Things I hate about... - Cubase 7

[Compyfox]

See, and this is where I disagree.

While Cubase is not yet(!) as ugly as Wavelab, it's great to boot with. You have the best of both worlds: Songwriting (MIDI and VSTi) with the option to also mix properly.


Take ProTools for example. This one was clearly advertised as digital tape machine, and all the MIDI features were tacked on later. Cubase on the other hand was always a MIDI tool, with audio features added from Cubase 3 (VST/Score/etc) on. And it worked, it still does.


The thing is that certain aspects of Cubase degraded to complete idiotism. I agree that the DJ approach with Cubase is wrong. But then again, Steinberg always had to fight that since SX days that their host is merely a shadow of their original idea and aimed at "noobs". Though still, the learning courve is steep.

Then they created Nuendo to separate the man from the boys (which is only capable of mixing more than 5.1 streams, has a handful of surround tools more - but you need the "Producer Pack" to get the features of Cubase), then Sequel as "entry level" Cubase and competition to Magix MusicMaker... *cough*



Cubase at it's core is fine as it is. The showstoppers are visuals, certain limited features, or features that are now limited again. Then I have a feeling, that the MIDI community is driven back again - no wonder since day and age of USB MIDI and VSTi. But still.

And... currently Cubase is focused on Post Production (or Editing in terms of audio) rather than songwriting. At least how they advertise it. And that thing is faulty! Granted, less faulty than 7.0, but 7.0.3 took them almost half a year, and it's still bug ridden. And no sign of a 7.1 or something on the horizon. At least not until WL8 is out, and then Nuendo is bugfixed. And then maybe by autumn comes Cubase. Paid of course.



And early next year, we will see Cubase 8...

[jeffh]

feature creep is what ruined the whole software market, see what notorious products like MS Office, Photoshop, or Cubase have become !

sorry but there's no way to satisfy any kind of customer and any kind of needs.
they should rather focus on specific market niches like Adobe did with Lightroom which is designed only for photographers and it's a godsend compared to the wasted time it would take to do batch automation with PS CS6.

no matter what Steinberg will do, creating and mastering a song is a complex thing, there's just no way to make it too much "intuitive".

it would be more logic to clearly separate the midi/tracking part from the mixing/mastering part, eventually in two separate products rather than the actualy ugly "all in one" concept that is a jack of all trades and master of none.

it would give us a clean GUI without distractions, we could better focus on playing music rather than messing up with samples and FXs.

a cretive artist should not be dustracted about setting up channel filters, output buses, mixer inserts, etc, that's something that come later in the final mix eventually but Steinberg pretends all these things to be more prominent that the midi track itself and the song itself, how is all this making my life easier ? no way, it's gonna be making think about going back to Cubase 2.0 which at least it was a kick ass sequencers without all the bells and whistles of today's DAWs.

Quoted for wisdom...

That's the nature of proprietary commercial software... They have to add something, anything, every year or 2 to have an upgrade to sell you... At some point they run out of useful things to add for their original use-case, so then they must add features that make it appropriate for other use-cases to widen their potential customer base, then you wind up with one giant clusterf_ck of an application that tries to be everything to everybody (and the unmanageable, buggy codebase that goes with such a bloated application).

I've actually recently decided to do something similar to what you describe. I had been trying to make my DAW more useful for traditional recorded genres for the next major release I'm working on, but decided instead to circle the wagons and focus even harder on the original use-case (electronic music). To appease the traditional genres, I'm going to later fork my DAW into a separate DAW that is specifically for traditional recorded genres(but will look nothing like the original, other than sharing some underlying architecture and my plugins)... As development progresses, I'm really starting to see the value in specialist DAWs for specific genres, there is real potential for innovation there...

[sockofgold]

Sorry you guys aren't feeling the C7 update. I have to say, though, that I am really digging it. I agree that the graphics on the new mixer are a step down from C6, but the functionality additions, I think, more than make up for it. Plus, it's not an easy to make a fully-scalable GUI like that mixer now has, so I am willing to give Steinberg a break for now on that front. At least I can size the mixer however I want now, and have inserts AND sends visible at the same time.

The channel strip plugins are so-so, I would say, but it is REALLY nice to just be able to drop in a quick compressor without needing to go through your plugins list. Nice for quick/simple mix fixes. Overall, I like the channel strip features.

Also, I personally like dark GUIs, so I enjoy the new GUI for the main window area. Just a matter of taste, though.

That's all I wanted to say. I hope future updates fix the issues some of you guys are having, as I have really enjoyed the update from 6.5 to 7 so far. Just wanted to add one voice of positivity to the thread.

[jancivil]

All i can say is that they should rethink the whole concept of DAWs from scratch !

I disagree ... the feature creep without design is the problem.

It's ridicolous that creative artists are overwhelmed by features that belong to studio mastering, we've really gone beyong "feature creep", not to mention as stated by others here that nowadays we're also supposed to be "always on" and perpetually online dealing with GBs of updates for softwares that are full of bugs in the first place.

Again, I completely disagree. This used to be a recording/editing/mixing/rendering app. The problem is that they keep trying to add f'n looper/dance/trance/dj features to a design that doesn't lend itself to those concepts. It's the clash of concepts that is the problem.

I'm with you, Digriz. The feature creep coming from the decision to appeal to the beatz crowd is the problem. The default preferences are so clearly for people that come from that side of things.

I use Cubase to compose and to mix (and produce in the more substantial use of that term). I am not overwhelmed by the features belonging to studio or mastering procedures. I don't have perpetual issues, I don't need to be online behind it.

Steinberg is a bit infected IMO by the notion Cubendo can be all things to all people in the market for a DAW. In some regards they're competing with Ableton, which is a bad idea IMO. They now feel they have to include all this content, which a lot of which I really have no use for. There is a point, and this thread seems to indicate they're passing a rubicon with C7, where conflicting goals results in some incoherence.

[tooneba]

Don't hesitate to say 'Studio One' there.

[Compyfox]

Sorry, but no.

Certain aspects are clearly copied by AVID ProTools (the mix console especially), to a certain extend Cognitone Synfire, they tried to incorporate Celemony Melodyne years ago, and with the introduction of Sequel back in the days (and certain tools of it now being in Cubase), they also wanted to tackle Magix, while the Channel Strip idea is clearly inspired by the likes of Harrison and Propellerheads.


C7 is as far from Ableton as SynthEdit is from Macintosh.

[tooneba]

oh sry, I tried to reply to jancivil.

[sockofgold]

C7 is as far from Ableton as SynthEdit is from Macintosh.

Glad I'm not the only one who felt that that was not a valid comparison. I don't really see at all how Cubase is trying to compete with Live. They're just so completely different, and neither of their newer versions really added any features that seem like a direct response to one-another.

[BERFAB]

Cubase was my first DAW (since version SX2) and I've faithfully upgraded to every new release. I'm always amazed by the power of this thing and, truth be told, I love it. Truly. There's a million features I will never use, or even fully understand, but they're there if I need them. The features I do use are great--and the new stuff (channel strip, etc.) is just awesome, IMHO.

I'm so in love with Cubase (some would say 'fanboy' but that has a slightly different connotation) that I know that I tend to overlook some things that others might fault. That said, I have to admit that this latest release (C7), is somewhat finicky. There are odd, unexplained crashes (I've lost some work as a result). And there are also some crashes that are easily replicated (if I open a new track- either audio or midi- and then change my mind and try to cancel, instant crash).

So, even I, a dedicated user/lover of the thing, have to admit that it is not the "rock solid" release of previous versions. It would be nice if these things were ironed out by Steinberg soon. I'm guessing that a 7.1 release would help, but that doesn't seem to be in the offing. The past several releases (5 & 6) all had relatively quick .1 releases that solved a ton of problems with the initial release.

I still love Cubase, but I don't fire it up with the same confidence that I used to. Hopefully, that will change.

Cheers
-B

[jancivil]

C7 is as far from Ableton as SynthEdit is from Macintosh.

SE is an operating system? I did not know that.

Glad I'm not the only one who felt that that was not a valid comparison. I don't really see at all how Cubase is trying to compete with Live. They're just so completely different, and neither of their newer versions really added any features that seem like a direct response to one-another.

The arranger track. All of the sample content. They are less different than they were ten years ago, anyway. I wasn't saying they are similiar per se.

[jancivil]

I'm grateful for this thread. I may one day go to C6.5 but I really am dissuaded from C7.

[SJ_Digriz]

I can't emphasize enough that my disgruntlement with Cubase has nothing to do with stability. It runs fine. There are some operational annoyances but nothing out of the ordinary. My problem is that the mixer is half assed. You have to click your brains out to do simple things. Some major functions are now hidden. You can't get as many tracks on the screen simultaneously as you used to.

