|
Post by drsax on Nov 22, 2017 21:24:21 GMT -6
For you guys that have upgraded, does 9.5 run just as fast/smooth? I'm on an older Mac Pro that's decently fast but don't want to bog things down if 64 bit floating point is going to take more processing power. I’m a WIN 10 64 guy but it’s smoother and more efficient on my system than 9.0 was
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 29, 2017 23:10:20 GMT -6
Demo available....FWIW.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 2, 2017 21:21:29 GMT -6
Besides the launch time, which has always been truly painful on Cubase....this is snappier. On both my OSX MBAir and the antique decade old Core2Quad.
And besides UI "snap"...I opened a C6 project I was working on (old PC hardware) and having some trouble with playing Keyscape WHILE the large 88.2 project ran...works flawlessly in 9.5.
I in no way love the docked/zoned thing (even after a year on LPX), but hit f3 and the mixer comes up full screen, hit it again, it goes away--like it's always worked. Frankly--that's always been a good practice of Steiny's they may implement some new way to do something, but they take care to not remove the OLD way when they can.
On thing that scares me a little is that they DO seem to be trusting the devs for latency compensation...maybe....the Voxengo works now as designed (which intentionally "lies" to the host)--but, I've been inserting all kinds of latent stuff all over the mixer and I can't seem to get the loopback compensation off--so...somehow they seem to have kept it tight. I was scared that the first overhaul since they took on Avid's TDM system would break the reason I CHOSE Cubase. Initial testing in 32 and 64bit engines seems to say it still works. It's a simple loop test--not like I used to have with racks of hardware inserts and auxes...but...good sign.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 4, 2017 15:01:50 GMT -6
Hey....when did they make the decision that the mixer view didn't need access to the polarity and input trim controls? Just because Logic doesn't have them on the mix AT ALL....doesn't mean there's not a functional need.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 4, 2017 15:05:37 GMT -6
I think you have to change it up top there...in the racks thingy
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 4, 2017 15:55:34 GMT -6
Life saver. Thank you.
Here's the thing about this greased pig...whole 36 track 88.2 mix going with the buffers set to 2048 and I think "what would some horns sound like on this?"...open Kontakt, 15 seconds later, I'm recording Session Horns Pro latency free while the whole mix plays. On...you know...a decade old Windows machine.
I'm gonna do this project in it...I'll probably have to buy this one unless something horrible rears it's head.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 4, 2017 17:08:20 GMT -6
I've been mixing everything in PTs...well, just because...all of my templates, etc...but damn, I'm starting to get the thing where it spikes the CPU and the playback craps out...then I have to toggle the buffer rate to get it back copacetic. It's extremely annoying. Maybe the next project I mix I'll mix in Cubase. That will be the ONE time where somebody says, I need the PT's session!
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 4, 2017 21:13:37 GMT -6
The last time I used ProTools was v10 native...and that's exactly what I thought "it works...you just have to keep jiggling the virtual wires"--cutting stuff off and on... #sameAsItEvahWas real men mix in MixBus32c.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 5, 2017 9:59:42 GMT -6
The last time I used ProTools was v10 native...and that's exactly what I thought "it works...you just have to keep jiggling the virtual wires"--cutting stuff off and on... #sameAsItEvahWas real men mix in MixBus32c. That shit is a workflow killa
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 5, 2017 13:20:51 GMT -6
Jiggling wires or Mixbus? Or both? Ha.
Right click "update origin"....fucking thank you. I sometimes work with a drummer who can't seem to ever get his sync right....then I can use my tracks that Logic timestamped incorrectly--move them into place and update origin.
Couple of things that bug me.
...as an MCU user--the new "visibility zones" in the mixer configurations don't reflect on the faders--even though that what the faders mirror--the current mixer config (used to be mixer views). Not sure if there's a setting I'm not seeing...or if I need to simply not use them. Too bad--it's a nice visual organization thing to be able to align things to the left, center left, or far right of the view/config. But, it's confusing when it looks one way--but, the faders are in a different order.
