If anything RME is one of the few hardware companies that quickly addresses any issues they encounter with constant updates. I’ve been an RME user for almost 10 years and don’t have anything but respect for that company. They also deliver what they advertise everytime!
There are hundreds of verified-by-steinberg bugs. So why don’t they get fixed? Follow the money. Depending on your workflow they may or may not be important.
For example myself working with 4 video monitors (using all 3 mix consoles) and lots of outboard synths and hardware interfaced by 4 MOTU Midi Timepieces for 32 in/outs and a QconPro…my biggest complaints are centered around navigation and focus issues because I value fast workflow, and make use of as many key commands to make things more efficient on a daily basis.
But for the user just using a laptop, the potential issues will be very different.
As said before, for any business…follow the money. It’s a compromise between prosumers who are in the drivers seat for all DAW’s as opposed to those every-day and professional users. Unlike the things and concepts that appeal to prosumers, I believe the OP, as well as myself, are asking for more resources devoted to making what already exists work…or work better and focus on bugs.
And by the way, since 1997 I have never had any crackling (unless I purposely set my buffer size too low) or resource issues…ever. I’m guessing one reason is my PC’s have been built for audio by people who know DAW’s.
Cubase can work as advertised only for those who never use the many flawed features. Otherwise, it is impossible to say that it works as advertised. There are simply too many quirks.
If one doesn’t use multiple screens, one cannot encounter problems with windows not being placed properly. If one doesn’t use Generic Remote, one cannot encounter issues and inconsistencies there. If one doesn’t use render in place, one will never see bugs there. And so on.
One thing are system related problems, like skipping audio and midi latency. But another thing are bugs which are result of sloppy programmers, or not enough resources.
Clearly Cubase will not work well on a broken system. But on a system where other DAWs work fine, Cubase should work fine too. And several bugs should have been fixed months or years ago. And inconsistencies should never be there in the first place. And when will they ever update Generic Remote to include all mixer and channel functions? Ehh…
So one person complains his screen system has issues with navigation, but he NEVER had issues with pops etc… because he has a dedicated build as system… another person’s issue is WITH pops etc…
Again… many issues indeed, but for relative small groups of the user base. Your issues are severe, but not high in priority as they are not representing the majority of users. Indeed probably a commercial choice, but hey, with a plenty open issues and limited resources choices have to be made.
I do understand all your concerns, but posting in a thread like this is not helping getting issues fixed. Posting proper bug reports in their respective places will work much better then a whine fest in a general thread.
Bottom line is, you as individual consumers have only one way to ultimately have influence over a company, with your wallet.
Btw, this is my last post in this thread, as I have better things to do, like make more music. I’ll just agree to disagree with y’all
Have a great day!
The forum is flooded with cracks and pops issues.
Not only in the General forum, but in the Issues forums as well. I’m not sure why VinnieD is being so defensive of Cubase instead of being sympathetic to others who are having real issues with the software. I mean, what else besides complaining do we have left if Steinberg doesn’t fix the many reported issues, some of which have been there for years?
The ONLY part of VinnieD’s comments I did agree with was the voting with my wallet part. That’s it, lol.
I Like Cubase for sure, especially the way it works regarding graphics, flexible audio editing, and not to forget the midi department. For now have played along paying about 100 bucks (or 50?) from update to update, a regular ball game almost half yearly. But still wonder why so many clients stick with this Steinberg - Cubase game; too many bugs stay unfixed. I begin to think that bugs are kept in older versions on purpose, or even put in, so they can sell you the new version with all of a sudden some old annoyances fixed if you pay 100 bucks, yes please, thank you.
Now there’s a number nine out LoL; i think enough is enough. Cubase 8.5 seems very stable for now, except for a few bugs like playback time lapse. Might seriously consider changing to another DAW by the way … any suggestions? F
So freeze your system or do what the ‘smart money’ does and wait until the negative chatter dies down on the forum and either buy then or try the demo… took me a couple of years to learn that one lol…
I have been told Digital Performer is most “close” but also Studio One has a fresher foundation and it’s definitely “up and coming.” I think you will find advantages and disadvantages with those plus I know for a fact, missing features. There are also some nice features in those but missing in Cubase. With that said, I still think Cubase is the most “feature rich” DAW. Therefore it depends on your workflow and goals of a DAW. What do you really need in a DAW?
Keep in mind what seems like a simple feature request or simple bug fix might in reality be extremely difficult and costly. Unfortunately, bug-fixing and workflow improvements don’t necessarily attract new users.
For myself at some point I just have to say this is just a tool and I’m going to make the best of it that I can. My goal is completed tracks with deadlines. Is your goal the same? My issues are often better workflow and unfinished features/bugs and continual work-arounds. Reading forums, but limiting my time on them, I find users whos goal is not the same as mine. For some I think it is simply a hobby or just experimenting and pushing the limits of the DAW. The result might be some finished tracks, but that is secondary to the “pure enjoyment” of exploring the DAW. You find this in every area of audio. Users who have to meet an objective vs. users who are hobbyists. An example would be spending days or weeks comparing a emulation VSTI to the real synthesizer. Another example is esoteric comparisons of high end converters where IMO it often comes down to which “flavor” and nothing is really “best” and rarely conducted objectively blind in controlled audio environments. Obviously, there is nothing wrong with this, but it is different than the user who just wants to use the tool to meet an objective. Most users fall somewhere in the middle.
So what are your goals? How much time do you want to spend to really learn a new DAW? I will guarantee you there are bugs in every DAW with unhappy users. Assuming Cubase is the most feature-rich DAW is it not acceptable to assume it might be the one plagued with the most bugs? That is no license for Steinberg to ignore the most common verified bugs, but I think they also have to make a profit for Yamaha with each new release. Personally I’m thankful they haven’t dreamed up LoopMash3. Follow the money. The money is controlled by prosumers, not every-day users or pros with deadlines. This is why I think so many bugs go ignored.
Keep perspective that forums may not represent the overall status of any DAW. I’m here to learn. Many have questions that can be easily answered and then never participate again. The majority of DAW users I think never participate.
Does mix history interest you? I find it amusing to see now that we got mix undo…many are begging for the mix undo to be stored with the project. Or better yet, keep the last 20 changes but somehow delete the prior change. More feature requests and complaining right?
The same goes for sampler tracks. We got it, but it’s not nearly good enough, and now look at all the potential sampler improvements. Steinberg just opened more cans of worms.
Meanwhile some very basic core DAW function bugs and concepts go unfixed…year in and year out.
So does mix history or sampler tracks seduce you? If not…stay on 8.5, or look to the other side where the grass looks greener.
Thanks for your extensive reply and information. Been using Cubase a lot for professional video music scoring, FX and comment editing in the past. These days more as tool for songwriting etc. BTW a can of worms is necessary at times, but only for fishing really. F
Agree. I have reported two issues with RME gear and the actually fixed the bugs AND let me know they fixed them. Stellar support. The cost a lot, but that is why I stayed with RME.
Yep !!! Such a pitty.
Time perhaps for a thread revival, even though this thread has (absurdly) been moved to The Lounge.
On the face of it, Steinberg have indeed listened to us. 9.5 in particular was all about smaller improvements and workflow boosts. However, they’ve missed a critical part of the picture - bug fixes and performance improvements. I’m near-clinicaly-depressed about the current state of Cubase. Many of us have our issues, the problems and niggles that stop us from really moving forward with Cubase. For me, the really big ones are to do with Track Archives and Multitimbral Disabled Tracks (in this logged issues thread here - https://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=253&t=123873 . Cubase has all the tools I need to have a slick, effective modular-template based approach, but its so woefully buggy (and has been for years) that it’s like pulling teeth.
After a few terrible years, Avid have really started to up their game in Pro Tools. Their implementation of Track Presets leaves Cubase for dust, and promises a revolution in how you can worth with that DAW. If they really focus on midi (as they’ve hinted) then it might finally be time to wave goodbye to Cubase. But I so long for Steinberg to really grab the bull by the horns and focus on support, bugs and performance.
It’s interesting to look through this old thread though to see how many people who said they would leave Cubase have updated anyway, and are still using Cubase. Well, this forum is on the Internet.
Well, it’s very hard to switch away from your main DAW after you’ve invested your whole career working on it and you know it inside and out. I think we just like to threaten leaving so that Steinberg will take some of our concerns or ideas seriously sometimes, when it feels like we are not being taken seriously.
I’ve stuck on 9.0 - simply no point in my updating til the bugs that are crippling me are addressed.
Perhaps more depressing was that this wasn’t a difficult decision to make, I wasn’t even remotely tempted to update to 9.5. It was just a wave of apathy on my part.
I think what’s important here is to know where any potential issues will appear and create a workflow that avoids them.
I read the thread referenced and understand there are some long-term issues regarding “Track Archives and Multitimbral Disabled Tracks (in this logged issues thread here.” Knowing this, what should an advanced or advancing user do to avoid having problems? In other words, if the bridge is washed out down one road, is there another road? I’m not sure I fully understand what the problem is.
In the old days of magnetic tape there were all kinds of problems and huge barriers to entry in terms of cost. Far, far fewer people had access to the kinds of tools and capabilities so many now have in Cubase and the other DAWS.
If a long-standing issue is unresolved, that’s a drag, requests for improvements are fine. But, in the mean time, what are we going to do? Stop making all the great sounds we’re able to make with Cubase?
For me, its simply to stop upgrading as there seems to be very little point. Cubase works, kind of, yet upgrading won’t improve that situation. So it’s a case of lots of compromises, bodges and patching things up on the fly. It’s therefore not a case of flouncing off but inevitably as other DAWs improve, I might well be tempted (especially from Pro Tools as its a DAW I already know).
The issues in that linked thread are so severe that it curtails how I can move forward with Cubase. I’ve started another thread to improve Track Presets, as that might be an alternative option to the buggy Track Archives and Multitimbral disabled tracks. Currently the functionality is so poor its not a contender, but if they were significantly enhanced (and reliable) I’d throw my eggs in that basket.
I’ll look up your thread on Track Presets.
Is there no way to work so as to avoid whatever problems you’re having? Given how much the program does, isn’t there another workflow pattern you can establish so you don’t hit these problems? I’m not suggesting there is but wondering if there is?
Anyway, I understand that uncovering an issue in the process of work is upsetting. You think something is working and should work, but it does not. I’m just glad these kinds of problems don’t require bringing in a different tape recorder or finding time in some other location and praying the equipment there is adequate. Good luck with your projects.