Search found 39 matches

Return

Re: Hahahaha!!!!! I've lost it.

Are you saying Cubase is slow?....could it be your computer?
No, he´s saying it´s too much clicking, and waiting for buttons to appear on roll over, and having to remember to approach them from the correct side, since otherwise the wrong buttons appear, that in earlier versions had been there without having to hover over a certain areas to make them appear.

EDIT: Of course that´s only what I think the OP is saying
by thinkingcap
Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:52 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

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


- but make the hover area bigger, and better to find, e.g. more to the inside of the insert slot
- also make the buttons bigger. once hovering they can occupy a lot of space, does not matter, you can read the insert name as long as you don't hover
I don't want to hover ... ever. I want to look and see.

The insert slot size is bigger than before and still displays less information.

Sorry, I don't like these ideas.
by JMCecil
Wed Nov 06, 2013 3:16 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: [Poll] Fix the insert handling in the new mixer console?

Even though the Mix Console is much better than before, I still think that the issues mentioned here would definitely make its workflow even better. Steinberg needs to look back at the previous mixer and bring back the things it did well. Yes, the mixer in Cubase 6 did not display Inserts and Sends at the same time, but the information it did display was presented all at once and without clutter. That's the kind of functionality that needs to be present in the current mixer.

The other thing, and this is probably of higher priority in my view, is the hidden plugins issue. This needs fixing ASAP!! Even with the single click behavior back, one still needs to click twice every time the plugin goes underneath the mixer (which happens every time the mixer is not the focus; so it happens a LOT). Still a clicking fest.
by jose7822
Fri Nov 08, 2013 12:30 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

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

The new insert handling in mixer console, with the hidden buttons, makes workflow better or worse?

Edit:
Notice where I have the mouse pointer located and what actually happens when I click.
This happens all the time for us that have narrow mixer settings (many mixer channels on screen).
Take a look the my screenshot gif animation here:
http://www.gifti.me/i/tUPlGTuh.gif
by msy
Wed Nov 06, 2013 8:51 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Request: Revert FX Plugin Insert Handling

It was nice in Earlier Cubase versions.

But now When I want to edit the FX Insert or Want to remove it I always misclick and have the presets and crap..

Please give us the option to revert it back to the old behaviour where I was quick!
by tekniq
Sun Oct 20, 2013 6:38 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

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


I don't want to hover ... ever. I want to look and see.



By showing less, it looks cleaner so there are less distractions. The current way is better for me.
that just means you don't mix and master, as those are the values that you use to do those things. They aren't a distraction, they are the data the matters.
by JMCecil
Fri Nov 22, 2013 4:32 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

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


that just means you don't mix and master, as those are the values that you use to do those things. They aren't a distraction, they are the data the matters.

The data is not what matters.

Somehow people have turned out better mixes with an analog hardware mixer and fewer effects. Of course I spend time mixing. When mixing, I leave the insert area open.

I do not understand this problem of accidentally opening inserts. This never happens for me. I think you guys need to get a bigger monitor. I believe the new mixer was made for a second monitor. I don't want to read too much crap on the mixer because my monitor mixer is is not in front of my face.

I would be curious to know how many people complaining here are using a laptop and a track pad? You need to get a real computer and real monitors.

I have to agree with JMCecil. Those of us having work flow issues are not generally restricted by our interfaces. I run 3 monitors, 24 faders of MCU Pro, CMC series toys... and for the few things I still have to go to the computer for, I want certain information displayed in a certain way. Having fixed real-estate for individual controls is more important to me than plugin/preset name because those are pieces of info that hold no value. I know what I have inserted and how I have things routed. I don't use presets. But I DO bypass/engage, I do switch pre/post, I do want to know what is open but hidden behind something.

And most importantly, I want to turn knobs and flick switches, not hover my mouse so I can find out the information that is relevant to me or find the right place to hover so I can find the button I need.

Having alternate GUIs for different workflows would be enough to keep me a happy, loyal CuBase user.
by tze019
Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:51 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

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


But lets not assume that these are easy design fixes, they aren't. As soon as you attempt to resolve one thing, you create another problem.

And, fwiw, they don't need to invent anything, or come up with some new clever mechanism. The 6.5 mixer experience was outstanding, as was the control room. The reasons have been beat to death, I'll not rehash that. Looking forward to 7.5.
by JMCecil
Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:07 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: So 7.5 is here (almost)

Steinberg used to be a very serious developing house. Back in the 90s, cubase was used by almost every studio in the world.
I thought they were among the last companies to retain a certain degree of professionalism.
Now they talk about "sweet gui", suggest to "play around" with plugins (whatch the magneto II section) and other marketing, childish nonsense.
I work with it, for c. sake, along with lots of other people here. We don' t need fancy graphics (those gradient, blurred, confusing things steinberg calls events), toys to play with and half made features like the mixconsole.
........
We need a reliable system, and C7 is NOT!
Steinberg, just fix the thing, would you??!?!

All in all that sums up the situation nicely.
I guess most of the folks using Cubase for more than occasional "beatz creation" would agree on the priorities you mentioned.
This is not directed against new features per se (the new mixer (minus the zoom failure) has huge potential once it will be fully useable without focus bugs and with working workspace integration), but against premature release of half-baked changes in vital (workflow oriented) areas, taking a year or more to arrive at a solid, reasonably bugfree state.
Experiment all you want on stuff like LoopMash for example, most of us wouldn't care about or even notice the most daring design experiments there. :P
Criticism aside, new game, new luck - 7.5 looks great on paper, I'm open-minded towards the release.
But it will be judged by two criteria - the new stuff itself, and even more important, whether the C7 bugfixing finally brings the program up to the (pretty high) level of professionalism C6.5 undoubtedly had, fortunately still has.
Steinberg, you could do it in the past, please surprise us in a good, no-nonsense way again.
Many of us need a flawless, fast tool, you know - not a lifestyle screensaver.
ymmv,
Rhino
by Rhino
Sat Nov 30, 2013 1:47 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Track Instruments vs. Rack Instruments in Cubase 7.5

There's issues with both tracks and racks at the moment. Racks are (or were) the method of choice for sheer versatility and editing power, the problem now is, if you can't unload a vsti and leave an empty slot. The whole rack moves up one and all the instrument id's change, disastrous consequences if you have a a really large project as all finely tweaked.

With the new track concept, there's seemingly naming and saving problems, plus if you add another track it goes to the top and seemingly pushes everything down, again the consequences for huge projects could be a disaster.

The new rack itself needs a bit of work on the GUI as well, its a bit out of proportion really and the fonts above the control knobs are hardly eligible as well as a lack of frame highlighting which instrument you've just clicked on...typical of a new SB release lol
by Outsounder
Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:26 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Always show values of input gain, HPF/LPF filters.

And for the filters in the Channel Settings window please - no 'hovering' should be needed.

Thank you for listening.
by Puma0382
Thu Dec 12, 2013 5:23 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Always show values of input gain, HPF/LPF filters.

+1

I don't understand why anyone would want information hidden that doesn't take up any more screen space when exposed.
by Scab Pickens
Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:19 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Transport: Yet Another Close Window Inconsistency

That is -exactly- the issue. Unfortunately. most people here neither recall or care about the raison d'etre of the original SX.

According to Charlie:
1. To start using a new programming framework that would support 32 and 64 bit OSs and be future-proof.

2. To unify the UI in a -consistent- way. They -fully- recognised how 'balkanised' the UI had become because, as with many small companies: they let the UI for each component be designed by different people, rather than have teams work on the -guts- but then have an architect to enforce a UI standard.

The original look of SX was by Dave Nicholson and it was, IMHO, great. It was -suprisingly- 'modern'. Very -bright- and very flat. I -loved- it. And it responded to a very real problem: BUGS. The program had reached a ceiling. So they gave it the clean sweep.

But over time, as they started adding new 'stuff' it drifted, getting more and more skeuo...whatever and dark. and now it's back where it was in 2000... a dark hodgepodge. Clearly each -guy- gets to do his own UI.

Software companies have a 'personality'... and this is SB's... each guy apparently gets a lot of autonomy. Centralised 'standards' are just not that important so 'consistency' and 'documentation' are low priorities.

I don't long for the bugs of that era, but I -do- wish they had the same goals. Back then Charlie and Lars said it flat out: (paraphrase) "We are sacrificing short term 'features' for 'consistency' and 'stability. We'll add in features as we can, but those two things will always be our top priority because we're making a professional program.'"

Note that Charlie, Dave, Lars, etc. have been out of the picture for a decade.

