I was able to downloaded a Hotkey file from somebody who shared their knowledge to get around it. But yes, should be a native feature.
I’m on Windows pc and would love this on a future update for Cubase — to smoothen out the navigation inside the project window when using mouse scrolling (up/down as well as sideways) and while zooming instead of moving in ‘blocks’ which pulls you out of your workflow. Been using this DAW professionally over the years and this has to be my most frustrating feature. Any pro users out there hoping for this to be fixed?
Wow, so many whingers.
I thought the update was great and fixed some issues i had on my MUST fix list for the longest time, so thanks for that.
Yes there is still a huge list of features on the request lists, but they cant all be done at once.
Personally i am waiting for some more technical workflows within cubase, stacking multiple synths into one stack, controllable by the one midi and a macro control spot for linking in all the parameters of the stack.
Thats the thing thats slowing down my workflow drastically and also limiting what’s possible.
Everyone comes from a different angle, be patient.
I totally agree!
Surveys just for marketing is without sense for customers.
Wavelab (Philippe) and no doubt Dorico (Daniel) did a real good job!
Cubase team is not reacting. Features that are demanded for YEARS will simply not be implemented and customers are driven to other DAWs. Surveys only help when you really wish to help and keep customers…
Same thing here. Reported to Steinberg Support, got a confirmation E-Mail. Nothing back yet.
How could a function work, and when upgraded, not work?
A post was split to a new topic: RADIKAL TECHNOLOGIES SAC 2.2 gone?
Why do I have to pay for an 11 update while my 10.0 en 10.5 are instable? — other daws (S1 and reaper) are working fine on the same pc configuration. (interface/plug ins)
Depends ‘why’ it’s instable. Is it because of Steinberg? Because i’ve not had an unstable experience with C10/C10.5 at all.
If it is an inherent Cubase/Steinberg caused issue that’s been ongoing for 2 years (C10-C10.5), then, there’s nothing forcing you to stay with Cubase in this instance, you could switch to either DAW that you mention.
End of the day, It’s your choice to support whatever software that provides you with adequate quality and value. The Cubase yearly update model is very clear to all that sails this ship.
Thoroughly disagree with all your posts here, and I don’t even think it’s a matter of opinion. You’re actually just wrong, and commenting based on your own feelings of perceiving that you’ve been ignored and using that to characterize Steinberg/Cubase team as - “not caring” - as if we all the users have the same experience as you.
I participated in a “grill Steinberg” thread on the release of version 9(?) that ended up being some 20 pages long, critiquing Steinbergs development choices and conveying to them that they need to focus on simple rudimentary aspects of Cubase and uber simple boring but useful feature requests, time savers, protocol improvements, etc, etc. Simple things like ‘Snap on’ and ‘Snap off’ commands, more key commands in general, and fixing the Macro editor.
There was a good point in that thread, that “Steinberg may want to talk to the famous composers assistant, rather than the composer because the composer may do nothing other then play a piano”
There was a feature request even in that thread that came about directly via a conversation between Matthias and another user, when Matthias brought up in a situation where a composer and their assistant were in need of a better and quicker way to export stems and individual tracks out of 1000s of tracks, of which the export-track list becomes fairly useless. The user suggested and made a graphic of, what is now the Link Track Selection to Export Track List Selection (a hidden key command existed for this prior as well).
That had thread had an affect on Steinberg I think, they listened to some people in that thread because they had constructive criticism and conveyed their personal urgency and why. There have been countless user feature requests added since v9. I’ve personally had feature requests added.
Key Command improvements, key command separation from toggles, macro improvements, snap on/snap off.
smart tools/events, quicker editing protocols, bezier curves
Link Track Selection to Export Track List
Vertical extension of marker track events through entire project (my feature request)
Event based effects - direct offline processing
Global Tracks in the MIDI editor
Fixing old Generic Remote not saving bug
These are all user request - I could go on and on and on, there have been a TON of user feature requests. I’ve had my own personal feature requests added from the forums as well as from surveys that were pretty much unique to me from what I could see.
So your characterization is just plain wrong, you’re factually wrong, and I just think it’s an immature position to be honest.
And your comparison to the Dorico team is a false equivalency.
Dorico is a 4-year ‘New’ program built from the ground up, and thus, has much more immediate tangible flexibility in direction.
Cubase is a what, 30 year old program? That spans how many OS versions and how many codebases?
Dorico is a very specific program designed for a very specific thing, has a small specific niche user base. It does one thing, Score.
Cubase has a much larger user base that is very diverse in profession. Composers, sound designers, editors, sample creators, every genre of music, etc, etc.
The Dorico team having released a new program (and yes, it is still VERY VERY NEW after 4 years) is obviously going to be in a more open-feedback position. The Steinberg team is in a different situation updating and adding features to an old program.
I do not have much passion here after 30? years with Steinbergs Cubase.
So long it was fulfilling my needs. But there was a time Steinberg was the only one.
Time is changing…And my fingers are young enough to learn other tools…
If I compare the last demanded feature list with the new features in C11 there are not many matches
And your argument that Dorico is so young makes it more worse:
Dorico had really to work hard for basic functionality that is far from special wishes from customers. But even in that early phase they were in close communication with their customers . Daniel and his team made a terrible good job.
Cubase is a ready and matured product. Here you really have (and you are able) to listen for your customer wishes because the core functionality is already implemented.
But our discussion becomes worthless because finally it is a marketing decision from the cubase product manager. They have all the key numbers that we do not have.
In case these numbers are not evolving so good (who knows?) they could listen to some critics. Or they could ignore them all and bet on their own ideas…
I asked 2 other guys (long time cubase user) how satisfied they were with Cubase11:
Both told me that they will skip this version because they found no helpful features in it.
And so will I.
So in case Steinberg have problems with the product they get at least one reason (one of the others could be the old fashioned dongle!) for people looking for alternatives.
If these implemented features bring new customer or hold old ones: good for Steinberg and good luck.
Maybe that’s your problem mate, and maybe it is the need to be quenching your thirst for some “satisfaction” high, in which, I doubt you’d ever actually feel completely satisfied. What did Ableton update? What did Logic update? what did ProTools update? what did FL update? I don’t see too many speedy big changes to those DAWs, in fact I would argue, Steinberg/Cubase offer a lot per update compared to those DAWs, and that’s on top of Cubase having features and interfaces for 30 years that some of those other DAWs still don’t.
I don’t think anything you’ve said has actually really negated my post at all - because I confronted with concise, tangible, and touchable facts and logic.
My fingers are young as well, but I also want to save them - and you know what does? Project Logical Editor - something Cubase has had since like, 1989 and I’m pretty sure no other DAW has this. You’ve probably never even used it or delved into it I’m guessing… If that’s the case, dedicate your young fingers to - actually - learning the DAW you already have because I guarantee you if you did you wouldn’t be “threatening to go to other DAWSs” - the people using those other DAWs, don’t know about PLE.
What else, what about Sampler Track? They released V1 and the forums were absolutely filled with feature requests to do more with Sampler Track. Steinberg delivered, and they delivered really good and really quick.
What about the included VSTis, VSTs, etc - we get. This are extremely powerful and well designed plugins to have in the stock DAW, I might be able to sell or not bother installing some of my 3rd party.
Heck, probably around Cubase 8 or 9 I had a feature request to include spectral editing in the DAW… Steinberg literally bought/partnered a company called Sepctralayers which can literally plug right into the DAW via ARA2, and Cubase 11 comes with a lite version.
How much more can you ask for? Again, this is just a tiny tiny sampling of user requests that have been included…
RMS meters and better analysis… done.
Full coloured channel strips… people begged for this… done
copy CC data… done
improve save Template… done
general Improve Import Tracks To Project and include FolderTracks+contents+routing… DONE
Again just a small small sampling of user requests that have been included
You’re just wrong. period. Not trying to be a d!ck, But I’m just a direct person and tell people when they are wrong. and you are wrong.
This is just from the poll list, there were lots of other features added that were requested but not part of this Feature Request Poll.
1 Gapless Audio Engine (7,90)
2 Move tracks within the mix console (5,66)
3 General Improvements to MIDI editor and Smart tools for MIDI editing (4,72)
4 Bezier curves in midi editor (4,59)
5 Multitrack Audio Warp (4,28)
6 Export to Video (3,73)
7 Smart Tool (3,70)
8 Inspector In Lower Zone Idea - Mockup Design (3,47)
9 Full coloured tracks in the mixconsole (3,37)
10 Audio Connections overhaul or External FX Plugin w/flexible routing (3,03)
11 Allow Free Warp On The Project Window (2,92)
12 Automation saved with TrackVersions (2,76)
13 A proper ‘Import Session Data’ feature (2,64)
14 Total integration of Dorico (2,44)
15 Tabbed GUI Windows. Namely VST/VSTi Windows (2,42)
16 Plug-in Aliases (2,39)
17 Cubase for Linux (2,33)
18 Multi quick control (2,11)
19 Horizontal mouse wheel should scroll the mix console (1,96)
20 Ripple Edit (1,92)
21 Expression maps UX improvements (1,87)
22 MIDI Editor UI ‘Tabs for Controller lanes’ (1,85)
23 Better Arpeggiators (1,84)
24 Multiple Track Freeze / Unfreeze (1,82)
25 Save Folder Track Preset, saves all contained tracks+routings (1,78)
26 Modernize remote control functions (1,76) *coming soon/in the works
27 Eliminate mix console focus (1,61)
28 Improve The ‘Save As Template’ Function (1,60)
29 Songwriter Tool (1,59)
30 Synchronisation of editing cc data between multiple vsti/midi tracks (1,54)
31 Improve Hardware Remote Plugin Control in Cubase (1,53)
32 The ability to snap to triplets within audio warp (1,34)
33 Save mp3 export ID3 tag settings per project (1,27)
34 Steinberg/Cubase server for quick saving and stability (1,17)
35 Triplet/Dotted grid snap in audio editor (1,15)
36 Clarification of all the remote control features (0,96)
37 Remember the height of each tab in the lower zone (0,81)
38 Per articulation delay parameter for Expression Maps (0,80)
39 ‘Glue’ Key Command (0,78)
40 Turn off Workspace remembering zoom and track height (0,73)
41 Rack presets (0,64)
42 Audio Pool Export (0,54)
43 Transport visible at bottom of Key Editor (0,50)
44 Add option to allow multiple MCU devices to mirror controls (0,50)
45 Video Track Versions (0,36)
46 Info line transpose algo FREE (0,35)
47 Voice control of Cubase transport functions, marker / arranger navigation, looping (0,30)
48 Straight/Parabola Line Tool Key Commandfor each ‘Line Type’ (0,24)
49 ‘Show Part Borders’ available as key command (0,23)
50 External Synchronization per project not global (0,20)
Haven’t checked if some of the key commands in that list were added in 11
Having been a user for close to 25 years, I was extremely dissapointed that after upgrading to 10.5 from 7.5 on the 22nd September 2020 at the cost of £171, the latest 11 is released around 30 days later, No grace period discount, Steinberg want an additional £85 for the upgrade, I see absolutlely no logic in this, If i had waited 30 days & upgraded to 11 from 7.5 it would only cost £136, I have clearly been taken advantage of for being loyal, My total cost for doing this is £256, Thats almost double someone that didn’t use the upgrade path. I asked the support question over 30 days looking for an explanation for this situation & have been ignored. Disrespectful to say the least. 10.5 doesn’t even have full functionality, timewarping & many other features are bug ridden, I am considering selling my license as the treatment from Steinberg has been disrespectful over this, I checked eBay to see what the license is worth on the second hand market & was very dispointed to find the software is only valued at £230! Thats less than what i would have to pay in total to go up to 11. Hmmmm
Matthius i would really appreciate some communication & a transparent explanation on this matter. Thanks
I think this is a bit unreasonable, I mean, what explanation do you want?
Where do they draw the line? You think the grace period should be 50 days instead of 30? why? Just for you only? or who exactly? Why 50 days and not 51?
This is - purely - 500% - your fault mate. You could have done some basic research on Steinberg/Cubase release date patterns… All the Cubase releases since Cubase 7.0 (2012) have been between November 11 and December 7…
That’s the explanation you deserve. Sorry.
And honestly… 30 days is already an excessively generous grace period… If I was running Steinberg, it would be 1 week… 2 weeks tops… Because, essentially, the grace period is meant as a courtesy for those who have bought the previous version so close to the new release that they’ve likely barely or even haven’t commercially profited from the pre-new-version license… And 30 days is more than enough to pay off a $120-$250 upgrade… so 30 days is definitely very very gracious.
£171 spent over 6 years is hardly being loyal mate, nor are you being taken advantage of. That’s nothing in software terms. Based on your use then that’s going to see you good for another 5+ years.
Does it suck that they dropped the price for longterm users? I don’t think so, i think it’s a really positive move by Steinberg. You purchased at the wrong time - and yeah i can see how that sucks for you, but look on the positive - if you fancy upgrading wait for spring sales and you’ll get C11 for ~£40.
If the software is too buggy for you, well that’s a completely different discussion. And only you can decide if it’s ‘suitable’ or not.
I am sorry that you feel disrespected by Steinberg. Our support team got a lot of emails with the release of Cubase 11 due to the issues with our license management system. They are working hard to answer as much support tickets as possible before the holidays.
Unfortunately you have missed our grace period for Cubase 11 by a couple of weeks. We are offering a grace period of four weeks previous to the release. But we have to draw a line somewhere. It’s not possible to decide individually case by case.
All the best,
How much do they work hard?
My year old ticket is still has no answer.
This is not a support I paid for!
And yes, I am a professional musician
I would like to be in your situation where all is ok and I am totally happy with the DAW I am using.
But I am not! Cubase is missing some basic functionality and this is asked for since more than 8 years. If I have to switch the DAW after 30+ years using it there are valid reasons.
For me the DAW I am using is not a religion I have to fight for. It’s a tool!
When I am missing functionality I report this. When there are alternatives to use I will use it. This is not “threatening” as you call it.
I am NOT in the team Cubase, so I do not have to praise them every single day.
I am neither in the AVID team nor in the APPLE team.
If you feel the responsibility to fight for Steinberg, Steinberg will be quite happy but this doesn’t change my position (If you want to solve my problems: Tell me how I free warp multiple tracks in a quick manner).
When you are quite happy with the scale and color assistent and all the shiny VSTi’s…good. I do not need them because I have a lot of other tools.
You might need them when you want to start as a beginner with a product out of the box.
I am always quite amused when fan boys tell us: “ooh, I do not need this, you will not need this too!”. Please: broaden your horizon…
@Soft_machine If you send me your ticket number I can check with the support team.
How, after 30 years, do you today decide that it lacks some basic functionality? Serious question, as that’s a long time to sit waiting for base level functionality.
And of course, no-one is forcing you to use Cubase, it should be a choice that we all make as individuals. If we no longer fit the demographic for the direction of particular software development, that’s just how progression works - some leave, new users join.
I guess it really comes down to what you class as ‘basic’ functionalities, and how truly important they are - or if you’re comparing some functions to other DAWs and feeling envious that they’re not in Cubase.
If that’s the case, You can’t take single elements of a total product and compare, compare DAW products as a whole and i think the vast majority would agree that Cubase is not lacking in core areas. It’s feature set is pretty massive.
However, if you’ve sat for 8-30 years without basic functionality, in truth, you’re part of the problem for buying in to that model for so long. A company will measure success in sales, money talks.
Support Ticket #220840
Temporary solved by myself