take_it_easy
Published on 06/01/06 at 02:19
No problem with the installation.
No incompatibility meeting. Gnrale configuration is easy.
Ct manual is a bit lightweight.
SUITABILITY/PERFORMANCE
The app is installed on a Pentium IV with 1.5 Gig 3 Gig of Ram and a map EMU emulator x. It runs perfectly: I can run ten VSTi whose load emulator x 1.2 gig of samples and a dozen audio tracks + many effects without any problem (20% of cpu used !). J'tais far a fan of Logic 5.5 but with my config and Logic, I met a few inexplicable crashes (saturation of the memory (not seen my config), fatal errors ...) d 'o my obligatory passage to another sequencer. So far I did not think could Cubase gallery, see emagiC be better.
But I am royal plant. Whether in terms of stability (10/10) or the ergonomics, I sign for Cubase.
OVERALL OPINION
I use it for a month and I will not return to E-magic even since the takeover by Apple, was afraid of this ct l.
I prfre is ergonomics: Most paramtres a track are visible from one pannel: we should not spend time double click To create an all-out track. automation tracks trs is clear on this point there is nothing inferior logic.
Treatments such as time stretch audio are better than those of E-magic (prcis faster and, according to prcoute trs useful).
Only regret: the plug-ins for E-magic such as reverbs and delays: on Cubase, it's a little less pro.
Quality / price: even if a 10/10 is a good budget.
No incompatibility meeting. Gnrale configuration is easy.
Ct manual is a bit lightweight.
SUITABILITY/PERFORMANCE
The app is installed on a Pentium IV with 1.5 Gig 3 Gig of Ram and a map EMU emulator x. It runs perfectly: I can run ten VSTi whose load emulator x 1.2 gig of samples and a dozen audio tracks + many effects without any problem (20% of cpu used !). J'tais far a fan of Logic 5.5 but with my config and Logic, I met a few inexplicable crashes (saturation of the memory (not seen my config), fatal errors ...) d 'o my obligatory passage to another sequencer. So far I did not think could Cubase gallery, see emagiC be better.
But I am royal plant. Whether in terms of stability (10/10) or the ergonomics, I sign for Cubase.
OVERALL OPINION
I use it for a month and I will not return to E-magic even since the takeover by Apple, was afraid of this ct l.
I prfre is ergonomics: Most paramtres a track are visible from one pannel: we should not spend time double click To create an all-out track. automation tracks trs is clear on this point there is nothing inferior logic.
Treatments such as time stretch audio are better than those of E-magic (prcis faster and, according to prcoute trs useful).
Only regret: the plug-ins for E-magic such as reverbs and delays: on Cubase, it's a little less pro.
Quality / price: even if a 10/10 is a good budget.