One thing that Puzzles me in addition to the track names being harder to read:
Why are the Track NUMBERS so much brighter and easy to read than the volume(dB) and Pan values?
Is it important how many tracks you got in your Project?
+1
This is part of my biggest issue.
Since when was the new mixers layout of buttons and readouts BETTER than it was in 6.5?
Just because you change something doesnāt mean itās better. I seriously have to look HARD at that ā4 Squareā of buttons to know what they heck Iām clicking on.
Did they test out Cubase 7 with actual HUMANS?
I would really like Steinberg to ad something like a ā6.5ā style mixer, āRETROā, whatever they want as a mixer option to call it to Cubase 7. Until the mixer is fixed all their unneccessary updates just come across as wasted time on their part.
Can we change the whole track lane color in the mixer, yet? I know that the track lane labels change but I canāt change the whole lane and these shades of grey are giving me Alzheimerās since I ran out of Prozacā¦
Have we gotten there, yetā¦or did I just forget? Oh, I donāt remember?
that would be a really nice feature, to make things more obvious and to separate tracks more clearly!
but even though it would be nice to have the option of changing the whole track lane color, i think a better and more subtle solution for this idea would be to have only the faders change color (and of course the track lane labels) and not the whole track lane!?
too much color in the mixer could be annoying to look atā¦maybeā¦!?
The moderators keep removing my posts in this thread too!!
I donāt put anything controversial either , just a few complaints about the programā¦what gives??
I really like cubase, been using it for nearly 20yrs ā¦why would I wish it harm??
The mixers odd, why canāt I say that?
Cheers.
A query for the Steinberg people
I have just downloaded and purchased Cubase Elements 7 upgrade from 6 (as opposed to purchasing it in a box) and I have two dongles on two computers. They both currently run Elements 6 independantly, but when I go to apply the Activation code to the 2nd computer, it says itās already been used for an upgrade elsewhere.
Is there a way to let the USB or soft e-Licencer see that two computers are using the program (2 seats, 1 company) ? Or will I need to purchase another upgrade for the 2nd ?
Hereās your direct comparison, with equal widths:
Huge black holes (meter background). Come on, can I jump on there ? Whatās inside ?
please replace those horrid white dots in the channel edit window with something more useful ,WE ARE NOT IN THE 90ās AUTOCAD . Who wants to see stupid nodes every where ???
Get a grip Steinberg , who ever thought up that idea should be demoted to tea boy/girl
Donāt get me wrong im loving c7 but your starting to play with the graphics to much now and controlling certain things in c7 by white nodes is complete and utter basic programming crap . Please donāt make it any worse !
One thing that Puzzles me in addition to the track names being harder to read:
Why are the Track NUMBERS so much brighter and easy to read than the volume(dB) and Pan values?
Is it important how many tracks you got in your Project?
+1
contrast is way too low and numbers too small !
bye, Jan
Hereās your direct comparison, with equal widths:
Steven, I know this is mainly about the font,
but You may want to add the Gain / Phase part in the C7 mixer pic.
This is another area, that has been ādegradedā.
Jan
wellā¦ I hope that SB will release a patch in exception fashion to fix this font size issues. tks!!
Is the channel/track names, fader position indicator and peak indicator more readable in the C6.5 mixer or the C7 mixer?
I thought soI also like the placement of the āAll Bypassā buttons for the Inserts, Eq and Sends in the C6.5 mixer (and a lot more).
+1
the meter on fader area can be narrower and add there eq,ins ,send,ch strip bypass buttons or add another row for bypass buttons under/above fader
One thing that Puzzles me in addition to the track names being harder to read:
Why are the Track NUMBERS so much brighter and easy to read than the volume(dB) and Pan values?
Is it important how many tracks you got in your Project?
+1
In the C7 mixer the fader cap is actually closer to the neighbor channel-meter than its own. And the track numbers ought to be placed at the left side (follow western basic reading rules).
+1 the fader area always confuses me, all channels mashed up, needed some separation line.
MC has lot of goods sorry for the criticism but we the users point out the things that hard on our eyes and workflow.
cheers
Well ā¦ we should not forget, that the current ānot so goodā look is caused by the resizing feature.
Itās obviously much easier, to resize āsame sizeā areas and buttons.
On the other hand, itās very well possible to design good looking sizable mixers.
Just copy ābirdline light green mixerā in google search and make it show āpicturesā.
( AFAIK, weāre not allowed to post links to competition sites ā¦ )
The other reason is, most probably, touch screen compatibility.
Now while that may be interesting to some,
for many of us, especially those making a living with Cubase ( assumption ! ), it is not.
But what to do ?
Only solution would be, to offer two mixer designs.
But that again would need too many resources.
Soo ā¦ is there no way out ??
Steinberg ??
Jan
I updated from 7.0.4 to 7.0.5 and now the gray background from the black text in the mixer is gone and it is very difficult to read the text - you can see here:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9178387/CubaseMixer.jpg
Any way to fix this??
Hello,
This may seem like no big deal to some, but it completely messes up workflow, which to others, is a big deal:
I like to use the mouse-wheel for quick zooming in/out horizontally in the Arrange and Key Editor windows. On Mac, you hold command while scrolling up/down on the mouse wheel. Prior to 7.0.5, Iād scroll down to zoom out and, obviously, scroll up to zoom in. I got very used to this over the years, yet (I think) 7.0.5 changed this to the opposite of what it was, i.e. scroll up to zoom out, scroll down to zoom in.
Is there a setting Iām missing? Did I accidentally do this in Mac OS? Iāve looked around the best I could to make sure it wasnāt the OS.
If this was changed in 7.0.5, why? Why do the developers at Steinberg keep changing things that worked fine?? Iāve posted a few topics about this sort of thing, and itās beginning to really stink. Please Steinberg, if nobody asked for something to change/be fixed, please donāt change it!
Iām still having the same issues with the mixconsole where it arbitrarily opens in odd formats. So M1 is now goofy in this project. M2 and M3 still work normally. But, if itās like before they will eventually have size/position problems too. Also, Mixconsole still doesnāt work with workspaces. The M1 still comes up with monitor 1s resolution on monitor 2 sometimes.
Unless Iām missing it, we still need key commands to open and close the Channel Selector and Control Room Meter on the MC.
You still have the focus problem where hotkeys for mixconsole functions donāt work if the console is not in focus.
Check out System Preferences, Mouse: Scroll Direction.
I meanā¦ so stone me, but in comparison below C6 mixer looks better to me than c7.
Hereās your direct comparison, with equal widths: