I am waiting for the day...

I am waiting for the day when:

  1. Cubase automation can be shown on top of the audio track, instead of having to be opened in a lane below the track.

  2. there is a track selection button, so only the tracks that need to be worked on at the moment are the only ones that need be displayed.

  3. only one plug in window has to be open at a time, and follows to whatever track or mixer channel is selected

  4. audio is automatically created in parts instead of lanes (like VST32)

I sort of like Cubase. I buy all the updates; I want to use it, but the above items of concern (which cause so much extra time in workflow, click open, click open, click open, click open; close; and then do it all over again) forces me back to Digital Performer and Studio One Professional.

The problem is: I mix in the DP, Studio One 2 or Logic then have to import my final audio file back into Cubase to export as mp3. The mp3 files generated by Cubase sound SOOOO GOOD, and the other programs’ mp3 files cannot compare to the quality and size. I can get a very small mp3 file, that sounds SOOO GOOD from Cubase.

Well, until my wish list is answered, I will have to mix in one program, mp3 export in another.

Come on Steinberg…track selection for the window and automation viewable on top of the file are in EVERY OTHER PROGRAM but Cubase.

And, please give me a preference that puts audio in parts…just like midi. It works much better for punches, comping and manipulation.

What will happen on this day you are waiting for?
You will then use the program instead of XYZ that you use now.
Why not use XYZ now and be done with it.
Or does XYZ have something missing as well ?
Perhaps you need bespoke custom made software?

Hippo

I was lurking waiting for the sarcasm to come. I love (reading) the Cubase forum. :mrgreen:

  1. This is kinda like CC Data on MIDI events? Interesting, but how would you be able to determine which parameter is in view?

  2. There is Disable Selected Tracks option. Or, you could minimize the unwanted tracks all the way and deal with the larger ones. Or both. I’m thinking that if you totally removed the tracks from the screen you would totally forget that they were there. Which, you basically have by the Remove Selected Tracks option.

  3. Don’t quite understand this one. Right now, by using AOT, you can have multiple plugin screens displaying at once. How would they follow to their channel? What do you have in mind?

  4. Okay. At what point would you divide the parts?

You really have to think, yes these may be nice FQ’s, but is it really that necessary? Does this meet the needs of the masses? And on at least a couple of these the answer would be a no.

Let me try to help the OP…

Same way you do in the current automation track. You’d have a selector on the track to select envelopes.

  1. There is Disable Selected Tracks option. Or, you could minimize the unwanted tracks all the way and deal with the larger ones. Or both. I’m thinking that if you totally removed the tracks from the screen you would totally forget that they were there. Which, you basically have by the Remove Selected Tracks option.

I think he’s talking about a track list to hide things you don’t want to see and no, you don’t forget that they were there, ask any PT user. :slight_smile:

  1. Don’t quite understand this one. Right now, by using AOT, you can have multiple plugin screens displaying at once. How would they follow to their channel? What do you have in mind?

I think what he means is having the plugin UI window optionally follow (change with ) the track selection. In the case he’s talking about, anything in the plugin chain can be reached directly from the one window. In Cubase, not really, so that wouldn’t really fit with the current design, to have it follow. You’d still have to go to the mixer or inspector to get to another plug in the chain.

So… yeah, that wouldn’t work here.

Thanks for the clarification. I guess since I haven’t really used PT, Logic, Reaper, Studio1, etc., it’s hard to follow.

What if you were to group the tracks in a folder and then hide the contents? Wouldn’t that be similar? If the tracks you wanted to hide were already in folders, that could be a problem.

Okay, after the clarification #3 sounds really cool!


So are you sure you don’t mean recorded as an audio EVENT (then able to be managed as audio parts)? I’ve never seen Cubase split it into parts as it’s recorded. Can’t you still work with audio parts in C6 or did the lane system replace that?

Not really, just more choices for what to see, how and when. Cubase will almost certainly add one at some point., a tracklist. It really makes zero sense not to have one and anyone who doesnt want to use it can ignore it by just never opening it.

Okay guys, I go back with Cubase a long, long time.

The year was 1991; I was tired of sequencing on my Roland W30 keyboard workstation, and seeing the little screen display a couple lines at a time of midi information. I ordered a Macintosh LC2 Computer and a Mitsubishi 14 inch monitor. I thought I was in heaven. I went to the Woodwind/Brasswind in South Bend, IN (when it was in the little shop on State Line Road) and purchased Cubase. It was just a midi sequencer then.

I had a Fostex R8 with the optional midi sync controller on top. I would time-stripe track 8 on the Fostex, and link it to Cubase. When I hit play on the computer, the Fostex started moving. When I selected which tracks to record, a control message was sent to the Fostex to put it in record mode.

Yeah, that’s how it was back then. I stayed with Cubase…VST 24, VST 32 (my favorite).

Back in the VST 24 and 32 days, audio was recorded to parts without giving it a second thought. One part was on the track screen, no matter how many lanes were contained inside it. You could punch in and the audio was recorded on lanes under in the part. The bottom lane was the active lane, clip, mute, drag all editing was done in the part, close the part and there you go !!! All the audio was self-contained, just like the midi information is now. It was beautiful !!!


This is what I mean by audio to parts. Now, you have to record the audio, select it all, turn it into a part. God forbid if you should need to make a quick edit. You have to dissolve the part, make the edit, make it all a part again…TOO MUCH WORK FOR WHAT USED TO BE SIMPLE. And the audio was in a container, ready to be moved along the time-line. It was perfect for radio commercial work. If the voice or sound effect needed to be moved, it could be, then edited again if need be, while still all being inside one part. It makes my heart hurt to think how (as my kentucky grandpa used to say) how GOMMED UP it is. Cubase had it right then; They need to go back to when it was right and fix it.

And, selecting which tracks to work on (which ones are visible and which ones are hidden) is a beautiful thing. Saves screen real estate for what you are actually working on at the moment. Studio One and Digital Performer both have this right. Logic has the “hide” button, but it is still more cumbersome than the other two.

And, Studio One Pro 2 has it right as far as the window following the selected track. It is a beautiful thing. Yes, beautiful. In the interface window, select a track, and the open plug in switches to the one that is selected. No need to open and close boxes all the time. The plug in window follows the selection. What a time-saver !!! And at the top of the plug in window insert 1, 2, 3 or whatever can be chosen. They are in tabs at the top of the window.

And, all the DAWs have automation on TOP OF THE AUDIO. In Logic, just click A and the automation pops on top. In Studio One, one click displays the automation and in DP, hold the option key down and select one tracks setting for automation and they all change to that. Brilliant.

But where that can’t hold a candle to Cubase is in the mp3 export. NONE OF THEM SOUND AS GOOD AS CUBASE. Steinberg got this one right. The algorithms are perfect. (Fancy word, I think that’s the term.)

Okay, this is why I take the stand on the things that I do. Just wish I could use one program and get good mp3s. Studio One comes closest. With the integration of Melodyne into the program, it is beautiful. But, Steinberg’s Vari Audio is not shabby at all. It works great and I think they are both better than Auto Tune.

There you go, guys. That’s my reasoning. What do you all think?

From the old guy on the block,

Sam

I just came over from Pro Tools, and I have to say I disagree with everything your saying OP. I like Cubase right now as is over Pro Tools. And I know PT in and out.

OK, I like the idea of the having the EQ/ ‘E’ window open for a track, selecting a different track and having this track’s info take the place of the previous track. Well, if this is what is being suggested?

mr.Roos: That is exactly the behaviour I’m getting with my cc121. If I open the ‘e’ window on a track and select a different track using the cc121, it’ll open the ‘e’ window of the newly selected track. Works great, but I don’t think I’d want that to happen with inserts/sends or VSTi’s. I have quite some screenspace, so how do I determine which plugs I want to see if Cubase keeps closing and opening windows?

erm…
http://www.steinberg.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=17953

In cubase you can use shortcuts and workspaces. Return open/closes the editors. for midi InplaceEditor. I have a simple and fast shortcut for channel setting window etc. e.g.


sorry, there are so many brilliant -> shortcuts in cubase to handle automation!! (ONLY one click=visible/invisible, and so on, e.g.)
I use it a lot, very very fast working!
and please check the automation panel in cubase - great feature, what other daw´s do not have…
http://media.soundonsound.com/sos/feb11/images/Cubase_01.jpg

finally: I think you must learn to deal with cubase, not all the time comparing with other daws.
In cubase are so many great and useful features and shortcuts, that others -> do not have (!)
discover the possibilities. :sunglasses:
BTW: I know and use S1 too, not bad - but drag/drop and dockable windows are not everything… S1 is missing so much…

Cent.

Ask yourself. Is the problem with me? Or Cubase?
Cubase bends over backwards, packs itself with features for everyman to use.
Do you do that much for your art?

Don’t answer me. I don’t need to know.

It is a matter of quick navigation. In Studio one, I only need have one insert channel open. Whatever track I click on, the insert follows. The open insert has tabs at the top to toggle between inserts for that track.

This is what I am talking about. Speed. No reason to open and close box after box. My mixes (track count of about 20 usually) are not huge, but every solution for saving time is needed.

It’s just easier, and quicker. But, I love the mp3s that are so high quality. I will continue to use it if just for that.

Tell me more about cc121. I would like it to follow open inserts.

Also, guys, share with me any time savers for automation. I am open to any suggestions. It’s why I post here.

I’m not dissing Cubase. I’ve owned it since 1991. I’ve worked it for 20 years now. I’m still open to learn.

Like I said, the cc121 opens the channel settings of the selected track, where you can view the channel EQ, inserts, sends and fader. It doesn’t actually open all those plugin windows though. (I’m glad it doesn’t).

Look at workspaces like Centralmusic said, it’s not exactly the same but it’ll work just as fast once you set it up.

Really? Forces you? EVERY OTHER PROGRAM? Now … give me a break!

  1. audio is automatically created in parts

Never again, please! I don’t need those stupid parts. I don’t want them! Those parts were what kept me recording my audio-only projects on Cool Edit Pro during VST period. I cursed those parts for “forcing” me to use CEP. I cursed those parts while working with mixed MIDI/audio projects in Cubase.

Do you set up a key command to that controller?

The automation select-ability. Yes, it is a huge time saver.

I really do not like to have those lanes open under the track. it is double the screen real estate for no reason.

And, the parts…how beautiful…to have all the audio contained in a group. Made it great for doing radio commercials that required lots of punches to get little kids parts, sometimes splitting at a word…to work out and sound like phrases.

I loved it.

Actually, that’s the behavior he was talking about, what the “e” window does now, but not just with the “e” window, with the actual plugin UI window. But again, it wouldn’t work here because Cubase’s plugin windows are singular… they only show one plug in the chain, you’d still have to seek out the other plugs in the chain from elsewhere.

Example: One Plugin UI open. Not only is it open but every plug in the chain is directly accessible there. Not only are plugs directly accessible there, but they can be re-ordered from there. Now… you’re working on a song with 70 tracks. With that preference “On”, every time you select a track, the plugin UI reflects it’s plugs, you don’t have to go looking for them, they’re always there, in the same UI window, ready to be tweaked.

If you don’t want that to happen, don’t turn the option on. If you want one to persist by itself, pin it down. Really simple and really effective as relates to the elusive and subjective idea of “workflow”.

Here’s the overview… let’s try to stay focused…

Cubase is an exceptional workstation. It really is. One of the best ever. However… its UI methods are lagging behind in many ways… things that they’ve suggested will be improved in the next major version cycle… which is great. But talking about them now - before they actually do them - might be useful?

People talk about things like Studio One in comparison not because it’s a better overall workstation than Cubase, it’s not… Cubase is much more powerful… but because it’s UI methods are much, much better (as a clearly factual matter) and they want some of that in the thing they love. Not sure why that’s an issue.

We can discuss it intelligently… perhaps to the benefit of all… or we can be uber-sensitive about it and throw straw. You can - if you are talented - make great music in any software. That’s hardly the point. The point is trying to improve the thing you already love and prefer using.