Matthias,
What is the policy on bug fixes?
Definitely a disappointing release… :cry No real workflow enhancements IMHO. Give us an option in the preferences for a smart tool,this way no body gets upset.
A very lacklustre update.
Out of all the great new features listed on Steinbergs site, only the mix console history could be considered appropriate for Cubase PRO.
Such a basic sampler is only really appropriate for an entry level version - come on, even Cubasis has a more advanced version than this! If you’re not prepared to include Halion, or even a stripped back version then you shouldn’t have bothered wasting your time. There’s little more this does than could already be done with VariAudio.
An updated EQ should be a part of the channel strip. Have a switch for backwards compatibility. You’ve got to move forwards at some point (and this applies to Insert Gate 
) so have a Save As V.8 option. This has worked in ProTools for years as a way to get around this issue.
The Zone is an interface tweak. It hasn’t been massively thought out though - seems like a rush job. It will only come into its own on large monitors - but the program still isn’t HiDPI ready yet! You’ve spent all this effort on a GUI tweak, along with all the updated plugin graphics - and its still all gonna need re-doing again!
Cloud collaboration - I’d love to know how many people bother with this. Avid can’t sell it either, thats why its price keeps dropping!
The marker tracks update will be useful for scorers, but your video engine is still woefully lacking and probably won’t be seen until 9.5, and the lack of HiDPI again makes the use of most new macs difficult.
As has already been said, what about an updated metronome, improved track import, bezier curves, render improvements, arrange page and multiple track warp, mediabay improvements, freeze multiple tracks, comping improvements, mono/stereo tracks… all stuff that would massively improve workflow for pro’s, but which is obviously not sexy enough for marketing.
The best thing about this update by far (and you don’t even mention it as a feature) is that those damn hover boxes have been binned. (I could have put some sort of emoji here but its not particularly funny)
The comments here are possibly a touch negative, but certainly the upgrade is a little light. I will upgrade anyway, but the price of £80 in the UK is a bit excessive in my view.
I am just browsing through the comments since my last post…
And that’s where you lost me.
Keep the features requests and ideas for improvements in the FR thread coming and feel free to discuss the new features in the forum. We will prepare more details about the smaller improvements of the C9 update in the next couple of days.
Have a nice weekend
Only had a brief look so far and haven’t done any proper work in C9 yet. It’s not the most feature heavy update there’s ever been but I definitely like it.
MixConsole history: Huge one for me personally. Perfect for spending 20 minutes experimenting freely with some drum mix settings and then instantly jumping back to A/B your work. This feature all on it’s own makes it a great update.
Sample Track: When I heard people talking about this as a possible C9 feature, I thought: “What a waste of time, I already have Kontakt”. But actually, having played with it, I see that I will most definitely use this often. Super quick and easy. Just enough features to give you all the basics but not TOO complex to ruin the speed/ease of use. If I want advanced full featured sampling, I reach for Kontakt. If I want to quickly experiment with a sound/re-pitch a snare drum/chop up a vocal, then Sample Track is one mouse click away. RE: it not being suitable for a pro… I’m a full time pro and I think I will use this feature most days! 
Lower zone: Again, not something I would have particularly asked for but will definitely be useful. First thing I notice is that it makes it very easy to edit some audio warp points whilst being able to visualise a second audio file in the arrange page at the same time. Perfect for time aligning multiple vocal tracks.
Overall… a thumbs up from me!
Despite it being completely useless? Think about it. If you want to undo an action taken at the beginning of your mix session, you’ll need to undo everything that you’ve done since that action as well! I essence abandoning your entire mix and waste hours of work!
Hardly a professionally implemented feature, if you ask me!
Some people complain that not enough Steinberg staff come to this forum. Constructive criticism? Of course, that is good. Insulting them when they have probably worked hard on this software for years? I don’t think that will make them want to come here and talk to the users!
Can it be improved? Obviously yes. Is it 100% absolutely perfect? Obviously no. Calling it completely useless is quite ridiculous in my opinion.
In the situation you describe, you could scroll back through the history, copy the settings of a particular channel (or save the EQ settings etc), then bring the history forwards again and paste those settings back onto the channel. Now your channel is the same as it was 30 minutes ago but the rest of your mix adjustments are not lost. USELESS!
Critizizing a delevloper for bad implementation, and sloppy work, is not insulting. The vast majority of the criticism that has been put forth here, in the last 48 hours, are fully justified. That is constructive criticism!
Ration and abusing customers that are dissatisfied. That is insulting. I think you’ve misunderstood Steinbergs claim. They’ve claimed that they were going to start listening to their users (customers), not that their users (customers) should shut up and obey Steinberg.
Obviously it can. I will post a proposition on how it could be repaired to useful state later. But the point is that there must be a stop to the practise of software developers to release inferior and damaged products with the hope that they may be fixed some time in the future.
We should all make our decisions on how a product work today, not hwe it might work some time in the future. Despute the fact that Cubase 9 has been met with massive criticism, Steinbeg has hardly recognised it. Much less given any indication of if and when the flawed features will be repaired.
Yes, but first you need to find the settings in an endless list of thousands of entries. This would take a long time (possibly hours). It would be much faster to not bother with the undo feature, use your ears and just change the darn parameter(s). This would only take seconds.
USELESS! definitely!
The way this was once put to me was, “Imagine a game of jenga, where in the middle of the game you want to take away the middle layer but keep the top layer”. Technically I think it is a bit like this
Z
After getting MixConsole history, the request so many people had, you move the goalposts to undestructive history or else it’s “unusable”?
It might just be me, but you do know there’s other DAWs if you are this unhappy, right?
That’s a very good analogy of how a proper undo feature should work. The Cubase implementation, on the other hand, forces you to throw away all the layers above the one you intend to remove! Not much of a game left, is there?
What I mean is the top layer depends on the middle layer (too) for it’s sounds, take way the middle and the top changes - unwise IMO.
And why should I (and everyone else who is dissatisfied) be forced to abandon the DAW that we love and has spent decades learning how to use, just because we can’t complain when the developer drops the ball. You may think that you do Steinberg a favour by defending them at all cost. You don’t!
Just look at all the complaints on this board. What do you think would happen if all these people abandoned Cubase, and no new customers bought the software (after reading this board and the devastating magazine reviews, I’m sure will follow)?
By voicing our complaints, we are actually helping Steinberg making a better product (that continues winning awars) in the long run? Cubase 9 won’t win any awards. Well, maybe for the worst upgrade in history.
I’m genuinely surprised when people want to stick with a product they say is unusable.
There will always be complaints on this board. The MixConsole undo is proof of that: even now it’s added, it turns out it has to be more than what was asked for to satisfy the ones who were complaining. From the perspective of someone who never cared so much about this undo feature at all, it seems incredibly entitled.
If you want to help to improve Cubase by requesting features, then make a constructive post in the Feature requests sub-forum.
Some people never learn. Not even if a mountain is dropped on them. The discussion with will lead nowhere. Let the rest of us who want to be able to go on using using Cubase continue with the discussion, without rants and insults.
By the way, the Feature Requests sub-forum is for requesting new features. Not for discussing badly implemented excising ones. Understand the difference?
Do the other few DAW’s with mixer undo (Pro Tools, Sonar, Samplitude, Reaper, maybe some others?) operate in such a way that you can undo individual parameter changes without altering more recent mix changes?
Yay, semantics. I consider being able to disable seperate operations in the history a new feature since it’s not a feature right now. But it doesn’t even matter since the forum description covers this either way:
All feature requests and suggestions > for upcoming releases of Cubase Pro 9, Cubase Artist 9 and Cubase Elements 9 can be posted here.