There are a lot of things that improve workflow for composition and music production in Cubase Pro that aren't in Artist, and a bunch of features from Pro that Artist Lacks which are in Cakewalk - which sits, functionally, between Cubase Artist and Pro. That's the tier where I'd invest in Cubase (or Nuendo). I don't think either of those bring enough value to justify the costs on that platform.Ĭubase Pro is a different level of product, though. Mid Tiers are a bad buy, because better can usually be had for free, or far less cost - unless you're choosing based on aesthetic preferences (User Interface Design, etc.) or band wagoning DAW popularity within a market niche.Ĭubase Artist is over 50% more expensive than Logic Pro on macOS, and Elements is half the cost of Logic Pro. On Windows 10, most DAWs below the "Pro Tiers" aren't worth it unless you're using the lower tiers to ease in before switching over and going straight to Pro - or you're using a DAW targetted at a specific market segment (Reason, Live, FL Studio, Maschine/MPC, etc.). or were using it as a lite version on a second machine to avoid constantly bouncing your Dongle around. Elements is just not worth it unless you're using it as a way to acclimate to Cubase before jumping straight to Pro. Artist is missing a lot of good production and workflow features vs. Some of my film composer colleagues here in Norway previously used Sibelius for that kind of workflow, and are now moving into Dorico.I would actually use Cakewalk by BandLab over Cubase Elements, and most likely over Artist, as well. In that case, I think Dorico indeed could work as a highly creative tool where you could do the whole process (especially coupled with NotePerformer for the most realistic playback of all the hairpins and playing techniques). If that means a full orchestra or only a couple of studio musicians varies from project to project, budget and time constraints Quite sadly, these days the whole score might end up as 100% sample libraries, but that is another debate…īut I guess what you’re saying is that you have a notation background and not very much a DAW background. But I only notate the parts that will actually be played by real musicians. Then I use Dorico to translate that into readable music (I have never actually used Cubase’s own score editor). So to me, Cubase is the creative tool where the ideas are transformed from my head and onto music. I still compose by ear, first and foremost. I am one of those “in the middle”, who has had music education, but notation or reading music is still not my strongest side (also because of my ADHD, to be fair). This process is of course different for every composer, often depending on what “school” you are from, and how your head works (a highly individual thing!). Therefore, I mould the compositions in Cubase first, and then move to Dorico when I need to create scores for the live musicians. In the notation software, the goal is of course the opposite - to take the performance and make it readable to another musician. Because the slight imperfections in timing might be exactly what makes the performance work. When I track MIDI from VST sample libraries, I focus on how it sounds, with no thought at all on how it is notated. I think scoring software and DAW software have different roles. Hello there! I am a composer working with music for theatre, film and television.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |