0:00 What are modulators? 1:10 Available modulators 3:00 Bitwig: Modulation with an LFO 4:30 Cubase: Modulation with an LFO 6:25 Bitwig: Modulation with an Step Sequencer 7:42 Cubase: Modulation with an Step Sequencer 8:44 Cubase: Modulation with a Macro Knob 11:05 Bitwig: Modulation with a Macro Knob 12:08 Bitwig: Modulation of native Bitwig devices (with MSEG) 13:25 Cubase: Modulation of native Cubase device 14:00 Verdict
Bitwig has played such a huge part in innovating and pushing development forward. Love to see other DAW's taking inspiration from Bitwig! They have brought so many features to the industry like MPE, CLAP plugins, native modulators, operators, .DAW project files etc. They are still a relatively unknown DAW though, I really wish they would get more recognition.
Bitwig's modulator implementation is far and away the best out there. That said, Cubase's is pretty good. A number of the things that you do here can be done in easier ways (adding plugins, you can see the modulators in the same window as the instrument GUI for instance ), but there are a lot of quality of life tweaks in Bitwig that make their modulator implementation the most flexible and usable one out there. That said, I'm really excited by Cubase's addition of this functionality. ...and thank you for everything you do. It is REALLY appreciated on this end. Cheers!
For example? Currently all major DAWs are similar capable. It is all about the workflow and which one suits you better. I did use Cubase for 20+ years and since about 2 years Bitwig is on a level I could fully switch.
Hmm, I’m not sure. I moved from Cubase to Bitwig and don’t miss it at all-except for the chord system, which is also available in Studio One. Other than that, I think Bitwig offers a refreshing, modern approach! Even with all the updates, Cubase still looks and feels like a DAW from 2007, and CLAP is much better than VST3.
24 дні тому
@@mossgraber I agree that all major DAWs have similar capabilities, but it's the details in these functions that makes us choose which one we like the best. 🙂 I really like the Mixing Console(s) in Cubase for example. For starters you have four separate mixing consoles in Cubase, so you can have buses in one, only vocal tracks in one and maybe only drums in the third and the rest in the fourth, and so on.. Great if you have multiple monitors with easy access to specific channels/buses in front of you at all times. There are loads of configuration in the console of what should be visible or not depending on if you're mixing/recording ect. I also love the three zones (left, middle, right) in the mixing console.. And you can save different snapshots on what channels to show, which is great for ex. larger orchestral project with 100+ channels. ..I can go on and on .. (It looks like you can't change colors on the tracks in Bitwig? ..Maybe you can(?) I don't know)... And this is just the mixing console.
The Cubase mixing console is nice. While you can color tracks in Bitwig it is hard to sport which one is the selected channel. But one drawback in Cubase is the grouping (it got a bit better). In Bitwig simply select some channels, press Ctrl+G and put effects on it.
I love Bitwig. Reaper is my go to though, so many advanced features, I find it hard to go back to any other DAW. Yes, Reaper could do with a modulation UI overhaul, but modulation has been in Reaper for years.
You can view modulators in multiple places: e.g. you can add a tab to the inspector panel and see the overview,, you can do that in the console (mixer); you can also see the modulators on top of the plugin window itself (there's a button on the right of each plugin header) and you can open each one in a separate floating window. Also, just like in Bitwig you can automate the parameter on the track and modulators will move it "around" that value and frankly I like that it actually moves the knob on the VST GUI, because it corresponds to what you hear. They will probably be never as fast, easy and versatile as in Bitwig, but considering this is their first try I'm pretty shocked by how well they're implemented. They basically gave us all of the key modulator types (LFO, MSEG, steps, env. follower) and instead of giving us 6 separate LFOs with small differences (one can be free, another can be triggered by MIDI, another by transport) Cubase gives one, but it has all the options inside of it already. So it's way less cluttered in that way. This will cover what 80-90% of people wanted. Not everyone's Polarity ;) And also, you could really prepare better - it seems like you're doing it the first time?
I don't think that having modulators in many places makes it more usable. Sorry, for overlooking that they can be accessed in the plugin window as well. It is well hidden and all the Cubase 14 videos I watched didn't show that (I guess they couldn't find it as well 😉).
@@mossgraber I'm not saying it's more usable or not, but it reduces a confusion that you were clearly showing in your video, because you're used to Bitwig. So having them opened in the plugin window would've been more familiar. Don't know what videos you were watching? Why not the official one, that takes 9 minutes to show & explain modulators?
