![]() ![]() That said the other two are also guilty of this. A lot of features/menu commands are in what I would say are 'traditional' places, so it takes a bit to learn to navigate that. Great interface, the only caveat is that it can be daunting at first. Not that set up for heavily quantized dance music production for instance, though it's possible to of course. Typically the least stable of the three, and the most CPU hoggish.ĭigital Performer is the most advanced old school DAW in terms of remixing and vast arrangements, many great features for this. very good CPU use.Ĭubase is the easiest to write in for electronic music, lots of features that help with that, good audio editing capabilities. Logic is fast, but linear and clunky in rearranging a song, multi instruments etc. In a quick comparison of the sequencers of the three from my own experience: ![]() ![]() I can't tell you what DP's Windows performance VS Mac will be as it's not out yet, it's due in the next month or two. I know that buffer sizes for some godawful reason have to be really high in Cubase to get anything like the low buffer performance of DP or Logic on Mac. If you want cross platform then Cubase and Digital Performer 8 are the choices really. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |