Same here. My today post was removed. I’v comparing ugly, unproffesional look of faders and meters to ProTools 11 (link to youtube). Or maybe somehow I remove it ? 
Almost same feelings. I think major problem with MicConsole is RESIZING. Its slow on larger projects. MC is like 3D graphics on poor videocard ! Why enybody need resizable mixer ? I need just static, solid, fast graphic 2D mixer. If I have larger monitor, then more channels and pannels I’ll see. On small less. And thats it. When you brosing webpage on small laptop screen, you see less. On large monitor yuo see more. Who need CPU hungry resizing ?
Look PT11 mixer. Its a proffesional place to work. And its not resizable. Just readable, beautiful, ergonomic, fast graphics. Ehh, I’m done.
I see there are generic remote improvements… when configuring track selection remotes it now gives you the standard cubase track list GUI from the find in the arrange… BUT if the track # changes this setting is still useless. It seems to me if you are going to select the Track Name for the remote track selection that this setting should be based on the name, not the track number! is this impossible with the generic remote protocol?
PT11 … yeah great how’s that going to work out with my 100’s of VST plugins! Not.
PT11 … MIDI … no thank you.
Believe me PT might have a plain Jane mixer but there’s 100 other features that would drive you crazy because they are so much easier to do in Cubase.
Mixconsole is definitely getting there a couple more updates and it’ll be perfect - then people can moan about something else.
I did a session on PT10 recently - no text search for plugins - the program feels like a dinosaur, I’ll take C7 any day of the week.
I’ve finally gotten into MC - I can’t bear to open 6.5 now. OK MC isn’t perfect but SB have demonstrated a commitment to achieve that end and I"m very grateful for all their hard work.
Same problem here with the font size of the mixer channels (in Windows). I hope a quick fix will be out soon.
Otherwise, update is very nice.
Well a perfectly readable mixer 7.0.4 project become a mess in 7.0.5
any assignments made in GR bound to a specific track have always been referenced based on the respective track’s order in the arrange, and lost as soon as the order is changed. 
the only partial workaround i’ve come across is perhaps splitting the arrange and keeping those critical GR-mapped tracks in the upper part at the top and never moving them.
According to the installer I don’t have Cubase 7 installed.
Oh well back to using Cubase 7.0.4.
Is the project corruption bug fixed as well ?
i guess there´s no way possible to please everyone…
i´ve only had time for a very short test of 7.05, so i can´t really say anything definitive about it yet, but it seems to be running fine, so far…!
actually looking at the comparison of the mixer in 6.5 and 7.05, i´d prefer the one in 7.05!
it has a lot cleaner and more professional look imho!
the mixer in 6.5 is way too cluttered in comparison imho!
i do agree however, that the mixer in 7.05 still has some issues that need to be solved!
one thing i noticed about the above image, is that if you look at, for example, track 113…
the volume is set to 20.88 in 6.5, but in 7.05 it says 20.9…!?
this seems to be random, looking at the tracks in the image…!?
One thing that Puzzles me in addition to the track names being harder to read:
Why are the Track NUMBERS so much brighter and easy to read than the volume(dB) and Pan values?
Is it important how many tracks you got in your Project?
+1
This is part of my biggest issue.
Since when was the new mixers layout of buttons and readouts BETTER than it was in 6.5?
Just because you change something doesn’t mean it’s better. I seriously have to look HARD at that “4 Square” of buttons to know what they heck I’m clicking on.
Did they test out Cubase 7 with actual HUMANS?
I would really like Steinberg to ad something like a “6.5” style mixer, “RETRO”, whatever they want as a mixer option to call it to Cubase 7. Until the mixer is fixed all their unneccessary updates just come across as wasted time on their part.
that would be a really nice feature, to make things more obvious and to separate tracks more clearly!
but even though it would be nice to have the option of changing the whole track lane color, i think a better and more subtle solution for this idea would be to have only the faders change color (and of course the track lane labels) and not the whole track lane!?
too much color in the mixer could be annoying to look at…maybe…!?
The moderators keep removing my posts in this thread too!! 
I don’t put anything controversial either , just a few complaints about the program…what gives??
I really like cubase, been using it for nearly 20yrs …why would I wish it harm??
The mixers odd, why can’t I say that? 
Cheers.
A query for the Steinberg people 
I have just downloaded and purchased Cubase Elements 7 upgrade from 6 (as opposed to purchasing it in a box) and I have two dongles on two computers. They both currently run Elements 6 independantly, but when I go to apply the Activation code to the 2nd computer, it says it’s already been used for an upgrade elsewhere.
Is there a way to let the USB or soft e-Licencer see that two computers are using the program (2 seats, 1 company) ? Or will I need to purchase another upgrade for the 2nd ?
Huge black holes (meter background). Come on, can I jump on there ? What’s inside ? 
please replace those horrid white dots in the channel edit window with something more useful ,WE ARE NOT IN THE 90’s AUTOCAD . Who wants to see stupid nodes every where ???
Get a grip Steinberg , who ever thought up that idea should be demoted to tea boy/girl
Don’t get me wrong im loving c7 but your starting to play with the graphics to much now and controlling certain things in c7 by white nodes is complete and utter basic programming crap . Please don’t make it any worse !
+1
contrast is way too low and numbers too small !
bye, Jan
Steven, I know this is mainly about the font,
but You may want to add the Gain / Phase part in the C7 mixer pic.
This is another area, that has been ‘degraded’.
Jan