--JC

PS: If one cares, one has to make some noise. SB people are generally very polite. Like most talented people they are arrogant and condescending and not too concerned with the rabble. Think 'House, MD' They believe what they are doing is 'right'. Their policy has always been to allow 'discussion'. They try to simply ignore grousing and LOVE it when a few 'apologists' make fun of whiners like me... saves them the trouble of policing the forum to have 'poindexters' taken down a peg or two. But when the villager pitchforks come out, they have -ALWAYS- responded. They are -not- comfortable with a lot of complaints because, like most bright people, they hate the idea that they may not be 'getting all A's.'

In short, all it would take would be 5 or 6 people getting seriously dis-chuffed to get some response on any issue. What has happened, IMHO, is that, because of the cesspool that the previous forum became, most guys here now have become -way- too 'civil'. A certain number of people will say, 'Yes, xxxxx would be nice. Please do yyyyyyy.' And that has -never- worked. SB totally ignores that---as do all software devs. Nice does not work with software devs.

Nobody wants to go back to the crappy days of the 'Sparky' forum, but if you want any serious attention to any of these 'details' you'll have to get upset. Comments like, "Boy I'm really looking forward to that new Score!" or "I would like xxxxx too but overall I have to give them credit for..." are less than useless. They are polite, decent, balanced and they only enable more bad behaviour.

What do YOU respond to from customers? Measured 'gee it would be nice if...' or I'M NOT HAPPY!

---JC


I'm a graphic designer by trade. I care!

But I think a lot of this seems to be a case on no one-in-particular in-house design team? Look at ALL the Steinberg stuff, it's a hodgepodge of graphic style, it's all piecemeal. Seems that they need to hire a presiding design director to oversee each and every UI, and require that certain navigational standards are met. A library, if you will, a master set of how elements must be defined, each time they're used.

But someone has to actually CARE about it, because it's never going to be a bottom line. You need that kinda of anal weirdo person in house that just gets jollies from having his socks match his belt.
by suntower
Mon Jan 13, 2014 8:38 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Stop putting FX and Group channels into folders


it is a "one click" solution.

Nope it is several click solution to open the folder and drag to the desired location. Then do it for the next one and the next and the next.

if you create an option (insert after selected track)
you have to click on that track before,
at least have the correct track selected.
again, incorrect. I am usually already on the track for which I wish to add something below. I actually can't think of any other rational location for an inserted track. Also, have you noticed how arbitrary even adding a regular track is? In large projects it can be like finding a needle in a haystack. The current methodology makes no sense in any workflow.
by JMCecil
Tue Mar 04, 2014 1:25 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: What is going on with Cubase 7?

And may I add Nuendo 6 to that. I think all the things you mention
have been documented...for quite some time now. Cubase 7 and
Nuendo 6 are done deals. (No more development for either)
If you want fixes you will have to upgrade to 7.5.
Oh yea, many of the documented issues are still present in 7.5 along with
some new ones, so maybe wait for version 8.
I'm trialing Cubase 7.5 and just found the "Mute" bug for channel 1.
How in the world...never mind.

If you need a new drum machine, or track versions, or another tape saturation plugin
they have you covered.

For me the new drum machine is almost worth it. Track versions are a convenience
but I prefer to manage alternate takes spread out on tracks.
Never hit a limit with too many tracks...And everything is visible all the time.
Magneto II doesn't have the mojo that the very 1st ever version of Magneto had.
That is obviously just my opinion. I use the UAD Studer, Ampex or Fatso
for those duties anyway.

Steinberg, please focus on your origins. You know Cubase and Nuendo.
Take the time to address the fundamental issues please.

Flickering Cursors, Mixer Key Commands, Mouse wheel malfunctions, etc...
You know what they are.
by Rotund
Wed Mar 12, 2014 9:03 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Cubase 8 /8.5/9...

Quality takes a lot of CPU power. They can't release a super quality sounding DAW that will take too much ressources. You won't be able to achieve anything with this kind of DAW. Buying your own quality plugins gives some flexibility in the way you manage your computer ressources.
by patcub
Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:35 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Cubase 8 /8.5/9...

totally against to the request in the OP. do you need some particular plugins? you buy them. period. Cubase has to focus on the workflow improvement.
by dr4kan
Sun Mar 30, 2014 1:41 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Cubase 8 /8.5/9...

Workflow is everything, plug-ins are nothing. I can buy the third party plug ins(fx and instruments) and tailor my sound canvas EXACTLY as I want it like that. I CANT buy general workflow in Cubase from a third party developer, it has to be supplied by Steinberg and this is their job to do. Not to cater for any special type of music, like EDM for example just because it´s massive right now. Maybe in 5 years time EDM is really tired and FOLK is the s**t.. Then Cubase need to be just as good for that.
We must avoid bloat as far as possible and building in lots of synths, "phat edm" fx etc is not the way to do that.

Keep it clean, buy what YOU need and do not make others with no interest in your specific needs pay for it.
by claesbjo
Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:01 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Option to not see Filters in PRE rack + visibility issue

I think there should be an option to not see the filter section of the PRE rack. Also, the old knob made it so much easier to see the value and it was nice that the "pre gain" was on a knob, similar to how it is on a real mixer normally.
by vanrivers
Mon Apr 14, 2014 6:37 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Plugin Name Display in mixer like it used to be

This is the one thing with the new mixer that i really don't get why they changed. The way it shortened the names of the plugins and channel ames was perfect. Now it's impossible to tell what plugins that are being used. The same problem happens with sends.

Please, give us an option to have it like it was in 6.5 and backwards.

thanks
Henrik
by vanrivers
Mon Apr 14, 2014 6:28 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Ad new group to tracks (placement of group track)

When running this new command, which for the record is great, I think that the new group that's being created should end up being positioned after the last track that belongs to the group. Now the group ends up last in the track count (or in the "group folder") which doesn't really make sense to me. Best would be if there's an option to choose where it should end hip with the default being after the last "belonging" track.
by vanrivers
Mon Apr 14, 2014 6:31 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: 7.5.20 Impressions...

The funny part is that the interface wastes more space, and provides FAR less information. I don't loath the "look". I loath the functionality. I want to look at the mixer and see the information.
by JMCecil
Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:55 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: 7.5.20 Impressions...

The funny part is that the interface wastes more space, and provides FAR less information. I don't loath the "look". I loath the functionality. I want to look at the mixer and see the information.

YES. You nailed it. Way too much clicking and fussing about to see all the things you could at the same time on the previous version's mix window. Clicking all of the time is not "pro" in any way, shape or form, especially since it doesn't need to be that way. It looks fine -- it's just not designed well in that way right now.

And - for the record - people like Tp3 are not trolls. They have an opinion. Someone is not a hater or troll if they simply disagree with your opinion. Period.
by Headlands
Thu Apr 17, 2014 8:06 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: 7.5.20 Impressions...

... and to all those, liking the current mixer and dissing the Reaper designs:

Again, it's NOT about taste.
Designs copying real mixers, have the clear advatage,
that those mixers have been designed for fast and easy daily work.
Knobs/switches have different size, shape and color.
MAkes it way easier for the brain to navigate.
All info is always visible. This may be a problem for a newbie
but clearly speeds up the workflow, if you use Cubase for daily work.

Cubase pre 7.x.x mixer designers knew about all that.
Now they decided to go for touchscreen and thus we have the current mess ...

Not good.


Jan
by DaDa
Mon Apr 21, 2014 9:23 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Annoying "Presets" window on track inserts

I've lost count of the amount of times I have gone to double click an insert to open the editor window and instead have the presets browser pop up since moving to 7.

The new style inserts button and it's non-descript appearance and rollover buttons with limited info are fiddly enough but the presence of the presets button is a big usability mistake.

Firstly it's not even very useful, who honestly needs to change presets that much on a plugin. Secondly why position it where it is, directly in the middle of the button. This is were you naturally go to 'open' the button i.e edit the plugin not have some other window pop up. It's not important enough to be locate there.

If this button must be on the insert button, which I'm convinced it's not - can be placed some where out of the way.

Why there needs to be a magic 3-in-one button I don't know, separate buttons for separate functions worked fine and didn't encourage mis-fires.

I've been using 7 for a year now so this isn't a case of getting used to it, it's just bad design.

Thank you!
by ControlX2012
Wed Apr 23, 2014 5:12 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Stop adding exporting audio to the bottom of an arrangement

It should go under the current track, 90% of the time I have to drag the new track up 30-40 tracks to where I want it, very boring!
by ControlX2012
Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:35 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Include ARA Melodyne support in Cubase 8...