@2:44 i would have expected a deep dive into 100 new javascript drivenbymoss modulators for Cubase 😅 ❤ I mean, the javascript section is something which goes BEYOND what Bitwig can do, so it's actually one of the biggest strengths of Cubases Modulators! :) Also, a word concerning "Imitation is the highest form of flattery", which i read a lot concerning this update. If the big flagship DAWs like Cubase integrate what once was unique to Bitwig, this is not good news - sorry to tell. Because if the implementation gets really good, Bitwig will lose customers, and not attract many new customers. Which is quite logical: when potential new users are comparing DAWs, Bitwig still lacks a lot in the fundamentals of audio, midi and automation editing and QoL Features. When the once unique Bitwig features are no longer unique, users will choose anything but Bitwig, because it’s less well-rounded of a DAW. Which is my way of saying: i really hope Bitwig sharpens its fundamental DAW editing tools - all types of users will benefit from that. I know far too many users who tell me they considered switching to Bitwig for quite some time now, but it were missing fundamentals / QoL features which prevented their flow and stopped any plans of switching. Which is a pity, because Bitwig deserves a big userbase, recognition and success.
Maybe I will look into this JavaScript modulator thingy, just out of curiosity. I don't think that Bitwig is in any danger from the Cubase side. Especially, as a new user, the learning curve in Bitwig is much lower than in Cubase where you have menus and icons everywhere.
Yes Bitwig has a design with modulators being part of the. DAW and Cubase would have to change a lot to make it simpler. I don’t think they would risk to do something like that
@@sternenherz i installed ableton 12 before bitwig, and you don't wan't to know how many crash reports i gathered in a week. Bitwig i use everyday since, and i am still waiting for the first crash;-)
to access individual "Inserts" directly simply use one of the right Track Inspectors. You may need to enable that section via the context menu: right click in the track inspector, enable "Inserts" and off you go. You can drag each section to a position where you see fit.
Yes, I know. My point was that the instrument device is accessed differently than the other inserts. I was using Cubase for 20+ years and that was something that annoyed me constantly since I always clicked in the wrong place. And revisiting Cubase after 2 years using Bitwig exclusivly made it even more visible why I left it...
@@mossgraber haha, ok, I get it and I agree. Same here. I thought I mention it cos I was happy when I discovered this setting and it's one of the first things I change. I guess Cubase's UI is full of these bizarre compromises. It's what you get within a 40 years old program and a long standing user base. I believe every user has sth. to moan about one thing or the other. 😁 There's so much stuff buried in these inspectors (and some context menus) 🙄
24 дні тому+1
It’s nice that you’ve found your favorite DAW, but maybe you shouldn’t criticize Cubase for flaws that is more about you not knowing how Cubase works?.. 8:50 for example.. You don’t have to first open the “e” and then the insert. You can customize the inspector to the left to have all inserts listed there. Either that or you can show the whole channel strip of the selected channel to the left of the inspector (you have that “show channel” button in the toolbar 5th from the right at the top). And you can configure that to show exactly what you need/want as well. IMO this is better since everything doesn’t have to be fitted in that small space at the bottom. But that’s one of the reasons like Cubase better I guess. 😛...Different DAW manufacturers have always, and will always, draw inspiration from their competitors. This competition is a good thing, as it drives them to keep improving. Bitwig wouldn’t be what it is today without inspiration from other DAWs on the market..
I was using Cubase for 20+ years. I know about the inspector which now has 21 pages to choose from... 😉
24 дні тому+1
@@mossgraber then you should know that you don't need to press the "e" and open the channels settings to get to your inserts.. 😉
24 дні тому
@@mossgraber (and it's only 21 pages to choose from if that's what you want it to show.. that's one of the strengths with Cubase - choose exactly what you want visible/hidden to make the workflow good for you)
I was not clear in that section: I was not annoyed about opening the dialog to get to the inserts but that the instrument device is on a different button than the insert devices.
Bitwig has a native plugin called "Drum Machine" that holds 8 banks of samples, each bank organized in a 4x4 square and auto-mapped to a keyboard. There are, at present, 276 pre-made drum kits and you can make/modify your own from samples. Each sample can be tweaked in all the ways samples can be tweaked, and each sample has its own unique FX layer. I've been using Superior Drummer as my go-to drum plugin for years (and still use it in Bitwig) but the more I learn how to use Drum Machine, the less I use SD. It's very powerful.
@@Soul_Avery Yes, it's niche and therefore you can never be sure, if for instance a controller will support it natively. You always have to do a lot of research. If you use Ableton the answer is always "Yes of course, this controller will work perfectly out of the box."
That's a bit of work. On the MPC you need to assign a MIDI CC to the parameter you want to control. Menu -> MIDI LEARN. Source is the Plugin on the track you want to control. Target is the parameter you want to control. Set Type to "Abs CC". In Bitwig add a MIDI CC device to the track which triggers the MPC. Map the MIDI CC of the first slot to the one on the MPC. Now you can finally add modulators to the MIDI CC device. If you want to use that regularily it makes sense to setup a template on the MPC as well as in Bitwig.
I just recently upgraded to Bitwig Studio from using the full version of Cubase and I feel like I’m much more productive in Bitwig because nothing is really intuitive to me in Cubase in regards to finding things, I constantly have to keep looking in the manual or on UA-cam to figure stuff out. I started looking for another DAW in anticipation of Logic Pro for Mac becoming subscription based like the iPad version which I don’t care for, I don’t mind paying for upgrades/updates but if I don’t want or need them I don’t want to lose my ability to use a program if I don’t pay.
1.Some corrections and context I want to add In Cubase NO the effects are not in the lowerzone with the modulators based on the Cubases workflow that would be overwhelming for most I think. But you don't have to open another window or the mixer as you did. In the left zone and in the channel inspector you can open the effects. You just don't have the right configuration. I would like to see an instrument button in the modulator section to quickly get to the instrument but for this, I just use a key command 2. There is literally a triangle shape next to the sine wave 3. I think the modulators are a decent size. each modulator has a name of what it's modulating. As a Cubase user I see it and know exactly where it's going- What I'd like to see going forward is color coordination of the modulators so a way to color the different devices and collapsible modulators as well.
No triangle LFO, seriously? It's both Bitwig AND Cubase (Nuendo) that I chose to work with, after trying almost every competitor at some point over the last decades. For some good reasons. Both have their quirks but I think both really keep things interesting by innovating and specializing in certain areas. Well it's the Modulators that made me Stick with Bitwig from the very beginning. Interesting that Steinberg got inspired by that feature more than by the clip matrix like some other DAW manufacturers (eg Studio One, DP or Bitwig 😉)
While I think most of your statements simply root from the fact that you personally prefer the Bitwig workflow your last point is IMO quite a thing. Bitwig uses a modulator to offset the original parameter value (in its stock plugins) while Cubase always changes the destination parameter itself. That is a real big difference and becomes visible when e.g. you remove a connection from a modulator to a destination. In Cubase the destination parameter will most likely have a different value from the one you started with. Ouch.
Regarding opening inserts in Cubase, you have not got your channel tab open, The fader does not need to be in the inspector tab anymore, Cubase has a dedicated Channel tab, showing fader and inserts and routing. By not utilising that channel tab you are making opening vsts harder than it needs to be.
I think I’m lost Cubase has 2 different step sequencers. In the new one there are randomizers on each track and on the sequencer globally you can choose between 3 different randomization algorithms.
Im a Bitwigger. But I appreciate that other Companys supports DAW Project and introduce Modulations. Cubase has many great features but the look and the workflow is a mess... Bitwigs modulation power and the Grids are unbeatable...and I love the look and the easy workflow. Except the Piano roll *hahahaha and your scripts for many of my devices soooo worth fully. Thank you..
No, this is not possible. Cubase treats tempo differently than Bitwig. It is one of these differences between DAWs where you can see a different design philosophy.
Ich war schwer enttäuscht, dass Modulatoren nur in der Pro Version verfügbar sind. Es ist vor allem das einzige neue 14er-Feature das nicht in Cubase Artist enthalten ist. Das klingt alles nach eine typischen, beknackten Marketing-Entscheidung von der die Anwender nichts haben. Im Grunde ist das "nur" ein interner, virtueller MIDI-Controller, der sich selbst und die Parameter von Plugins automatisiert oder über die VST Schnittstelle Daten sendet. Das könnte Cubase Elements technisch gesehen auch schon, ist aber 500 Euro billiger. Auf den Makro-Knopf oder ModScript-Editor könnten sie in den kleinen Versionen ja auch gerne verzichten und bei Pro Projekten die das nutzen einfach "deaktivieren", so wie andere Spuren auch deaktiviert / schreibgeschützt werden, aber vorhanden sind, wenn sie nicht unterstützt werden sollen. Die JavaScript Runtime ist ja anscheinend sowieso nicht in Elements drin (MIDI Controller Scripte kann man auch nicht erstellen). Ist jedenfalls keine eine interessante Preisalternative, wenn man generative Musik und Sound Design machen will und den ganzen Luxus-Schnickschnack von Cubase Pro dazu schlicht nicht benötigt aber bezahlen müsste. Das Geld geht dann halt weiter an Bitwig & Co. Da kann Steinberg gerne den deplatzierten Score-Editor aus Elements rauswerfen. Für halbwegs vernünftige Orchester-Kompositionen werden in Elements sowieso zu wenige Spuren unterstützt. Ich kenne ein paar Elements-User: einige wissen nicht al dass es den Editor gibt und keiner kann damit was anfangen. Modulatoren wären aber sicher für jeden ein interessantes Spielzeug - selbst wenn es nur der LFO und Shaper wäre. Da ginge schon was.
