Choosing between Vegas and Cubase for audio

thomaskay wrote on 12/20/2004, 7:12 PM
I have Cubase 2.0 and Vegas 5.

I've been putting off recording audio for awhile now and if some of you use both, I'd like to hear your thoughts.

I am basically a one man recorder and my drumming is limited, so I will have to record in sections. I might want to be able to paste sections throughout the some - or at least keep it around the metronome where I can experiment with sections. All my instruments will be analog and I don't want to use a sequencer.

But in general, I would like to hear pro's and cons of the apps from an audio side that might effect which platform I choose. I've just been away from recording too long to be able to think practically about both apps for my own comparison. I appreciate any feedback.

Thomas

Comments

thomaskay wrote on 12/20/2004, 10:25 PM
Wow. This forum use to be hopping. Nevermind that no one has responded to my post. But not a post since? Damn.

Can I deduce this as Vegas (on the audio side) not doing well? Is it back in MI again? I know it was pulled a few years ago. Oh well, love the crossfading, but this is depressing (in a melodramatic way).

I was hoping that Sony would show some might with Vegas on the audio side.
wobblyboy wrote on 12/20/2004, 11:10 PM
If you are using midi, you should use Cubase. If you doing stright recording with track overlays I prefer Vegas. I think it is easier to use and much easier to edit with. I have used Cubase for audio for about 6 years. I have been using Vegas lately unless I need midi capability.
drbam wrote on 12/21/2004, 6:32 AM
Yes, if you are using midi then obviously Cubase is your choice but even then, you may wish to consider using both since you have them. Do your sequencing in Cubase, render to wav and import into Vegas for further recording, editing, and mixing. I've seen many forum posts from those who work with Sonar or Cubase for sequencing who prefer to work this way. If you do a lot of editing, once you've had a taste of Vegas, its really painful to use anything else.

drbam
Ben  wrote on 12/21/2004, 6:46 AM
For all audio work, Vegas beats any other DAW hands down, especially if you do more than just recording and mixing, i.e. lots of editing. I now find using anything else pretty painful after Vegas; I even find rendering out my midi tracks in Sonar quite a clunky process.

Midi in Vegas would be the icing on the cake, and it's something we've all long pushed for. Imagine being able to edit midi with the same power you can edit audio...

Ben

(Btw, the lack of a huge response if probably due to your subject heading. 'Which format' implies you're trying to decide between wav, mp3, etc... something I'm sure most people here are tired of answering. 'Which DAW...', however, would have got the flames going!)
thomaskay wrote on 12/21/2004, 7:24 AM
Correct - format is the wrong choice. I was more commenting on the lack of posting in general in the audio forum - a sharp decline from earlier days.

Editing - I agree. I can't do without it. I don't really know what I'm looking for. I guess I was hoping for a gem that I probably wouldn't come upon myself.
MrPhil wrote on 12/23/2004, 12:44 AM
"the lack of posting in general in the audio forum - a sharp decline from earlier days."

- Maybe it's less troubles, and more work going on these days?
H2000 wrote on 12/23/2004, 5:26 PM
I think it's been very quiet here because Vegas5 seems to be very stable and people are really not having any issues. They are happily at work.

Which leads to...

Having used Cubase and Logic, I can tell you I have no desire to use either of them - ever again! They are both feature packed and powerful programs, but they are also complicated, convoluted, and downright frustrating to do even the simpliest things. They have been devoloped originally as MIDI sequencers, then audio was added later. I know some may not agree, but to me they are designed for the technical/keyboardist/programmer mentality.

I prefer to have the computer be least intrusive as possible when making music, which is why I use ACID and Vegas. If your not doing MIDI, your choice is clear!
decrink wrote on 12/28/2004, 1:35 PM
I agree with some of the reasons why posting is less. I used to read and post to these forums quite often but I've been doing project after project in VV5 without problem and understanding how it all works makes for fewer questions.
I just don't have time to check in with the forums much any more.

OK, gotta go and import some video then record some tracks for another project.
Rednroll wrote on 12/28/2004, 8:31 PM
"VV5"

Never heard of this app, can you tell us more about it?
MJhig wrote on 12/28/2004, 8:54 PM
Really... "VV5"... got a link?

Virtual Venereal disease 5?... Vote for k. Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse 5, (he's dead now) ?... Very Very 5?... huh?

Oh wait! Voluptuous Vixen 5!

Hmmm, after Goggling I come up blank. What gives?

MJ
thomaskay wrote on 12/28/2004, 10:47 PM
Doubt it. Nice thought, though.
Rednroll wrote on 12/29/2004, 8:19 AM
I've been a Voluptuous Vixen's 1,2,&3 user and would love to get my hands on VV5.
lineout wrote on 12/29/2004, 2:39 PM
Is Voluptuous Vixen 5 another name wave's L3 compressor? It some how gives me the same effect
thomaskay wrote on 12/29/2004, 10:11 PM
I'm staying with Vegas for audio. I think Cubase still has a problem with clicks on crossfades. Crossfading with Vegas is a dream - for audio and video. It would seem to me that the natural progression of the music studio would be DVD production. Vegas could very well back into an advantageous situation if they continued to progress on both sides equally.