As it would be silly to try and reproduce every single function of one in the other.
That’s what leads to self cancellation.
You might think it’s not important, but in essence, I think it’s really important to make the distinction when we ask for stuff “like in this other daw”
Asking for a clone is no good for me. At all.
Asking for a tool that addresses the situation, and by the way, look at this daw, they handle it way better (again, agreed) seems way better to me.
At least for devs to properly do their job, imho.
Now, yes, yes, I think Nuendo should handle grouping as good as protools does it.
But that doesn’t mean that it simply needs to be a plain copy (which in terms of dev is simply impossible and will not happen)
Look at what avid did with the clip gain, for instance.
It took them like forever (32bf) but in the end it’s way better than in Nuendo (convert and coalesce to track auto)
They had the good idea not to make a plain copy.
That’s just what I mean here. Otherwise, I sign on for Better grouping functions…