REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

For users of legacy Steinberg Cubase software
CinStudios
Member
Posts: 226
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 6:35 am
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by CinStudios »

Well...

I can honestly say that I've just spent 20 minutes listening to the top picks for speedcore/splittercore Youtube songs and I really have a hard time qualifying it as music.

Every track contains such a cacophony of noise and machine gun blast fills and parts that it just sounds like nonsense.

Now, I know that some of our parents will say the same thing about our music today. The difference being that there is and identifiable groove and quality to our music that makes you feel good. The stuff I heard did not contain that, even remotely. In fact, I can confidently say that if hearing 700-900 + BPM music that sounds like a bunch of glitches and Machine gun fire makes you feel good, you might need to re-evaluate your life...

Sorry to get away from the OP (and no offense intended)

samicide
Junior Member
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:32 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by samicide »

CinStudios wrote:Well...

I can honestly say that I've just spent 20 minutes listening to the top picks for speedcore/splittercore Youtube songs and I really have a hard time qualifying it as music.

Every track contains such a cacophony of noise and machine gun blast fills and parts that it just sounds like nonsense.

Now, I know that some of our parents will say the same thing about our music today. The difference being that there is and identifiable groove and quality to our music that makes you feel good. The stuff I heard did not contain that, even remotely. In fact, I can confidently say that if hearing 700-900 + BPM music that sounds like a bunch of glitches and Machine gun fire makes you feel good, you might need to re-evaluate your life...

Sorry to get away from the OP (and no offense intended)



nobody asked what you consider music or not.
Cubase 9.5

User avatar
Johnny B Richman
Member
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 4:12 pm
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by Johnny B Richman »

CinStudios wrote:Well...

I can honestly say that I've just spent 20 minutes listening to the top picks for speedcore/splittercore Youtube songs and I really have a hard time qualifying it as music.

Every track contains such a cacophony of noise and machine gun blast fills and parts that it just sounds like nonsense.

Now, I know that some of our parents will say the same thing about our music today. The difference being that there is and identifiable groove and quality to our music that makes you feel good. The stuff I heard did not contain that, even remotely. In fact, I can confidently say that if hearing 700-900 + BPM music that sounds like a bunch of glitches and Machine gun fire makes you feel good, you might need to re-evaluate your life...

Sorry to get away from the OP (and no offense intended)
+1
Really tough for my sensitive ears and musical taste listening to this as well :shock: Calling this "music"?? Oh come on... :roll:
Win7 x64 SP1, Intel Core i7-2600K 3,4 GHz, 16 GB RAM, Gigabyte GA-P67A-UD4-B3, RME Fireface 400, MIDISport 4x4, MSI GeForce GTX 1060 + 2x HP ZR2440w displays
Cubase Pro 10.0.20, WaveLab 9.5.50, HALion 6

Guest

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by Guest »

LeVzi wrote:Its a relief to know I have this workaround, gives me the freedom again to carry on, and actually opens up a new zone to my work. Hopefully other things will work in sync with this, although I should imagine when something "Syncs" to tempo it locks at the 200bpm not 400bpm as required.
But now you have learned some new things that will enable new expressions, even within the context of what you are doing.

Sure it is easier to write in 4's but as you delve deeper into a piece of music one requires more beats at different tempos and to gain that ultimate speed is a process of building up to it and using your synthesizers to oscillate and modulate the sound rather than the sequencer but as a starting point, yes remove the tempo limitation but at the same time it must be a NEW feature and not hamper existing features such as metronome and/or score.

Oh and don't worry about other devices or sequencers syncing to cubase, as by that time it will be someone else's (a producer's) problem.

GL

LeVzi
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 8:37 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by LeVzi »

ok before this degrades into an all out flame war, and the topic gets locked, this isn't about what is deemed "Music". Your opinions on the music in question are totally irrelavent, and if you feel the need to post said opinion on the genre, then I feel your attitude to creation is jaded and I question why you are even here. So either keep it on topic or just don't post, I don't troll around looking to slate other styles, I expect the same from others. And as for re-evaluating my life as I like and create this ? Sorry but LOL , that was quite funny.

Now back on topic, Brains, I see how it works, and I see that this workaround functions, but again, it gets away from the whole point that Cubase lacks the ability other DAW's have to leave things as they are, write in 4/4 and allow the tempo to increase to or up to 999bpm. This also allows tempo locking from plugins to the correct speed, not half. I am sure there will be other issues where the incorrect tempo setting will cause samplers etc to do things incorrectly.

