Rumours of Cubase SX 4

[original flipper]

HI

The doubling up of midi/vst channels on the SX mixer freaked me out when I first started using it, once I realised you could loose them from view they were 'outa there' - (ex-Logic, sometimes SXuser) for me this is the kind of thing that makes SX 'feel heavy' - but I also feel attracted to it at times, then I want to automate - and I get pissed again .... with the stack of automation lanes.

I know some people like this - I like the way Logic places automation over the track and as you pile on various layers the previous ones become translucent.

Automation for me is probably the second most important feature after midi editing - I am very impressed with how Live currently deals with this.

Flipper.

[CorrosiveGod]

HI


I know some people like this - I like the way Logic places automation over the track and as you pile on various layers the previous ones become translucent.

This is what made me stop using SX 3. I got tired of having all these useless tracks showing in the sequencer window for automation. Why couldn't of steinberg early on make the right decision do make automation less of a pain,

[Sascha Franck]

Why couldn't of steinberg early on make the right decision do make automation less of a pain,

Because Dave Nicholson is responsible for the GUI portion of it. And he's got no clue, period (he's proven that numerous times).

And Muff, in Logic you got both options, a mixer which will follow your arrange and a 100% customizeable one.

[kritikon]

There've actually been some sensible comments in this thread

1. Edit VSTi goes to midi channel - dumb
2. Automation...could be better, but then I can see the point of the way it's implemented - sometimes I like having a whole lane for 1 automation paramter.
3. Arrangeable mixer...not sure about that one - it doesn't really cramp my style much.
4. Audio to midi - yup, dunno why they ever lost that one.

And some more...

5.FX channels with no routing option - dumb - shouldn't need to use group channels for this.
6.Export implemetation. Why can't I just export to a selected channel like VST5? Why does it insist on creating a new folder when you "bounce selection".
7. If they absolutely insist on having a separate midi channel and audio channel, then at least when you load a VSTi, it should be assigned automatically once you've selected which midi channel you want to use. No ferreting about allocating routing etc.

Having said that - there's a whole lotta good stuff. And I'm another one who has never come across any bug in SX2 that has changed the way I work. And what's wrong about Steinberg's bug policy etc? They're about the only host dev that have an official bug report and forum...that can on occasion be extremely helpful. Wouldn't you rather know about bugs than have a dev just assume that if you don't know about them, they don't exist. I find Steinberg a whole lot more honest than some other devs.

SX4....not interested if it's the usual upgrade type (a few features and more bloat)
What would interest me is more workflow. Pare down the GUI and some of the tortuous editing routes. Bring in the remaining useful functions they lost from VST and get rid of the useless ones they developed in SX. Not that all of the new features are silly...some are a great idea.

But this silly reputation SX has as a buggy host is nonsense. Straight from the box, SX2.2 is the most stable version I've ever used. I loved VST, but automation was shite, it crashed not often, but occasionally, and locked up frequently. I can't remember the last time SX2.2 crashed without at least letting me save first. It sounds pristine, it has a bunch of some very useful FX and filters, and it is a pretty powerful audio editor nowadays.

When I read the bug list on Cubase.net, I have to stop myself from laughing. One that I remember vividly was some jerk complaining how the solo button took 1/2 a second longer to kick in when he had 100+ midi channels in action. Not that it didn't work...it just took too long - it made it completely "unusable" Unusuable because he had to wait 1/2 a second for a feature within a project that nobody in their right mind would expect any host to work with without problems. And from stupid complaints like that, it gets the reputation as "buggy". It may have some design flaws (as does every host) but they are not necessarily bugs.

"Whenever I assign DestroyFX Geometer to insert slot 6 on audio channel 73, it fails to remember the patch number...only when it is in slot 6, and the preceding 5 slots must be taken up with 2 modFX and 3 delays - it usually only happens when one of those pluginFX has 2 letter Zs in its name though, and the VSTi that it is inserted into has to be a Synthedit synth with 3 filters. Press record on loop overdub mode, hit pause exactly 0.278 seconds before the punch out point on the 3rd loop around, rewind at 75% speed whilst holding down the jog-forward wheel (when the transport panel is situated over audio channel 47 with the send7 amount automation lane open at 55% zoom-in) and group together channels 3,5,8,13 and 29 routed to group 15."

And Steinberg get a rep as buggy because of dorks like that? When they have a seriuos bug reported, it usually gets fixed fairly quick I find.

All they need is a GUI designer that is an actual using musician, and it would be unbeatable IMO.

[kuniklo]

2. Automation...could be better, but then I can see the point of the way it's implemented - sometimes I like having a whole lane for 1 automation paramter.

The really irritating thing about this is that there's no way to tie automation data to midi/audio clips in a reliable way. Start moving stuff around and it all falls apart. When I'm using Cubase I just use midi ccs instead of automation, since they at least can be.

[original flipper]

HI

I quite like the way Logic have gone with V7 - a major update of the GUI and more pretty decent synths and plugins.

I think features get to the point of ... 'Do I really now need: Liquid time-line evaporation revamping'?

Perhaps once a host has got the tools to manipulate data it is time for them to give us more tools to create the data!

Why don't steiny buy up say Rhino, Vanguard and the Ohmies plugs (could be any - they just slipped out!)and put that in maintenance release V3.2 and call it a BIG THANK YOU up-date?

Flipper.

[efluon]

Why couldn't of steinberg early on make the right decision do make automation less of a pain,

Because Dave Nicholson is responsible for the GUI portion of it. And he's got no clue, period (he's proven that numerous times).

would you care to tell where dave has proven to have no clue? i mean, i really liked the gfx in cubase before vst, but we all got used to colours, didn't we? (i love the live gui. muzys and tracktion are great, too, but then how much data do these proggies have to represent?)
and i really prefer the dave-nicholson-gui to the frank-simmerlein-gui (ie vst, halion, ..)

come on, at least one proof of cluelessness please.

as to automation.. there is two major flaws (which are not graphic-flaws btw) i heard of: the pain 0f moving automation with parts (i.e. not having part-based automation). and the seperate lanes for automation data (which i can not see as a flaw, as for me it is a feature, as i do automate more than one param at a time).

[Sascha Franck]

efloun, I've been having quite some heated discussions with Dave Nicholson in the past. Some of them are private, some of them are lost in cyberspace. But he's allways been right while I've allways been the dumb user without a clue.

However, the GUI portion of SX is clearly dumb to a higher extent.
Take the new (SX3) "E" button on the lower right in the inspector. It's supposed to open the audio channel of a VSTi. It does that, fine. Now select another VSTi track and guess what you'll get? Right, the bloated MIDI channel settings - even if you've chosen the new "E" button in the first place... that's just lame, nothing else.

Do we need to talk about the mixer?
How about a mixer NOT displaying unused inserts? How about a mixer NOT displaying unused sends? How about a mixer displaying a mix of sends and inserts?
I don't know many people using 8 inserts and 8 sends at a time, so there'd be space to display a mix of them.

Do we need to talk about plugin windows majorly clogging up your workspace in case you don't close them? In Logic, you can sort of "chain" them. So, whenever you open a plugin GUI the previously opened one will be closed. Of course you can also have it staying opened.

Do we need to talk about insufficient dual monitor support? You need to resize your main program window to put, say, an editor onto your secondary monitor. This will result in more screen estate taken by title bars and the likes, and, even worse, it'll only work properly with two monitors of the same size and resolution. Almost impossible should you be working on a laptop (with additional monitor).
In Logic, EACH and EVERY Window can be opened as a "float" window (= allways on top), so you can just drag it out of the main program window and resize it to your likings. And yes, that's working for editors as well. Couldn't be any better.

Do we need to talk about the lousy multiout VSTi implementation? Whenever I open some multiout VSTi, I'll end up with numerous additional channels in my mixer. I need to hide them. Should I decide to want an additional out, I'd have to click "unhide" and deactivate the "hideable" status of the channel in question, then hide the unused ones again.

Do we need to talk about the solo function which is working completely different in project, mixer and editor windows?

Do we need to talk about not being able to record VSTi plugin parameter movements as plain MIDI data? Perfectly possible in Logic, and yes it DOES make sense, should you want to tweak a filter sweep or something (things like stretching come to mind).
The same goes for any audio channel parameter. Movements of those can only be recorded as automation data while Logic allows for both options.

Do we need to talk about the absence of any visual quantization control?
In Logic, I select a part and the q-settings are displayed in my part info box. That's just brilliant.

Do we need to talk about the impossibility to assign incoming MIDI CC data to plugin parameters? Yes, it can be done in the generic remote thingy, but again, it can only be recorded as automation data. Plus, it's a global rather than a song based setting.
You'd need an extra subhost such as eXT to get you there.
Again, possible in Logic (admittedly requiring some tweaks, but hey, Logic/PC hasn't been updated since 3 years).

And then there's the left out audio to MIDI functionality - which is still there in the background (as you can export hitpoints to groove templates), it's just not there in any menu - so yes, that's a GUI issue as well.

These are just the ones coming to my mind immediately. And all of them are GUI issues. Actually, SX could be a great program for me, but the GUI spoils it.

Btw, did any folks notice that SX isn't recording audio during count in? It starts recording roughly a 16th before your left locator, but it won't record, say, a full bar of a pickup phrase.
You can fool around with preroll settings, but using those instead of the usual count in requires pressing record twice. Uberlame. Admittedly no GUI issue, but an incredible left out.

[stag]

Thank God the H20 "demo" has ben released.
I guess just b/c i can setup and make any other sequencer than SX to work for me, they all scumy bad.
Now boys get a P2P share thing before Steinberg releases SX4 and have a taste of comtemporarity before is too late.
If you want to figth a nuclear war don´t bring on your knives, if you want to make serious music investigate deep what works for you: One man´s poison is another´s pleasure.

[efluon]

quite SOME cubase-bashing there
but those are not really proofs of dave nicholsons cluelessness.
some of these are even windows vs mac differences (seriously, if you want window-handling like unix does, you should not use windows. even when it is possible to emulate the behaviour.). some are design-decisions that people that did NOT start with logic see as features. some are dictated by the data-model chosen (which may be advantageous for other aspects of editing and mixing). some are just personal taste and habit (i absolutely can not work with logic, and that is just because i am used to cubase. but that does not mean that logic is broken, does it). and some are really flaws which should be adressed. i am sure those will be adressed (hehe, in the 4.0 version??), but from what i know, mr nicholson will not do anything but make bitmaps on any of the items you mentioned there.

[Sascha Franck]

I don't bash Cubase because I want it to be upside down, all I am asking for is additions to the current design. Additions that MANY users would simply love (at least that's my experience, and I'm teaching both SX and Logic at the local conservatory, so people can compare them 1:1).

But I'll rest my case as I've allready wasted too much words on the matter.

[the_nihilist]

I just wish cubase would ship with some decent plugins. Most of the stuff in it now is just a holdover from ancient versions of cubase, and it'd be nice to see a suite of the essential plugins (dynamics, modulation, reverb) that could hold its own against some of the other stuff out there.

edit: and is a multitap delay that much to ask for?

[Sascha Franck]

I think adding plugins is just like brainwashing people. Yes, I truly love Logics plugins, but I'd prefer if they would finally adress some of the serious issues instead of adding more plugins (ok, I'm still on Logic/PC, so I can't argue at all, but even the latest Mac versions still suffer from some serious problems). The same goes for Cubase.

[AndrewW]

I think that the new Cubase will not be SX4, but SX64!!! It should support many CPUs, so that when AMD releases quad-Core Athlons, we'll be ready for it. Hmmm, and bunch of never heard before features.
I'm looking forward to SX3.1

[the_nihilist]

I think adding plugins is just like brainwashing people. Yes, I truly love Logics plugins, but I'd prefer if they would finally adress some of the serious issues instead of adding more plugins (ok, I'm still on Logic/PC, so I can't argue at all, but even the latest Mac versions still suffer from some serious problems). The same goes for Cubase.

Well, it just annoys me that I paid nearly $700 for this dongle and the software, and yet to make something that sounds half-decent, I have to buy yet another $1k worth of plugins (which I can't afford yet).