Hey all. Has the Cubase-Motif integration steered you away from your other DAW?

I’ve been using Ableton Live for about six years now, I was using hardware recorders before that.

I had tried Cubase AI a few times back when I had an ES and my computers were always too underpowered. I could launch the program but it would hang on loading a project. However I could run Acid, Live and Reason with no problems.

Once I got the XFin 2011 I wanted to try Cubase again so I could use the VST editor (Live does not support VST3). I finally had a computer (MacBook Pro) powerful enough to do so but I have never been happy with the Cubase UI. Basic tasks that are easy to do in Live, literally without having to open the manual, required lots of reading and experimenting to understand how to do it in Cubase. There are some things only possible if I upgrade from AI and some things not even possible in Cubase. I hate the multiple windows on the screen, a real problem when using a 13” laptop!  Steinberg is more strict about requiring current OSes, Live still runs fine on Mac OS 10.7 but Cubase 8 requires 10.11. Upgrading my OS forces me to make paid upgrades to other applications that I use.

What I do like about Cubase is the simpler step sequencing function and channel strips controllable by the XF in Remote mode. I have yet to use the notation features but it’s nice to have that available.

So where I am at now is using Rewire to link Cubase and Live together. I use Cubase strictly as a MIDI sequencer for the XF but do my audio recording in Live. If Live ever gets VST3 support, I’ll probably drop Cubase altogether.

Yamaha really should have made Motifs integrate as well with a range of DAWs.  Surely, you want your flagship product (back then) to work beautifully with all the main DAW options instead of marginalizing a lot of people who use something else? I’m not sure owning Steinberg justifies their decision, either.

I used to use Cubase between 1989 (when it came out on Atari) and about 1998 ish. I was on Mac by 1996 and Steinberg were bolting on audio recording / processing to Cubase around that time. 

It used to be a beautiful MIDI sequencing package and had very little competition (those of you who have used C Lab Notator will know what I mean because it had more in common with an accounting package than what I wanted to see in sequencing software) but I’d say the late 90s were when it started to go a bit wrong and somehow got needlessly complicated.  As already mentioned, the look and layout of it has never really made sense or improved much and after a while, people who could afford to do so, were using the Yamaha ‘DSP Factory’ PCI card with its own GUI in Cubase which improved matters a lot. It all went stale though, and it still kind of is, somehow.

There are problems and annoyances with all DAWs either in terms of how they work, how they look or how they try and extract more money out of you for updates, but unfortunately Cubase has been left behind a little, and that’s really sad because it was the best for a time.  It will always be a big name and a serious product, but it has way too much competition now and other DAWs do things better and easier. Many are better just because they offer just one version for everyone and can do the same things for less money. 

All I can truly say that I miss about Cubase is the drum edit page, which was visually wrong, but an absolute joy to use.  Gridlines ran through the centre of drum notes. (Instead of flush with them like most other grid based edit pages)

I feel for people when they tell me they pay for it just to use the Motif integration, but usually use another DAW at all other times, and I feel for those who don’t ever seem to quite have the right version of the cut down Cubase, or the intermediate but still lite version, or the full blown Cubase, in order to do something normal.

I don’t have a Motif but a MoXF, and I’m a bit of a Cubase fan-boy.
Sure it was a steep learning curve in the beginning, but it was also my first DAW so now when I’ve looked at others, like Live or Reaper, they just look wrong to me. ;-)

The MoXF integration is definitely a bonus, but Cubase itself has also improved a LOT in later versions. Just the ability to have the mixer in full screen on one monitor would by itself stop me from ever trying another DAW again.

Hey all. Thank you for your experiences. I enjoy hearing folks’ travels, especially when it’s with gear I’m using.

For the past long season, I’ve focused in on Pro Tools regular, with a now almost decade-old laptop. And a 003. But, I was in a simple needs phase. Spurred by putting 2 SSDs into my MBP, I’ve found myself considering those different DAWs that have been calling my attention. Cubase as one. Starting from the Motif connection. But, recently I had a lot of fun with Cubasis on an iPad. And that reminded me of the fun during my first sequencing days with Cubase a long time ago.

If I ever get around to exploring Cubase I believe it will be to check out the sequencing of external synths; primarily the XF. Or, see if I can figure out and make good use of the workflow of going from an XF sequence, and then to Cubase.

That said, Live is the next DAW I’m most interested in exploring- for the pattern-based audio flow. I’m a linear guy - for the simplicity of it. But, I want to see if I can be useful with pattern-based.

I never know when to rein it in and focus, or when to grow & expand. In exploring the DAWs that have called to me, I’m pretty annoyed with those that have stringent OS requirements. I’m in full agreement in not liking to be pushed to upgrade. I just stopped using Pro Tools 9 on Snow Leopard! And that’s in part because it was “taken” from me when I connected my iLok to my iLok account. Truth is, Pro Tools 10 on Snow Leopard works. And I think it’s gonna be great. Live and DP can go back far; and still be “supported”.

I know the only real way to know if Cubase-Motif integration is worth it, is to dig in, figure it out, and see. As it’ll be a while ‘till I get that going, I wanted to get a feel for what it’s like. Thanks.

I beleive that you will see all the main DAWs change to a pay per month or a per year scheme before long, where you rent the use of their products and maybe hardware, and that includes the updates.

Avid are pretty much already doing that with Pro Tools and even when it was Digidesign, and a lot fairer to users, you could tell that they never really wanted you to own the software or the hardware, at least not for very long. 

There’s not a lot more that they can build into DAWs and you’ll notice that updates, certainly in the last 5 or so years don’t seem to contain much new and that you can happily use older versions on older operating systems for quite some time.

I have no idea what it’s like for Windows users, but Apple have been banging out a new operating system every year since 2011, when before that, it was close to biennially. Trying to keep up with it can cause you a lot of hassle and expense, especially if you only use one machine for music making and personal computing needs.

It’s all plateaued really, with DAWs and operating systems, there’s not much new, and why should there be?

Much older versions of DAWs easily have the features for you to play, record, mix and master, just like studios did in the days before computers, albeit expensive studio hardware, and there’s no way those guys would rebuild their studio for a very small upgrade on something, like shinier knobs and an option to add tiny amounts of 50 or 60Hz mains hum on a Fairchild or something (or more battle scarred knobs, which is probably what happens these days lol)

Anyone who listens to your music, doesn’t care what you used to make it, or how you arrived at it.

Yup.

My main issue is the following:

Continue on the path I find myself on. Pro Tools.
Or, take the time investment to explore other paths that may have workflow or creative benefits.

I believe the truth is:
Both are true.

And blindfolds in the right place are necessary. But where are those right places?

For example, my reasons to consider Cubase, from my Pro Tools 10 regular on an old MBP path are:

1. I really dig the Motif XF for its strengths. So, perhaps, for me, the instrument should influence the DAW.
2. I suspect sequencing in Cubase is fun.
3. I wonder if Cubase sequencing Motif XF (and a few other hardware instruments) will be tighter and more effective than doing the same with PT.

—
What I’ll do is:
Set it up. And then, I’ll give it a shot here and there. And go with the flow. But I know that it will require a certain base level of time investment to give it a fair shot. And that’s where I have to be very mindful. And so, while I’m in installation phase, I write here, seeking insight.

--
As always, with great appreciation to you all.

I’ve never used Pro Tools, I’m an amateur and sticking with the tools that are appropriate, so I can’t say if it would be tighter or more efficient in Cubase. ;-)

From my Elements 8 I’m sequencing the MOXF, a Mininova and an Electribe, the first two using their VST editors, and to me it’s tight enough.
Apart from Groove Agent and sometimes Maschine for drums, I don’t use any VST instruments but quite a few audio plugins (mainly/exclusively Izotope stuff these days).
The freeze function in Cubase is rather handy due to the latter since my PC would be on its knees without it.

dsetto - 17 February 2017 03:47 PM

3. I wonder if Cubase sequencing Motif XF (and a few other hardware instruments) will be tighter and more effective than doing the same with PT.

Undoubtedly.

I use PT extensively for mixing and tracking, but the MIDI side of it is really not that great. It actually never had integrated MIDI sequencing until around 1999 and it took them many years to get it up to scratch after that.

Sequencing in Cubase is way more fun.

Hi Gang

Is the Motif XF compatible with the new Cubase 9?

Thanks.

Bonkwell - 18 February 2017 06:33 PM

Hi Gang

Is the Motif XF compatible with the new Cubase 9?

Thanks.

Yes.  I’m using Cubase 9 Pro and the Motif XF through Firewire.  No problems at all once I downloaded and ran the Motif Extensions software.

Thanks much appreciated.

Hey. I know the following has been written about a lot. That said, for the sake of discussion, kb420, would you be willing to share with me (us) how you use Cubase with the Motif XF? And do you use anything that’s part of the unique collaborative features between the two?

Phil’s word that sequencing is tighter & more fun in Cubase than in PT is enough for me to bother trying that specifically with Cubase AI and external MIDI instruments.

philwoodmusic - 17 February 2017 02:55 PM

I beleive that you will see all the main DAWs change to a pay per month or a per year scheme before long, where you rent the use of their products and maybe hardware, and that includes the updates.

Avid are pretty much already doing that with Pro Tools and even when it was Digidesign, and a lot fairer to users, you could tell that they never really wanted you to own the software or the hardware, at least not for very long. 

There’s not a lot more that they can build into DAWs and you’ll notice that updates, certainly in the last 5 or so years don’t seem to contain much new and that you can happily use older versions on older operating systems for quite some time.

I have no idea what it’s like for Windows users, but Apple have been banging out a new operating system every year since 2011, when before that, it was close to biennially. Trying to keep up with it can cause you a lot of hassle and expense, especially if you only use one machine for music making and personal computing needs.

It’s all plateaued really, with DAWs and operating systems, there’s not much new, and why should there be?

Much older versions of DAWs easily have the features for you to play, record, mix and master, just like studios did in the days before computers, albeit expensive studio hardware, and there’s no way those guys would rebuild their studio for a very small upgrade on something, like shinier knobs and an option to add tiny amounts of 50 or 60Hz mains hum on a Fairchild or something (or more battle scarred knobs, which is probably what happens these days lol)

Anyone who listens to your music, doesn’t care what you used to make it, or how you arrived at it.

pay -to- play you can have that.,

I’m old school here’s my DAW

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/DP24SD

It integrates just fine with my MOTIF and MOX.  I can record, mix, master, burn cd’s, write USB, transfer to my Mac etc,etc without being on the hook for any monthly or yearly fees.  Just the idea of paying somebody just so I can edit my midi/wav ......

In fact I just did a lot of work on a Tascam DP-02 little 8 track very nice to work with also, and it only had 8 tracks, but all the editing I needed at the time.

I’ve used Cubase AI 5 now for a few years off and on, just to see what all the fuss was about.  Its okay.  But when money is on the line, I use the Tascam (almost no learning curve LOL) gear in conjunction with my keyboards

.

That’s great and highly portable, too. I prefer hardware, good old bomb proof hardware!

Whilst I hope it doesn’t happen, the pay to play thing could affect all types of software, not just music, and I think it could happen when all the companies finally run out of ideas.

Maybe it’s a conspiracy theory, but a lot of DAW manufacturers made masses of money when Apple moved over to intel processors and again when everyone went 64 bit.  That was just so the software could run, but it was presented as an ‘update’ with the straightest face possible.

You have to wonder if software and hardware manufacturers dream up mutually beneficial ideas.