Cubase 11 showed one more time to it’s customers that the team don’t listen what we really need

Cubase 11 showed one more time to it’s customers that the team don’t listen what we really need.
Probably the team should learn some lessons from the guys behind Dorico, because they really know how to communicate with the users / Daniel, Ulf, Paul and Lillie are everyday on the forum discussing with the people/ and how to balance between our needs and their own plans for the software. This doesn’t happen with the team behind Cubase, which is really terrible…
Almost nothing of the most important and wanted things was improved, or added to ind behavior towards the customers is going to be changed!

2 Likes

totally agree. never seen the updates and new tools that are wanted by the community… for years.

1 Like

Why am I getting the feeling that this is a duplicate account of someone I’ve already had this conversation with…

edit

1 Like

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 commands:
Key Command improvements, key command separation from toggles, macro improvements, snap on/snap off.

Editing:
smart tools/events, quicker editing protocols, bezier curves

Export:
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

ARA/ARA2

RMS normalization

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.

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) :white_check_mark:
4 Bezier curves in midi editor (4,59) :white_check_mark:
5 Multitrack Audio Warp (4,28)
6 Export to Video (3,73) :white_check_mark:
7 Smart Tool (3,70) :white_check_mark:
8 Inspector In Lower Zone Idea - Mockup Design (3,47)
9 Full coloured tracks in the mixconsole (3,37) :white_check_mark:
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) :white_check_mark:
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) :white_check_mark: *coming soon/in the works
27 Eliminate mix console focus (1,61)
28 Improve The ‘Save As Template’ Function (1,60) :white_check_mark:
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) :white_check_mark:
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)

I have to chime in, here. Do you realize that on the 50 items of the poll list in your post, there are only 9 ticked ? And you falsely processed the 26th one, which is one of my first personal FR, by the way : your Coming soon/in the work remark is a moot one, as in C11, we still have the antiquated and buggy Generic Remote feature, this, with the useless RCE and the quick controls mess…

So, there are 8 left… Meanwhile we have gained :

  • added features that never have been asked, as if the development crew was afraid to touch the core of Cubase code for things like, say, Ripple edit or Multitrack warp/freeze.

  • added effects : better than nothing, but again, it isn’t what a lot of us need : there are third party brands for this and, sorry, But I don’t think that any of the bundled VSTis are ‘extremely powerful’ : actually I don’t use them and rely on third party ones since countless years (see my profile if you want more details…).

And could you please let beside the “You’re just wrong, period” kind of comment, because I could do the same with you, it’s very easy. I still believe that a forum is, mostly, a discussion space, though. Thanks…

I’ve been very underwhelmed by the additions in C11 and even N11 although others seem happy.

and some of the ticked ones are a bit vague IMO:
‘general improvements to MIDI editor’ ?
‘export to video’ - which is hugely limited
‘improve the save as template’ - still not right :slight_smile:

And remember these were ones suggested by SB - so it was already a ‘loaded’ list - no mention of some of the very longstanding bugs and issues that people have been requesting fixes for, sometimes for many years.

As cubic13 says, they didn’t really address any of the ‘difficult’ ones - but they gave us some plugins and some sample packs…which nobody asked for…and we quietly lost some stuff like Houston support.

It’s probably not helpful to anybody (and SB aren’t particularly reading these anyway !) - to bash them. But like the original poster I’d love to see some more active and positive participation in the forum. At the moment they tend to ‘post and run’ - The Dorico forum on the other hand is amazing and I don’t even use Dorico !

That was just the poll mate, there are many other things added that have been asked for, for many years (like advanced batch export).

The 26th one isn’t falsely ticked, it is confirmed in development - meaning, they’ve listened. The complaint is about listening, so it’s ticked. Do you want a buggy incomplete #26? no.

I wonder how many lines of code just these 9 things are, because you seem to have the perception that 9 out 50 isn’t alot… as if this stuff is as easy as making a beat in Cubase. I don’t think you really have any idea about code, and code implementation of completely new features into an old program - any one small thing, is extremely complicated and can break 100 other things. So we are lucky to have 8 and a stable program/release.

So once I again, I’ve proved that the title and concept of this thread, and the comments in the other one I’ve linked, despite you not getting what - you - want, are a false premise and accusation.

But you’re allowed to be unhappy about not getting you want, I just don’t think it’s a fair or accurate characterization of some people working very hard at Steinberg, and tangibly, do listen. If you want everything on the list, or the features you want - you’ll be waiting 3 years for a update, instead they give us what they can twice a year.

Hmm… What was this poll all about ? If I remember well, it was the result of a Steinberg move (and a welcomed one, I should say) attempting to get what could be the most expected features/enhancements for following upgrades, this, during the summer of… 2019. We indeed got the batch export enhancement : fine, but overall, there are still 8 out of 50 features ticked.

I’m living in a real world, not in a virtual one. So, has there been any enhancement related to remote control devices handling in Cubase ? No. From which, I think that you should untick this 26th item…

So, 8 or 9 ? :grin:
Beside this, I admit : I have absolutly “any idea about code”. But the problem isn’t about the average user programming skills : it’s about the ability of the development crew to enhance Cubase core features. I see this as a customer : I’m ready to pay for any update fees, as long as there are true enhancements of Cubase core functionalities.

I’ll be factual : C11 is working perfectly here, with even a decreased audio processing load, compared to 10.5.20, while being as stable as could be expected. This alone made the upgrade worth.
Beside this, I never said that the dev crew isn’t working hard : as the OP has suggested, I think that the end result doesn’t match the users expectations. I could list several things that either, are not rightly working and haven’t been fixed since countless years, or haven’t been implemented in a reliable way (HiDPi, gapless audio, among others…) but, at a point, who cares ? Not you, evidently…

This is the only part of your post the matters, and I don’t think you are living in the real world, because you don’t have realistic expectations - at all.

Do you think that all 50 things on the poll, are just automatically possible and could be done over night? Do you think #1 is just as easy as #7?

This is again, a false statement you are making to validate your and the OPs own perception. You’re speaking for all users, and it’s just not factual. Many people are very pleased with the additions, myself included. Actually, I think it shows a lot of promise, that Steinberg have shifted focus to what users actually want - an accumulation of small, boring, improved details (like Marker project lines) instead of things like ‘Audio Alignment’. So there’s actually a 3-4 year curve of development shifting here that - is - again - the result of Steinberg listening to the community which you are overlooking because you didn’t get what you want this year.

HiDPI isn’t a problem for most people. It’s a problem for people who decided to invest in the latest consumer standards of which nothing supports out of the gate. That’s their fault, not Steinbergs. It’s literally impossible for developers to - immediately - support every new consumer gadget standard every time a new one comes out.

Gapless probably requires a rewrite of the entire program, and will probably result in a plethora of bugs and performance issues.

I don’t care, because you could take %90 of what is in Cubase out, and I would still have fun making music, figure out how to be creative in a simplified structure, and still make money.

@LoveGames
OK, its the end of debate, for me, as it could last endlessly. We are obviously not on the same track and life is short : I have other things to do… :flushed:

I accept your concession.

Dual monitors = boring editing job made less boring with Steinberg forum debates on the other screen.

Just realize if version 12 has #26, and #1 gappless, and a bunch of others off that list… there will be some chap, maybe cubic14, on the forums saying “Cubase 11, again, showed one more time to it’s customers that the team don’t listen…” and cubic13 will not be on the forums busy setting up his MIDI remote control protocols.

just a reminder to keep it nice and friendly- it’s fine to have different opinions…trying to score points isn’t helpful and doesn’t advance a discussion :+1:

1 Like

Yessir, and we should try and extend that to the developers as well.

I’m willing to be friends with everyone

1 Like

indeed - and FWIW I don’t know many of the devs, but those who I do know are as friendly and committed as it’s possible to be…doesn’t mean the listen to feature requests though :smiley: