know if anything fruitful comes out of your meeting with the Avid rep.

You and me both!

What exactly is a channel in PT? Is it like a bus in Logic, basically a 'wire' that connects a track output to a track input, but it's not a track itself?

A channel is like a channel on a mixing console. It is the channel part op a track, but has no audio track associated with it. (although, like any track or channel, you can freeze it).
They call it an "Aux track" which annoys me, because Pro Tools is made for professionals, who know the difference between a track and a channel, so just call it a damn channel.

Basically, it would be similar to what in cubase is the channel part of an bus channel or FX channel, but it's not married to a bus that gets created when you create the channel. In stead, you can freely choose its input. It can be a bus, or an input.
You know, like a channel on a mixing console, you decide what you patch into it.

Cubase and Nuendo are very deep, and I've always been able to find a way to do what I need, but my routing needs and template aren't nearly as complex as yours. My complaints around Cubendo are really more to do with the poor (IMO) user interface, the lack of a proper 'smart' mouse editing tool, and the way they handle external FX inserts.

They are deep, deeper than Pro Tools in many ways, but in comparison with pro tools, their routing is dumbed down a bit.
Probably to make it easier on non engineers. Alas, that is at the expense of flexibility.
I can do what I need to do, but without making macros, it would be unworkably painstaking in Cubase.
Try recreating twenty sends divided over three tracks every time I decide to try a different 2bus compressor or limiter.
In fact, now that I think about it, I'm not even sure I can create a macro for it because the names of the SC busses will change each time.

I like Studio One and have been using it some on my Mac lately. They've taken some cues from PT with the editing interface. I use a lot of external outboard gear and I think that S1 has the best external insert workflow, the Pipeline plugin is great.

It feels nicer than Cubase, GUI wise. The audio device setup seems more solid than in Cubase too, even though I finally managed to to get Cubase to talk to my HD Native correctly in Administrator mode.

I was excited when V3 was announced with native touchscreen support, and it's definitely improved with the subsequent releases, but overall I'm not happy with it either.

S1's multi touch support sucks. It feels slapped on. It can't touch DTouch. The Navigating is okay, but the actual editing, faders etc are crap.
They need to update that before it's useable on touch.

Also, compared to Cubase external control surface support in S1 is very poor. They've released their own Faderport 8, but it's too small and lacks the features that I'd need in a hardware control surface (waaaay too much menu diving and reusing of controls). I feel like they added touchscreen support as a way to 'get out' of having to provide better proper control surface support.

I don't think I'll ever be interested in a hardware controller anymore. Maybe a single fader for the DFader thing...
What I would like is a 24 faderbank sized touch screen, that's dedicated for the DTouch mixer, macros and virtual keyboard.
Using a normal second touch screen for that is just too big I think with 27" let alone higher. You could cut at least half of it off, vertically...

Really, my biggest issue is that I can't stand running my DAW in Windows, and I'm hoping that we see DTouch Cubase for Mac at some point. PT has always supposedly had excellent Mac support and it's one of the reasons that I've considered it.

I've just been toying around with windows now for two weeks. I'm on 8.1.
It's nice to be on an OS that's intended for touch, but yeah there's still some of those typical microsoft oversights and quirks.
It's not horrible, but I'd definitely prefer it if Apple got their act together and added multitouch support to macOS.

I think MS has gone down a disgusting path with Windows 10 and I'm not interested in using it to make music. I'm a professional Windows developer and systems engineer so there's no doubt that frustrations that I face at work are helping to shape my opinion, but I just don't want to have to spend so much time disabling Windows services and processes to just have MS turn them back on or rename them (to break scripts) with the next update. And don't get me started on telemetry. As a user you really never have the power to turn that off at the OS level. Apple is far from perfect, but at least they're a consumer electronics company and have much tighter privacy policies than MS or google, their main goal to sell you hardware.

Hhhmm.. Here's to hoping Apple gets their heads out of their... cores.

I think the fee to opt back in if your subscription lapses is horrible. Since they allow buying PT HD software by itself now I can pick up PT 12 HD brand new for under $1000, which will come with a year of support and updates. So basically if you let your subscription lapse you end up having to pay the same as buying it brand new again...WTF??

That's the thing, I OWN HD, got a perpetual license. I should be able to step into the 12 subscription game at any time and maybe pay an upgrade price for PT13, but 1k? Gedoudahe!!!!

If I were to get PT 12 HD I'd also get an HD Native card to use with my Symphony I/O.. But now they'll get me for $299 for a Digilink license.. It seems like Avid is constantly just trying to find way to bleed a little more $$ from their customers, and it's held me at bay.

This has been annoying PT users since the days they had their act together, it was barely tolerable back then. Now it's just insulting, and I told them this.

BTW.. have you ever given Reaper a try? There's no touchscreen control for it, but it supposedly has the best low latency performance of any DAW, and has completely free routing. I've never gotten past it's interface, but I do know that it's fully customizable, you can even write scripts to add buttons and functionality directly to the interaface, they expose a lot of under the hood stuff through an API.

I have, but not recently. It seems more flexible than Cubase and Studio One for my use, but the lack of multitouch support or DTouch will annoy me. If Cubase lets me down, Reaper is the next thing I'll try.

[DT_bettinzana]

Hello ~ufo~,
have you checked those "plugin wrapper" like the BueCats ones?
I am interested in them too, not to fix a problem like yours, but for something else.
So I am curious to know if you have tested something.

[clonewar]

Hi ufo, just curious how things are going with your transition? Have you found a workflow in Cubase that works for you?

Aside of the routing and other Cubase interface issues you were having, I'm curious about how you feel the Cubase DTouch/touchscreen workflow compares to PT and DTouch? I've been waiting for the Mac version of DTouch for Cubase/Nuendo, but in the meantime I might add PT (not just for touchscreen purposes, also for easier compatibility with other studios, etc). It seems like DTouch for PT is much more limited than the Cubase version because of HUI, but some of HUI's limitations are lifted because of the direct touch access to the PT interface, and the DTouch macro engine. Losing the Matrix window and the new floating mixer would be a real bummer though, but PT does bring the powerful memory locations.

Any thoughts? Are you staying with Cubase?

[~ufo~]

Hi Michael,

I must stay, after spending nearly a month with the cubase session here and there, I still find myself shouting at the screen way more than I'd like to.
I'm sure I'd be able to get used to most of it eventually, but I'd need more time, but my trial is over in a few days and I won't be in a rush to buy a license.

As it stands, I found out that Pro Tools is running smoothly for me on windows (the issues I'm having appear to be mainly related to PT and Mac).
Avid have given me a free one year extension and told me they are working on a fix and told me to get back in touch around September to see how I got on. So as it stands I don't NEED to transition to another DAW, only another OS.
I may toy around with a few DAWs, just to see if they're nicer to compose in. Studio One feels a cooler contestant there, if they'd just get their native multi touch support in order.

Cubase has been more stable for me than PT on Mac is at the moment, BUT, it has not been night and day.
Pro Tools on Windows has been so stable for me it is night and day with both Cubase and Pro Tools on Mac.

Regarding DTouch in particular:
(take this with a grain of salt, I really didn't get into DTouch for Cubase deeply enough to form a real opinion)

- The new floating windows seems like a logical evolution, it would allow you to avoid the mixer screen altogether.
- I dislike the current mixer screen because it has the macros in the left top corner. I understand it makes sense because of the Cubase GUI, but I don't think it makes sense ergonomically. It feels like function is following form here. So the new floating mixer, at least for me, feels more logical.
- I don't like the way set to zero and set to infinity works in DTouch for Cubase, with that latching toggle to activate first.
I want a button for it in the channel strip, that can be swiped, not a two step action.
- Even though DTouch for Pro Tools is more limited, I feel it's a more elegant implementation at this point. But take that with a grain of salt since I just don't know Cubase that well, it all feels alien to me.
- Honestly there's not much functionality I'm missing in DTouch for PT, if I can start customising my channel strip and I could get a separate zoom and scroll pad open at the same time, possibly supporting gestures (only in those hot zones) I think I'll be okay.
- The matrix window... I'm not sure about it. It might not be for me (I hardly used the matrix on the Pro Control either).
If you are used to having a lot of tracks/channels visible at a time, it may be fantastic. However, even though I run huge sessions, I rarely have more than 24 channels visible at a time, usually less than twenty. That's just because I have everything organised in show/hide markers which recall the open plugins too. That workflow leaves little to be desired and I don't see there matrix helping me much there.
That said, like most functionality, in the end I usually find a way to make it be helpful to me. I just haven't found it yet, nor have I looked for it.

I hope this helps.

[DT_bettinzana]

Hello guys!

I want to say one important thing about "DTouch for PT" Vs "DTouch for Cubendo" from the perspective of the developer (mine):

DTouch for PT is at 95% of its evolution path. Due to the lack of a good protocol, we cannot add much.

DTouch for Cubendo is at 25% of its evolution path. We can do a lot more. I don't want to be too much excited, but I could say that we are 90% limited only by our imagination.

That said, you can use the DAW that you wish. I have already chosen mine. Not because Cubase is perfect but because PT is COMPLETELY closed. If you plan to upgrade your studio based on PT, sooner or later you will need to purchase their control surfaces, etc ...
And don't forget that Avid is a pro-video, not an audio, company.

I repeat: this is my very personal thinking, but I am a registered AAX developer and I know their policies.