My suspicion is that the bugs that get get fixed (apart from crashes, which are obviously always top priority) are those that are either reported by several people through support, or are reported by the right people (I guess that if Hans Zimmer as the most famous Cubase user reports something, there is some jumping going on at Cubase HQ…)
I also suspect that the Cubase development team and the support team are somewhat understaffed (it is very noticeable with the support, which either doesn’t answer at all or only several weeks later, and I produce very accurate bug reports and reproduction sequences). It seems like there is enough money at Steinberg/Yamaha to buy other Software (Spectrallayers) or trying to compete on a market that is dominated by Apple (VST Live), but not for the actual flagship product?
Regarding beta: I personally think that a public beta (or semi-public) of new Cubase releases could be beneficial, if managed correctly. Several other DAW vendors like Ableton, Bitwig or Reaper do exactly that. Not only can it help to detect and iron out more bugs on the myriad of different system configurations or use cases out there, it also can help create a sense of community and being involved within the Cubase user base.
This is the last thing im saying .
I really can’t see how , with all the graphical failures ive personally seen that you can close the book on C12 .
I completely understand your team would be under pressure BUT as end users we want to know the licences we purchase will work . That’s it . My 0.52 works perfect for me BUT 3 months of 2 days a week and a constant 8 hours a day trouble shoot a new build just to run an update ?
If C13 changes AGAIN as dramatically as C12 with the problems then …
I appreciate everything your team tries to do , i hope C12 was just a stop gap on to something more stable out of the box without every point update breaking something
While some people won’t like to read what you’ve written here, I do appreciate your transparency on the matter, and that can only be respected so thanks for sharing this info.
I also appreciate Matthias’ transparency here. Having spent my career as an engineering executive in the software industry, I know all too well how difficult it is to balance the needs of a large, widely varied user base with inevitably finite resources and market pressures. I always used to joke that my job was “to make the smallest number of users unhappy”
And yes, I have my own list of Cubase bugs and issues that I would love to see fixed (incl. a recent rash of mysterious crashes), but all in all, Cubase represents an incredible value, and the most helpful thing we in this forum can do is to submit high-quality bug reports/feature requests so they are easy to triage/fix.
I’ll say what I’ve always said. If Steinberg was even the slightest bit transparent about their roadmap and what is being fixed and when, there wouldn’t be NEARLY the amount of upset we get.
Instead, Cubase development is classified above top secret, so we have users waiting for months in the dark, hoping that they will win the lottery and one of their issues will actually be chosen to be fixed.
@Matthias_Quellmann , I’m sure these decisions aren’t up to you and I appreciate what insight you’re actually able to give us. I also don’t envy your job as it seems you are the one that has to bear the brunt of it all. But the process itself when it comes to all the secrecy around development is kind of silly and more or less is the cause of our frustration.
Sharing the development process in public is the worst nightmare a software company can do, it is basically useless. Development tasks can change in a way that it looks even more strange to users who are not familiar with how that works, than keeping it where it belongs to, the development team.
I work in a development team and I wouldn’t share anything of our plans somewhere with customers, never ever…
This one is pretty obvious, but also makes the next one:
Quite problematic: a public beta process requires staff.
It also makes bugs fixing harder to postpone like it is done now.
BTW, I totally agree there should be a public beta. I also think there should be paid support plans etc etc but since Steinberg is so opaque, the way they see interaction with their customers and with the different categories of customers is a mystery to me. Which makes it very hard to trust them, actually.
Head over to the Dorico forum. It’s basically a utopia compared to here. Daniel interacts with people directly and responds to almost every thread himself. He’s pretty open about things they are or aren’t actively working on. It’s wonderful. There is a balance, I think.
All I want is to make a feature request or post about a bug and for a Cubase employee to simply comment and say “No.” At least they’d be being honest about it and I won’t have to wonder about it through the next three paid updates.
I know what Daniel is doing in the Dorico forum and I really think it is fantastic how he is supporting users of Dorico.
But even Daniel is not openly discussing the development process and he is not telling what fixes are going into the product and when.
What is different between Cubase and Dorico is how often Daniel and other members, like Ulf, are communicating in the forum. That is something that is missing here and here I agree with you.
However, it still doesn’t make the development process for Cubase silly, as you said.
I’m also disappointed that motorized faders didn’t get the much needed fixing love in the MIDI Remote in C12.
——
However, I do consider fixes for track import from other projects very meaningful, since that feature seems generally more powerful than track presets and/or keeping deactivated tracks in large templates.
For my use case, being able to import multiple tracks complete with routing and plugin GUI positions remembered is a welcome advantage while using track import.
For example, this allowed me to add an orchestral track section complete with section routings to a pop/rock/electronica project as a late/afterthought production idea. Having done that recently, it was a significant time saver. Very cool!
OK I downloaded the latest version and I hope that all of these computer lock-ups get resolved. A bit off topic but if you have a dell computer running windows 11 there is a firmware update you need to install so let’s see what happens over the coming days.
They don’t work well with the new MIDI Remote, but still fine with the eventually to be deprecated Generic Remote and (if I recall correctly) the MCU or HUI protocols.
The key (if you’re unhappy with Cubase) is to read the documentation. Then, if Cubase 12 doesn’t perform as the documentation says, I believe you can get a refund, according to this (paragraph 11.3.2).
After closing the editor, the settings of all the editor tools are reset to default each time. Two patches and nothing changes. Every time you open jury with, you have to turn on the acoustic feedback button. Help solve the problem.
I have the impression that there will always be users who are looking for something to complain about.
If one oder two of the 1000 functions of Cubase break during an update and only work again with the next update, but you have to pay for it, so what? That just happens.
To me, the complaining sometimes seems like that: “When I was working with Cubase 11, my grandma was alive, but after installing Cubase 12, she died. Will I get my grandma back after the update to Cubase 13?”