Like I stated before, all I am asking for is the tempo to be unlocked to a maximum of 999, as it is in other DAW's. Thats the request. All Steinberg could do is state that it a) cannot be done, and why it cannot. or b) state they will do it. If it was to impede on other functions, then obviously leave it alone, but I suspect it won't, but by all means, implement it, send me the beta and I will be happy to test it throughly to make sure it doesnt effect any part of Cubase.
AMD FX 8350 4Ghz , 16Gb DDR3 RAM, 1x1TB SSD, 1x1TB HDD 1x500gb HDD. Sapphire RX 560 4Gb Graphics, Audient ID 14 USB Interface, Alesis Q49 Keyboard. Cubase 10 Pro

Guest

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by Guest »

That is what I am saying to you, it is easier writing in 4's and this is nothing new in music world.

When I first started using cubase I found I was able to cut every (drum) note into a separate part, but that the information itself always needed to be a certain length, ie longer than the part so eventually I stopped doing that but it was a learning process I needed to go through, while at the same time I was using linear mode for writing midi which meant I was stuck with one tempo.

I'm not arguing against faster tempos, I am just saying in the current situation it would need to be a new feature as opposed to modifying other parts of the application.

LeVzi
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 8:37 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by LeVzi »

I dunno, maybe it's not as simple as just simply unlocking the tempo track and allowing bpm's of up to 999. I wait to hear from Steinberg on this.

But I don't understand why the likes of Logic and Ableton are ok to do it, yet Cubase cannot, just doesnt make sense.
AMD FX 8350 4Ghz , 16Gb DDR3 RAM, 1x1TB SSD, 1x1TB HDD 1x500gb HDD. Sapphire RX 560 4Gb Graphics, Audient ID 14 USB Interface, Alesis Q49 Keyboard. Cubase 10 Pro

Guest

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by Guest »

It's to do with the overriding design of Cubase.

Conman
Senior Member
Posts: 2116
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 4:31 am

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by Conman »

ok before this degrades into an all out flame war, and the topic gets locked, this isn't about what is deemed "Music". Your opinions on the music in question are totally irrelavent, and if you feel the need to post said opinion on the genre, then I feel your attitude to creation is jaded and I question why you are even here. So either keep it on topic or just don't post, I don't troll around looking to slate other styles, I expect the same from others. And as for re-evaluating my life as I like and create this ? Sorry but LOL , that was quite funny.
Calm, calm. Flaming is personal abuse. And if the question is not about "music" then what does it matter what people say about the music?
I have seen these elements / FX used in conventional music for a few years now so it's not totally redundant to experiment here.
The question is about the metronome but I think the premise that because other DAWs go up to eleven then so should Cubase has faults in that Cubase is working, in the main, to main music industry mechanical standards which means that in common with mechanical and most electronic metronomes Cubase keeps within the 30 - 300bpm standard (actually in practise with mechanical & electronic metronomes it's usuall 40 - 280bpm). Those standards have been around for a few centuries and have not yet stifled anyones creativity.
I'd say that the other DAWs that "go up to eleven" are the ones with a mistaken design principle that would mislead young or inexperienced musicians into believing that their standard is the norm which it is not.
There are probably only a half-dozen DAWs doing this as against a few thousand metronome manufacturers. So clearly the DAWs are the odd ones out.

Good to see you getting into the loop here though.
Asus P6T deluxe; Core i7 920 2.67gHz; 12gig ram; Win7 Pro SP1; Roland Octa-Capture usb inteface; Cubase 6; and no 3rd party additions couple of hard drives PSU 750watt; NVidia GE Force 9600.
"An entrepreneur accepts that the world is the way that it is and goes about changing it rather than waiting for someone to make it easy for them."

User avatar
vic_france
Grand Senior Member
Posts: 3330
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 5:16 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by vic_france »

Conman wrote:.... Cubase keeps within the 30 - 300bpm standard
In actual fact, Cubase 6 goes all the way down to 1 BPM ;) (although, I think I read somewhere, Elastique Pro stops functioning at 20 BPM, if slowing down from 120 BPM)
Mac Pro Quad-Core (2009) 2.66 GHz | 16GB RAM | MOTU PCI-424/2408mk3|MOTU Midi Timepiece AV | Mac OS X 10.9.5 | Cubase 9.5.0| Logic Pro X 10.2.2| ProTools 11.3.1| Ableton Live 9.7.5| Reaper 562 | Studio One Pro 3.5.1

-steve-
External Moderator
Posts: 9670
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:42 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by -steve- »

Audiences rioted at the premier of Stravisky's Rite of Spring, and even at Tschaikowsky's Violin Concerto in D. They said it wasn't music.

On another note,

I shall write a piece in 1/1 with the tempo marking: Tempo: Presque Pas Whole note=1 bpm.

It will be premiered on 11/11/2011, at 11:11

I will invite Charlie Sheen, for I will have won.

You heard it here first.
independent manufacturer rep (not a Steinberg employee)
[safe mode] [cubase manual] [score editor manual]

User avatar
vic_france
Grand Senior Member
Posts: 3330
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 5:16 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by vic_france »

SteveInChicago wrote:It will be premiered on 11/11/2011, at 11:11
Yes, but that that tempo, when will it end?
Mac Pro Quad-Core (2009) 2.66 GHz | 16GB RAM | MOTU PCI-424/2408mk3|MOTU Midi Timepiece AV | Mac OS X 10.9.5 | Cubase 9.5.0| Logic Pro X 10.2.2| ProTools 11.3.1| Ableton Live 9.7.5| Reaper 562 | Studio One Pro 3.5.1

-steve-
External Moderator
Posts: 9670
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:42 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by -steve- »

Well, it's kind of a long piece, around 44,701 measures all told, so it should end on 12/12/2011 at 12:12. I am working on finding a conductor who can really keep time.
independent manufacturer rep (not a Steinberg employee)
[safe mode] [cubase manual] [score editor manual]

User avatar
curteye
External Moderator
Posts: 4756
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 2:03 am
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by curteye »

Aloha guys,
Just to chime in,

I love it when musicians (usually younger ones) do a new style of music that
has never been done before and they are really passionate about it.
Rock on guys.


OTOH
When I on occasion listen back to some of the old acid rock music (that I used to be soooo proud of because I thought it was soooo progressive) I sometimes get embarrassed.


—c—
If yer gear ain't breakin down, you aint workin' much.

iMac 5K 4.2Gz 16GB
MBP 3.0Gz......16GB

Location:
On the side of a volcano in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

User avatar
Keres
Junior Member
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:55 am
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by Keres »

Sorry, 999 bpm is simply not fast enough.

I'm planning on producing several award-winning albums all consisting of music with a fixed tempo of 1001 bpm.

Are my aspirations to be thwarted? ;)
C6.0.7/ CC121/ XP 32 SP2/ 2xDelta 1010

-steve-
External Moderator
Posts: 9670
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:42 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by -steve- »

Sorry to have hijacked the thread with this silliness.

Curteye, +1
independent manufacturer rep (not a Steinberg employee)
[safe mode] [cubase manual] [score editor manual]

LeVzi
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 8:37 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by LeVzi »

Conman wrote:
ok before this degrades into an all out flame war, and the topic gets locked, this isn't about what is deemed "Music". Your opinions on the music in question are totally irrelavent, and if you feel the need to post said opinion on the genre, then I feel your attitude to creation is jaded and I question why you are even here. So either keep it on topic or just don't post, I don't troll around looking to slate other styles, I expect the same from others. And as for re-evaluating my life as I like and create this ? Sorry but LOL , that was quite funny.
Calm, calm. Flaming is personal abuse. And if the question is not about "music" then what does it matter what people say about the music?
I have seen these elements / FX used in conventional music for a few years now so it's not totally redundant to experiment here.
The question is about the metronome but I think the premise that because other DAWs go up to eleven then so should Cubase has faults in that Cubase is working, in the main, to main music industry mechanical standards which means that in common with mechanical and most electronic metronomes Cubase keeps within the 30 - 300bpm standard (actually in practise with mechanical & electronic metronomes it's usuall 40 - 280bpm). Those standards have been around for a few centuries and have not yet stifled anyones creativity.
I'd say that the other DAWs that "go up to eleven" are the ones with a mistaken design principle that would mislead young or inexperienced musicians into believing that their standard is the norm which it is not.
There are probably only a half-dozen DAWs doing this as against a few thousand metronome manufacturers. So clearly the DAWs are the odd ones out.

Good to see you getting into the loop here though.
Well unfortunately times have changed in quite a major way, the need for all aspects of design are needed, and unfortunately in the tempo area, Cubase lacks the ability to match the other DAW's. I would definately say it is Cubase that is the odd one out, and not the likes of Ableton and Logic etc, there is no real need to limit the bpm to 300, other than the program itself is limited that it cannot function beyond this. I often wish to write at 320-350bpm. Going up to eleven as you put it, is not actually over cooking tempo at all, 999 is the known region where distinct beats merge into a tone, moby proved that with the track that was 1000bpm. I could download demo's of all the DAW's and check their tempo limits, I doubt they have them tbh, so it's not a case of a few, i'd go as far as to suggest they ALL have 999 limits, not 300 ala Cubase.

So , back to the original point, the 300 limit, if possible, could be removed with no real issues at all provided nothing gets compromised. If the limit can be extended to 999 and Cubase works the same way it does now, excellent, if the program wouldn't function properly with that tempo limit, then that as they say is life. Again I am awaiting word from Steinberg, the support system is probably the worst i've encountered. But once official word on the tempo is known one way or the other, either here or in the support ticket I have open, this topic can be laid to rest :)
AMD FX 8350 4Ghz , 16Gb DDR3 RAM, 1x1TB SSD, 1x1TB HDD 1x500gb HDD. Sapphire RX 560 4Gb Graphics, Audient ID 14 USB Interface, Alesis Q49 Keyboard. Cubase 10 Pro

Conman
Senior Member
Posts: 2116
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 4:31 am

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by Conman »

Unlikely Steinberg will say diddly about this.

Why do you want the speed to go to 99999999bpm? Are you going to play it? Do you want an orchestra to play it?
If it's a machine thing then the metronome can be worked around as all you need do is work out the math.
Or is it that, having found nothing else wrong with Cubase you just want to nit-pick to push the company around a bit? Because Moby sure hasn't bothered. I'm pretty sure that if Moby was here using Cubase that he'd say pretty much what everyone else has been trying to tell you gently.
I think that if you don't get it now you never will so I'll leave you to your minority activity anxieties.
Asus P6T deluxe; Core i7 920 2.67gHz; 12gig ram; Win7 Pro SP1; Roland Octa-Capture usb inteface; Cubase 6; and no 3rd party additions couple of hard drives PSU 750watt; NVidia GE Force 9600.
"An entrepreneur accepts that the world is the way that it is and goes about changing it rather than waiting for someone to make it easy for them."

samicide
Junior Member
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:32 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by samicide »

Conman and Brains are both like trolls, it is possible they are the same person. Both share the same trait of uselessness while desperately trying to have the last word.
Cubase 9.5

Guest

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by Guest »

If you don't like what others' say then you have the option to ignore.

Calling people out in a baiting kind of a manner is not helpful IMV.

I guess there is some irony in that.

goodbyenine
Member
Posts: 226
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 2:10 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by goodbyenine »

Sorry but I have to concur with some posters here - this stuff is on the edge of noise.

But - another (better) reason for increasing the tempo limit in Cubase (and Nuendo) is so that the Time Warp Tool has more flexibility when squeezing bars. Actual bars.

Also, whether asked for or not, I have the right to state that, in my opinion, this genre of acoustic output is outside any definition of music that I can dream up.
Late Mac Tower based studio (10.8.5) with N6.5 and 2nd N6.5 (10.8.5), RME Madi via 648, Nanoclock, M3000 x 4 Ext FX, Video via BM Decklink on MP, composition workstation Single Hexacore MP. Sync: MMC N6.5>N6.5. VE Pro 5 always online via slaves. UK TV Music production at 25fps 48k at all times. Softriad Raid management. Powercore 4 running via VE Pro slave, Altiverb hosted on slave as bank of Ext FX. Waves and other plugins. Kontakt 5 central to workflow.

samicide
Junior Member
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:32 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by samicide »

goodbyenine wrote:Sorry but I have to concur with some posters here - this stuff is on the edge of noise.

But - another (better) reason for increasing the tempo limit in Cubase (and Nuendo) is so that the Time Warp Tool has more flexibility when squeezing bars. Actual bars.

Also, whether asked for or not, I have the right to state that, in my opinion, this genre of acoustic output is outside any definition of music that I can dream up.


Thankfully nobody asked you what you are able to dream up.

if any of you think you can define what music is or is not then you truly are part of 'the problem'
Cubase 9.5

LeVzi
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 8:37 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by LeVzi »

I didn't start this topic to defend the style of music I Create, nor do I have to.

Creativity should have no limits, I am sure any artist would agree, and the jaded opinion of those who are so arrogant to slate anything other than the norm has no meaning.

I simply now await Steinberg's response regarding this matter. Who knows, maybe it will benefit others with a higher tempo limit, it will certainly bring Cubase into line with the other DAW's thats for sure.
AMD FX 8350 4Ghz , 16Gb DDR3 RAM, 1x1TB SSD, 1x1TB HDD 1x500gb HDD. Sapphire RX 560 4Gb Graphics, Audient ID 14 USB Interface, Alesis Q49 Keyboard. Cubase 10 Pro

Guest

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by Guest »

It will be of benefit to all users as there will be a clear distinction between what can be done with a metronome and what can't, in particular the inbuilt metronome, as well as potentially opening up further options to meld notes and trigger sounds.

Good luck with your quest.

johngar
Member
Posts: 564
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 5:46 pm
Contact:

Re: REQUEST - Removal of 300bpm limit.

Post by johngar »

LeVzi wrote:I didn't start this topic to defend the style of music I Create, nor do I have to.

Creativity should have no limits, I am sure any artist would agree, and the jaded opinion of those who are so arrogant to slate anything other than the norm has no meaning.
I agree.

And, going beyond the 300 limit can be useful in other areas, like sound design.
PC | Nuendo 10 | i7-4930k | Win10 | 32gb ram | Intensity Pro | Radeon HD7700 | RME9632 | Euphonix MC Control -Mix - Transport | Generic

artifactdetroit.com

Post Reply

Return to “Older Cubase versions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests