Mac doesnât have zoom? On PC âWindowsâ+â+â is zoom in. Use it all the time for super old VST plugins
On every other DAW, you simply use the scroll wheel to scroll the mixer. In other DAWs there is no need to drag an impossibly tiny scroll bar. There is no need to hover over a microscopic scroll region. There is no need to first zoom the display before you can scroll the mixer. With other DAWs there is no need to go to the feature requests forum and explain that the mixer should be easily scrollable.
Oh I thought you were talking about the points selector in the poll⌠I thought this was a thread about a poll
ooops. I only picked 3. There was others but they didnât get mentioned so not on list.
Might want to account for minorities of users who use niche features that not as many Cubase users use.
For instance. "Do You Work ITB or OTB/Both?
Anyone who works OTB with analog hardware will agree External FX needs to be improved, but Iâm assuming there is a much larger user base of people working exclusively ITB, so the voting numbers might show that no one seems to care about External FX, when there is a very important professional/commercial user group that does, and are also probably too busy to be keeping their eye on the forums to see this poll.
My most wanted âfeatureâ was not on the list:
Make volume and panning accessable directly in the project window - like Logic and Protools.
In Cubase you to have to select the track first and then via the inspector adjust volume and panning.
Yes, this. 500 times everyday. The most infuriating thing about Cubase. Forget all the other new features, Iâd pay ÂŁ100 just for this.
Make Cubase and Wavelab (when the user buys both) the PLUGINS available for both Cubase and Wavelab.
For instance the Frequency EQ, you cannot use it in WavelabâŚ
The Master Rig from Wavelab, cannot be used in Cubase.
The Reason is : I made a whole project tracks in Cubase 10 with Frequency and save presets, i mind i could use Frequency in Wavelab.
I was wrong, the plugin Frequency cannot be used in wavelab.
Quess what : Fabfilter Pro Q2 works in Cubase and Wavelab and i can use the saved presetsâŚ
That is kind of sick that i have to use other plugins from other manufacturors.
And set aside Steinberg Plugins that work only under Cubase 10 or Only under Wavelab 9.5âŚ
I am a believer you buy Cubase 10 and Wavelab 9.5, you surely could use PLUGINS in both software.
But instead, this is not the caseâŚ
I was kind of surprised as well that this wasnât mentioned. There are a lot of things missing that I get as requests on a regular base. I would suggest that we do these kind of polls every couple of month. We could keep the top 25 items and exchange the bottom half with new items.
It would be nice if we were able to see the poll results as they come in. I know other sites I use have polls that do this and you see it on the web page.
My most wanted âfeatureâ was not on the list either:
Please bring back the resizable right-click toolboxâŚ
(It needs less mouse movement while editing with two shorter rows in stead of one long row. I canât get used to it and stick on Cubase 9.5 although I bought 10)
Thatâs a very good idea. Hope you can make it happen. 
Regards 
Now thereâs an idea ⌠license each major feature individually so we pay only for those features we need.
- Everyone gets a basic Cubase for free, on whatever platform they want â Windows, Mac, Linux, iOS, Android, cloud
- If a feature is available for that platform, you buy a license to use it
- Licenses could be time-limited ⌠if you only need a feature for a month, you rent it
mixing. all three mixers can be used without sharing global settings
eg mixer 1 input busses meters set to input
mixer 2 meters set to other than what mixer 1 and three are âŚ
thanks for the chance to voice my wish
T 
No. Very bad. Youâd need to pay as much (or more), but for less features.
And it would also take resources to develop this system, giving you even less in the end.
Thatâs something thatâs useful for pro users to have a quick workflow. But I donât think home users have it highly prioritized.
The time window to send requests this time was from friday afternoon until saturday morning. You can then expect mostly home user replies. If this would be published next time, letâs say, on a monday morning, you could probably expect a bit different replies, i.e. a higher share of pro user replies.
I donât think itâs Pro/Home split at all. I think it has more to do with preferences around user workflow and UI. For instance, I keep my tracks in the Arranger very thin as to see as many tracks as I can. And if I need a larger view on a track for editing or something, Iâll toggle the track height with Z. So with very thin tracks, Iâm not going to see volume and pan in the Arranger/Project view.
Now, how do I work like this? Well, it works in conjunction with a mixer thatâs almost constantly docked. Then Iâve got a screenset/keybinding that gets me to full-blown mixer view. All on a wide-screen monitor. The volume/pan adjustments happen either in the docked mixer, or full screen one, and the widescreen eliminates the need for a lot of horizontal scrolling.
So with that type of setup, adding a volume and pan to the Arranger very little value. But I donât begrudge anyone who wants it, and itâs a very common feature in most DAWs. But it wouldnât add much to my particular workflow. I prefer the docked mixer for volume/pan.
You know what I would love to see though? Fully height adjustable mixer channels like Reaper that could display inserts and sends all at once, even when docked! Heck, just give me 4 insert slots and the first send! And if thereâs not enough height, then only show the faders.
functional hidpi
Yes, lots of music professionals are up early every Monday morning. 
Ah yes, the old âsweeping assumption based on zero evidenceâ argument again ⌠