This is not true. CC64 is a controller just like any of the rest and can have a value between 0 and 127. CC64’s suggested usage is damper/sustain pedal, but it doesn’t have to be used for that. Even when used to represent a sustain pedal, many of them actually send 0-127 and not just on or off. This is more common on a digital piano where you want to achieve “half pedal”.
I suspect you might have the wrong idea of the differences between Ramp and Step modes on the MIDI CC lanes. They don’t denote binary or non-binary states. They are just two different ways of representing and editing data. Ramp mode makes editing easier when moving from one value to another over time but at the cost of control and precision. Which takes me to my last point about Step vs Ramp.
As it stands currently, using Ramp mode in Cubase is flawed in my opinion because of data reduction. When using Ramp mode, Cubase reduces the amount of data to a degree that the result is a much more “stepped” curve than is visually shown. It is a case of what you see is not what you get. In some applications it might not be noticeable, but in others it is very much so.
Here is an example of how Cubase handles MIDI CC data.
I have drawn a ramp shape twice. First using Step Mode and then using Ramp Mode.
In order to see how Cubase reduces the amount of data in Ramp Mode, I have exported this as a MIDI file and then imported it back in. This is the result:
We can also use the MIDI Monitor to show us exactly what MIDI CC values are produced when using Ramp.
Here we see that what looks like a smooth ramp for 127 down to 0 has in fact been reduced to only 12 unique values. If we instead use Step Mode, we get the full scale—128 unique values.
Because of this behavior, I recommend anyone to stay away from Ramp Mode completely until Steinberg address this flaw.