etc.Ĭode: fots ~ > Library > Logs > DiagnosticReports $ ll Cubase\ 9.5_2018-0* I don't use e-drum kits, so that might be an application that would make a difference, if Poly-Aftertouch is badly needed to choke groups of instruments, or. So far, I haven't had the need to use/record Poly-Aftertouch with my HW-Synth, so it really doesn't bother me that much. Is it a technical one, that can't be accomplished for a specific reason/s ? or just something they don't feel is a high-priority, although it has been requested by so many users ? IF you have a solution to this I am all ears I'm aware that Poly-Aftertouch support has been requested from Presonus ages ago, yet sadly, they seem to not deliver it, I wonder what is the issue ? I challenge you to choke a cymbal on an e kit there, good luck. Why is it that Cubase, Logic, Reaper, and so on can do this basic midi message function yet Presonus chooses to ignore every e-drummer on the planet? WE have been requesting this since version 1. Yes I know the difference between the two controller types, however, imo of course.Great feedback, thanks so much for your insights. I think a move from Cubase 9 to Studio One would be a step down in quality of life. If you're a guy sitting in the bedroom on one laptop and a few vstis and you want a self-contained daw that does not work in large sync you'll like Studio One. not to mention sync to tape as a slave if need be. and with bazillions of running tracks and effects. Particularly for use in a large system as master or slave.for audio or midi. But that would be even more puzzling.Ĭubase is where I need it to be and has been for many years. plus.a lot of the Presonus interfaces themselves don't have sync capabilities anyway. The only reason I can think of that the ex-Nuendo guys haven't built slave-sync in is because they're convinced they're selling to a dumbed-down crowd. can work in the context of slave/master in large systems. But even Reaper (I believe).and Cakewalk. It has a slightly better interface look than Reaper, and about the same look imo as the now-free Cakewalk. Maybe the Studio One name was chosen to hammer in the concept that "this daw will not talk to anything but itself". "I" and others can NOT create on Studio one without boundaries, nor can "I" and others Produce without limits. STILL can not generate smpte for master purposes in a large system such as a daw farm or multiple slaved computers for film etc. has a transport that STILL can not slave to incoming time code.much less do any slaving on a sample-accurate basis. that's the current tag line on the version 4 main pageīS. No Wars, just info of your experience please facepalm: For anyone of you that get and use Studio one 4 and Cubase 10 which do you think is better for midi and VSTs. I'm a Cubase 10 (correction I meant 9.5) user, that is considering Studio One 4. It looks like Studio one 4 has just come out.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |