Wow - that is really true?? I am shocked if so. Confirmation?
(BTW, the linked-to thread “does not exist” … what’s that all about?)
Cubase is one of the best platforms for EDM, just ask Deadmau5.
So much of the Beatport stuff sounds, to me, like people rehashing the same material with slightly different branding. I wonder how much of content of those “top tracks” represent the actual creative and engineering work of the posters and how much is just, more or less, re-mixes and even just mash-ups of some other tracks or sounds they purchased or took from the site?
If someone wants specific features, I think there’s a better chance it will be considered by the developers if it presented in the features section as a clearly stated feature or functionality you think is a good idea. Other than that, rather than asking “what is cubase missing,” ask, “how can Cubase do X” More often than not, the latter question will get you closer to what you want to hear in your projects and to get help on how to do it from the people reading and posting on this forum. Good luck.
99% of the “EDM lobbyists” here are EDM hobbyist, looking for the silver bullet to ignite their “career”
All the requests, are “me too” feature requests read on forum posts from other “EDM wannabee experts” and YT tutorials of someone using studio1 or Ableton. It’s the DUPLO of the building blocks, wav percussion loops, midi phrases and soft synth flavour of the week preset packs. “Production” is nothing more than rehashing beatport remixpacks. It’s a copy and paste culture. And the “individual identity” can only be found, by randomly stacking more than 8 plugins and pray for rain.
It’s a nice HOBBY, but these cry babies are NOT relevant for production, get a BEATPORT Top100 #1 position first. THÉN start moaning about inserts, or sample accurate fx. The lack of these “features” are NOT holding anyone back, neither are they critical. If you can’t produce good house or techno with Cubase right now, you should chose a different HOBBY
Not being an EDM producer myself… for balance and discussion… as those people are still paying the same amount for their software, regardless of the end results, how does that diminish their wants/needs or opinions?
I have to admit personally i find most EDM less fun to listen to than a car alarm going off whilst self administering sharp blows to the back of my head with an ice axe, i find dubstep in particular, like being in an MRI machine whilst having a root filling sans anaesthetic 
but that’s not the point, it’s just my own opinion, and we all know what Dirty Harry had to say about opinions … even the most successful producers on the planet started off as a ‘blank slate’ in terms of knowledge and experience, and most of them had their own ‘magic bullet’ moment either creatively or networking wise… some of those hobbyists have gone on to have INCREDIBLY successful careers… most likely more successful than anyone posting on here
In terms of the OP though, it was clearly marked as to what it was relating to, so why knock it?..
The beatport thing does seem to be a bit of a ‘shark feeding frenzy’ when anything original is put up there… never used it myself but i know people who do and spent a bit of time checking the site out myself.
I have been offered a few ‘deals’ from thinly veiled ‘management’ who essentially just want ‘remix fodder’ for their army of ‘remixers’ which is something that appears to go on quite a lot on there.
I do agree, but those requests is NOT what EDM is about. The top 10 EDM productions of 2016 where not dependant om sample accurate FX, or having more than 8 insert slots. That’s more my point, people get hung up on stuff that’s not relevant.
Matjones, LOL, some of those EDM so called “genres” are very annoying.
We do best, I think, when we use what we have, better. That said, there’s naturally nothing wrong with having banks of good equipment and a perfect studio; production spaces are wonderful things.
With Cubase, for me, question is NOT “what is Cubase incapable of doing,” but rather, “how do I go about creating or generating, a sound, an effect, a mix?” , and “oh this again – template.” I think today’s powerful DAWs, like Cubase, offer serious engineering potential to a very wide population. In other words, Cubase is amazing – and so are some of the other top DAWS.
The OP here may have completely valid points to make and good ideas. I just don’t think they were presented so they can be understood clearly. In product development you have “Features and Benefits” So, name the feature or function you want and then describe the benefits it offers. Alternatively, and I think more interesting, is to ask in the forums “how do I do X.Y or Z with Cubase?”
It seems at least some of the top quality “beatport” material is being made, at least in the first iteration, by very creative and highly skilled artists, producers and engineers. Kudos to them, but, with our DAW systems it’s relatively easy to re-hash and mash-up the tracks, hence the huge volume of material being released – some of it sounds like the beep, beep, beep of a truck backing up, some of it’s excellent, interesting music performed by talented artists.
Sameness and being “in genre” seems so confining, but the promise of a “hit” attracts many. Perhaps frustration with not knowing how to “get the hit” is being expressed as “what is the software missing or lacking.” The hits come from the inside, not the software; the software, the studio, the instruments are only tools. This is something I think is well known by many who post and may read these threads here. Take care. 
This is the less abbrasive way of putting it, but yes, below is what it boils down to.
Thanks Raphie, and I’m sure my post isn’t the “last word” on any of this as well.
If someone wants to take a more DJ-like approach to music making, I see nothing wrong with it. Since the old Acid Pro first came out, and really, we could link that back to early MIDI driven synth pop, but, since then, people have made interesting and well-received music in this way. As I see it, Ableton, with its ingenious loop-based production technology is, perhaps, the best choice for making that kind of loop-based music. I’d say Ableton is superior to Cubase in that regard, and there’s a host of dedicated hardware controllers on the market built specifically for use in Ableton.
For example, Michelle Dorrance, the well-known tap dancer and choreographer, has some of her music triggered or linked to samples and loops and there’s a “controllerist” who is using Ableton in some fashion. (Michelle Dorrance Michelle Dorrance - MacArthur Foundation; http://www.hoodline.com/events/the-blues-project-with-michelle-dorrance-toshi-reagon-and-more). Really great stuff she and her company do.
So, is Cubase “missing” that kind of functionality? Not really, Cubase is not intended for that kind of production.
However, I’d have to say that Cubase’s Arranger Track is superior to what Ableton offers (unless I’m just not yet good enough at Ableton). By creating parts and then flattening those into different Arrangements and then, perhaps, creating a new arrangement from that and flattening again, it’s possible to quickly build longer, interesting forms – allowing your music to “boldly go” where no tune has gone before. 
This is exactly my point. Cubase is a lineair focussed sequencer, not a non linear preset pattern or loop trigger
Ableton is perfect for setting up a bunch of loops and trigger them to your liking, but that’s more micro DJ’ing than really composing/writing music. The same with the need to mangle loops with more than 8 inserts and call it sound design. The more mature cubase user would just grab a synth and create it’s own drum patches exactly how he wants them to be. Different tools for different goals.
And that’s my biggest fear, I’m happy Cubase IS NOT Ableton or Studio One or… whatever other flavour of the week daw, that caters for the latest EDM trick of the week YT tutorial.
Let Cubase be Cubase, a DAW that has a workflow and vision legacy that made artists grow and thrive for over 25 years. Don’t let it become a “me too” platform because some teens and tweens just have discovered DAW production and feel they miss “essential features” because they’ve seen it somewhere or read about it somewhere.
It’s not the success one has had from a product that decides if they can talk about what they would like from it.
Generally, I completely agree, but I think both approaches – Ableton Loops vs. Cubase DAW – can generate interesting, original, and – with a lot of hard work, luck and passion – commercially successful music of good quality. There’s always been huge amounts of trash that the public seems to love, and lots of great music and sound goes unnoticed or under-appreciated. This goes back to the days of Franz Liszt, one of the original “shredders,” and probably forever.
While user-requested features may have gone undeveloped for years, those same users continue to use Cubase and update with some regularity as new versions are released. My hope is that Cubase develops with an eye on offering tools that offer (equal order) 1) musically relevant features, 2) more refined engineering capability (whatever that may be). 3) stability and reliability.
Thanks for you thoughts, Raphie. Reading the forums helps me use the product better and pick up new techniques and ideas. So, yes, by all means, let Cubase be Cubase and not this week’s special flavor. For me, it’s not “what is Cubase missing?” it’s “how might I make better use of what Cubase offers?” Take care for now.
I suppose the question should be more tailored towards what do you do in Cubase that you need to use a 3rd party VST for, that you couldn’t do with one featured.
Exactly! That’s what I miss in the topics as well, these requests are for the sake of argument and lack vision.
I would much rather discuss “I’m trying to get to such and such, how can I do that in Cubase?”
Multiple automation is definitely needed ,especially when doing multiple takes are used!! And maybe a low latency mode like mentioned before ,perhaps loading project in memory like ,yea I’ll say it pro tools…but for the most part runs really good ,I have been asking for multiple automation passes for ever…a must…oh yea I would like also to have mixer snapshots for experimenting with different mixes,instead of using different saved versions
mixing snapshots! now that’s something I can relate to and would consider useful.
As far as mixing goes cubase does it very well,there is almost nothing I can’t do ,and plus mixing with external hardware as well as plugins is the tits,I would like to see mixer snapshots thou,instead of saving to 2nd version ,like 1 project with abilities to load different mixes would rock !! I usally do like 3 or 4 mixes on a song just to try different effects variations.and mutes on instruments in different places in the song
Sorry for the double…but multiple automation passes a must have,just use track versions,duplicate track version and make new pass or have option to use old automation
+1 for mixer snapshots!