Here's a goofy thing. The track numbers are HUGE and BOLD ... The db level is tiny ... in a weird spot and virtually unreadable against the background and is chopped off when fully zoomed out. But, not the track number ... that continues to be big bold and beautiful. Who the f**k needs a 6 foot high track number taking up all the space.

You used to be able to spot a mono and stereo track in the mixer and project view via a circle or interleved circles on the left or on the bottom. It was effective and visible. Now for god know what reason, we truncate the track name so we can have the words MONO and STEREO printed out as a label. WTF? And we still don't get a simple indicator on the project list. It's a total disconnect.

You have to ENABLE Q-Link to multi-select and apply solo/mute etc in the mixer. WTF. What's wrong with just multi-selecting like every other application on the planet. Worse, you have to click the f**ker with a mouse.

Those types of things are all over the place. It's just a poorly thought out interface. Period. Conceptually there are lots of good things there. In practice they blew the implementation.

[Compyfox]

C7 is as far from Ableton as SynthEdit is from Macintosh.

SE is an operating system? I did not know that.

SynthEdit is not available on a Mac! It's literally "far from it" (not counting possbible beta's or ports).

Get it now?




BTW:
I was recently in touch with Steinberg... Their "timely manner" to answer support inquiery's is still top notch (read: NON EXISTANT!), but the one that answered me (not saying any names here) assured me, that every feedback is read and eventually ported.


What pisses me off though is their constant "it's not our problem" answer.

For example:
WL has redraw issues with ToneBoosters plugins, Cubase not. Steinberg representative was like "it's not our fault - though each software is written differently" - well no sh*t! Didn't know that while developing with Jeroen Breebaart.

Batch processing (even with Steinberg only plugins!) crashes the host with the default Kernel setup? Guess what "work's on my testrig - not Steinberg's problem".




Another example with Cubase:
The Behringer Control Fader (or BCF in short) is running in Mackie Mode, or better said "Mackie BabyHUI" mode over here. Since SX3 days, this worked well, no issues, no flaws whatsoever. Then came C7.

I have sporadic issues with the control not responding, buttons not working (I have to press them several times), especially transport controls. Now, this could be an issue with buttons in terms of the hardware, but my BCF is in excellent condition. The answer was "contact Behringer if it's a software problem".

I was like "WTF?! The Mackie Control protocols are ages old - now if you say 'funk the protocol' - who is to blame?!". Same with GM protocols for the BCR btw. I have two presets in the BCR, utilizing only General MIDI control messages for poti's and buttons - and not only am I locked out of the new "Remote Control" window, it's also acting up.

I mean, the hell? General MIDI, working since Cubase 1(!) and not anymore?

Tell you what... it's Behringer's fault - not Steinberg.




I could go on like this.


Then again, I was informed that there is a .0.4 version in the pipe - free of charge of course. When that will hit though... no idea.

And when 7.1 will arrive - no idea either. But if they ask for 50 quids again to reimplement something - which was already there in earlier versions, or only "minor" updates - they get the finger from me.



Sadly, you only encounter such things AFTER you bought the upgrade, because the "demo versions" are only available after months(!) and the dead demo licenses are not deleted after you went for a physical copy.

IF... the physical copy does even have all the installation files on the disk.




Man... I fear the arrival of WL8 - because I want to get a disk this time, so I don't need to wait like a week to get a darn image redownload.



EDIT:
I just saw a very interesting feature in Reaper, that is NOT included in Cubase yet... And that is "scale" and "chord" entering through the right mouse button in the piano-editor.

Seriously... this could be THE thing in Cubase 7, but alas... it's not there yet. Just external with the Chord Track. And I sure hope they implement a Circle of 5th with the next update. Non theory crackheads know jack sh*t what's going on with the current design.

[MFXxx]

Only real things that bug me in cubase (7).

No vst instrument audio input routing support (would love this).

The track symbols popping up when selecting a track (the general instrument icon pop up window). Haven't looked to see if there is a preference setting to swicth this off yet.

Not being able to set colours for group lanes.

Being able to link multi channels together.

[Tp3]

5) The MixConsole I - to be on top or not:
While I like the concept, something is going terribly wrong. I can't "lock" the height of my faders, only the width.

How do you lock the tracks width ? (so G/H won't be in effect while in MixConsole)