Key Edit functions (controller lanes)

No doubt the Key Edit window in Cubase is the best tool available for editing MIDI and no other program can match it but as good as it is, coming to use it nearly every day some things seem quite lacking mainly in the area of modifiers but also around general operation such as how it is presented when opened for first time, that is when no other editors are open.

Why is it that you are presented with Velocities, as if they are so important they take precedence over all other possible controllers? Also why is the last option presented for any key edit window and it is not track specific?

In another post I was told not to use Main Volume for changes in relation to notes and I’ve taken that on board for the future when I must split notes from chords into distinct midi channels (tracks) so as to be able to modify their respective volumes relative to one another for a single instance of a multi-timbral instrument with multiple copies of each instrument loaded.

What I’d like is to have Main Volume, or alternatively the Expression controller lane shown instead of Velocity, and I know it (velocities) look pretty and all but they are not always what I want to edit immediately and sure I could get C6 or Artist and use the list editor but what if I don’t want to spend that kind of cash when it’s Steinberg who should be innovating?

Because innovation by other workers costs money. Your own innovation is free. Mostly.
If another hundred or so posted wanting the same features I’m sure it would be considered.

Doesn’t each track will remember it’s CC lane configuration in the Key Editor?

Or am I not understanding what you’re after?



Yes, Note Velocity is the first parameter, whch is displayed in the Key Editor. This is logical. Lots of people doesn’t work with MIDI CC. But almost everyone needs to know velocity of all notes. You can change it very easy. And save it in your own Template, for example. I’m using more then 1 line of the MIDI CCs, displayed together.

The Main Volume restriction of using it to the whole MIDI channel, doesn’t affected by Cubase. This is MIDI restricition. This standard was invated in 1982, yo know… Conversely, Cubase can solve this by using Note Expression. And the Main VOlume (CC7) vs Expression (CC10), this is MIDI “issue” too. But you can use the MIDI7 as Expression too.

As I wrote, you can change the first line very easily. No problem here.


Hey all,

To begin, when a part has no controller lane open, to set one up of course it starts with Velocity and part of what I’m saying is I don’t think it should. In fact I’d personally rather have Main Volume, (preferences are best of course) as that means I can make the initial setting and move on without even having to consider something like using List Edit.

While some aspects of the controller lanes are remembered, such as how many are present in a particular part, what exactly they are, are not, as what was last used takes precedence here and while that is understandable to me it does not make any more sense than the program starting with Velocity when a controller lane is first opened.

One other thing I’d like to see is when changing the value of a single Main Volume change in real time, that you can use a modifier to test how loud it is, as would be in the audio world, ie a true continuous controller.

Hope I’m making some sense.

If I know, all DAWs make MIDI Notes Velocity as first option in the Key Editor, or Piano Roll, or similar editors. Logic does, Digital Performer does, Pro Tools does, Sonar does, Studio One does…

Velocity Shift in the MIDI Modifier is independent on the Volume. This is intention of the Velocity Shift, I think. For testing of Velocity (or any parameter/automation) changing, I would like to use lanes of MIDI CCs, or of automation. Or alternatives (like it is in the Logic, but alternatives are not for automation), or Takes (these are great in the Digital Performer, which is the only one DAW, which can do this, I think – trying different automation curves on one track). In the Cubase, you can Duplicate the track, mute the old one, and try the different version on the duplicated track. But this is not so efficient as Takes is.


Hi Martin,

I understand VST Expressions’ potential but alas my sample library cannot support it.

I will eventually do exactly what you have been educating me about in relation to multiple tracks of MIDI for the same instrument (or using separate channels in the same track) but I am hoping that SB will eventually do something about the Editors in order to make them more flexible, as the last overhaul did not change much in the way of basic functionalities.

For example, when you open the editor and no notes are selected, why present velocity? When I click on a single note it would be nice to show velocity rather than whatever the current controller lane is and I know you can have multiple lanes but I guess being a poor musician/producer it is difficult to even find money for a new monitor let alone a recent version of cubase.

In addition I don’t mind having to re-edit Volume changes or continuous controllers since multiple automations can be selected at once and manipulated but more work can be done in this area as I stated in another (ridiculed) post.


I don’t agree. OK, lets say, this could be option. But It has sense to display MIDI CCs values, when I clik on one note either.

Look at this example. I switch on the Auto Select Controlers button, because I want to select all controllers, when I select notes. I want to increase Expression of one note. So I click to one note. Expression MIDI CC is select together, and I can increase the line immediately on the whole note. I don’t need to select, or set any more parameter. Just so easy. In this case, it has sense to display MIDI CCs values even though I’m selecting just one note. Isn’t it?


Forums are great for discussion but as always I leave the specifics to the great Steinberg company for consideration and potential implementation.

Needless to say, I am finding myself unable to work in my now obsolete Cubase Studio 5, simply because Steinberg did a reasonable amount of innovation in the area of manipulating controllers, all I am saying is it could go further and become more intelligent which I believe you understand but as you’re an expert I must defer to you.

Cheers and thanks for participating in my threads.