That crossed my mind as well. Icons should probably disappear when the width is too narrow.
2 Likes
This is since V13. I also keep having problems with this one, as it appears unwanted and then you canât click on whatever you wanted.
The zone I marked takes up unnecessary space on a small laptop monitor.
I know the Show Menu Bar function.
I have such a proposition.
Or like this.
In this case, the menu opens when you hover the mouse cursor over the top edge of the screen.
Vst also have elements that are unnecessarily obscuring.
Many people work on small monitors.
Some elements take up unnecessary space.
3 Likes
just saw this one with the latest update âno valid licenseâ
I never got too much into this as I didnât have anytning to complain. Hereâs a 1:1 comparison between Cubase 11 and 13 Fader Caps, mixer Channels same height and width, looks like this:
Would you mind pointing on what exactly looks blurred on your screen? Thanks!
4 Likes
Look at the difference in the dark purple edges , C13âs blurred as mentioned plenty of times , we were even to told to STFU as it was mentioned so many time , Steinberg knows , thereâs no point on repeating for the Steinberg beta fanclub
1 Like
Cubase 11 looks much better.
Clean.Smooth. 
Cubase 13 rough. 
No clear separation between channels.
A mess of lines and numbers.
Fader Caps blurred.
1 Like
@Matthias_Quellmann is there any chance of bringing back the gradient track events from Cubase 8 era? It still looks far more aesthetic and modern than the boring flat look of the last few years.
Processing power and graphics have come a long way. Gradients wouldnât even tickle a computer these days.
1 Like
If you have a remote control device, it shows the group of tracks (usually, 8 - 7 in your case) that could be controlled one way or another via the involved device.
Donât ask me more about it, as itâs not documented as it should, IMOâŚ
I also donât like the extra lines.
Maybe the developers of Cubase could donate us a new program setting?
Like this:
Fader Cap Style = blank / dashed
I can already hear users of other DAWs talking about it in the future: âWow, tomorrow Iâm going to buy Cubase. Itâs amazing what you can do now with Cubase and how you can configure it. You can even set what the fader caps look like!â
2 Likes
I get the point of âa mess of lines and numbersâ. In fact I still prefer the 11 GUI over the 13. Itâs just that I donât see the âblurredâ point too much. But letâs not overstretch it, I was just curios about this item. Thanks for your reply!
Im going to say this one last time .
Just because you two eyed beta lovers canât see a problem doesnât mean there isnât one , when you loose an eye, your eye focus is more focused on one point , unlike having two eyes , so when you focus on the centre of the fader the Sharpe change of darkness on the fader caps is blurred to the focused eye , just like an adjustable touch light when you adjust the light for a wider view ,it looses itâs sharpness .
Thatâs it , if you donât suffer with this problem then donât belittle ,dismiss or mock us that do because it just shows what sort of pretentious âim alright jackâ person you are . This is a real issue whether you like it or not ⌠Ban number two coming for speaking the truth
Patience H-C - they already said the âbiggerâ UI/UX changes wonât come in a maintenance updateâŚ
For me, having finally updated, this 13.0.30 shows they are working hard to get there. I have to say, I like the new fonts choices here, the meters, the faders, the overall newer âlookâ⌠
The Cubase 13 faders havenât really bothered me all that much. (FWIW, my vision isnât really impaired in any significant sense, but I do have some issues with the modern types of bifocals where distance from the screen at various times dictates whether you should be looking more toward the top/normal â i.e. far â of the lens or the bottom â i.e. near/reading â part.) However, seeing your side-by-side, blown up screen shot was very instructive for getting a feel for what is going on. Iâve marked it up to see if I can shed some light, just looking at the blue faders:
When I looked at both sets of faders side by side in your blowup, it was immediately obvious that the left side (C12) looked more or less like three-dimensional hardware faders, including with the finger indentation in the middle and clearly delineated edges, while the right side (C13) looked more like flat graphics. I wouldnât necessarily call this âblurryâ, though I could see how it could be interpreted that way in smaller size and from a distance.
The key difference appears to be that the C12 faders have some simulated light direction, whereas the C13 faders do not. For example, look at the difference in shading at the top (1) and bottom (3) in the C12 faders versus the lack of difference between those same areas in C13. The top area in C12 clearly has the raised part of the fader closer to the viewer (i.e. lighter), while the part closer to the background is farther away (i.e. darker). The bottom seems to be a bit more confused in that respect, but the âshadowâ under the bottom lip (or whatever it would be called) would at least suggest the lighting is coming from the top. (to be more 3-D, the part of the fader closer to the background surface should really be even darker than the shadow under the lip). By contrast the top and bottom areas in C13 donât have the two clear bands of shading, and this makes them look two dimensional, like stripes at the top and bottom of the rectangle in the middle.
Now, if we look at the middle area (2), the top part of that in C12, has gradient shading, again like the light is coming from the top but the lip is putting the top part in shadow, whereas the area above the bottom lip is getting the lighting. It makes it pretty clear to see that finger indentation. On the other hand, the rectangular part of that middle in Cubase 13 does not appear to have shading, so it feels two-dimensional.
Iâm guessing there is some performance consideration behind this, for example with using the gradients needing extra processing, but, be it at small size or blown-up size, the C12 faders definitely look more three-dimensional to me as a result of the shading and color use. The C13 faders donât bother me personally, but seeing them side-by-side like this does definitely make the visual difference stand out, and the C12 ones decidedly look more like real hardware faders, while the C13 ones are more cartoonish.
8 Likes
Loving the new Update! Thanks a lot
Not hard enough , do you buy a car and expect not to drive it for 3 months due to the windscreen causing focus issues due to bad lamination ?
Patients has gone , C13 for sale here for ÂŁ250 if you want ? Think positive , if you buy it iâll have no reason to come here and face the barrage of fanisum 
But you wouldnât buy that car, because the lamination âissueâ would show straight away with your impairment, before you parted with any money, surelyâŚ? Its called a test-drive.!
Sorry youâve run out of patience.
And no, Iâm all good now thanks - did the update from C12 for ÂŁ85
Anyway, good luck.!
Smaaaaart answer , to someone that cares , you get my point unless âŚwell maybe the 18th century blinkers need removing .
Tut ta
But I also admit that the last update (13/0/30)
improved a few things.
Itâs better. Weâre waiting for more
Am I right in thinking there was a time where you could get to the Cubase skin file and make changes? To me the ability to be able to change the underlying assets would help in these cases and allow people to use what works for them.
@Matthias_Quellmann would it be possible to have an option in the next release to use C12 style fader caps? It seems that a lot of work has gone into cleaning assets up on subjective issues, but those with certain disabilities have been overlooked.
1 Like