Is Cubase the most frustrating DAW ever created?

[Domlun]

I love Cubase but am probably going to leave it, as the troubles are mounting.

I have found as of late that projects get EASILY and often corrupted.

I have also found that after version 10, the load times for my projects can be excessive, 15-20 minutes, some projects take about ONE HOUR to open!

Don't even get me started on the near CONSTANT CPU spiking to sky high levels, when it's literally not even playing. Just sitting there, open on the screen. It's BAD!!!

Lastly, I think the upgrade price is excessive, which currently stands at $200 for me.
The ONLY real benefit to me of upgrading to Cubase 13 is that I would qualify for customer support from Steinberg.

Being on Cubase 11, I'm now using an "unsupported" product, so we'll see if they even answer my latest support request.

I don't care about new instruments (got more than I use already), effects (got more than I use already) or changes to aesthetic schemes, so... I don't really upgrade compulsively like I used to.

I'm thinking about going back to Studio One, as I seem to remember something about Studio One being able to open up Cubase projects. Anyone familiar with that functionality?

Plus now, I'm having HEAPS OF TROUBLE trying to open existing projects correctly after installing a new HD and doing a fresh install of everything. You can find my post on this last issue currently on this forum.

[Gam456]

I'm thinking about going back to Studio One, as I seem to remember something about Studio One being able to open up Cubase projects. Anyone familiar with that functionality?

Studio One is compatible with DawProject an open source format and Bitwig

[lfm]

I'm thinking about going back to Studio One, as I seem to remember something about Studio One being able to open up Cubase projects. Anyone familiar with that functionality?

Yes, I used that 2018 moving to StudioOne.

You use saving tracks in a project as track archive xml file, and that can be used to import into StudioOne. Same as I used to make track templates.

Select tracks with Ctrl - A or similar and save selected tracks if it was on File Export menu or something.

I remember it was a bit confusing wording, save selected tracks or something, but manual call it track archive.
- the intuitive naming would be Save Track Archive, I think

[dune_rave]

Cubase has a cool feature: Arranger tracks ( )

AFAIK My other daws ( FL Studio, Reaper, Ableton) dont have such feature.
Reaper can achieve similar by using one of its own extension, but thats not the same though, when you have such arranging feature right out of the box.

So maybe cubase is not that bad... of course if your saved projects files gets corrupted(as i've read' in another post) thats strange.
I'm on windows, if i run ito some bugs in the future, maybe i will post it here...

[Joliciel]

I completely understand your frustrations with Cubase. I've been using it since version 9 and am currently on version 13. While I appreciate many of the updates they've made, I agree that project load times can be excessive, and it's certainly a point of concern for many users.

I’ve also encountered some performance issues, especially during installation and with certain behaviors that can be frustrating. For example, the inability to save control room inserts like we can with track inserts has been a particular annoyance for me.

It's challenging when our tools start feeling like a burden rather than an aid. I hope that future updates will address these issues and improve overall performance. If you do decide to explore other options like Studio One, I hope it provides you with a better experience!

[burkek]

If you're having that many issues with Cubase, I blame you. There are thousands and thousands of people using Cubase with little or no issues. Look at your system configuration. Use of pathetically slow mechanical drives (not suitable for today's large libraries). Insufficient amount of memory. Slow CPU. Lack of decent GPU (for plugin use). Library and instrument placement (mechanical drive? SSD? NAS?). Windows or macOS? What did you replace your hard drive with? Another slow mechanical drive? You want solutions you need to provide details.

[Obsolete187521]

[DELETED]

[jrwaltb]

Not related to Cubase but I just purchased wavlab pro and it reminds me why I left Cubase back in 2004. Everything is really frustrating, even playing files take seconds to play if they are not the same samplerate of project unless you have the resample plugin running on the resample output and that still does not work for preview . Also the file browsers are just bizarre and there is like 3 different ones and none of them are using the operating system styles that people get accustomed too.

Look there might be reasons for all these things so I am just venting but what makes me upset is the stock plugins are really bad and when applied to the file they are not compensating for the delay which maybe can be fixed by a setting or type of rendering (as there are 3 or more different ways to process files and 3 different output racks ) but its going to be some work and research to find out how. Also it looks worse and more convoluted then it was in 2001.... Honestly I am only posting this because maybe I am missing something that can easily be fixed via settings or workflow,l want to like it because I am not sure of a better option for Mac but YES Cubase/Wavlab are very frustrating

[PAK]

Also it looks worse and more convoluted then it was in 2001....

Wavelab is largely the work of one main dev (So is SpectraLayers). It probably had most of the basic editing features people needed by version 6 and, nowadays, new features are often aimed towards serving a specific need / niche (EG Podcasting).

As programs like Wavelab, and Cubase, add complexity, they have to make choices about what they do and don't show, and that often leans towards highlighting features you might have no use for. So, ultimately, you can't really get around having to spend time configuring their interfaces to suit your own needs.

In Cubase that's as simple as right-clicking the Toolbar and Transport Bar, and selecting what you do and don't want to see. Most other settings are usually found in the Settings menu or by right-clicking the window where you don't see options to change things. The main problem, especially for a new user, will be understanding what everything does.

The default layout, in present day Wavelab, is.. err.. not to my tastes either. But you can configure it to look a lot more like the classic Wavelab. (See attached screenshot).

[Obsolete187521]

[DELETED]

[Harry_HH]

”Is Cubase the most frustrating DAW ever created?”

Yes, it is.


”But it's still an amazingly good DAW.”

Amazing is that anyone can use it succesfully.


Change the UI - totally!
The graphics of the CB looks like a child drawing.

[PAK]

Developing good software means making complexity simple and, indeed, making

That was once the case with Cubase. It no longer is. Everything has become unnecessarily complicated, over-engineered, inconsistent, and no choices are being made anymore. Hence threads like this one.

Enshittification affects more than just platforms.

Hmm, I’m not sure how much more simple Steinberg could’ve made things than literally allowing you to change the Toolbar and Transport settings with one click. You can save configs and reload too, meaning you can quickly change things to whatever suits your task.

To simplify further, in that area, would require removing features. If someone’s at that point then Cubase is probably the wrong software for them. Sometimes you click with something, and sometimes you don’t. EG, I’ll use Reaper to test things sometimes, but I just can't gel with it as a host.

Not that Steinberg couldn’t improve anything, and work is required to make Cubase more robust against buggy plugins, and its own bugs for that matter. But catering to the lowest common denominator can just as easily ruin software, and one persons “simplification” is another’s annoying or dumbing down to the point of making things more difficult..

[jrwaltb]

Also it looks worse and more convoluted then it was in 2001....

Wavelab is largely the work of one main dev (So is SpectraLayers). It probably had most of the basic editing features people needed by version 6 and, nowadays, new features are often aimed towards serving a specific need / niche (EG Podcasting).

As programs like Wavelab, and Cubase, add complexity, they have to make choices about what they do and don't show, and that often leans towards highlighting features you might have no use for. So, ultimately, you can't really get around having to spend time configuring their interfaces to suit your own needs.

In Cubase that's as simple as right-clicking the Toolbar and Transport Bar, and selecting what you do and don't want to see. Most other settings are usually found in the Settings menu or by right-clicking the window where you don't see options to change things. The main problem, especially for a new user, will be understanding what everything does.

The default layout, in present day Wavelab, is.. err.. not to my tastes either. But you can configure it to look a lot more like the classic Wavelab. (See attached screenshot).

Its really hard but some of the things I can do in it are cool, like the spectrum tools. I would love to see different layouts and setting configs/themes if you have any.

Also, is it best to just create a "temp" or "edit" project and montage contained in that project to use for quick edits of samples and layering of samples that need to be rendered to a custom pool where all custom samples get rendered? Basically I am trying to use it, with all its capabilities and maintain the current file organization of all my custom samples. The project/montage idea if fine but I don't want the actual files rendered nested in project folders and I don't want project folders scattered all over my external drive of custom folders. TLDR, what is a good workflow set up for this kind of setup? I know I can configure each project differently but I have a feeling Wavlab's idea of what a project should be is much different than mine? Should I abandon projects and just use separate montages? If I just use the defaults and start going I will run out of space in a week and never know what is what, it will be a complete breakdown of the system

[PAK]

TLDR, what is a good workflow set up for this kind of setup? I know I can configure each project differently but I have a feeling Wavlab's idea of what a project should be is much different than mine?

Where and how you structure is obviously a matter of personal taste. I mostly use Wavelab for single file editing, so I’m not the best person to ask. The default options are more than most programs offer (separate open and save folders etc), before you even get to custom templates along with batch processing and scripting to automate some things.

Their Wavelab Youtube channel should point you in roughly the right direction..EG There’s a 3.5hr video about Workflows on there, done for Wavelab 10, along with links to settings files etc, plus a newer workflows one from 7 months ago, aimed at new users, under the "Live" video tab. The Wavelab forum on forums.steinberg.net is more likely to give useful help if you get stuck

[mothra]

You can also head over to Steinberg's user forums. If you need help with Wavelab, you will likely get help straight from PG. I know the few times I've posted in there, I've gotten an answer directly from the man himself. You won't find the Cubase team in the forums but Phillippe is still very much attached to his 'baby' that way.