I’d love to see (or be told how to…)
+1, great list!
Few things I would love to see in Cubase:
cheers!
Yeah same in my country
Also i want to add support 4k display
In studio one i can open native instruments, other 3rd party plugins
I want to use waves studio rack but the studio rack in cubase its poor i cant press any button to resize the scale
My studio rack its only open as one fader 
the other options i cant seeing it
This problem is one of Steinberg’s very troublesome problems
My screen is for 4k, and when I run Studio One, it works with me smoothly, on any screens, and even waves plugins , studio rack and Native instrument (Kontakt).
I cannot operate it properly and clearly in Cubase, even though Studio One with one press of a button I can fix it, knowing that Studio One sometimes without any thing works automatically.
When will Steinberg prolong this topic? I participated in this forum to share this topic with you. I found many talking about it. I sent a lot of emails to Steinberg a lot about many problems and they not responses.
I know that some other plugins companies bear part of the problem, but since they are working well in Studio One, Steinberg has no excuse for not supporting the screens.
It is not logical to add it in the next update 11 and we buy this update because finally this is not an additional feature this is a basic problem …
Something I don’t see on this list, at least not directly, is better handling of cross-fades. The support in Cubase is tedious and quirky. That stems from the basic orientation that only one event per track is played normally. I realize you can do the X command, and there are some settings to allow a limited cross-fade (up to a half second IIRC). But I see no reason why a user should have to do anything. If you overlap events, they should cross-fade automatically – or at least the user should have the option for cross-fades to happen automatically.
This is how SONAR works and it is a very natural, intuitive thing.
808 Glide /Slide option Like FL studio it would be Great
**thank u all
There is no major reason for moving this thread to the lounge
These are our opinions and they must be respected. We love to write these opinions to improve the Cubase
We have no other intentions
Also, my topic is anger to the supervisors, and it was moved without a convincing reason**
Wave / Aiff import in Beat Designer, not only for MIDI tracks! Like FLS for one shot drums. It will be great for patterns construction with one shots samples. With multi outs for mixer assign.
please see/bump this thread: Steinberg Forums
and https://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=285&t=177880&p=945393&hilit=fade#p945393
its possible to do cross fades and fades automatically, but ! there is no option for visual interpretation of it unfortunately
watch this (this guy has some good quick tips for cubase on his channel )
Only up to 500 ms, I believe.
500ms is enough overlap most of the time. But the problem is that if you happen to overlap 501 ms, it will not do the fade and you have nothing to indicate that. So it is an absolutely worthless feature, IMHO. Either you do the fades automatically or you don’t. I can’t use a “sometimes” feature, so I always use the X command instead.
Please add too:
neve & vintage yamaha plugin
wavelab analyzer (phase e spectrum)
m4a support
new frequency eq with dynamic e comparision
magneto III
new mb compressor
new mb limiter/maximizer
new mb clipper
…
thankx
I love Steinberg! 
I’d like to see better mastering capabilities, as in StudioOne. I’m not all that interested in laying out complete CDs. I haven’t punched out a CD in years. But S1 has a feature that makes it quick and easy to set the loudness level. Something like that would be very welcome.
You might want to take a look at Wavelab.
Thanks. I had not looked at Wavelab. Some interesting tools there, but it strikes me as an odd grab bag of features that don’t really have a mission together. I have tools that do most of those things already (e.g. Izotope RX7), so I probably wouldn’t want to put out another $500 for Wavelab. The nice thing about StudioOne is that they have the essential mastering pieces right in the DAW. Again, my main concern is level-setting. Today I might drop Insight on the main bus, but you have to go through a full render to measure the LUs. With StudioOne you can do that in just a few seconds per song without having to do a full render.
Of course, with S1, the mastering step is separate and after the mixing step, as is traditional in the industry, which is why you don’t have to render to set levels. In my case, for quick projects I prefer to do the the mastering stuff on the master bus of my mix session. So maybe I am my own worst enemy here.
I guess if Wavelab were more tightly integrated with Cubase – AND IF STEINBERG OFFERED SPECIAL PRICING FOR EXISTING CUBASE USERS – I would be more inclined to buy Wavelab and use the more conventional mastering workflow.
Fair enough. Yes, WL is basically what you want on steroids. They do have lighter versions. But hopefully we get to see some of these features in Cubase—although I doubt it will be anytime soon.
I would disagree. Wavelab is a mastering suite for professional ME’s. An ME can master in any digital environment. What Wavelab offers is features that are not found in DAWs. A few of those that I use fairly often:
What Wavelab isn’t…is you buy it and that’s the end. It’s the framework or environment for an ME to further purchase whatever 3rd party tools is necessary. Yes Wavelab comes with some decent basics, but it’s far from what I think any ME would need. The features built-in such as smart bypass or how you can set up audio analysis or error correction to your own specifications is what I like.
I don’t use S1. However any time any DAW attempts to become all things to all users, you get compromises. S1 has your concerns covered, plus a lot of what I call finalizing tools for many users who don’t want to send their work out to ME’s. Wavelab is built for ME’s. Again an ME could master in S1, or most any DAW, but how it works with outboard gear, plus the missing functions of whatever DAW, is going to make a big difference. Wavelab is just very comprehensive and was built from the ground up for mastering…nothing else. If there is any lacking feature I can think of, it would be the Cubase style of automation. Wavelab has Effect Morphing, but that’s nothing like Cubase automation.
I’ll assume your familiar with the Cubase “edit in Wavelab” feature finally brought back with I think C9? I did like the old CubaseSX integration with Wavelab a bit better where you just double click on the sample part in Cubase to open Wavelab, but “Edit in Wavelab” pretty much achieves the same thing. If this is now what you meant, what do you mean by “tightly integrated?” Keep in mind Wavelab and Cubase are totally 2 different applications. Wavelab is pretty much a 1 man operation and under the hood, and I think very little code similarities with Cubase.
Yes. I have seen that. This is why I call it a grab bag. “Edit in Wavelab” is about precise, microscopic editing to an individual audio event. That is about as far away from mastering as you can get, IMHO. In my opinion, the idealized workflow is defect correction → mixing → mastering. If you have a mix problem while mastering, you are already in trouble. If you have an audio defect to fix while you are mixing, you are already in trouble.
In the real world, we do what we have to do, so I’m not saying it is a bad thing to have the ability to quickly go back and fix the source audio if you overlooked something before you started mixing – or somebody gave you bad WAVs. But it ain’t mastering in my book.
The kind of integration I would like to see is in the real mastering process. If you mix a stem, then you should be able to click one button that puts you into the mastering environment with that stem open and ready to go. The files should all be saved within the overall project folder and so on. And if in the mastering process you discover the mix wasn’t quite right, you should be able to click one button and return to the open mixing project just as it was before you created the stem. Maybe this is possible with Wavelab and Cubase. If it is, it isn’t obvious to me.
I’m only guessing, but I think one reason Cubase featured the first Cubase-Wavelab integration, which existed up to Cubase SX, is because the Cubase editor was just generally too basic and bad awhile the Wavelab editor was much more advanced. Again, that’s just my guess. Cubase didn’t even integrate audio into their sequencer until the late 90s. Wavelab iirc, was around version 3 or 4 by that time. So integrating Cubase audio so Wavelab can edit it, was IMO a very smart decision. I’m not sure what you mean by “precise microscopic editing to an individual audio event.” Wavelab can address any length .wav file…not just microscopic editing.
Of course. You want that click/pop or whatever removed asap. However in my years of mastering you might be amazed at the technical defects that should have been caught prior to mixing. And I’ll assume you mean self-mastering or finalizing?
It isn’t. That should be addressed in tracking. Or at the very least caught by a mix engineer. By the mastering stage you may be polishing a turd.
The stem is typically a single .wav file right? You click one button in Cubase, Wavelab opens and it opens that .wav file or stem as you call it. If you want multiple files, i.e multiple stems, there is more steps as you would take each .wav or each stem in Cubase and transfer it to the Wavelab Montage and therefore eventually mixing the stems into a master. This isn’t the primary purpose of the Montage, but you can certainly do this.
Of course. You configure the Wavelab location, and once you have set the directory from then on it saves those files wherever you want them saved.
I’m not sure I understand. In Cubase you mix down to multiple stems. Take any Cubase stem, click Edit in Wavelab, and Wavelab opens for editing. Take another stem in Cubase and do the same thing. Eventually you end up with all stems in the Wavelab Montage. So now in Wavelab since you are “mastering” and mixing those stems you discover the mix isn’t quite right in Wavelab? Then I would save what I have in Wavelab and go back to Cubase without updating in Cubase. I’ll add that working with client stems often adds a can of worms and IMO isn’t desirable, and costs more. If you have a good mix engineer, there should be a good reason(s) for submitting stems in the first place.
It’s not the ME’s role to proclaim the “mix wasn’t quite right.” That is the responsibility of the mix engineer or whoever tracked and mixed. Of course the ME can suggest if asked, but I would never voluntary tell a client the mix isn’t right, without some type of prompting by the client/producer.
I think you are referring to self-mastering or finalizing correct? In that case, if I follow you, it is possible. As a matter of fact with WL10, there are some enhanced history features that make the history feature in Cubase look rather archaic. Normally, a commercial ME isn’t going to take a clients mix and go back to any DAW. As said if the issue isn’t corrected in tracking or mixing, it’s too late by the mastering stage…unless you have a pocket full of money.