Der neue Score Editor benutzt jetzt Dorico Algorithmen und ist ein großer Schritt nach vorne. Nativer Import von Dorico Projekten in Cubase wurde schon angekündigt. Das ist mein persönliches Highlight für Cubase 14. Modulatoren und den neuen Drumkit Editor brauche ich hingegen garnicht. Cubase 14 fühlt such zudem wesentlich performanter und flotter an, das zweite große Plus. So ist insgesamt für jeden was Nützliches dabei.
@@rudigerk ich würde jetzt auch nicht anfangen nur noch Modulatoren zu verwenden, ist ja in Artist auch nicht möglich. Die anderen neuen Schmankerl sind ja auch in fast allen Versionen mit dabei, inkl. der Performance Boost. Der Noteneditor ist auch in allen Versionen drin, selbst Elements. Sein Nutzen ist für Leute die nicht komponieren und mit Notensatz vertraut sind ist der Editor eben irrelevant. Da ist es egal ob er jetzt auf Dorico basiert und besser als der Vorgänger ist. Ich weiß nicht, wie viele Hip Hop, EDM und Ambience Partituren etc. so existieren... Auch nicht so wirklich meine Genres. Mit Elements kann man das aber locker alles machen. Elements wird wohl kaum in einem Studio-Umfeld oder für Filmmusik verwendet, womit die "Gefahr", dass jemand eine Partitur benötigt sehr schwindet, und damit auch die Notwendigkeit für den Editor. Für Pop, Rock, EDM, Ambience und Beat Maker ist das aber voll ausreichend. Die Modulatoren passen in dieses Segment schon sehr gut rein. Ein Noteneditor aber? Ich bin seit Version 1 Cubase User und hab in 40 Jahren 1 x "gebraucht". Als es irgendwann mal "Cubase Score" gab (lange her) habe ich mit Freuden auf die günstigere Version ohne den Editor gewechselt. Jetzt hab ich ihn ungewollt wieder, den Listen-Editor dafür aber nicht mehr. Damit hab ich früher gerne und viel gearbeitet.
@@mossgraber keine Ahnung wie hoch der Leidensdruck sein muss, dass ein Elements User deshalb auf Pro umsteigt und ein paar Hunderter hinlegt. Da ist die Wahrscheinlichkeit auf Bitwig zu wechseln deutlich höher. Vergleicht man Elements mit Bitwig 8-track die beide kostenlos bei Audio Devices mit dabei sind, bin ich mir nicht so sicher ob das am Ende 'ne Milchmädchen-Rechnung seitens Steinberg war.
@@CirTap It is rather simple - if you prefer the feature set of Bitwig, then use Bitwig. If your approach to music making is better covered by Cubase, then use Cubase. While you might prefer one, other people might prefer the other.
who in bitwig came up with the most incomprehensible choke group in drum machine! why can't you make a choke group a-b-c-d-f..... no, you need to look with your eyes for who appointed who didn't and instead of the label a-b-c-d-f choke group I have a bunch of names of notes notes!!! There are some strange shortcomings a bunch of innovations but sometimes simple things turn into strange inventions of bicycles! You constantly need to keep in mind where you sent what to choke
![Cubase 14 [First Look]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nC5H0ZqSCsk/mqdefault.jpg)
0:00 What are modulators?
1:10 Available modulators
3:00 Bitwig: Modulation with an LFO
4:30 Cubase: Modulation with an LFO
6:25 Bitwig: Modulation with an Step Sequencer
7:42 Cubase: Modulation with an Step Sequencer
8:44 Cubase: Modulation with a Macro Knob
11:05 Bitwig: Modulation with a Macro Knob
12:08 Bitwig: Modulation of native Bitwig devices (with MSEG)
13:25 Cubase: Modulation of native Cubase device
14:00 Verdict
Bitwig has played such a huge part in innovating and pushing development forward. Love to see other DAW's taking inspiration from Bitwig! They have brought so many features to the industry like MPE, CLAP plugins, native modulators, operators, .DAW project files etc. They are still a relatively unknown DAW though, I really wish they would get more recognition.
They won many new users in the last 2 years.
@@mossgraber Love to see it!
what, they also played a role in the development of MPE? that's crazy
@@andrere2 If I remember corretly, Bitwig was the 1st DAW to implement MPE.
Bitwig's modulator implementation is far and away the best out there. That said, Cubase's is pretty good. A number of the things that you do here can be done in easier ways (adding plugins, you can see the modulators in the same window as the instrument GUI for instance ), but there are a lot of quality of life tweaks in Bitwig that make their modulator implementation the most flexible and usable one out there. That said, I'm really excited by Cubase's addition of this functionality.
...and thank you for everything you do. It is REALLY appreciated on this end. Cheers!
Wasn't aware that you can show it in the window as well. Thanks for the hint!
@@mossgrabertop right of any plugin window. 👍🏻
Hope Bitwig copies Piano roll from other DAWs. Midi editing is pretty basic in Bitwig.
Bitwig may have a better modulation system, but when it comes to basic DAW features, Cubase sweeps the floor with Bitwig. It's not even close.
For example? Currently all major DAWs are similar capable. It is all about the workflow and which one suits you better. I did use Cubase for 20+ years and since about 2 years Bitwig is on a level I could fully switch.
Hmm, I’m not sure. I moved from Cubase to Bitwig and don’t miss it at all-except for the chord system, which is also available in Studio One. Other than that, I think Bitwig offers a refreshing, modern approach! Even with all the updates, Cubase still looks and feels like a DAW from 2007, and CLAP is much better than VST3.
@@mossgraber I agree that all major DAWs have similar capabilities, but it's the details in these functions that makes us choose which one we like the best. 🙂 I really like the Mixing Console(s) in Cubase for example. For starters you have four separate mixing consoles in Cubase, so you can have buses in one, only vocal tracks in one and maybe only drums in the third and the rest in the fourth, and so on.. Great if you have multiple monitors with easy access to specific channels/buses in front of you at all times. There are loads of configuration in the console of what should be visible or not depending on if you're mixing/recording ect. I also love the three zones (left, middle, right) in the mixing console.. And you can save different snapshots on what channels to show, which is great for ex. larger orchestral project with 100+ channels. ..I can go on and on .. (It looks like you can't change colors on the tracks in Bitwig? ..Maybe you can(?) I don't know)... And this is just the mixing console.
The Cubase mixing console is nice. While you can color tracks in Bitwig it is hard to sport which one is the selected channel. But one drawback in Cubase is the grouping (it got a bit better). In Bitwig simply select some channels, press Ctrl+G and put effects on it.
I love Bitwig. Reaper is my go to though, so many advanced features, I find it hard to go back to any other DAW. Yes, Reaper could do with a modulation UI overhaul, but modulation has been in Reaper for years.
Bitwig is King
for beginners
@@probilmusic3396has nothing to do with beginners, has to do with creativity and Bitwig is King
Ok, and Cubase is Queen. 😊😅
@ no, it’s the old horse 🤣😉✌️
Cubase is EMPEROR!!!!!
You can view modulators in multiple places: e.g. you can add a tab to the inspector panel and see the overview,, you can do that in the console (mixer); you can also see the modulators on top of the plugin window itself (there's a button on the right of each plugin header) and you can open each one in a separate floating window. Also, just like in Bitwig you can automate the parameter on the track and modulators will move it "around" that value and frankly I like that it actually moves the knob on the VST GUI, because it corresponds to what you hear.
They will probably be never as fast, easy and versatile as in Bitwig, but considering this is their first try I'm pretty shocked by how well they're implemented. They basically gave us all of the key modulator types (LFO, MSEG, steps, env. follower) and instead of giving us 6 separate LFOs with small differences (one can be free, another can be triggered by MIDI, another by transport) Cubase gives one, but it has all the options inside of it already. So it's way less cluttered in that way.
This will cover what 80-90% of people wanted. Not everyone's Polarity ;)
And also, you could really prepare better - it seems like you're doing it the first time?
I don't think that having modulators in many places makes it more usable. Sorry, for overlooking that they can be accessed in the plugin window as well. It is well hidden and all the Cubase 14 videos I watched didn't show that (I guess they couldn't find it as well 😉).
@@mossgraber I'm not saying it's more usable or not, but it reduces a confusion that you were clearly showing in your video, because you're used to Bitwig. So having them opened in the plugin window would've been more familiar.
Don't know what videos you were watching? Why not the official one, that takes 9 minutes to show & explain modulators?
I switched from cubase to bitwig at the start of the year and now I can move projects between them. I feel blessed
I just tryed Cubase 14 on Splice and found it terrible confusing compared to Bitwig! Im just so use to Bitwig and Ableton 12 layouts. Cheers...
@2:44 i would have expected a deep dive into 100 new javascript drivenbymoss modulators for Cubase 😅 ❤ I mean, the javascript section is something which goes BEYOND what Bitwig can do, so it's actually one of the biggest strengths of Cubases Modulators! :)
Also, a word concerning "Imitation is the highest form of flattery", which i read a lot concerning this update. If the big flagship DAWs like Cubase integrate what once was unique to Bitwig, this is not good news - sorry to tell. Because if the implementation gets really good, Bitwig will lose customers, and not attract many new customers. Which is quite logical: when potential new users are comparing DAWs, Bitwig still lacks a lot in the fundamentals of audio, midi and automation editing and QoL Features. When the once unique Bitwig features are no longer unique, users will choose anything but Bitwig, because it’s less well-rounded of a DAW. Which is my way of saying: i really hope Bitwig sharpens its fundamental DAW editing tools - all types of users will benefit from that. I know far too many users who tell me they considered switching to Bitwig for quite some time now, but it were missing fundamentals / QoL features which prevented their flow and stopped any plans of switching. Which is a pity, because Bitwig deserves a big userbase, recognition and success.
Maybe I will look into this JavaScript modulator thingy, just out of curiosity. I don't think that Bitwig is in any danger from the Cubase side. Especially, as a new user, the learning curve in Bitwig is much lower than in Cubase where you have menus and icons everywhere.
@@mossgraber Yea the danger would have been much greater, if Ableton would have gone all-in on Modulators.
@@sternenherz You can already do modulators as well in Ableton. They are separate devices.
Yes Bitwig has a design with modulators being part of the. DAW and Cubase would have to change a lot to make it simpler. I don’t think they would risk to do something like that
@@sternenherz i installed ableton 12 before bitwig, and you don't wan't to know how many crash reports i gathered in a week. Bitwig i use everyday since, and i am still waiting for the first crash;-)
to access individual "Inserts" directly simply use one of the right Track Inspectors. You may need to enable that section via the context menu: right click in the track inspector, enable "Inserts" and off you go. You can drag each section to a position where you see fit.
Yes, I know. My point was that the instrument device is accessed differently than the other inserts. I was using Cubase for 20+ years and that was something that annoyed me constantly since I always clicked in the wrong place. And revisiting Cubase after 2 years using Bitwig exclusivly made it even more visible why I left it...
@@mossgraber haha, ok, I get it and I agree. Same here. I thought I mention it cos I was happy when I discovered this setting and it's one of the first things I change.
I guess Cubase's UI is full of these bizarre compromises. It's what you get within a 40 years old program and a long standing user base. I believe every user has sth. to moan about one thing or the other. 😁
There's so much stuff buried in these inspectors (and some context menus) 🙄
It’s nice that you’ve found your favorite DAW, but maybe you shouldn’t criticize Cubase for flaws that is more about you not knowing how Cubase works?.. 8:50 for example.. You don’t have to first open the “e” and then the insert. You can customize the inspector to the left to have all inserts listed there. Either that or you can show the whole channel strip of the selected channel to the left of the inspector (you have that “show channel” button in the toolbar 5th from the right at the top). And you can configure that to show exactly what you need/want as well. IMO this is better since everything doesn’t have to be fitted in that small space at the bottom. But that’s one of the reasons like Cubase better I guess. 😛...Different DAW manufacturers have always, and will always, draw inspiration from their competitors. This competition is a good thing, as it drives them to keep improving. Bitwig wouldn’t be what it is today without inspiration from other DAWs on the market..
I was using Cubase for 20+ years. I know about the inspector which now has 21 pages to choose from... 😉
@@mossgraber then you should know that you don't need to press the "e" and open the channels settings to get to your inserts.. 😉
@@mossgraber (and it's only 21 pages to choose from if that's what you want it to show.. that's one of the strengths with Cubase - choose exactly what you want visible/hidden to make the workflow good for you)
I was not clear in that section: I was not annoyed about opening the dialog to get to the inserts but that the instrument device is on a different button than the insert devices.
in cubase every plugin has a modulation button on top....you dont need to do it in the lower zone
Yes, meanwhile found out about this as well.
Score editor in cubase is second to none for dose who know music theory , so learn music in right way
Offtopic but Cubase added a great drum machine. Wish Bitwig had similar features
Bitwig has a native plugin called "Drum Machine" that holds 8 banks of samples, each bank organized in a 4x4 square and auto-mapped to a keyboard. There are, at present, 276 pre-made drum kits and you can make/modify your own from samples. Each sample can be tweaked in all the ways samples can be tweaked, and each sample has its own unique FX layer. I've been using Superior Drummer as my go-to drum plugin for years (and still use it in Bitwig) but the more I learn how to use Drum Machine, the less I use SD. It's very powerful.
Are there any plans to bring the DrivenByMoss plugin to Launchkey MK4?
Currently, I have no plans to support it. Bitwig already added support in their latest update.
So the top dog copies the underdog. Nice
I don’t think Bitwig is an underdog any longer. Very powerful but also niche
@@Soul_Avery Yes, it's niche and therefore you can never be sure, if for instance a controller will support it natively. You always have to do a lot of research. If you use Ableton the answer is always "Yes of course, this controller will work perfectly out of the box."
Excellent! How would I use Bitwig modulators to control my MPC internal instruments on MPC 3?
That's a bit of work. On the MPC you need to assign a MIDI CC to the parameter you want to control. Menu -> MIDI LEARN. Source is the Plugin on the track you want to control. Target is the parameter you want to control. Set Type to "Abs CC". In Bitwig add a MIDI CC device to the track which triggers the MPC. Map the MIDI CC of the first slot to the one on the MPC. Now you can finally add modulators to the MIDI CC device. If you want to use that regularily it makes sense to setup a template on the MPC as well as in Bitwig.
