what is Cubase lacking most for you and which DAW is a positive reference about it, and why?
please be as objective has you can. I ask this because i am not sure if cubase is that much oriented for EDM and seems slow to adapt to EDM needs and so i assume EDM producers is not a big focus on Steinberg Strategy and so i don’t know if i am in the right DAW.
IMO: Automation is too simplistic in cubase (specially everything that is related with the Y Axis of automation), a good reference is FL Studio which creates automation parts with it’s own editor and has formula controller to relate/ modulate different knobs the way we want. I don’t remember how it deals with the Y Axis because i have used it like 12 years ago, so it might not be a good reference.
Edit: 0) Just learned of an issue that, if true, will be at the top of my list: Sample accurate automation! Appearently, sound card buffer size changes, change where automation aligns, slightly. If so, yikes!
-
Number one feature: Stability when projects get large – they will. No excuses, no finger-pointing, just do whatever it takes to treat 5gb+ projects a like first class citizen.
-
Cubase needs more than 6 freezable inserts. Period. (And it needs more than 2 post-fader inserts.)
Sidebar / TL;DR: [This is not debatable. If you don’t produce electronic music I don’t wanna hear the mantra that 6 is enough for your recorded guitar – it is. I don’t wanna hear that more effects are bad engineering practices, they’re not for newer dance genres that require extreme sound design. If you do produce electronic music and make this claim, I need to hear a link to your work and it better be of commercial quality and something modern and fresh one might imagine being sold in reasonable quantity on Beatport. A simple ambient track does not count. If you do, and it is, then please explain your workflow and I bet it involves lots of bouncing of audio. My argument revolves around not having to do that as much. If you’re a “bouncer,” great, then this feature doesn’t harm you. There, I think I spared this thread from every indie rock guy coming out of the woodwork to proclaim 6 freezable inserts are enough for their overhead drums channel – yes, it is. In fact, 3 inserts are probably enough. 
]
-
Batch freeze/unfreeze. And its own “Settings Menu” like Render In-place has, so that one button (on, say, a surface controller) will perform the operation based on options set in its settings menu; i.e., no annoying dialog box / workflow stopper.
-
Render In-place needs:
a) Pre-fader option.
b) A Disable Track that disables all plugins (even post-fader inserts) and that doesn’t cause crashing in subsequent freeze operations (a confirmed bug) and it also needs a menu item for it under Project so that it can be hardware surface controller initiated
c) A feature / option that remembers its first audio clip it bounced and will automatically replace it (and all its shared copies) on subsequent renders. Basically, make a change and have it automatically reflected across the entire project where that share audio clip exists.
-
Ability to rearrange frozen tracks. And unlike Studio One’s implementation, it shouldn’t flatten shared copies during the process. That’s a destructive, lossy process that entirely defeats the purpose of its championed reversibility.
-
Add a feature to Track Versions that incorporates Automation. Without it, it’s useless to us. We use automation on every track.
-
Remote Device Editor needs to not be tied to the “ordinal position” of channels. Adding a single channel breaks the Remote Device. It should be tied to some internal ID of the channel. This one simple “fix” would make Remote Devices useful again.
-
Automation needs real Bezier curve tools.
-
Better ways to implement VST2 compatible Sidechains, or at least a friendly way to implement the Quad-channels.
-
Options to remove all annoying dialog messages in favor of “Setting Menus” that provide options and defaults. Basically, anything that has a dialog box, that could conceivably be something someone would want similar defaults for, time after time, should be accommodated so that the dialog does not ever pop up (unless the user goes into prefs or settings to disable it or change an option).
-
Better support for Drag-and-drop of samples, MIDI, presets, plugins, etc.
-
A gain plugin. Some of us don’t like to automate faders, use the Trim feature or use VCA fader groups, we just want a gain plugin to automate ourselves. We use freeware plugins, but it would be nice to have a stock one for this.
-
A “audio transporter” plugin with a transmitter and receiver to send audio from anywhere in Cubase to anywhere else (feedback loops and all).
-
An overhaul of the Audio Pool. It’s bright, ugly, needs a better layout, more features and integration.
-
A smarter low-latency-mode feature that allows the user to choose which inserts to power down.
-
A simple way to power off (not bypass, power off) all inserts on a track (not Disable Track).
-
Better ways to multitask and cut and paste between two or more projects. It’s not reliable now and no one with a real project of any size uses this.
-
Better ways to import/export tracks, channels, presets, mixer settings, etc.
All this stuff is really useful for Indie rock drum overheads as well… 
+1
Benji
I’d like more cowbell.
Soundgooderizer
I think it’s more of a question of what it has opposed to what is missing. It has loads. I’ve used them all and I always come back to qbass
then feel free to open a topic if that what your interested to know.
i feel a bit like you in almost every topic, anyway from what you told which ones you think should have priority in being implemented? stability is obvious. .
below average automation
slicing and warp in Arrange
no free routing
poor midi recording
no sync to Mtc with tempo changes
jalcide,
An impressive list of missing things and many of which, I have not noticed as I do not do EDM. However, they are features that I would find very useful. Is there a DAW that does what Cubase does in addition to this list of potential short-comings? And, I ask with great respect and I am not trying to be a wise guy. Thanks.
Thanks. Yeah, my numbers roughly translate to what my personal priority preference would be.
As for stability being obvious. I agree, I’m just trying to send a message to Steinberg, the marketing dept. in particular, that some of us do consider it almost a “feature.”
Each year, marketing puts pressure on development to push out a new version with features they think we the consumer wants (and will pay for). I’m quite sure “stability” is also taken for granted and not on that internal bullet list. As a software developer myself, I think it should be. Stability doesn’t just happen, it needs as much work (if not more) than any feature on a sexy marketing bullet list.
Anyway, it was to drive that point home. 
Cheers.
This, especially.
I’m not sure there is one DAW that does it all, strictly speaking. Most DAWs do most of the items.
Studio One comes darn close to doing them all.
It just has one killer (killer) showstopper that is tragic: it flattens (deletes) shared midi copies during its freeze process (a.k.a. “transform instrument”). So I can’t use it. And Studio One is a crash factory with 5GB+ projects during freeze / unfreeze.
TL;DR:
#1 is something most DAWs struggle with, mostly due to the VST spec being very open-ended (a good thing, but bad for stability). Since Steinberg invented and maintains the VST spec I hold them to the highest standards to set the example. This line-item is mostly a message to Steinberg Marketing that some of us do consider stability a “feature” and would like to see it rise to the level of a marketing bullet on the Cubase packaging, right next to ASIO Guard 2 and similar. Cubase should be the most stable DAW in the world due to their intellectual property rights with ASIO and VST.
#2 All modern DAWs now have unlimited inserts. Many since over a decade ago. The one, other than Cubase, that doesn’t, at least has more than 6 freezable. It’s hard to believe Steinberg invented the VST spec. Their flagship product certainly doesn’t celebrate it. In addition to the late '90s era 8 insert limit, there’s no chainer/manager/UI front-end editor like in Sonar.
#3 - #5 Studio One has covered, except for “c” and with the other exception of the note I make about Studio One. Some other DAWs, too.
#6 is a Cubase-only feature.
#7 Many other DAWs do this better. The best implementation is in Studio One, which does it perfectly.
#8 I think all (or most) DAWs do this now. Cubase is the only one in the dark ages with lack of Bezier.
#9 Most DAWs do it better.
#10 Most DAWs are less chatty with modal dialogs that you have to dismiss away. Especially for things like Freeze, it’s maddening. Studio One does batch freeze, no questions asked.
#11 All DAWs do this better.
#12 I think most DAWs have a gain plugin.
#13 Bitwig does it.
#14 All DAWs are better with their audio pools.
#15 Not sure on this one. I haven’t tried to use it in other DAWs. I just know that it’s not very helpful in Cubase’s implementation. It always seems to bypass the plugins needed and not bypass ones that could be.
#17 All the major DAWs do this better.
#18 Not sure on this one.
Cubase really needs subgrouping of the Cue Sends.
I use Cubase IC Pro and one of it’s main purpose is to give the performer the ability to control the headphone mix. Unfortunately, it can’t be used for that, due to a badly thought out design.
The problem is twofold:
There is no way to lock out the performer from having access to the transport controls. But that’s an issue for the IC Pro forum.
The second is that the performer is forced to juggle around far too many faders. It’s unrealistic to ask a performer to balance hundreds of channels, and at the same time concentrate on singing (or playing an instrument). Letting the performer balance the headphone mix has been quite common in major studios since the 70’s. However, that doesn’t mean that a second 120 channel SSL 4000 series mixer is dragged into the studio. The cue sends on the main control are pre-mixed in to a small number of groups. These are then fed to, say, an 8-channel mixer in the studio.
This problem could easily be corrected in Cubase with the introduction of subgrouped Cue Sends. The performer could then be given control of these (8) groups in IC Pro, instead of hundreds of tracks directly.
Another advantage that dedicated Cue Mixers with vertical faders could provide were they also to be forseen with VCA faders. 
I had to actually look up what EDM means…
I’m proud that I didn’t know…it’s on par with knowing all of Justin Biebers songs
I suppose for EDM, you’d be better off with Garage Band & Fruity Loops, than Cubase.
A bunch of these guys make a lot of money, to each their own…
Plus, it’s really difficult to do well. 
Peace,
Benji
So does Justin Bieber.
Touché!
I love the feature list.
As a sort of hybrid guy, I agree, and don’t always realize the conveniences I’m missing from not having these things. You kinda just find a way to make it happen.
I like that Cubase doesn’t force me into thinking EDM. It’s wide open and I have to make it what I need. I’m always limited, but I can always find a way. I think it keeps me creative and unpredictable.
But yes, these features are needed. I don’t and will never use a program like Live or Bitwig. I think they encourage a particular style of music.
better midi editing and piano roll mesh that i don’t have rack my brains about what I’m seeing. reintroduction of DX support