LFO & other modulation sources to drive automation

Big +1 let’s steal from what bitwig does so well. Cubase would be unstoppable.

I wonder if the lack of modulation is a design philosophy issue. For example, are there creative arguments against automating our modulation?

Regarding this topic, we can now modulate external CC data with UVI Falcon 3.0
Of course this requires careful routing, mapping, etc. It’s been a headache mapping it to Arturia’s software.

In my example, I’m sending CC73 and CC74 from Falcon to Pigments. Then I’m automating the speed of the CC LFOs that you can see in Nuendo.

1 Like

Yes Cubase really miss a powerfull modulating system comparing to other DAW. I can really imagine like having a new space in the lower zone where you can add modulations modules (lfo, random, envelope follower, remap) and then assign it to any touched parameter. Then also having like a filter for only seeing lfo’s or let’s say modulations applied on the bass track. It would be a game changer !

3 Likes

The fact that I just spent a hour reading a thread addressing this over 3 years ago and still nothing has been done is honestly so disrespectful. Everyone asks for it, pays obscene amounts of money…… and we get a shapebox flop and some reskins……siiiick :clap:t4:

2 Likes

I have to stay with Cubase for work but returned to Ableton Live (11) last week for my personal projects after years of not using it. Oh man, I felt like I moved from a scooter to a space rocket :wink:
Modulation and automation are so efficient there, it’s crazy. I forgot that it’s possible to work that fast. Cubase now feels like a turtle in comparison.

The only minus of Ableton is that max4live devices are very CPU and RAM hungry so even using just several LFO devices can quickly raise the CPU usage more than it should (as I can’t imagine basic LFO to be really that much demanding process these days).

Live 12 seems to catch up with Cubase for the piano roll tools and even went beyond that in some places.

If not for other Cubase features that I need for work I think that I would abandon Steinberg’s ship after all those years, especially after C13 and its GUI that I can’t stand.
It feels bitter but it is what it is.

2 Likes

I’m excited for Ableton 12. I might make the switch, too. I’ve never liked their piano roll much at all and I’m very, very heavy on the MIDI. And yeah, totally agree about what was said above about MIDI Learn: it should be industry-standard everywhere, and me, I like the super simple right-click “MIDI learn, MIDI forget” variety the best to this day. Bitwig is way ahead of the game with their modulation system and I wish this were more widely adopted: there’s simply no good reason why not.

Whole genres were birthed by using tools the “wrong” way, like the TB-303 birthed acid house. Amazing that it takes the industry so long to catch on to this and the old school devs have been so resistant to change. I’m glad competition is so hot in this space recently. It’s clearly making some people some money, and the plugin market has absolutely exploded, arguably saturated! I know I have far too many, so I’m only going for covering niches these days: no more esoteric compressors or “warm” EQs: I have plenty.

1 Like

Agreed. I’ve been testing the beta. You’re not going to be disappointed. The midi roll definitely catches up and for certain types of workflow now easily surpasses. You’ve been able to invert with the click of the button for years so that’s already +1.
Cubase still number 1 lol. When you add up vari-audio + chord track and many other things. For me at least I can’t live without.
Plus this new “mixer” is just a graphic rejig. It’s not a “real” mixer sadly. I wish there was one that this what the other does. Imo if Ableton and Cubase joined. That would be the perfect DAW

2 Likes

Hey, anyone else need a dedicated LFO tool to control native and 3rd party plugin/synth parameters in Cubase? Ableton has it, Logic has it, FLstudio has it. It’s really handy and tbh I can’t think of any reason why we still don’t have it in Cubase 13. Of course we can use the MIDI Auto LFO plugin, but it’s so poor in functions, and so cumbersome to configure. For example you can’t control the LFO rate by another LFO, you can’t map the LFO rate to MIDI CC, you can’t hear it working until you hit play.
It should be as easy as:

  1. Add an LFO tool anywhere as a plugin.
  2. Map the source to any parameter by a “Map” or “Learn” function.
  3. Done.
    No over-complicated routing. No “impossible mappings”. No searching for a free MIDI channel.
    DAW makers should boost our creativity, not kill it with software dead-ends and loose-ends.

It’s not 2007 anymore - people expect basic DAW functions to be there and work, especially that LFOs are not rocket science. We’re not talking about developing a new granular synth from the ground-up. Please stop adding stuff that nobody wants and focus on the basics instead.

Since the Auto LFO is already there maybe you could kindly work on it and expad it’s capabilities so we’re not so obscenely far behind Ableton Live? It’s 2024 and people have been asking for this for years.

LFO should be fully MIDI-controllable either via external MIDI controllers or via another instance of LFO plugin. It should oscilate all the time (so we can hear it working) and retrigger when we hit play.

Just to be clear - automation curves added recently don’t cut it since they can’t really be played/performed and need to be drawn which is daunting.

Any other thoughts anyone?

Nobody? Really? Nobody…

Says spokesperson for the entire population of earth.

Glad that’s settled now.

Hey, please don’t take it too personally and too literally. I meant more of a figure of speech. Of course I want new features and do use some of them with joy whenever an update comes out. But it’s also not a big secret that many users report stability and performance issues and do complain about Steinberg putting too much emphasis on new “redundant” features instead of basic DAW usability and functionality.
That’s more what I meant.
And at no point did I mean that I’m a spokesperson of an entire population - I’m just frustrated that some basic features are asked for and are not introduced. Instead we get other features that seem to fix stuff that wasn’t broken in the first place - like the generally “beloved” new GUI.
Please don’t feel offended as this wasn’t my intention.

Well, LFO’s aren’t really a part of a ‘DAW’ either. At least not until very recently like when Bitwig came out and took a modular synth approach to it. It’s also a completely different kind of workflow and layout than Cubase is. It goes in the bucket with all the folks wanting Cubase to become a clone of Ableton Live. Live and Bitwig are Live and Bitwig, They have their own workflow they took, that’s why they are the ‘different’ ones. Cubase is Cubase and has its own way of getting the same job done, like it always has.

Well, you made made an exaggeration and got called out for it. Rightfully so, in my opinion. We are trying to keep this forum a decent place and not have the madness of the rest of the internet, where anybody can say whatever they want and afterwards just claim they didn’t mean it, creep in.

I don’t wanna fight. It’s pointless.
I just want a better piece of software. Don’t we all?

Waiting soooooooo long?

+1