Search found 8 matches


Re: Cubase 7 Pro Film/TV Composers: Voice Your Opinion/Rate

I've been thinking about this a LOT recently. It's been pointed out to me that I rant a lot and I've been trying to figure out what my problem is. Truthfully, there are no dealbreakers in Cubase. It does basically everything I need very competently. And they keep adding neat-o features which make it more and more flexible, which is great. It's also 'fast' in terms of actual execution: loading, rendering, etc. are all satisfactory.

But here's the thing... Cubase keeps getting SLOWER to work with. Not -faster-. What inflames my sphincter with each passing year is that Cubase is like this: I go to a restaurant and I ask for a diet plate. And the waiter brings me the all you can eat buffet. And I say, 'No... I want the diet plate.' But the guy keeps bringing more of the all you can eat deal. And I feel bad for complaining, because... the guy keeps bringing me more food. I feel ungrateful---but it's not what I know is good for me. And I feel like a 'whiner'. But what they keep giving me is not what I need. It's great, but it's not what I -really- need.

1. Window management is rough.

2. Preset Management/File Management really stinks.

3. Key commands and icons and window layouts are getting less and less efficient.

...And all that stuff seems so 'small' but the truth? I work SLOWER now than I did in 2007. And I'm not getting any younger so it's getting increasingly annoying.

The projects I work on now are MUCH larger than they used to be. People expect MORE stuff; not 16 tracks... 160 tracks. And the workflow hasn't kept up. In fact, it's heading in the wrong direction.

And THAT is what drives me nuts. Many of the changes SB keeps making are not what I need. They're doing cool stuff, but it's clear they aren't listening to the stuff -I- care most about and that's frustrating. So I feel trapped. I have too many years in to change. Which is not a great feeling sometimes.

by suntower
Wed Dec 18, 2013 8:56 am
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: APPEAL: C7.X Pro Composers: Voice Your Opinion here![POL

The -broad- generalisation I seem to see from what I've read here over the years is this:

It -seems- like 'recording engineers' (people who work primarily with pre-recorded audio) like the direction of Cubase more than people like me who are 'composers' or 'orchestrators' (people who create structures from the ground up -inside- Cubase.) The vast majority of improvements seem to be for people who are taking a 'song' or big sections of content and then massaging it into shape. More of a traditional engineer or producer.

But for -me- who -composes- in Cubase and want to very quickly try ideas, jettison them; edit the -structure- itself, the more features Cubase adds, the -slower- the workflow the basic operations of 'ranges' and 'windows' and 'key commands' have not really been improved in a decade. A decade. You might argue 'Mediabay' and 'Presets' are big changes, but to that I would say: those were actually steps -backwards-. Call me old, but I -still- prefer FXPs. And I just want the options to load and save files where -I- want to... not in some 'cloud' like Mediabay. I want to -know- where everything is.
by suntower
Wed Dec 18, 2013 7:19 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Metronome click patterns/Programmable click track

No, by accepting the Terms and Conditions, Cubase users agree to use only 4/4.

While the program does give a superficial appearance of allowing other time signatures, this does NOT imply that Steinberg actually condones such practice. For instance, the metronome and grid lines have been specifically designed to discourage compound time, and a little-known feature of Cubase is its ability to give a painful electric shock to anyone who persists in attempting to use anything but 4/4.

The metronome in (the by-then-tablet-only) C12 will just be a synthesised voice shouting ONE TWO THREE FOUR, but that'll be OK because the only people who'll still buy the (new toy-style, touch-only) Cubase will have no idea that other time signatures are possible. Happy little people. See them smiling. The Cubase screen it pretty and they can touch it.

See the pretty screen. Touch the pretty screen. Life is good. One two three four, one two three four, one two three four, ...
by chase
Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:02 am
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

[FR]Change order of Instruments in the VST Instrument Rack


I've been using Cubase since its version 1.0, which was around 1992 or 1993. I had my opportunities to work on other DAWs and even systems such as Opus and Synclavier, but I've always made Cubase my personal choice. This is my only personal setup now. You can probably tell I am a fan.

However. There is one big problem with 7.5 which prevents me from using it so far.

