Hi,
I don’t know if it’s already implemented or not.
The possibility to easily arm several tracks in one click for recording. Like a preset of selected tracks.
You’re not necessarly close to the keyboard when you’re recording. In my case, when I record drums, sometimes I have to check something on another track. So the tracks are deselected and I have to go back to the keyboard.
About Frequency 2, being able to listen only the band frenquency you’re working on.
Also, the double click on Stop button to go at the relative start doesn’t work anymore?
Matthias hello,
Well, ok, let call them “a bit out of context”, personally to me I don’t need them… Yes, if someone want’s to speed-up a bit the his/her workflow locking the keys to certain scale is useful. Just I’ve never felt the need of such thing.
For the electronic music… Matthias, this is the area of software like FL Studio and Ableton Live. They are far more comfortable for electronic genres. Cubase on the other side is far more widely used for film scoring and large orchestral pieces, and also audio recording, editing, mixing and mastering. Generally Cubase is more designed towards the professionals. Yes the fast and intuitive workflow is very important, but still many things are missing… as I said Triplet and Dotted grid is missing from the Audio Editor… this is a must to have for Free Warping an audio file…
I the past I also asked for a way to naturally write a poly-rhythmic music. For example Violins I in 4/4 and Violins II in 7/8. For this we need multiple Signature Tracks (for such improvement I’m asking since Cubase version 7.5).
About the Cubase <-> Dorico integration… I’m aware that it won’t happen over night, but still I asked for Multiple Voices and Channels per Instrument/MIDI Track years ago, just like it is implemented in Dorico. One Instrument/MIDI Track = One player /Section player… we need to create Divisi (different articulations/expressions on single Instrument/MIDI Track). The Expression Maps should also look like it is implemented in Dorico, because it looks far more logical and easier, than in Cubase… These two improvements are a must for the future integration between the two apps. And I started to ask about them at least two years ago.
Definitely there are many good improvements in version 11. And I’m thankful for them. But also there are many other far more important things, asked for many years which are still not improved or implemented… many of them are already mentioned in the comment and video by @przydzial.lukasz .
Matthias, with all my respect, but who are all those “professionals” you are talking about?! To me, and probably most of us on the forum, they seem to be some kind of a secret group of phantom people. The is no any sort of normal discussion between the users and the team on the Cubase forum. No one shares with us what those “professionals” want to be included… since many pro level requests are still not part of Cubase… Anyway…
I will say it one more time… the team behind Dorico must be the icon and model for proper behavior towards the users for the whole Steinberg company. Those guys are always there discussing with us almost everything about Dorico. They also have their prior base of composers, engravers, publishers, arrangers and orchestrators with whom they work more closely, but they don’t forget about the people on the forum.
Seems like a catch22 here. There is too little direct dialogue with Steinberg in the forum. So the more serious users may not feel there isn’t any point to hang around in there. And since there are few pro users in the forum the Steinberg staff may feel it is a waste of time to hang in there as well. I am not sure, just guessing here buy maybe well known profiles like Guy Michelmore and others have a more direct connection with Steinberg.
It would be very nice to see how the customer base breaks down in categories of users. Pop, techno, classical, filmscores, pros and average Joes. It may not be as many Hans Zimmers as some expect.
Well, I can assure you that there are many more users producing electronic music in Cubase than you are assuming. How do I know? Surveys.
Our artist roster is not a secret. We do a lot of studio visits and feedback sessions with a lot of different composers and producers from all kind of genres.
Well, let’s at least agree on that. The Dorico team is great and they are doing a fantastic job. No doubt about this!
Cant find five new things I like enough in the list and no mention of ARA improvements
Mentioning any others just to make up would convey a false impression to the company of my views
A very disappointing release for a major one from my usage
Score view is otherwise a scale visualizer. The key signature defines the scale, with anything out of key called out visually as an accidental. Up until now the key editor has been the equivalent of using the score editor without a key signature, defined chromatically with all sharps and flats needing to be called out explicitly in line. From that point of view, the scale visualization / lock-to-scale bring the simplicity to the key editor which has existed in scores for hundreds of years.
I can imagine, that this need to have more time to implement. But Dorico is aprox. 4 years on market now and I cannot imagine in that case what is mid term goal to you? And when I spoke with guys from Dorico team (before release 2.0), they actually assure me, that who is responsible for Score Editor in Cubase, he don’t want change how it works. So this kind of words about willing to do the integration of/to Dorico (not in engraving feature but UX and UI ) is pretty unsatisfied in this point of view. Sorry.
PS: Look on Notation Composer software…thay can handle this feature pretty good
I agree with the point that composers wishes about enhancing composing tools and workflow in Cubase is not same what producers of electronic music or recording studios (many of them using Pro Tools) or composer “easyway” (supposed to be not offensive) wants. If I would do they work I would be definitely happy and satisfied.
So let’s agree that Cubase team fulfill their needs for now. Will be more enhancements in future for them. That’s for sure. So…in the most humble way. Can Cubase team focus on needs of professional composers now ? Thank you.
Or maybe…better idea…integrate Lua or Action Script, that we can do something nice by ourselves.
Fix the plug in window resizing. Plugin GUI’s are smaller in this version. If I use the resize option, the plugins are disabled. This goes for UAD, Waves, Plugin Alliance plugins. I have had to revert to V10.5 which is disappointing as there are new features in V11 I was excited about
Dominik, pozdrav!
I’m glad to see that I’m not alone in this “fight” of endless try to explain to Matthias what are the really important things, which need serious attention, but unfortunately he disagree with me on almost all of them… Well, I’m not angry on them… since they would like to live in a parallel Universe with their prior group of “pro” and “hobby” users… Who am I to stop them?! Probably the guys who left Steinberg and created Studio One didn’t take this decision by accident?! Still Studio One isn’t as superior as Cubase, or Nuendo but probably in a few years they might take the lead, if
the guys at Steiny don’t return to world where we are all living.
I really like Cubase, and I don’t want to replace it, but if they continue to put in the corner the most important improvements and new features, I will be forced to move to another DAW.
I’m loyal Cubase user for many years, but I feel that my opinion and suggestions are not important for the team behind Cubase. Anyway…
About the Score Editor… it is the worst and most useless I’ve ever seen. It takes so much time to do very simple things and UI of it looks terrible. Logic Pro, Digital Performer, Pro Tools, Studio One, Cakewalk have far better looking, working and organized Score Editors… Except these DAWs there are three scoring apps that can be used as good examples for functional UI and UX - Dorico, Overture and Guitar Pro.
I know that Cubase is an old piece of software and the code needs to be carefully edited, but still…
Still I don’t loose my faith that something could change in a better way!
Personally, I really enjoy Cubase 11 and think that the improvements (particularly in the MIDI editor) are pretty huge. It really is still my favourite DAW and I have tried them all extensively.
My biggest hope for the future is more creative possitibilities, particularly layering of instruments and ability to build effect racks like Studio One / Ableton Live.
I’ve personally never been a fan of the built in instruments or effects in Cubase, which is why I exclusively use 3rd party stuff. Ableton Live is on a completely different level with regards to that. But due to the fact I’ve already acquired great plugins, this doesn’t affect me as much unless I’m collaborating with others.
Cubase’s weakest point for me (in general) is support which is pretty much the worst I’ve ever dealt with in the audio industry. I have never once gotten any useful help via YAMAHA, and the fact that I have to go via YAMAHA to even report a problem is awful. Though it has always been like this, even prior to YAMAHA. Previously, I would have to go via the Steinberg distributor in Australia which were not so great at providing help either. I’m a technical guy (I work in IT) and it’s frustrating not being able to have a dialogue with technical people or the devs.
In saying all of that that, I really REALLY appreciated seeing Steinberg devs and reps responding directly to forum threads here. I hope we see more of that!!!
So in summary, love the software, would really love more creative additions, hate the support system (at least in Australia).
Would love to see bus emulation (entire signal flow to and from including the master bus) like what UA is doing with Luna. Emulations of various console models of SSL, API, and NEVE specifically. I work almost exclusively with UA plugins but I don’t want to have to buy even the cheapest UA interface just to be able to use Luna for mixing to get analogue bus emulation. UA claims it’s free but we all know it isn’t if you have to buy a $500 (cheapest solution) piece of their hardware just to be able to use it, I think that’s the cheapest they have. The interface is just a really expensive dongle that I would never even use for tracking since I already have an SSL 24 channel interface. I don’t want at all to have to use 2 DAW’s. I like Cubase and would like to just be able to stick with using it exclusively. I think Steinberg is completely capable of doing this. PLEASE add this feature to Cubase.
I agree. It is a very rare occasion when I enter any forum to give praise. But after asking for these midi-editor improovements for years it felt like a decent thing to do. I have been feeling what Thurisaz feels now for many year. That Cubase was getting behind other DAWs. I bought a copy of Tracktion Waveform, downloaded Reaper and bought month of trial of Studio One. I was on the verge of abandoning the Cubase ship… until this version11 dropped like a gift from nowhere
So now I feel that Cubase is good enough for me again. Is it perfect, no. Building instruments could be handled better as you say. I have mentioned that I am missing some more advanced chords in the score track. But most of all I dream of a Cubase native function/effect that can transform midi data and send it out as audio in CV format to control my modular stuff.
Now to the point.
In saying all of that that, I really REALLY appreciated seeing Steinberg devs and reps responding directly to forum threads here. I hope we see more of that!!!
I think this is great. I really hope for a more open dialog about the development of Cubase. Especially since it seems that the user base needs very different things. I hope for more votes about proposed features and discussions about how upcoming features should work in this forum. And perhaps it would be possible to split votes into plugin, studio, midiediting and scoring lanes and realease something in each category in upcoming releases. I am not saying that everybody should get as much in every release, but I think it would make many of us a whole lot more connected to the DAW if we could see that the upcoming release had something in store for us and that feature requests was added to a list where we could all vote.
Finally upgraded from Cubase Pro 10.5.20 few days ago. And quite pleased with what I’m getting, actually, with a diminished audio-processing load, among others. So, in this survey, among others and as in the previous one, I asked in comment for these :
A true debugging of the Generic Remote definitions feature (NRPN messages recognition broken, handling of tracks add/removal…), as well as an overhaul of the mess constituted by RCE, Quick controls of all kinds, GRD, etc.
Several workflow/UI enhancements : will we finally be able to truely pin the audio fader of Instrument tracks in the inspector ? This with the ability to adjust independently the horizontal and vertical lines intensity in the arrangement window, or the overuse of the ‘e’ symbol…
An integration of VST 2.4 plug-ins/VSTis presets in Mediabay. It’s been nearly 15 years (since Cubase 4…) that I don’t even try to use it because of this. Useless for me, as it is : we are already in 2020 and VST 2.4 still rules for most of the VSTis currently on the market, AFAICS…
At least, I would have tried again : let’s see what the future brings…
EDIT : I would have liked to be able to save my survey answers as a PDF. Maybe for the next one ?
Well, I’m not angry on them… since they would like to live in a parallel Universe with their prior group of “pro” and “hobby” users… Who am I to stop them?! Probably the guys who left Steinberg and created Studio One didn’t take this decision by accident?! Still Studio One isn’t as superior as Cubase, or Nuendo but probably in a few years they might take the lead, if