Please include ARA support in Cubase 8 so Melodyne users can really take advantage of the software.
by austinhaynesmusic
Mon Apr 28, 2014 11:37 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Most important feature ever. Ver8



My thought on this... :idea:

1) Are aesthetics super wichtig...? (really important)
2) How many users actually care about the scoring facility?
3) How many users care about a detailed professional scoring facility?
4) Would more detailed scoring facilities be better handled in an external app/program, where issues and tech stuff can be dealt with separately from Cubase?

:idea: :ugeek:

Scoring is important for those who work with real musicians who need real notes as i do. I expect Cubase to have this possibility because i do not want to change the software (and spend additional money for it) just for generating my notes. More over, i was used to compose using a score editor, but since i changed from Logic (PC - Version!) to Cubase, i had to use its Key - Editor instead, because Cubase's Note - Editor is not very intuitive and handy to use. In my opinion, even the more than 10 years old Logic 4.7 - note editor is better to use than the current one in Cubase !

So i am really looking forward to the new scoring system and i hope strongly that it will be fully integrated into Cubase. I don't know how many users like me want and need a good scoring system, but i am quite sure that i am not the only one.
by MidiMike
Wed May 14, 2014 10:24 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Cubase 7.5 / 8 - 'Unlimited' Inserts

So you have never used a 1176 in combination with a LA-2A?

But of corse it only takes two insert though ;)

I do very fine with the nr of inserts we have today when mixing.
My wish for more than 6 pre-fader inserts is solely for the reason of being able to quickly A/B different plugins (compressors, eq's and what not).

As I said before, you DON'T have to use all at once. In fact, you don't need to use any. But.........

.........But not let our old-school thinking be the limitation of the software.
by iBM
Tue May 20, 2014 7:57 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Supreme Requests


Problem was always, in my opinion, the lack of a proper channelstrip (solved with version 7.0) and the lack of a proper algorithmic reverb (solved with version 7.5

oh sure, those were the problems with Cubase. Not the impossibility of re-arranging track in the mix console, not the missing undo for the mix console, not the impossibility of saving mix console scenes, not the impossibility of preserving mono tracks when exporting stems (unless 1000 clicks), not the missing of a bounce in place function, etc...

And still in 2014 we need to manually copy files with the settings, etc... as we don't have an open dialog window where to choose our preferences/settings/etc from.

but sure, what Cubase was missing was an algorithmic reverb...even though many 3rd party products are better.
by dr4kan
Tue Jun 10, 2014 10:49 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Essential EDM plugins

Threads like this make me weep for the future of humanity.
by JMCecil
Mon Jul 07, 2014 5:03 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Need dead areas around touch controls

Music making on a touch interface is a horrible story.
by ggc
Sun Jul 20, 2014 5:40 pm
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic

Re: Cubase 7.5 / 8 - 'Unlimited' Inserts

-1

If I need that many effects, I just bake it into the part. Plain and simple and no drag on the CPU. I don't want them to alter the mixer if it is going to cause me any problems. They changed it a lot recently. For gawds sake just leave it alone. This is like picking at a scab. It's complex enough!

They've already laid the foundation with the new Mix Console's expanding / collapsing sections. So we already know how it would work. It shouldn't cause much confusion. I'm sure it could default to showing only 6+2 slots, like it does now.

As for drag on the CPU, that's what the freeze button is for. That way, we get non-destructive and don't have to print the effects AND get CPU freed.

And for those of us freezing, the number of inserts we current have is only 6 (six freezable).

Put a 3rd party virtual console at the end (common), now it's 5.

Put a 3rd party peak-check-limiter before that (also common), now it's 4.

If it's a vocal (or bass), or a synth part with untamed dynamics (pretty much every channel I deal with) an 1176 + la2a combo is common (and awesome) one-two punch for controlling dynamics. Now only two slots are left and we haven't even started with the real, unique, creative sound design stuff.

Basically, this pattern is common enough for me that I feel like I start with really only two insert slots to "go crazy" with.

And this doesn't even allow inserting meters or gain staging plugins. Ideally, I'd like to have a trim plugin between each plugin that doesn't offer its own output volume so that I can hit the next plugin the way I want -- not even possible in Cubase when I'm left with 2 inserts after my bread-and-butter plugins.

I've resorted to using Magma and it's a royal pain seeing "Magma" in every channel and having no idea what is what. And it uses more CPU.

Cubase is the only DAW in the world with so few inserts.
by Jalcide
Tue Aug 19, 2014 7:06 am
 
Jump to forum
Jump to topic