In 7.0.6, my current template, which I use every day on a project which I earn my living, includes 45 Kontakts on TOP of the VST instruments list, and then some Omni's, a Halion SE with Dark Planet, Stylus RMX, and a couple of others at the BOTTOM of the list. So there is gap between the 45th Kontakt and the rest of the VSTi's at the bottom. This is so that I can add more Kontakts later and not have their numbering be messed up in the Audio Export window when I need to export audio from a specific Kontakt plugin within my template.

Now: you can imagine how many tracks I've got in my template. Each of them is assigned to the spesific MIDI channel of a specific VST Instrument. That each specific VST instrument sits within its specific slot within the VST Instruments rack, which affects its MIDI track assignments. If the slot is changed, the corresponding MIDI track will play the wrong sound.

In the new update 7.5, I open my template. I want to add a new VST Instrument. So I open the VST Instruments rack window. The instruments which used to be in the bottom of the VST Instruments list are now listed consecutively after all the other instruments on top of the list, which means their VST Instrument numbers are now switched and I will have to re-assign them within my template. Well, that's a drag but it's not like re-assigning Instrument numbers to the first 45 Kontakt MIDI tracks, if I had to. Let's hope I don't have to re-assign those Kontakt tracks.

Now. I click on instrument 45 (which is my Kontakt 45. The next is Omnisphere. By clicking Instrument 45 I am hoping that it's now selected (although there is no indication of that), and thus I hope to to add a new VST Instruments after the Kontakt 45. Just like if you select a MIDI track in the Project window and then add another MIDI track, the new track is going to be added under the track you've just selected. That's the theory.

I click on "Add instrument track" button on top and select Kontakt. The new VST instrument is added ON TOP OF THE VST INSTRUMENT RACK . THIS instrument is now #1 in the list. There is no way for me to change this, this is the only way it works, there is no way to move it down to become #46, and there is no other way around it. This re-assigns all my template's MIDI tracks corresponding to the "previously"-first 45 Kontakts to the wrong new VST Instrument number values . That's 720 MIDI tracks for me to look forward to re-assigning manually to their "new" VST Instrument slot numbers. No way.

This is pure big NO to 7.5 for me until this is fixed. I'm sorry guys, I'm a huge fan of Cubase and have always been, but why make such decisions (the new VST Instruments window) without even testing it? You need betatesters? I'm a Spectrasonics betatester for the past 12 years and I can help you with it. This issue is a really serious one: film, TV, game composers with huge templates are not going to go for this, um, Feature? - no way. Please re-work it. Again - need my help testing? I'll do it happily.

Thank you.
by alexkharlamov
Thu Dec 05, 2013 1:08 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: 7.5.20 Impressions...

Regarding the new mixer bashers. I am 100% in support this new mixer in C7. Working great for me.
I think the designers have done a super job as well!
Well done guys!
This is not about "bashing", "thinking" or "liking".
It is out of question, that the designers have done a bad job.
The new Mixer is simply not good !

- Taking more space for the same information.
- Hidden information all over the place.
- Completely missing information, that was there before and is still needed.
- Not 'point and click', anymore ! Instead You need a 'master' in 'mouse gestures'.
E.g.: to see a send level for several adjacent tracks,
you need to make certain mouse gestures and then wait ...
If nothing happens, try again ...
- Bad contrast and readability.
- Everything has the same shape / looks the same.
( unintuitive, steeper learning curve, error prone )
- Gain changes up to +/-2db are not visible.
- Everything can be sized, but settings can not be stored/recalled, globally
- there's more ...

Nothing above, is about taste.
It just shows, that the current Mixer is not "well done".
It brings Cubase' work s low to new heights !

But yes, it still can be used to mix a song ...

On Toppic :
The Control Room Mixer can show more info, now. Good. It now remembers it's visual settings. Good
Still not as good as it was before, though.
Sadly nothing more, for me ...
Looks like they want me to pay the 'major fee', again.

by DaDa
Thu Apr 10, 2014 4:12 am
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Why such changes?

such changes
much advancing
very music
by ggc
Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:30 am
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Aero is not the problem - it's the non-standard menu bar

I think C8 is a clear indication that there's been a further emphasis on OS X development. That's not all bad of course. Some of the things benefit both platforms -- having to work around OS X's sub par low latency performance must have been a big driver for ASIO Guard improvements, but it's great to have for everyone.