I just recently upgraded to Bitwig Studio from using the full version of Cubase and I feel like I’m much more productive in Bitwig because nothing is really intuitive to me in Cubase in regards to finding things, I constantly have to keep looking in the manual or on UA-cam to figure stuff out. I started looking for another DAW in anticipation of Logic Pro for Mac becoming subscription based like the iPad version which I don’t care for, I don’t mind paying for upgrades/updates but if I don’t want or need them I don’t want to lose my ability to use a program if I don’t pay.
1.Some corrections and context I want to add In Cubase NO the effects are not in the lowerzone with the modulators based on the Cubases workflow that would be overwhelming for most I think. But you don't have to open another window or the mixer as you did. In the left zone and in the channel inspector you can open the effects. You just don't have the right configuration. I would like to see an instrument button in the modulator section to quickly get to the instrument but for this, I just use a key command
2. There is literally a triangle shape next to the sine wave
3. I think the modulators are a decent size. each modulator has a name of what it's modulating. As a Cubase user I see it and know exactly where it's going- What I'd like to see going forward is color coordination of the modulators so a way to color the different devices and collapsible modulators as well.
No triangle LFO, seriously? It's both Bitwig AND Cubase (Nuendo) that I chose to work with, after trying almost every competitor at some point over the last decades. For some good reasons. Both have their quirks but I think both really keep things interesting by innovating and specializing in certain areas.
Well it's the Modulators that made me Stick with Bitwig from the very beginning. Interesting that Steinberg got inspired by that feature more than by the clip matrix like some other DAW manufacturers (eg Studio One, DP or Bitwig 😉)
I guess they will do that too in the not to far future, now that Studio One has it.
While I think most of your statements simply root from the fact that you personally prefer the Bitwig workflow your last point is IMO quite a thing. Bitwig uses a modulator to offset the original parameter value (in its stock plugins) while Cubase always changes the destination parameter itself. That is a real big difference and becomes visible when e.g. you remove a connection from a modulator to a destination. In Cubase the destination parameter will most likely have a different value from the one you started with. Ouch.
Regarding opening inserts in Cubase, you have not got your channel tab open, The fader does not need to be in the inspector tab anymore, Cubase has a dedicated Channel tab, showing fader and inserts and routing.
By not utilising that channel tab you are making opening vsts harder than it needs to be.
It seems randomization is missing on the cubase step sequencer which is something I hope is added in an update. Hoping I just overlooked it
I think it is missing.
It is not present now but it's a good idea.
They have a literal random modulator so they had an emphasis on randomness as a whole it seems with that and the patterns. Hoping it’s in an update.
I think I’m lost Cubase has 2 different step sequencers. In the new one there are randomizers on each track and on the sequencer globally you can choose between 3 different randomization algorithms.
@ sorry, I’m referring to the modulator. Not the step sequencer for inputting notes.
Im a Bitwigger. But I appreciate that other Companys supports DAW Project and introduce Modulations. Cubase has many great features but the look and the workflow is a mess...
Bitwigs modulation power and the Grids are unbeatable...and I love the look and the easy workflow. Except the Piano roll *hahahaha
and your scripts for many of my devices soooo worth fully. Thank you..
Is it possible to modulate the bpm with lfo with cubase ou bitwig ?
You can do it in Bitwig. Don't think that it is possible in Cubase but I might be wrong.
No, this is not possible. Cubase treats tempo differently than Bitwig. It is one of these differences between DAWs where you can see a different design philosophy.
@@klauba you mean it s not possible only in cubase ?
@@ri6thechameleon Sorry, my answer referred to Cubase only. Jürgen already mentioned that it can be done in Biwig.
If you were able to make a script for ableton push to work on Cubase I’d pay top dollars🔥🔥🔥
This would require a complete rewrite of the code and take several months...
Yes. Bitwig was not inspired by Cubase. At all. Bitwig was the first daw!
cubase modulators look more inspired by how ableton does it. it's not bad i imagine. just not great either ^^
Ich war schwer enttäuscht, dass Modulatoren nur in der Pro Version verfügbar sind. Es ist vor allem das einzige neue 14er-Feature das nicht in Cubase Artist enthalten ist. Das klingt alles nach eine typischen, beknackten Marketing-Entscheidung von der die Anwender nichts haben.
Im Grunde ist das "nur" ein interner, virtueller MIDI-Controller, der sich selbst und die Parameter von Plugins automatisiert oder über die VST Schnittstelle Daten sendet. Das könnte Cubase Elements technisch gesehen auch schon, ist aber 500 Euro billiger. Auf den Makro-Knopf oder ModScript-Editor könnten sie in den kleinen Versionen ja auch gerne verzichten und bei Pro Projekten die das nutzen einfach "deaktivieren", so wie andere Spuren auch deaktiviert / schreibgeschützt werden, aber vorhanden sind, wenn sie nicht unterstützt werden sollen.
Die JavaScript Runtime ist ja anscheinend sowieso nicht in Elements drin (MIDI Controller Scripte kann man auch nicht erstellen).
Ist jedenfalls keine eine interessante Preisalternative, wenn man generative Musik und Sound Design machen will und den ganzen Luxus-Schnickschnack von Cubase Pro dazu schlicht nicht benötigt aber bezahlen müsste. Das Geld geht dann halt weiter an Bitwig & Co.
Da kann Steinberg gerne den deplatzierten Score-Editor aus Elements rauswerfen. Für halbwegs vernünftige Orchester-Kompositionen werden in Elements sowieso zu wenige Spuren unterstützt. Ich kenne ein paar Elements-User: einige wissen nicht al dass es den Editor gibt und keiner kann damit was anfangen. Modulatoren wären aber sicher für jeden ein interessantes Spielzeug - selbst wenn es nur der LFO und Shaper wäre. Da ginge schon was.
Der neue Score Editor benutzt jetzt Dorico Algorithmen und ist ein großer Schritt nach vorne.
Nativer Import von Dorico Projekten in Cubase wurde schon angekündigt.
Das ist mein persönliches Highlight für Cubase 14.
Modulatoren und den neuen Drumkit Editor brauche ich hingegen garnicht.
Cubase 14 fühlt such zudem wesentlich performanter und flotter an, das zweite große Plus.
So ist insgesamt für jeden was Nützliches dabei.
It is clearly the intention to make you buy the big version sooner or later but that holds true for all companies 🙂
@@rudigerk ich würde jetzt auch nicht anfangen nur noch Modulatoren zu verwenden, ist ja in Artist auch nicht möglich.
Die anderen neuen Schmankerl sind ja auch in fast allen Versionen mit dabei, inkl. der Performance Boost.
Der Noteneditor ist auch in allen Versionen drin, selbst Elements. Sein Nutzen ist für Leute die nicht komponieren und mit Notensatz vertraut sind ist der Editor eben irrelevant. Da ist es egal ob er jetzt auf Dorico basiert und besser als der Vorgänger ist.
Ich weiß nicht, wie viele Hip Hop, EDM und Ambience Partituren etc. so existieren... Auch nicht so wirklich meine Genres.
Mit Elements kann man das aber locker alles machen.
Elements wird wohl kaum in einem Studio-Umfeld oder für Filmmusik verwendet, womit die "Gefahr", dass jemand eine Partitur benötigt sehr schwindet, und damit auch die Notwendigkeit für den Editor.
Für Pop, Rock, EDM, Ambience und Beat Maker ist das aber voll ausreichend.
Die Modulatoren passen in dieses Segment schon sehr gut rein. Ein Noteneditor aber?
Ich bin seit Version 1 Cubase User und hab in 40 Jahren 1 x "gebraucht". Als es irgendwann mal "Cubase Score" gab (lange her) habe ich mit Freuden auf die günstigere Version ohne den Editor gewechselt.
Jetzt hab ich ihn ungewollt wieder, den Listen-Editor dafür aber nicht mehr.
Damit hab ich früher gerne und viel gearbeitet.
@@mossgraber keine Ahnung wie hoch der Leidensdruck sein muss, dass ein Elements User deshalb auf Pro umsteigt und ein paar Hunderter hinlegt.
Da ist die Wahrscheinlichkeit auf Bitwig zu wechseln deutlich höher.
Vergleicht man Elements mit Bitwig 8-track die beide kostenlos bei Audio Devices mit dabei sind, bin ich mir nicht so sicher ob das am Ende 'ne Milchmädchen-Rechnung seitens Steinberg war.
@@CirTap It is rather simple - if you prefer the feature set of Bitwig, then use Bitwig. If your approach to music making is better covered by Cubase, then use Cubase. While you might prefer one, other people might prefer the other.
Bitwig is all about workflow. Cubase's modulation workflow is bad.
its pretty good, bitwig has the edge but cubes's implementation is not bad.
who in bitwig came up with the most incomprehensible choke group in drum machine! why can't you make a choke group
a-b-c-d-f..... no, you need to look with your eyes for who appointed who didn't and instead of the label a-b-c-d-f choke group I have a bunch of names of notes notes!!! There are some strange shortcomings a bunch of innovations but sometimes simple things turn into strange inventions of bicycles! You constantly need to keep in mind where you sent what to choke
Now compare Bitwig modulators with Max/MSP modulators.
😂 Max/MSP is pure insanity.