And the exporting. Seriously, why can't they update this with a "ignore fader/pan/plug in" and know that I ALWAYS want a mono track exported mono. I thought for sure in these 6 or 7 years, they'd have gotten THAT right. Their "export track" exports it as a non timestamped PCM file with accompanying XML....so, suitable for ONLY importing into another Cubase session. Maybe I'm missing something. Let's say I've recorded a guitar track--firs thing I do is clean it up--45sec of snip snip fade fade, and it's digital black when I'm not playing. Cool. Now I want to export that. You have to hard pan it (to remove pan law volume change)....set the fader to unity....bypass any plug ins....THEN do export audio mixdown--THEN, if it's mono, select "mono downmix" in that dialog. When I finish projects, I literally do a "save AS" so I can reset all the channels on the mixer for a two pass batch export (one pass for the mono--one for stereo tracks).
Logic? "Export selected tracks (or regions) as files"--one dialog....out they go as timestamped AND rendered from zero (for old system compatibility) whatever format you selected. Mixbus is more like Cubase's Export Audio Mixdown where you check the channels you want exported--only, it exports mono to mono....and it has a check box that says "ignore plug ins and volume settings" or something. Why would you need to change your mix channel to simply export the edited track?
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 6, 2017 11:36:17 GMT -6
Cubase users...no one exports raw tracks?
I just exported a kick drum track as a timing reference for some other tracks I was exporting....this track was RECORDED in Cubase 6(Origin), exported to LPX (export1) however long ago...Cubase9 opens the original file/project--export again (export 2)...and I can't get export 1 and 2 to null in Logic. I can get it to MOSTLY null...once you make up for the fader and pan law differences, because Cubase can't export things without feeding it through their mixer channel and applying everything there...but, the lack of a simple track/edit level export is just an odd omission to me.
I went into the 9.5 Pool to see if maybe they added something there...nope--export pool exports a proprietary Stein berg archive format. Any export tracks dialog exports a non timestamped file and accompanying XML file--which means sample accurate transfer from one Steinberg product to another.
What am I missing here?
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Dec 6, 2017 12:44:11 GMT -6
popmann I recommend using the "Render in Place" function, from the Edit dropdown menu. You can choose the file path, and you can choose to bypass channel and effects setting if you want to
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 6, 2017 13:45:59 GMT -6
When I do that in 9.5, it still isn't timestamped properly. Weird thing is...it appears to have a timestamp in the Pool...but, take that file to Mixbus or Logic and neither sees it as having a timestamp. Do an "export audio mixdown" and both see it and respect it fine.
I found the workaround, which is SO 1998 tech--is to pencil in digital black at the beginning of the file....then you can do the track export(or the above render in place or bounce selection), and it will be rendered from zero.
There are so FEW things that Avid really gets right (IMO/E)--consolidate files is one. Take/playlist management and comping is the other, but everyone has copied that part by now and potentially bettered it. I don't do enough of that to put a huge value on it.
Render In Place Bounce Selection Export tracks Export Audio Mixdown (from channel output) Events to Part Export Track Archive Export pool Backup Project
That's a lot of options to not include a simple track level timestamped export of a mono track. The Render in Place dialog is the "right" one, IMO. That should be the same dialog for "export tracks". IMO.
I guess I'm a little weirded out because I remember BEFORE timestamps--when everything had to be rendered from zero (where Consolidate Files started I might add)....or you had to print a few clicks before or after so you could align by that...but, it's been somewhere between 15 and 20 years since the industry decided that Broadcast WAV and AIF (both PCM files with a timestamp header) would be all anyone used. If ever I seem OCD about compensation--same deal--it directly affects the timestamps of the recording. If Logic chooses to mis compensate for some bypassed plug ins, the recorded timestamps are now incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 6, 2017 14:04:23 GMT -6
Here's your consolidate files. The range tool selection is what I was missing to render from zero.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 6, 2017 16:42:09 GMT -6
If you combine the range selection with the newer "render in place" dialog, you can pretty painlessly get a straight export of the edited but flat file rendered from zero. Absurd that 20 years later rendering from zero is still a thing, but...you know...I am well over my quota for whining for the day.
|
|
|
Post by Bender on Dec 13, 2017 14:42:42 GMT -6
I haven't even cracked open my pro 9.5 yet but I'm getting super frustrated here on 8.5 Pro in automation land on this mix...