An interesting detail is the track list font which was perfectly fine on Windows before, but looked hideous on OS X. That wasn't Steinberg's fault, it's just that most fonts look hideous in low DPI on OS X (see ). The bigger font is one way to improve it on OS X now that retina is still not a thing in Cubase. On Windows it kind of feels like it just takes extra space unnecessarily.

The menu bar certainly feels strange, it does to Windows what running X apps like Gimp feels on OS X. Sure it works. And you'll get used to it. But it feels really weird to break platform consistency like that!

I'm sure there must be some grumblings about this internally at Steinberg as well, what with the unfortunate side effect of this non-standard implementation being extra work for the developers, playing Whac-a-Mole with bizarre interface bugs like the zero padding and taskbar autohide issues that would never happen with standard windows. Don't get me wrong, MDI definitely shouldn't make a comeback. But vanilla window frames would be nice.
by paaltio
Sun Dec 07, 2014 6:33 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Cubase 8 Pro was not ready for public release

Sorry for very late response. Not leaving this discussion, was busy over past few weeks.

Let me help you there:

Be assured that our opinion on the quality of this release will not be adjusted by the fact that it works fine for you

Sounds pretty irritated to me.

No, all that says is that you can be pretty sure that people who are having problems and feel that C8 was not ready for public release, won't change their opinion because others don't have problems.

So to be clear. A thread is started boldly stating (not questioning) that C8 was not ready for public release. Some loudly agree. However, when it is pointed out that many are getting on with it fine - yes, very much including those of us who use it for a living - this is of no relevance whatsoever. Indeed, we are to "be assured" of its irrelvance. Ditto when you compare with competitors at 10x the price yet far worse performance, this is also brushed aside as irrelevant.
I did post that "I have no issues" is a valid response to the initial part of the discussion in this thread. However, people of the opinion that "there are issues, and because of that C8 feels to be released early" were then trying to discuss how the current state could be improved upon in the future. "I have no issues" is irrelevant to that part of the discussion, unless it's used as an argument to not discuss how to improve the current state can be improved upon in the future - which in turn for those that have problems, isn't really an option?
I hope you understand the difference as to what your point "I have no problems" is relevant to, versus what it isn't?

It's the definitive point at which this thread demonstrates it has no value.
This thread having no value is your opinion, and you're entitled to it. My opinion is really different, so that does make your point not definitive (let's be precise here, "this is the point for me " would have been more suitable, your point is certainly not "the definitive" point).
More importantly though, if this thread really has no value for you, why do you keep coming back and try to force your opinion that "I have no issues" is sufficient argument to stop any parts of this discussion?

Regardless of what facts and opinions are considered, it will not matter.
Exactly what I was thinking. Thanks for confirming that through your post.

Some folks here want a jolly good rant, and they're going to have it, inconvenient facts be dammned, and shame on us for spoiling that particular ranty party.
Nice rant!

As for the idea that now the thread should about turn and become more cerebral and analytical - perhaps starting with a less infantile subject header might be a thought.
Noted. Any valid suggestions for a better header so that you don't need to resort to hyperbole to be able to describe it to your satisfaction?

I would love nothing more than to spend 2 hours going through everything else point by point (as we all know there's nothing more intellectually stimulating that reading forum arguments that spiral into ever decreasing circles of petulance after all), but I really must be off to earn that living.
Yep, your post shows clearly that you're not bothered to take the time to read some of the constructive posts in this thread. The little time you have must be spent not on arguing the better points, but rather on cherry-picking things you think are easy to argue in your favour, and spewing more hyperbole on how you're not interested in this thread.

Note that all the time you spent on writing that post, you could have spent on discussing how the current situation could be improved upon. And I would have gladly discussed that with you, or anyone else for that matter.
Steinberg improving the quality of their initial release now - even with zero effect on you - would maybe save you from some issues at the next release, when things maybe don't work out for you as well (and I might have zero issues)... you know what they say about karma.

Anyway, as I already wrote before, I really don't mind your opinion about having no problems. It's just not relevant to the part of the discussion I want to have. Feel free to chime in with some value add as to how Steinberg can ensure the quality of their initial releases can be improved upon in the future?


by characterstudios
Mon Jan 26, 2015 11:06 pm
Jump to forum
Jump to topic