APPEAL: C7.X Pro Composers: Voice Your Opinion here![POLL]

ASIO Guard is a baffling thing. There was clearly an opportunity to do something like Logic’s hybrid buffering that works incredibly well, but Cubase’s version doesn’t even support multitimbral instruments, and regardless it seems to cause performance issues with supported plugins. Goes in the same “so close, yet so far” category with the new instrument track. Steinberg has an opportunity here with both features to do a truly cool thing, but unfortunately it’s going to take some more time to truly get there.

Indeed. Their execution doesn’t seem to be there. How would this sound for a 7.5 update?

WHAT 7.5 SHOULD HAVE BEEN:

    • ASIO Guard now effects multi-timbral instruments
  • Updated Expression Map GUI
  • Reduced track loading & saving times via multi-threading
  • Track presets maintain their routing
  • Folder tracks can now be exported as track archives

I’d hand over $100 w/o skipping a beat to Steinberg if the above were the case. That’s what I don’t understand: Why do they keep adding half-baked features and then take their time fixing them? Why don’t they implemet these features with the highest user-demand?

I created a poll to get a feeling of the user-base on this topic. Really though, ask yourself this: when’s the last time we got an update that had even THREE high-priority features mentioned in it? No, that doesn’t include chord tracks :laughing:

But if your sessions are taking forever to load, why not have zero downtime in that regard? You could load hundreds of instruments into a template(s) and compose a ton of individual cues (as new projects) without ever having to load anything.

But you bring up a god point about instrument tracks…I prefer that as opposed to MIDI tracks for some reason.

I already said I did the static template thing with my 6 external PCs and I no longer want to work that way (externally or not). Part of the issue was that changes to the instruments weren’t saved with the project because the static template was so large it ran in uncoupled mode. I work modularly now where each instrument is its own instrument track so any changes to them save with the project, and I can library them in the MediaBay as track presets to be recalled quickly at a later time. Trust me, there are no suggestions that I have not traversed a hundred different angles by now, but thanks any way. This is the workflow that is most efficient for me.

Cool. Always interesting to hear other’s work flows.

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.

—JC

Agreed. Don’t you wish that there was a place where this information was easily accessible? Like a wiki for Cubase power-users?

Right now, I think that truly useful info can only be found buried within forum posts. Of all the DAWs I’ve used, Cubase is the most challenging to gather ‘lifehack’-type information for.

I’m familiar with the feeling. In 2011, I switched over, fresh from using Logic 9 exclusively for 4 years. It’s an anxious, threatening feeling going up against an arcane/unfamiliar DAW.

The truth is: WHAT OPTIONS DOES THE MODERN COMPOSER HAVE? I’m willing to bet that the majority of working composers are on old versions of Logic/Cubase on an outdated mac/windows OS. This is a joke! It’s 2013 and most of this stuff hasn’t changed radically in nearly 5 years.

Could we all agree that the people require a DAW that’s cutting-edge? E.g. modern/sleek GUI + font, extremely configurable, fast load/save, CPU efficient, frequent user-sourced feature additions, high limit for plugins on channel strips and total bus count, customizeable/intuitive file management, highly organized session folders, flexible importing/exporting of file formats, solid/useful video tools, well-rounded MIDI and audio-editing.

Decent stock plugins would be icing on the cake. :mrgreen:

Best codec i found for now is Avid DnxHD

thank you. do you mean best in terms of what cubase accepts and plays seamlessly? what sw do you yourself use to convert files into it?

thank you for the help.

I voted on the “MARKETING REASONS” but the truth its not as simple as many of you think. :wink:


The real truth are more complex then these poll alternatives. I have both close friends that work as developments, tech-nods, full time professional programmers, game manufactures and these kind of companies is a large boat to navigate. Its not as simple that they don’t want to add all the features. There are tons of meetings “in-house”, fixes and structures that need to be done and are up on “the daily agenda”, before just have the time to think of doing anything else.

And even if you do, its not as simple as just grab a computer at the company and start program some codes and add it to Cubase 7 right away.
Someone else, “teams” working perhaps on other features that need to be approved and “co-sync” so it work with your new code before your new code get implemented to the real system.

So as an example, there are probably more then 1000 of lines of codes that need to be program just to make a simple fix of example “Plugins windows” stay on top, not fall behind the mixer-page in full mode. Its very complex thing to do and they will do it but it will take some time to fix it. In the same time they need to work on fixes to 7.5 they also need to continue program all the new things that will come in Cubase 8.


Think about it!

Best Regards
Freddie

thank you. do you mean best in terms of what cubase accepts and plays seamlessly? what sw do you yourself use to convert files into it?

Both. It gives you gorgeous picture with very reasonable weight while working incredibly smoothly with Cubase (6, 6.5, 7 and 7.5, as far as i know). Don’t forget to copy your quicktimes on another internal hard drive than the one you got your sounds and project on, this way it will read much faster (assuming you got fast reliable drives of course)

I’ve kept using ProRes even on Windows, as it has worked so well with BlackMagic’s Infinity Pro (never tried DNxHD, perhaps it works as well). In case someone’s wondering how to encode ProRes on Windows, I’d suggest ffmpeg. No need for advanced options, just something like ffmpeg -i inputfile.mov -s 1920x1080 -vcodec prores -acodec libmp3lame -aq 3 outputfile.mov works for me.

Right now I find that I can work quicker than ever in Cubase! So in general I think they’re implementing the right things to keep me going. If there was a 5th option which allowed me to say that then I’d vote.

But, yes, there are many fixes left undone and some backward workflow steps (like Iterative vs Hard quantizing, which has been changed to a toggle operation - doesn’t make sense to me after all these years of two different commands, and slows down my workflow because I used to use both via key commands very quickly, now it’s difficult to say which is selected so it slows me down to check!).

On the other hand, I can tune a vocal line in 1/4 of the time it took before. It’s even quicker than melodyne, which was fairly fast, it’s the same quality now, and yet included in software no messing about. I can select plugins by typing the name, so much quicker than looking through my 100 long list (that’s if I can remember the name!). I can add group tracks to selected tracks in one step, great feature. I can time-stretch things to my heart’s content with superb quality.

All of these things I use daily to help me create my productions (e.g. soundtrack audio, albums, songs, mastering) which the public reward me by purchasing. So, there’s not that many things that stop me working as I need to.

But a discussion like this is definitely necessary so that Steinberg can see the shifting opinions.

Mike.

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.

Glad to hear Cubase is working for you.

I believe attention should be paid to the most widely req. features/fixes for this app that don’t get addressed by SB.

The poll addresses this specific situation: content with the app or not, why do the requests remain ignored?

+1
{‘-’}



If I understand your post correctly, you believe that Steinberg’s level of manpower can only do things so fast, based on time it takes change the code and the organization (or lack thereof) within the company. It seems that the ‘Technical Reasons’ option is more applicable than ‘Marketing’, in this case.

In fairness though, none of the old guard DAWs have had pretty much any changes to their MIDI workflows and tools in recent years, and new ones are so far just adding the most basic ones.

In that regard Steinberg has been doing pretty well, adding the CC scaling tools and expression maps within a few major versions back for example. But it seems to be just a fact of life that so much of the revenue for music software these days is coming from the home producer market now that composition-centric workflows will be almost entirely left to rely on the legacy features that kind of just sit there untouched.

This is why I think the matter of scripting support can’t be overemphasized. Even though not everyone could code for something like that, many would, and shared scripts would accumulate to an extensive database of optional workflows that suit separate niches.

Perhaps you’re right. I have no idea about ‘the competition’.

I think Note Expression is -fantastic-. Unfortunately, it’s also frustrating since no other vendors support it.

And I agree scripting would be great for power users. However, since such things are also not sexy, they don’t get done either.

Frustrating. I understand all the marketing reasons, but I see it as ‘income inequality’… seriously. My colleagues who are at the top end of the biz simply hire assistants to cover these deficiencies. While people at my end of the scale more and more are drawn to use ‘construction sets’ and loops rather than actually -writing- because it’s the only way to get 'er done.

IOW: the tools (or the lack thereof) instead of enhancing creativity, have a tendency to lock one into certain styles of music which are easier to produce (pun intended). The more ‘presets’; the more preset music.

—JC


It’s funny - I was bandying about the idea with another composer recently of what it would cost to develop a DAW from the ground up exclusively for film & TV composers. It feels like no DAW really caters to the workflows and needs of professionals while being reliable, flexible and jettisoning much of the fluff. A pipe dream…