Search found 14 matches

Return

Re: Sound On Sound says it all: Too Dark

I am by no means a mixing dude or anywhere near being a recording engineer, so these lines are simply an observation.

So it seems a few of things irritate many with the new mixer, two of them are darkness and disorientation. I've seen this discussed in several places now. So I went and searched for pictures real life mixers, and strangely enough there are a large number of dark faced mixers, and not at all bad to look at, I included a few in this post. I also saw many that "pleased" me more than others and some that directly displeased me. I think what pleasing translates to is an immediate understanding of what I saw. What JMCecil talked about above.

So in looking at them all, a few light ones too, but I concentrated on dark ones (for obvious reasons) and it appears to me that one thing is strikingly missing or rather I think it was supposed to be there by clever illusion (more in the bottom part of the mixer, with the sliders). I am talking about a very distinct separation of channels. The ones of most disinterest to me had very weak "lines" of separation between channels, where they were sort of disorienting, and the ones with lines (and I like many dislike a lot of lines in a UI, but) they immediately "registered".

sound_mixer.jpg
16262_resized_sound_300.png
mixer (2).jpg

Instinctively I also went over to PT11 to take a look at its mixer ( click on "Images" ) and I have to say it is by no means any better, at least not to my eyes. Way too busy. However, again, I am not mixing a whole lot, so these are just my personal opinions.
by Elektrobolt
Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:32 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Sound On Sound says it all: Too Dark

I'm not 100% sure the theme is too dark. I don't like it, but I won't blame the darkness. It's all about contrast and positioning and structure so that you can find what you are looking for. I find the new mixer to be a morass of blobs of indistinct washes of color. I can't tell which channel goes with which fader. I can't tell which row goes with which column. I really just can't find anything without actively trying to look for it. Even with the faders grouped, I can't easily delineate one channels setting from the next. I have no such problem in C6.5 or prior. I find trying to use the mixer extremely fatiguing and cumbersome. That doesn't even take into account the clickfest, lack of positional/zoom memory, losing plugins behind the mixer, can't use hotkeys unless you click on the mixer, rack configs not working, workspaces not working, linking only partially working for solo/mute/record ... etc ... etc ... etc ... and that's after a year of patches ... wooohooo
by JMCecil
Wed Oct 30, 2013 1:51 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Record-enabled tracks do not render?!

The problem is not that the track is record enabled, but the auto-monitoring setting. Which do you have set? Tape Machine Style?
by SteveInChicago
Fri Oct 25, 2013 4:48 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: [Poll] Fix the insert handling in the new mixer console?

By the way, the hover and hidden buttons will bite the borgz in the backside when they try to do touch interfaces.
by JMCecil
Wed Nov 06, 2013 3:18 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: This will change..nothing

If it doesn't change anything for you, why do you care what it costs? If the addition of MIDI, multitrack and lossless audio will make a difference to how you interact with artists, then the cost is a pittance surely?
by JMCecil
Thu Nov 14, 2013 4:14 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: this'll change everything 14 nov

I agree that some are missing the point. It is not about the quality of the sound. It is about replacing an IDEA (sketched out in MIDI) with an actual recording by an artist FROM A REMOTE LOCATION.
That performer does not even need to own Cubase (I think). All they need (I think) is the free "performer" application. They hear your basic song and then add a living breathing performance.
I think the latency over the internet is only a concern if you were trying to record from two different locations at once. If you are only recording at one location, you could be 30 seconds late at the mixing desk because all you are doing is recording the performance and replacing your MIDI track with it. So you turn your MIDI idea into a song with real instrument recordings one performer at a time from multiple locations. Not unlike simply sending them your project and letting them replace the MIDI and then send it back, but they don't need Cubase at all.

Anyway, I do think it is a good idea for collaborations. If all the collaborating performers use Cubase then it doesn't do too much other than save the hassle of sending the projects back and forth. Probably not something I would use, personally.

Lastly, I will agree that the video it quite funny. The tones of their voices and interaction reminds me of two ladies on a PBS talk show about flowers or pastries. Remember the NPR Delicious Dish skits on SNL with Ana Gasteyer and Molly Shannon? It does a fair job of describing what VST Connect is designed to do, however.
by jaslan
Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:39 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

[FR]Tap to set to unity

On the CH and FD it would be nice to have a tap mode that reset the faders to unity.
by JMCecil
Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:00 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Metronome click patterns/Programmable click track

Implement a feature where we can create patterns in the Cubase metronome, and save them as presets, and where we can set the value of the beat , and have that define the grid.

Yes, I know you are thinking, why not create a click track? well, for one thing, having this in the Cubase click would permit
- including the click in a mix-down
- controlling its volume from the control room
- the use of (non x/4) audio clicks within the metronome dialog
- Automating the click
and it would be faster to create and faster to change.

Example:
11/16: 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 1 2
7/8: 1 2 3 4 1 2 3

I want to add (just in case) that the pattern should not be limited to a low number of cells, such as is the case with the Score Time Signature dialog.
by SteveInChicago
Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:52 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Thank You Steinberg for making me lose business....

BriHar wrote:Yah, I'll contact support. ;)

It appears you can download the content: ftp://hsoiso:hsoiso@ftp.steinberg.net/H ... 101213.iso
by SteveInChicago
Tue Mar 04, 2014 4:35 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

listen botton for your de-esser

A listen botton for you de-esser so you can hear what your taking away.
by marcus82
Thu Apr 03, 2014 7:56 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: UR44 instrument input

thanks, I was hoping ur44 have proper HiZ input (1Mohm), but its not specified officially in manual...I will try to contact support for answer. 500Ohm is not proper HiZ.

The HiZ is 1Mohm. The original getting started manual contained incorrect information and an errata document quoted the correct values.
Check out the following post where I have listed the full details of the UR44 inputs/outputs/sample rates etc

http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=157&t=50168

Cheers

Stevo.. :D
by stevo1080
Sat Apr 19, 2014 10:03 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Clening up a section of a recording.

Take a look at spectral editing; by the sound of what you describe it might work well.
by Arjan P
Mon May 26, 2014 5:03 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: How to make WAV (Microsoft) signed 16 bit PCM

ignored or error?
You could try to process it via the Master Section directly to see maybe more details.
by PG
Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:28 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Hidden Cubase 8 features!

I find it rather remiss that there is no "whats New" document or Version History documentation.

Yes we can read about the new features bells and whistles on the product page enticing one to 'buy' the newest version, but there is nothing detailing changes and more importantly new options and preferences of interest to existing users.

Instead we are left discovering these for ourselves - hence this very thread. Who knows if some of these hidden ( undocumented ) "features" are not in fact unintended, benign software bugs which could just as easily disappear in the next update.

This seemed to stop a few versions ago, I remember every time there use to be a gigantic list, even listing new keyboard shortcuts etc... this is needed again!

Steinberg: you are doing yourself a disservice by not listing every tiny little change that you have introduced... guaranteed 1 of those tiny changes is a game changer for someone.
by Xtigma
Wed Dec 17, 2014 8:21 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic