The Cubase channel strip was officially introduced with the MixConsole in Cubase 7, announced in November 2012 and released shortly after.
With Cubase 10 (2018): The Channel Strip underwent significant GUI improvements, including enhanced metering on each module for better visual feedback.
It feels like it is time again to see another big update to clean up some of the Channel Strip FX - a Cubase DAW Channel Strip 3.0. This time the target should be to mirror third party emulation offering so much that Cubase now with DAW stock plugins offer similar options on most of the common mix products.
The need is to be able to mix not in the box but also in the DAW with only stock plugins, it would be nice if the Channel Strip 3.0 could mirror third party options much better with proper Neve, API and SSL channel strip emulations + preamps, all the biggest classic compressors (1176, LA-2A, DBX 160, SSL Bus) and more saturation options.
My wishlist:
Work together with Softube to make sure the new GUI works well with the Console 1 hardware - the goal should be for it to be possible to control the entire Cubase DAW channel strip with the Console 1 hardware eco system. This will require the design mirror the hardware more closely.
Support dual Gate/Tool, dual EQ and dual compressor options, current 2.0 is too limited. Update: Also add multiple EQ windows in DAW Mix Console and summed view (usable for third party plugins too to access).
Release preamp options (modern, vintage & tape). Vintage: Neve, API and SSL.
Release/redesign vintage channel strips from SSL, Neve and API, Pulteq, Gate, EQ and Compressor (where they exist). Make sure they actually look like the counterpart (no more weird creative reimagination, please)
Release/redesign vintage separate compressors (FET 1176, LA-2A, DBX 160), again make the design look the real versions (no weird creative reimagination making them look like other products, please).
Release more saturation options (more tape and tube options)
Consider redesigning or removing some of the current Channel Strip 2.0 options.
Sidenote:
When working with Softube, please collab to support when loading the Console 1 plugin on a track, make it possible to see the Console 1 effect chain in the DAW mix console + the Console 1 EQ curve. This would improve mix ergonomics considerably when going third party and not using the Cubase DAW channel strip.
This list could be endless, if you added every one’s favourite processors.
Better, perhaps, to have movable “free” slots so that 3rd party plugins may be used.
There are certain scenarios where you need to work within Cubase with what you got in the DAW (not going to argue with you when, if you know you know), hence would love to see Cubase offer the most common channel strips and compressors + other common vintage options in a new Cubase Channel Strip 3.0 as stock plugins. Increased modularity would be expected too (including routing third party options if needed).
Some competing DAW basically have many of these already in the DAW as stock plugins, so if Cubase really worked on a channel strip 3.0 and offered an even stronger portfolio of DAW stock plugins (like SSL, Neve, API, Opto, FET 1176, DBX 160, SSL Bus), then Cubase would be on top in this area, especially if it supports the Softube Console 1 hardware support too with the Cubase DAW channel strip.
Why that hardware? Would it be because that’s the one you own.
Which DAW’s already have credible SSL, API, Nerve etc built into their channel strips?
I’m not against this (as long as they are as good as the 3rd party ones out there). I think it’s a bit a ambitious but if you don’t ask you don’t get.
Not bothered about the softube, I think Nektar is a more up to date controller or even more likely the new Yamaha controller. Anyway interesting idea and something new for the engineers / studio owners.
Keep in mind that Steinberg has a range of consumer thresholds to meet in terms of latency and CPU usage… So there’s going to be a realistic limit on quality there to begin with being that everything needs to be “real-time”/low-latency and low CPU.
Being that MixConsole is a factory baseline integrated component of the software, it needs to be able to work well across the entire consumer range, within reason.
Even if they did incorporate more within these limitations - people are still going to opt for more resource intensive plugins in the inserts.
Perhaps one thing Steinberg could consider, and perhaps this would be Pro-Version only, is a MixConsole Analog+ which can be turned on, but with the warning that it costs more CPU, and latency.
Console 1 is currently third party hardware, the argument is that Cubase should work with Softube in development of Channel Strip 3.0 to ensure the UX is great.
Current Channel Strip 2.0 is almost the same as the Console 1 hardware in layout so there isn’t that much changes to be made.
Trust me, it makes sense.
I said many not all.
Two examples:
Logic already have parts of Neve, API and Pulteq and all mentioned compressors (like 1176, LA-2A and DBX 160 and more), but they have not covered all components in full channel strips - yet.
Luna does have 1st party support with many channel strips in their GUI, but you have to buy the Luna (DAW) versions, so they are technically within the DAW, downside it costs extra.
It is not an argument why to make these emulation and more about which DAW will be first. In my opinion Cubase should be one of the first to offer this.
Totally fair to use the Nektar, it has some upsides but also some downsides - I would argue the Console 1 hardware has better mix ergonomics when performing mixing duties and it already today resemble the Cubase Channel Strip 2.0 sections more closely. I would also add Console 1 is on a MK3 version for a reason and that version is not that old. It just makes sense to map it properly when developing Channel Strip 3.0.
Suspect Steinberg / Cubase would likely work to support multiple controllers like Console 1, Nektar and the possible growing Yamaha DAW hardware eco system with the new possible future Channel Strip 3.0.
Agree I like the new Yamaha single fader controller, many smart ideas that will likely get the competition going too.
Naturally third party options will be used in many cases too.
But like I said there are use cases where you may have to use only DAW stock plugins and it is practical in general to at least have these 1st party emulation options as stock plugins.
DAWs, for instance Logic, are already very close to offer many of the most common emulations options already. We are already almost there.
The current Channel Strip 2.0 GUI is basically the same layout already as the Console 1, the only thing is they haven’t mapped it and optimized it properly. So it would likely not change that much based on the Console 1 hardware.
Naturally I could see them adjusting the GUI in the Channel Strip 3.0 to work with Console 1 but also other hardware, just guessing but would not be surprised if we see new Yamaha hardware too.
Cubase would be wise to support multiple hardware with a future Cubase DAW Channel Strip 3.0.
Both Console 1 and Cubase Channel Strips are inspired by the hardware counterparts so it is technically not infringing on other eco systems. Makes sense for them to be matched more closely. And I suspect because it is a DAW they would add other hardware support too if they moved forward with this. It shouldn’t be an issue here.
Except Console 1 is a controller made to work with any DAW, the DAW is not made to work with Console 1. You don’t bend the DAW to work with accessories, it’s the other way around.
What happens when all the SSL and AVID and Mackie and Faderport people start complaining? Just because YOU own Console 1 doesn’t mean the rest of the world does. Steinberg has to cater to much more than just your individual dreams and wishes.
First: important to remember Console 1 is a channel strip controller and not a motorized 8 to 10 track mix fader controller.
Second: The Console 1 hardware would likely be one of many hardware supported, expect support for Nektar Panorama CS12 and likely a future Yamaha channel strip controller (and current Yamaha single fader would probably get support too although limited). But because Console 1 currently is one of the hardware most resembling the current Channel Strip 2.0 GUI already it would make a lot of sense to get this hardware mapped.
Lastly: If there is a wishlist of any other channel strip controllers you want to be mapped with a future DAW Channel Strip 3.0 just add them to this thread. If Mackie and AVID has channel strip controllers that would fit the current Cubase DAW channel strip 2.0 or possible future 3.0 GUI, please suggest them instead of accusing me of asking for exclusivity.
Yes you said many. So again what are these many DAW’s
You’ve quoted two, Logic which is Mac only and does it actually have API, SSL, Nerve, etc channel strips?
And a DAW named Luna. Hardly one of the better know.
So no not many..And I never claimed you said “ALL” DAW’s
Like many Cubase users I don’t and never will own the softube thingy.
So I would prefer that they (Steinberg) don’t waste resources on this.
Interesting thread though.
I won’t comment on your feature request, just on the quoted paragraph.
Most of the feature requests come from a “my needs are the most important [to me]” attitude. There is nothing wrong with it as long the requesting person doesn’t start to go wild, diminishing everybody else.
The “I don’t need it so I won’t suppport it” attitude seems very reasonable to me. I know that I support features from others that I don’t need myself but I don’t expect everybody else to do the same thing. If one knows that time is a limited resource then why would one support something that one doesn’t care about in favor of something that one does care about?
