I believe this is part of the known issues with Windows (OS) that Steinberg are (still) actively working with Microsoft to resolve.
2 Likes
yes, Adobe also have same issues with windows & same discussions on their forum.
1 Like
I just installed the trial and OMG itâs a real âExcel experienceâ. Itâs much uglier than in the pictures. Suddenly Ableton looks like a GUI masterpiece in comparison lol
But what really surprised me is how long it takes to open a window after a click. The Mixer window is the best because I can see how itâs drawn piece by piece. I can run demanding 3D games but I canât run basic 2D GUI⌠Of course C12 and before were flawless in that matter.
Someone really messed up the GUI of C13. Itâs not only visuals but also a performance. Itâs quite an achievement (in a pro world) to make a simpler and poorer GUI that is much more resource-demanding.
1 Like
I point you back to my comments earlier in the thread:
Nuendo 13.0.20 was built on 29 November; I guess the same is true for Cubase 13.0.20. Two weeks from building a release to passing all the testing and release qualifications needed for a public non-beta release is fairly normal. In other words, by the time @Markus_Staudt posted to acknowledge that Steinberg was working on the UI issues, the 13.0.20 release freeze had either happened or was just about to happen, hence Markus pointing out that any fixes were likely to miss 13.0.20. No matter how important your issue is, you cannot demand that a release that is otherwise ready is cancelled. How would it help anyone if all maintenance releases are cancelled until the UI issues can be addressed? Moreover, now that 13.0.20 has shipped, Steinberg may have more effort available to work on the UI without the clamour from customers needing the 13.0.20 fixes.
Nobody is forcing you to use version 13 - anyone with a version 13 licence can run version 12 until such time as they can move to version 13. Those who upgraded to version 13 from an eLicenser version of Cubase or Nuendo can also run version 11 and earlier, though new purchasers of versions 12 or 13 do not get a legacy eLicenser licence for version 11 and earlier. To be clear, I am not saying that 12 is good enough for people with visual disabilities; I am merely saying that it is an alternative option with all but the version 13 changes for those who cannot use the version 13 UI.
My background is legal, but in the UK, not the US. Nevertheless, as someone who is trained in a different common law jurisdiction to the US federal jurisdiction, I cannot see how the ADA applies to application software. Indeed, the applicability of the ADA Title III to websites, by analogy to a âpublic accommodationâ (i.e. a brick-and-mortar place of business) has yet to result in unanimity of approach in the US federal courts - see Saxon S. Kagume, Virtually Inaccessible: Resolving ADA Title III Standing in Click-and-Mortar Cases, 72 Emory L. J. 675 (2023) for a discussion of the current situation in that area.
If you were in the UK, Part 3 of the Equality Act 2010 would not help you. Whilst the duties applying to service providers extend to the provision of goods (s. 31(2)), this only goes as far as the retailing of goods and not the characteristics of the goods sold at retail. Even when Part 3 is relevant, the law only requires a service provider to provide âreasonable adjustmentsâ (s. 29(7)(a)), which is defined by s. 20 read in conjunction with schedule 2 paragraph 2 of the Act. Even if Part 3 Equality Act 2010 imposed a duty on Steinberg to take steps to avoid design practices that put a visually disabled person at a detriment (which it does not - the duty does not extend to manufacturing or software development activities), it is questionable whether a court would hold Steinberg liable if they explained: âversion 12 was OK, version 13 is a problem and we started to work on rectifying the issues as soon as visually disabled people alerted us to them, meanwhile everyone with a version 13 licence can use version 12 until the issues are fixedâ. (Edit to add: I do not propose to explore which Equality Act 2010 duties are anticipatory in effect and which are only reactive; I am already hypothetically extending the scope of the service provider duty beyond that imposed by law).
Even the ground-breaking digital accessibility provisions of Directive (EU) 2019/882, which come fully into force in the EU countries on 28 June 2025, will not apply to application software - only hardware and operating systems are in scope of that Directive (see Article 2 paragraph 1(a)).
Moreover, any suggestion that the current situation with Cubase and Nuendo 13 should proceed down a legal route feels premature to me. Even if you could find a jurisdiction in which Steinberg bears potential legal liability and in which you have standing to bring a claim, it would take some time and chew through a lot of legal expenses to get a case before the court. Steinberg has said they are working on this and will likely improve the situation long before you can get the matter to court.
I know you and others are desperately frustrated and upset by the current situation, and that this disappointment is compounded by Steinbergâs inability to fix anything in time for the 13.0.20 maintenance release. I join you in hoping that this matter is resolved soon, as someone with needs in other accessibility domains. However, I think there is a balance to be struck; Steinberg needs time to resolve the issues properly - not quickly cobble together a flawed release that fails to move towards complete and lasting visual accessibility.
As a matter of best practice, Steinberg should adopt current digital accessibility guidance into their UI/UX design activities, and I hope they learn from the problems that have arisen with Cubase/Nuendo 13. It is important to remind Steinberg of what, in the UK, is called the power of the âpurple poundâ - the buying power of disabled people. Moreover, I hope Steinberg will want to do better in the future to advance equality, diversity and inclusion.
Now you are talking directly about my lived reality. Even under the fairly stringent and aforementioned Part 3 Equality Act 2010 in the UK, service providers do not have to provide physical accessibility at any cost. Matters such as affordability to the service provider and any barriers to modifying an existing building (lack of space, laws that protect historic buildings etc.) can and often do make the provision of full wheelchair access unreasonable and therefore not required under the Act.
We are a long way away from full accessibility. The law will necessarily always lag behind best practice; you cannot use the force of law to mandate what is not already recognised as the correct way ahead. Accessibility will be an ongoing journey, though I hope that the widespread adoption of accessible digital design principles will bring about the accessibility of software and digital services long before all the physical accessibility challenges can be addressed.
4 Likes
Iâve no personal axe to grind on the matter⌠but appreciate you @David_W taking the time to write that in-depth response. An informative/interesting read that illustrates some of the (legal) complexities involved.
1 Like
good job to make the text color inverted to black
but why still the icons not inverted to black ?
we want the Single Menu Bar like Microsoft Visual Studio , Jet Brain
2 Likes
@ Ehabmxd I assume you havenât read the answer in other posts so hopefully youâll take this answer seriously but the reason Cubase doesnât currently do what Jetbrains can do is because Cubase is using an older codebase. If we want them to resolve that faster, we will need to give them more money. Their software is 30+ years old.
But, it is looking a bit ârandomâ as to what/when the track name turns black, donât you think.? Or is there some method/rule at play Iâm not understanding from your screen picâŚ? How consistent is it going to look like across a 100+ track list I wonderâŚ
Iâve already read it
I find your words very convincing
But I do not mind that version 14 will has a higher price for solving some problems and adding some features
Yep, just let the track name in white as in C12. Otherwhise its too distracting.
2 Likes
I believe their approach at the moment is that it turns black if it detects the background brightness is at a certain threshold. Hopefully, this is a temporary solution. I say this because I do believe thereâs a way to solve this problem without this visual inconsistency.
1 Like
Unfortunately, it likely wonât be version 14. They probably already have some things in order for v14. If anything, we should start making demands for version 15. Itâs possible they could make some big changes by then.
1 Like
Ok, thank you for that⌠I hope so too; right now, this seems like it could all look very âclumsyâ and ragged, fooling/distracting the eye unnecessarilyâŚ
You can control them, but you cannot turn them all into a black line
I made most of the tracks look black, but there were a few left that I donât know why didnât turn
1 Like
Hopefully Iâm not being overly optimistic. They made this update quickly so hopefully itâs a band-aid approach. I do believe, that due to the intensity of this thread, they are having deeper conversations about all of this. I feel positive that by the time we get to v15, they will have made meaningful changes.
2 Likes
That is an unusual look, the text switching back and forth in color. I donât personally have any issues with it. Professionally itâs odd but it may work better usability-wise? Or maybe not.
When it comes to aesthetics, I have a feeling Steinberg wonât want to take a screenshot of this black and white text and use that in their promotions. Hopefully theyâll just start copying Studio Oneâs solution to this.
1 Like
Absolutely agree. Just revert it back like it was in C12, this looks messy af.
One trackname is white, the other is black, the other is white again. And please turn everything black, which is not the track name. Read/Write, lock, M, S, donât have to stand out like the track name. I just have to see them, when I click on them and if I really need them.
4 Likes
Oh, good grief.! That frankly looks nasty - and disorientatingâŚ
Thanks for posting.
Dear, oh dear⌠Wait for C15 you reckonâŚ? Sorry, but I think I will stay at 12.0.70, whilst making effort to move over to something else (S1 is first choice) by thenâŚ
1 Like
I actually purchased a copy of Studio One and found it comfortable, advanced and easy to learn and learn
But there are things I miss in }Cubase that are not present in Studio One
But they are developing rapidly and interacting with users on their forum and email quickly
They really listen
2 Likes
God, that looks a nightmare to navigate quickly/easily⌠What a state weâre in. I have to look doubly hard to determine whatâs a track and whatâs automation etc, etcâŚ
Ok, holding off update to C13 for a bit longer now Iâve seen this.
Though, I will set time aside over Xmas to download the Trial edition and have a look on my system for myself.
Meantime, S1 update still on sale till end of the month I seeâŚ
3 Likes