Is Cubase getting old?

Before I begin, I must say, Ver 10 is stable for me, almost no crashes and I grateful for that.
The new Vari Audio is definitely an improvement.

So… forgive me my moaning, here I begin:

After version 9 I’m slowly started to get the feeling like Cubase is getting “old and tired”

Feels like after all these years its code became messy and complicated. Feels like developers struggling to work with it, fixing one thing and breaking another. Or not fixing some bugs at all, because they afraid ruining the whole thing.

Cubase used to be innovative DAW but not anymore.
Looking at new features it feels like more time is spent on makeup rather then “physical health”. Just for the sake of extending “What’s new” list.

Feels like “Younger” daws have more energy, cleaner, easier to work with code and because of that having more innovations.

What are the biggest additions?

  • 64bit blah blah - how much do you need it now and do you or our clients actually hear the difference? They say it’s a future-proof feature, I bet when we start using it we’ll meet some fancy bugs.

  • auto align - work unreliably, its align results are the worst among available auto align tools. Reaper for example has this feature for centuries it works like a charm and aligns much better.

  • new skins for the old plugins… how good is that? OK even if it was something we all needed badly, but even here, not all plugins got reskinned! I’m not gonna ask, how many people use native Cubase plugins when there are so many superior 3d party alternatives.

  • MixConsole snapshots - good but unreliable, because it doesn’t affect automation and potentially can bring the mess to the project

  • new channel strip - better say “reskinned”, nothing new is added, sound remains the same.

  • Easy Sidechaining - it is easy indeed, however several times I encountered bugs when the wrong sends were created and I had to do everything in old fashion. I guess we need to wait for Cubase 11 when it’ll work as expected.

  • Full support for high-resolution displays - how can you call it FULL when you say limited support for Windows 10 :confused:

  • Direct offline processing - while it’s good and stable for me, I see many reports that it is still buggy other users.

…that’s just to name a few.

My Cubase 10 impressions are like Steinberg hired new programmers who don’t know anything about the workflow and they started to change things that needed no changes bringing them in the clumsy area. Think of the new Export window or the Right Click menu… the list can go on and on, there are several threads about it here already.

The question is why I’m still using it (since SX3 btw)?
Because I hope I’m wrong and things will change with the next update.
I really hope I’m wrong.

Cheers

I use them all the time, since 3rd party plugins can be a) very resource hungry and b) too expensive.

Get to know them. Don’t fall for some marketing hype whose only purpose is to get your money.

The users are older for sure.

Cubase is fine, but by all means go check out the other, “younger” DAW’s like I did and you’ll be back in Cubase’s arms in no time…

yea, that happened to me as well. I tried to switch to the Studio One, have no time to learn something new.

i have the opposite experience tbh, cubase 10 came with a noticeable performance boost for me

So much of your post is your feeling. Theres absolutely nothing steinberg can do about the way you feel.

You want innovation but you ignore the elements of cubase 10 that are innovative because they’re not relevant to you personally - the 64bit processing precision, the VR/3d sound, the refined vari-audio, the updating of old plugins.

What is it exactly you want? Theres so much fiction and hearsay in your post. You need to be specific with your complaint and write it in a manner that Steinberg can action. Then it becomes useful.

In my view, Steinberg is listening to its users now more than ever and while I don’t think the C10 update is as good a progression as 9 or 9.5… I am excited by the prospect of Steinberg employees in the forum asking what we as users want.

Some parts are old and not changed for decades and are not even that much useful anymore. Other things are modern, like the size. 20 Gb and I wonder how much of that is never used by 99.9 percent of the users. Reaper is about 600 MB if I understand that correctly. They are adding stuff, but do they adding value?

1 Like

There are a lot of people who have used cubase for years so don’t want radical changes that change the way of working. If I wanted a totally different way of working I would ditch cubase and move elsewhere. I think they have it about right at the moment and I guess at some point there will be a big overall as there has been in the past.

I am in total agreement with MKOK. People ask me all the time why I use Cubase instead of ProTools and my answer is that I started with Cubase 1 and have stuck with it all these years. Why even TRY to take on a whole new environment when the one I am in suits me just fine.

Yes, exactly this. Browsing through the “feature requests” section, most of the threads I see are requests that are in (or similar to) Pro Tools or Studio One or DP, etc, etc. It’s very disheartening to me because I switched to Cubase over a decade ago due to features and workflow no other DAW had. I truly hope Steinberg does NOT change functions or workflows because I feel they will lose their veteran users.

Unfortunately, I also feel the same a little. I love Cubase, is has been the most innovative DAW in the world. They invented the VST format, ASIO, Eucon and have had a fresh alternative for comping tracks, saving and browsing presets, hiding tracks and midi learn and hardware support. The best features over the last 10 years have been the comp tool, group editing, variaudio, the mix console, the mixer undo button and the new snapshots. Snapshots are cool but that was my idea that I posted on the forum a year or so ago under ‘mix versions’. Where are the new innovative ideas. This versions was a little more catch up. They do need to play catchup to the other DAWs and in fact, they should probably even catch up in a few more areas but it would be nice to see some new mind blowing innovation from themselves.

Here is an example. This is my idea of mind blowing. 16 Step, 808 style, Step Sequencer Track integrated in arrangement window, who wouldn’t love that? https://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=285&t=150050

1 Like

The Reason for me Cubase 9 and 10 are OLD, because there are still a lot of windows and menu’s that do not have the Modern Looks. I exepected that to clear more in Cubase 10. Ok improved GA5 and Improved C10. Still when i went to Cubase 9 and now 10, i expected the new look into menu’s / options and midi functions windows etc. Still a lot of menu’s windows options or functions in the menu or shortcuts are looking very old.

Cubase is not getting old, but Steinberg can set a task to finally get rid of the old stuff or improve it to the new look.

Comparing to other DAWS is useless. There are so many things Cubase has that no other daw has. But who am I to say this… If this DAW doesn’t work for you, don’t use it. Plenty of users here won’t dare to touch other DAWS. Steinberg is listening to it’s users. Maybe not what you want. It’s bigger than your feelings…

what’s weird is those little things that have changed for no reason.
For example CTRL+click on the track to choose the color no longer functioning. What kind of update is that?
and that’s just one example, there are many of those, have a look at other threads here.

That what makes me think they have no full control over their DAW development.
If you never used those features that gone or went wrong and buggy then you have no reason to complain.

1 Like

While I agree with some of this, I strongly disagree with not implementing improvements that would make workflow faster. There is not a single thing wrong with wanting to make Cubase as fast as possible, and there are some things that are inarguably faster workflow-wise in other DAWs that would benefit Cubase hugely while 100% maintaining what we all love about it. It’s not about personal taste in this case – if something can be done with less clicks and navigation then it’s simply faster and more efficient, and every user will benefit while working on the DAW that we all love.

Yes, of course - I am 100% in agreement with you about faster workflow. :slight_smile: What I meant was taking what already works and is fast and changing it “just because”. An example of this is my argument about the “record in editor” button added in the Key Editor. To me, that was a step backwards in workflow because now you need to hit a 2nd button (apart from record enabling the track) if you want to record any MIDI data to a region while the editor is open.

Do I feel there can be quicker ways of doing functions Cubase already has? Again, yes I do. I am all for less mouse clicks, more key commands, more menu options, etc. But not at the expense of radically changing what Cubase always has been to be like another DAW.

Agreed! :slight_smile: And yes, anything that adds unnecessary clicks or navigation is a mistake (your example and the new Export Audio window mistake are great examples of this).

First of all I love the new interface of cubase 10. It’s so clean and easy to manage. I love the new drag and drop icon options. It’s fast and easier to find plugins with the icons. The resolution is also much sharper and looks great. I’m happy

I am happy that Steinberg is trying to streamline the workflow process, but, every time they change the workflow process, it slows down MY workflow process until I can memorize the new workflow and use it without having to think about it. Kind of like learning the words to a song and being able to perform it without thinking about what the words ARE. Adobe pulls the same thing with Photoshop all the time and it is aggravating at times. All in all, I have great appreciation and respect for what the Steinberg team has accomplished over the years.