It used to be (before I upgraded to pro in 7 & for eternity in my previous versions of cubase) that my automation used to work...after going pro,writing automations has become a nightmare whenever I try to pepper in automation in little spots on tracks; it just goes ahead and F!$# up the rest of the track automation....making it have long graded ramps - not keeping other automation,disregarding unrelated automation on that track and overall isn't smooth like it used to be etc. I can't even write a nice ramp without it just having like 2 points and not the many points for a smooth ramp up...tell me I can do this without using their dumb tools... I just want to automate the faders for a mix without the Read/Write side going nuts.
Reading up the manual & the forums only makes me more lost. virgin territory..automation chasing...touch, auto latch, crossover... Jesus.
There has got to be an easy setting I'm missing in this finangled automation menu or preferences that will let me change it away from whatever the hell is going on to get things back to normal...much like the whole comp tool/layered editing tick box debacle I found myself in upon upgrading from 5.5 ages ago...anyway anyone care to help me out so I can do it the old school way,cause this is nuts! I have 6 songs ahead of me mixing wise and can't deal.
Clarification:
All I want to do is keep a track on read, enable write- write in the automation for the section or little blip that I want, and when I'm done moving the fader:
* all the other automation on that track lane won't get messed up &/or change * if automating a ramp or lots of ups and downs have the automation resemble what I actually did and not some half a#*ed approximation of what it actually was.
I'm doing this in touch mode,which from my understanding is how I've always been accustomed to automation working, & once you let go of the click on the mouse the automation IT USED to stay there if no automation was after it, or snap immediately to whatever automation marker value was after it, regardless of how close or far it was from that section of automation.
When using VCA faders and groups seeing the multiple drawings of automation's takes a little getting used to as well but that's a whole nother topic.... Thanks ye cubase gods
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 13, 2017 17:25:32 GMT -6
Honestly--I use so little automation, I've not even turned anything on to see the differences. If I have 5 or 10 mostly minor moves in a mix, that's "heavily automated" for me. I do remember they made some overhaul thing where they allowed "blank spaces" that were ambiguous in the automation lane, and I thought : that's a mindfuck waiting to happen....
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Dec 13, 2017 22:59:28 GMT -6
I haven't even cracked open my pro 9.5 yet but I'm getting super frustrated here on 8.5 Pro in automation land on this mix... It used to be (before I upgraded to pro in 7 & for eternity in my previous versions of cubase) that my automation used to work...after going pro,writing automations has become a nightmare whenever I try to pepper in automation in little spots on tracks; it just goes ahead and F!$# up the rest of the track automation....making it have long graded ramps - not keeping other automation,disregarding unrelated automation on that track and overall isn't smooth like it used to be etc. I can't even write a nice ramp without it just having like 2 points and not the many points for a smooth ramp up...tell me I can do this without using their dumb tools... I just want to automate the faders for a mix without the Read/Write side going nuts. Reading up the manual & the forums only makes me more lost. virgin territory..automation chasing...touch, auto latch, crossover... Jesus. There has got to be an easy setting I'm missing in this finangled automation menu or preferences that will let me change it away from whatever the hell is going on to get things back to normal...much like the whole comp tool/layered editing tick box debacle I found myself in upon upgrading from 5.5 ages ago...anyway anyone care to help me out so I can do it the old school way,cause this is nuts! I have 6 songs ahead of me mixing wise and can't deal. Clarification: All I want to do is keep a track on read, enable write- write in the automation for the section or little blip that I want, and when I'm done moving the fader: * all the other automation on that track lane won't get messed up &/or change * if automating a ramp or lots of ups and downs have the automation resemble what I actually did and not some half a#*ed approximation of what it actually was. I'm doing this in touch mode,which from my understanding is how I've always been accustomed to automation working, & once you let go of the click on the mouse the automation IT USED to stay there if no automation was after it, or snap immediately to whatever automation marker value was after it, regardless of how close or far it was from that section of automation. When using VCA faders and groups seeing the multiple drawings of automation's takes a little getting used to as well but that's a whole nother topic.... Thanks ye cubase gods I’m sorry to hear of your automation issues... something doesn’t sound right. Maybe it’s an incorrect setting, or maybe some corrupt preferences. Have you reached out to Steinberg to see if they can help you get this squared away? It’s definitely frustrating when little issues like this distract us from a smooth workflow.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 14, 2017 9:02:46 GMT -6
Here's your consolidate files. The range tool selection is what I was missing to render from zero. Thanks! Helpful!
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 14, 2017 14:21:49 GMT -6
No prob. The first things I test about DAWs is import/export and timeline compensation. Call them "my issues". Don't get me started on the geek wood I got when I ran the Mixbus demo and the first thing they did was instruct me to plug in analog audio cables and calibrate the system for sample accurate compensation...."where's my wallet?"
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Dec 14, 2017 18:01:26 GMT -6
I haven't even cracked open my pro 9.5 yet but I'm getting super frustrated here on 8.5 Pro in automation land on this mix... It used to be (before I upgraded to pro in 7 & for eternity in my previous versions of cubase) that my automation used to work...after going pro,writing automations has become a nightmare whenever I try to pepper in automation in little spots on tracks; it just goes ahead and F!$# up the rest of the track automation....making it have long graded ramps - not keeping other automation,disregarding unrelated automation on that track and overall isn't smooth like it used to be etc. I can't even write a nice ramp without it just having like 2 points and not the many points for a smooth ramp up...tell me I can do this without using their dumb tools... I just want to automate the faders for a mix without the Read/Write side going nuts. Reading up the manual & the forums only makes me more lost. virgin territory..automation chasing...touch, auto latch, crossover... Jesus. There has got to be an easy setting I'm missing in this finangled automation menu or preferences that will let me change it away from whatever the hell is going on to get things back to normal...much like the whole comp tool/layered editing tick box debacle I found myself in upon upgrading from 5.5 ages ago...anyway anyone care to help me out so I can do it the old school way,cause this is nuts! I have 6 songs ahead of me mixing wise and can't deal. Clarification: All I want to do is keep a track on read, enable write- write in the automation for the section or little blip that I want, and when I'm done moving the fader: * all the other automation on that track lane won't get messed up &/or change * if automating a ramp or lots of ups and downs have the automation resemble what I actually did and not some half a#*ed approximation of what it actually was. I'm doing this in touch mode,which from my understanding is how I've always been accustomed to automation working, & once you let go of the click on the mouse the automation IT USED to stay there if no automation was after it, or snap immediately to whatever automation marker value was after it, regardless of how close or far it was from that section of automation. When using VCA faders and groups seeing the multiple drawings of automation's takes a little getting used to as well but that's a whole nother topic.... Thanks ye cubase gods I don't think there's any way to add new automation without having to consider your other automation. For example, if you automated the chorus of a vocal and then wanted to automate some of the verse, you would have to make four points for the verse automation and make sure the last point-which adjoins to the first chorus point- is the same volume. If there's an easier way, I'd love to hear it.
|
|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on Dec 14, 2017 20:03:32 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 14, 2017 20:31:24 GMT -6
That old article is how I've done it my whole time in Cubase. You don't understand what I'm complaining about. What I posted, is the way you export tracks...PCM files, without regard to mixer settings. The equivalent of "consolidate tracks" in ProTools or "Export Tracks as Audio Files" in LPX or "stem export" in Mixbuss--with both Logic and Mixbus having options on export to ignore the channel and plug in DSP.
I feel like you didn't even read it:
There's actually another workaround since you have to reset the mixer anyway(something they don't mention-and is ALL I was complaining about), which is to select all your mono tracks and assign them to a mono group....then without selecting "mono down mix" stereo will output to stereo and mono to mono.
I have a fundamental philosophical issue with exporting "tracks" with any DSP done. The only way to do that via "export Audio Mixdown" is to actually go into the mixer and bypass everything....hard pan everything (so no pan law volume changes)....bypass plug ins....and if you want the one pass solution, you assign all the mono tracks to a mono bus....THEN export audio mix down and batch it. It's the most NOT automatic batch process EVER!!
|
|
|
Post by toader on Dec 21, 2017 16:42:46 GMT -6
I've been using 9.5 here... Loving it. A lot of the new features are amazing. It could have been a full upgrade - not just a .5. I'm surprised they released so many features as part of a .5.
The only thing that bugs me so far - offline processing has no realtime preview while listening to the rest of your tracks. Without that, it seems kind of pointless to me. Overall though, it's a really great update.
|
|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on Dec 21, 2017 17:51:05 GMT -6
can't you just use plugins that don't require offline processing? Offline processing seems like such an antiquated approach to production that was spawned from the days of not enough CPU horsepower a decade ago...
|
|