mySoftware [Updates]

Once you create a user profile on Motifator and update with the appropriate information, the updates shown here will be specific to you.

newProducts [YOK]

rssFeeds [Syndicate]


forumforum
 

Old Motifator threads are available in the Archive.

Viewing topic "AI4 in the audio engine food chain?"

     
Posted on: March 07, 2009 @ 07:29 PM
SpongeBob
Total Posts:  1588
Joined  11-19-2006
status: Guru

Dose the new Cubase Studio 5 use the same sound engine as AI4? Wondering about the recording sound quality between the two.

Thanks in advance

Bob

  [ Ignore ]  

Posted on: March 08, 2009 @ 07:13 PM
frankE
Avatar
Total Posts:  5350
Joined  12-23-2002
status: Guru

Bob, I’ve not seen any information that suggests that the core audio engine of Cubase has changed significantly between version 4 and 5. The change was between SX3 and C4. If the free AI has the same engine as the commercial versions of C4 then the answer is, to the best of my knowledge right now, no the engine hasn’t changed much. BUT let’s not stop there though. The core engine may not have changed, but there have been significant programming changes in other area that connect back to the audio engine, so you might very well experience improved audio quality...for other reasons. In any case, I would suggest that it’s mostly a waste of energy to compare AI with C5, as one is basically comparing ‘apples and oranges’. When looking at performance, quality and features, the differences between the two programs is significant. Finally, let’s not forget one’s audio interface. If one uses a poorly performing interface with either version, audio quality will be poor, but if one uses a top quality interface....well you get the idea. :) HTH...............frank

  [ Ignore ]  

Posted on: March 08, 2009 @ 08:10 PM
SpongeBob
Total Posts:  1588
Joined  11-19-2006
status: Guru

Thanks for the info, Frank.

What I wanted to do was compare the audio quality of a recording made on the exact same hardware (my computer and sound card) and compare the result between the trial version of Sonar 8 I have installed and AI4, which I have already installed.

I am not applying any filters or FX - just the piano straight from my Rack XS. The Sonar recording sounds a lot better to me, but as you state, there are a lot of variables to consider. Lots of people use Cubase, so I have to assume that the Studio and full version sounds great as well.

Objectively, Sonar itself seems much more efficient. For example, AI4 takes 54 seconds to launch on my computer. Sonar 8 takes 7 seconds. Both are using the same plugs (Atmosphere and Sonic-Synth), plus a few of their own, but nothing too serious. Both work fine at 10ms once running.

I’m trying to decide between upgrading my Sonar 5PE, which will not run on Vista, to 8PE at $250, or go with Cubase Studio 5 at $200 (upgrade from AI4), or the full version of 5 for $400 (upgrade from AI4). I have a lot of Yamaha gear, so the integration is tempting, but for me, Sonar is so much easier to operate, and I have had virtually no problems with it so far. I cannot say that about AI4.

I have some time before I need to decide, so I was fishing around to see if my audio quality was going to be any better with a Cubase product. Both probably work equally as well, so it comes down to what I’m comfortable with. The other potential issue is that my computer has no free USB slots. No where to put the Steinberg key…

Thanks again.

Bob

  [ Ignore ]  


 
     


Previous Topic:

‹‹ import midi file problem in Cubase 5
Next Topic:

    Motif XS ››