We own both Cubase and Vegas. IMO, Vegas is much easier to use, more
intuitive and has an interface that follows windows conventions that
lends itself superbly to mix down and makes the program stand out
among its competitors.

Cubase has MIDI capability, a bit more robustness in the recording
department with some hardware mixtures (MOTU 2408 for one), and an
interface that is less intuitive and conforms little to standard
windows conventions. It has a much steeper learning curve and,
discounting the MIDI capability, does not perform any better for the
effort expended IMO.

Cubase will run on NT but not as easily and, as far as I can tell,
will not take advantage of multi-processors as will Vegas.

We use Vegas primarily for mixing and it is a whale of a tool in that
regard. If I had to get rid of one program it would be Cubase, mainly
because MIDI is not a necessity for us.

If MIDI capability is important to you, and it appears that it is,
than go elsewhere ... if you are looking for an audio only tool, then
you owe it to yourself to give the Vegas demo a try.

.....

Kai Wen Franklin wrote:
>>Will someone please tell me the difference between these
>>programs? I know that CW8, Logic Audio and Cubase will work
>>with midi tracks too, but can't they work as multitrackers
>>also. For the most part I write all of my music on my K2500
>>and record the music to my PC. I just want to use the a
>>multitracker to do my vocals and such and then mix it down.
>>What does Vegas do, that Cubase, CW8 and Logic Audio want?
>>Regards,
>>Kai

I agree with everything you've said, though I would add that you
could get Vegas and then add a plain/inexpensive version of Cubase or
Cake for just MIDI - which is what I do.

regards,

Paul



Karl Caillouet wrote:
>>
>>We own both Cubase and Vegas. IMO, Vegas is much easier to use,
more
>>intuitive and has an interface that follows windows conventions
that
>>lends itself superbly to mix down and makes the program stand out
>>among its competitors.
>>
>>Cubase has MIDI capability, a bit more robustness in the recording
>>department with some hardware mixtures (MOTU 2408 for one), and an
>>interface that is less intuitive and conforms little to standard
>>windows conventions. It has a much steeper learning curve and,
>>discounting the MIDI capability, does not perform any better for
the
>>effort expended IMO.
>>
>>Cubase will run on NT but not as easily and, as far as I can tell,
>>will not take advantage of multi-processors as will Vegas.
>>
>>We use Vegas primarily for mixing and it is a whale of a tool in
that
>>regard. If I had to get rid of one program it would be Cubase,
mainly
>>because MIDI is not a necessity for us.
>>
>>If MIDI capability is important to you, and it appears that it is,
>>than go elsewhere ... if you are looking for an audio only tool,
then
>>you owe it to yourself to give the Vegas demo a try.
>>
>>.....
>>
>>Kai Wen Franklin wrote:
>>>>Will someone please tell me the difference between these
>>>>programs? I know that CW8, Logic Audio and Cubase will work
>>>>with midi tracks too, but can't they work as multitrackers
>>>>also. For the most part I write all of my music on my K2500
>>>>and record the music to my PC. I just want to use the a
>>>>multitracker to do my vocals and such and then mix it down.
>>>>What does Vegas do, that Cubase, CW8 and Logic Audio want?
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Kai

Hear, hear!

I use my favorite Mac sequencer (synched to Vegas).

Brian

---

F. Paul Lembo III wrote:
>>I agree with everything you've said, though I would add that you
>>could get Vegas and then add a plain/inexpensive version of Cubase
or
>>Cake for just MIDI - which is what I do.
>>
>>regards,
>>
>>Paul
>>
>>
>>
>>Karl Caillouet wrote:
>>>>
>>>>We own both Cubase and Vegas. IMO, Vegas is much easier to use,
>>more
>>>>intuitive and has an interface that follows windows conventions
>>that
>>>>lends itself superbly to mix down and makes the program stand out
>>>>among its competitors.
>>>>
>>>>Cubase has MIDI capability, a bit more robustness in the
recording
>>>>department with some hardware mixtures (MOTU 2408 for one), and
an
>>>>interface that is less intuitive and conforms little to standard
>>>>windows conventions. It has a much steeper learning curve and,
>>>>discounting the MIDI capability, does not perform any better for
>>the
>>>>effort expended IMO.
>>>>
>>>>Cubase will run on NT but not as easily and, as far as I can
tell,
>>>>will not take advantage of multi-processors as will Vegas.
>>>>
>>>>We use Vegas primarily for mixing and it is a whale of a tool in
>>that
>>>>regard. If I had to get rid of one program it would be Cubase,
>>mainly
>>>>because MIDI is not a necessity for us.
>>>>
>>>>If MIDI capability is important to you, and it appears that it
is,
>>>>than go elsewhere ... if you are looking for an audio only tool,
>>then
>>>>you owe it to yourself to give the Vegas demo a try.
>>>>
>>>>.....
>>>>
>>>>Kai Wen Franklin wrote:
>>>>>>Will someone please tell me the difference between these
>>>>>>programs? I know that CW8, Logic Audio and Cubase will work
>>>>>>with midi tracks too, but can't they work as multitrackers
>>>>>>also. For the most part I write all of my music on my K2500
>>>>>>and record the music to my PC. I just want to use the a
>>>>>>multitracker to do my vocals and such and then mix it down.
>>>>>>What does Vegas do, that Cubase, CW8 and Logic Audio want?
>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>Kai

Brian Woodard wrote:
>>Hear, hear!
>>
>>I use my favorite Mac sequencer (synched to Vegas).
>>
>>Brian

I actually had a giggle locking ACID to Digital Performer on the Mac.
That was kinda fun. Unfortunately, having source material on two
seperate machines gets kinda old after a while. Makes it REAL hard to
keep source material in one place. While it's not a big deal for
someone who does a few songs now and then, I'm dealing with hundreds
of projects a year and that's no way to keep track of source files
spanned across several machines.

Maybe one day i'll entertain a raid network over a ethernet-100
connection and everyone just uses that... Since ACID loads everything
in memory, it doesn't need disk access such as DP would... seems too
much work though when it's just as easy to add the MIDI functionality
and design of DP to Vegas! ( ;-) ) - Just fix the choppy video
playback problem... I can't get a MOV or AVI @ 320 X 200 15fps to
play smoothly to save it's life and I'm on a 466 Celeron. Cakewalk
Pro 8 doesn't have a problem with it... just Vegas.

bat

Peter,

Yes, multiple masters are a hassle. When I started out, I needed to
place a 2" multi-track master tape, a half-track stereo master, a
cassette dump from the Linn Drum, and 5.25" diskette from the
Commodore into my storage room to back up a project. This new
computer-based audio is a snap by comparison. Now I can drop a CD-R
into a file folder with the MIDI diskette and it'll be years before
my storage room is full...

Peter Stone wrote:
>>
>>
>>I actually had a giggle locking ACID to Digital Performer on the
Mac.
>>That was kinda fun. Unfortunately, having source material on two
>>seperate machines gets kinda old after a while. Makes it REAL hard
to
>>keep source material in one place. While it's not a big deal for
>>someone who does a few songs now and then, I'm dealing with
hundreds
>>of projects a year and that's no way to keep track of source files
>>spanned across several machines.
>>
>>Maybe one day i'll entertain a raid network over a ethernet-100
>>connection and everyone just uses that... Since ACID loads
everything
>>in memory, it doesn't need disk access such as DP would... seems
too
>>much work though when it's just as easy to add the MIDI
functionality
>>and design of DP to Vegas! ( ;-) ) - Just fix the choppy video
>>playback problem... I can't get a MOV or AVI @ 320 X 200 15fps to
>>play smoothly to save it's life and I'm on a 466 Celeron. Cakewalk
>>Pro 8 doesn't have a problem with it... just Vegas.
>>
>>bat
>>

Thanks for the information guys. I only had a chance to mess around
with Vegas, for a day. Now between work and school my time ran out.
It looks like ACID to me. It is alot easier to pick up than Cubas.
I'm only want to mix audio and being that I already have Cubase, I
can't afford to spend $700.00 bucks on Vegas yet. I have to wait for
the price to come down a bit. If I could sell some of my music then
getting Vegas would be the second thing I would do. The first thing
would be to quite my job. (Just kidding)

Thanks,
Kai Wen