I’ve long wanted this.
I’m aware of 3rd party chainers, and how to do this using multiple channels. It’s just not as fast and organized, and it has all sort of workflow benefits (like, bypassing a pedal emulation chain with one automation lane).
The thing I don’t like about 3rd party chainers, is sustained compatibility, saving presets of the plugins in the chainer is not possible.
Thank you.
This was needed along with assignable macro’s a long time ago.
But i guess waves came to the rescue and gave us studiorack which is solving a lot of issues for me.
Definitely not as flexible as having it on the DAW level, where you can decide to turn inserts into a chain, but still…
Im also waiting to be able to stack my synths together as one with one midi controlling everything to have less mess…
A patcher type device that we can decide at any point to add synths into a stack would be great too…
Steinberg is really behind in this department.
Yes, and I think Steinberg could do better than what Reaper has done here in terms of both features and GUI/UX.
One thing I’d like to see in such a thing, is incremental freezing of inserts, and incremental freezing of Insert Containers. So if you have an insert container in insert 1, you could freeze it, and then continue adding inserts in the next insert slots. There’s no reason this couldn’t happen.
I’d also like to see general insert utilities/tools, akin to Nugen SigMod.
If we could get something that is a combination of Nugen SigMod and Reaper 7 Insert Containers with a better steinberg GUI/UX, that would be amazing.
There is a feature request in this thread:
Only 4 votes so far though - don’t know if it’s possible to add ’Cubase 12’ tag to that one &/or to merge threads?
I’ve been saying it. It’s just a matter of time.
Cubase has 3-5 years left at the current rate of failure.
The lack of understanding what we are asking for vs what they decide to do is incomprehensible.
The current builds are super bloated w/old code that continually breaks with every new update.
I doubt it, Steinberg has a very loyal base of users that will keep buying updates - Cubase, Nuendo, Wavelab, Spectralayers, Cubasis, etc…
I don’t think it’s so much of a lack of understanding as it is just the nature of the business and software. You can go on any DAW forum and see users are asking for stuff they are not getting.
Obviously, it’s not only about what users are asking, as the majority of users have never even created a forum account to ask for anything. And also, some users ask through other methods - email/support, and the new release survey.
And then on top of that, market research, industry trends, new technology/standards (Like MIDI 2.0), etc.
Then you have to factor in the complexity of feature requests - the complexity of coding the feature request just itself, and then the complexity of integrating it into the current code without breaking things. Maintaining backwards compatibility, a plan for forwards compatibility, etc.
And then obviously, Steinberg and Yamaha are a business and want to make a profit, and need to add features that they think will sell the DAW and that might not be what users are asking for.
The Sampler Track is a great example of that - for example, capturing users from FL Studio who want to advance to more of a studio/commercial DAW. And as a user since SX3, I actually love the sampler track addition - it has a rudimentary but immediate usefulness that contributes to my creativity and production.
They have to think about musical genres as well, and how different features appease different genre artists, how big the user base of each genre is using the product.
They have to strike a balance, I actually think they do a pretty good job of balancing feature additions for minority users vs majority users.
If you look at the vote list, you will see that they are listening - for example there was a PLE thread that is very popular, and they did give PLE a makeover and added new features. But PLE users are probably a minority, whereas Sampler Track probably appeases majority production trends.
A lot of users ask for workflow improvements, and there have been some of those in the basic tools.
Cubase is still measurably the best, most feature packed, and advanced DAW. It might seem like Studio 1 and Bitwig have leaped far ahead - but you will see how quickly their feature additions slowdown as the programs become more added onto, more bugs, - Software it’s a complex thing.
It would be great if a mod could combine all threads and votes perhaps.
4+3=7, and I’m sure some other people from the other thread would add some votes as well.