Feature suggestion: More extensive track presets

Steinberg, please consider expanding the “track preset” capability to include ALL elements of a track. Imagine when saving track presets if we could choose from a list which elements are saved. For example (input buss, output buss, input level, phase, insert FX, send FX, panning, fader level, inspector information, track notepad, automation, etc, etc, etc). Also, there could be an option/check box to instantly CHECK ALL of the elements at once. If all were checked at once, it would be the equivilant of “clone track” (copying EVERYTHING), except it’s done through track presets.

REASON THIS FEATURE IS NEEDED? SEE THIS THREAD:
https://www.steinberg.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=23236

This would save me a ton of work - and I imagine it would do the same for many other people with the same issue.

+1

I agree, this would be nice to have.

Nice idea maybe but wouldn’t it be nice to find out what Cubase does rather than look for things it can’t do?
At this rate we’ll get a Cubase that does everything for us. You have to have something that’s worth charging clients for. :mrgreen: Otherwise they will think they can do it all themselves (and maybe they do). :mrgreen:
Pencils and paper are still stocked in some shops I hear. They haven’t got a manual but you can write symbols down to describe the tracklist. :mrgreen:
Which might save the programmers 2 years thinking time and three years programming these “easy” features and fixes.

I have yet to see anyone ask for Cubase to have a feature for making studio logs, financial records and billing features which is what all PROs would love to have to save the real work.

You probably forgot Conman but not all people who use Cubase are the engineer type.

Mutesolo,

Please ignore Conman. He’s always commenting against anything that would improve Cubase, especially if it doesn’t apply to him (which is most of the time). Talk about selfishness and not being receptive to other people’s wants, only his :confused: .

Did you read the thread explaining the need for this feature? You seem confused. I’ll summarize the reason I think this would be a great feature:

_We have 12 projects we are working on. Each project has “temporary” drums programmed with MIDI and samples. Now, a real drummer is coming into studio to overdub real drum parts into existing projects (to replace the temp MIDI and sample drums). For each song, he will have the exact same microphone and input setup - 16 tracks and 16 microphones.

Anyway, on the 1st project, all of the drum tracks are named… they are all routed to the correct input and output channels. They all have notes in the “track notepad” describing the exact position of the mic, and the microphone that was used. How do I now copy all 16 tracks with all information into the next song so it is immediately ready to record drums as well?_

Someone in the other thread suggested using “track archive” which I will try later today… Still, regarding track presets: Is there a reason they should only save a few elements of a track? Wouldn’t it be more helpful if they could save EVERYTHING, or if we could pick and choose what elements are saved?

Someone in the other thread suggested using “track archive” which I will try later today.

Export selected tracks/Import track archive is perfect for your needs. Input & output routing, naming, notepad, inserts, groups & routings can all be exported & imported with a couple of clicks.

There are a couple things to watch…You can’t choose to exclude audio so maybe copy your tracks (or save project under a different name) & delete any audio first. And if you have sends to FX channels set up you should check their activation & destination routing as this doesn’t transfer. (Not sure if the FX channel is included in the archive…perhaps it does?)

The track archive feature actually works pretty well… it doesn’t seem to be importing routings though. All of the other important information seems to transfer. This is good enough for me to get the songs set for now. Thank you for the help!

Hi

Another workaround would be to start those project right.
Right at the start i would configure all lanes with inputs i need later safe this as a project template later just start again with this template do midstuff and wavs till you overdub it. In the end i will have my 12 tracks with already everything i need later to overdub. And had only once to configure those input. OR? Did i get it wrong?

Greetz Bassbase

Obviously you pay attention to what’s going on in the “bass” department.

No matter how many presets Steinberg put in none of them will be a proper starting point for your personal workflow in my opinion. You develop your own templates over time based on how you like your tracks set up for various types of projects with the plugins you most favour. Most of Steinbergs templates involve the built in EQs and compressors etc that are frankly never up to the job

That would work if I knew back then exactly how many channels I would need, and what mics would be on each channel, etc. How would I know that though until the drummer got his kit over here, and until he brought the mics, and we experimented to find the sound we wanted?

I had to figure all of that out afterward. Anyway, the track archive function worked beautifully… It didn’t take me nearly as long as I had thought. Cubase is awesome… It is working amazingly well for me lately.

It accounts for little at the end of the day because they are simply empty tracks that you can put in folders or leave in place since when a problem of project compatibility comes to the fore, you need to manually copy content, otherwise import with the latter method often being more trouble.

+1 definitely

I am redesigning my workflow and want to use MediaBay as a central way of involking saved track presets of instruments that are often used. But I have a base Cubase template with a reverb bus, for example. I want to have each track preset remember its respective reverb bus send, but this meta info is not saved in track presets. I am looking for a simple workaround to this now, not assuming this feature will ever be addressed.

Same here! Who knows, maybe this is a coding nightmare, but it would be so nice to see this implemented in Cubase 7.

+1 (and then some).

Really would like to see a more robust version of Track Presets. I routinely find myself re-creating input routings from memory (or written notes). Any thing that saves lots of time is exciting in my book, and this would speed-up my workflow every day. It’s not a flashy feature, just a boring and entirely essential one.

Related question - I’ve never been able to get input routings to import reliably from Track Archive .XMLs. That is, track XML’s import their track(s) along with their exported input routings fine - if I import them into their original parent project. But they import with “No input” shown in many other projects I’ve tried (with no rhyme or reason it seems). Any workarounds for this?

We have 12 projects we are working on. Each project has “temporary” drums programmed with MIDI and samples. Now, a real drummer is coming into studio to overdub real drum parts into existing projects (to replace the temp MIDI and sample drums). For each song, he will have the exact same microphone and input setup - 16 tracks and 16 microphones.

Anyway, on the 1st project, all of the drum tracks are named… they are all routed to the correct input and output channels. They all have notes in the “track notepad” describing the exact position of the mic, and the microphone that was used. How do I now copy all 16 tracks with all information into the next song so it is immediately ready to record drums as well?

This is where the “studio engineer” makes notes on PAPER and relies on his mic placement skills. No doubt the same thing has been done a million times before B.C. (Before Cubase) and will be done a million times after.
Cubase sometimes can’t do exactly the same things a Neve desk and Studer tapedeck couldn’t. All it does is make some things easier but not everything. Get real.
Besides it’s historically good to have hard copy on paper and not easily destructive data.

And it’s far easier to have a very simple drum mic set up or just threee or four mics. That way you record the instrument. Close micing also records 90% noise. Less noise, less correction settings.
Best to simplify user approach before making life harder for the equipment programmer. (I know the equipment programmer will agree with that one) :mrgreen:

Who knows, maybe this is a coding nightmare.

Probably hammered the button there.

Probably hammered the button there.

I don’t comment about “improvements”. I comment about suugestions that think they’re improvements.
I don’t comment on anyone else even those who ONLY post to comment about me. :mrgreen:
And posters who state the obvious. Of course I can be ignored. It’s allowed. As I am allowed to be realistic and tell posters why their pet might not be adopted to save them time going around in circles.
Show me the rule that says I have to be a “+1” nodding dog.
And I bump your thread so if it has any merits it’s up there longer.

Even if a suggestion is taken up it would still take weeks to discuss at Steinberg meetings and there would be far more ruthless taking it apart than I ever could.
Don’t be afraid of me. Use me. Comments are useless and insecure. Discussion is healthy. No one wins an argument but everyone wins a good discussion.