Side Topic : For me only Ableton does perfectly the click and range double tool. It feels so natural. with others I always struggled to select the correct one so never used… More with Cubase as it is just the reverse of every other DAW with this feature Click on lower zone and Range upper zone feels just wrong to me. I prefer to click the upper zone to select a region and lower part to draw range.
On Topic: Hoping for the convertible folder option to get implemented soon!
Having some folders be buses and some folders not be buses is confusing and messy topology. Think about multiple people in different cities working on a project, and dealing with some folders being buses and some not. That unnecessarily complicated, just keep them their own thing. Silly S1
meh, still don’t really see the point? Is it that important? not really, it’s not.
This is just one of those “S1 does this and so Cubase has to do this” threads. No, Cubase does not need to do this, and should focus resources into things that it already does better, and things like the Project Logical Editor.
Apparently not for you it isn’t, but it is for me and others clearly. I’d be using folders much more often if this option was added.
Were you apposed to the export updates in Cubase 11 too? Other DAWs were already doing that before. Bezier curves for pitch bends? Other DAWs were also doing that first. I don’t really understand why you’re so against borrowing ideas from other DAWs. I consider Cubase to be the best all-rounder on the market, but I can think of multiple areas where DAW x, y, and z run circles around Cubase and referencing those functions/features will only make Cubase that much better of a DAW.
Folders are meant for nothing other than session organization. They are a boring utility track, very simple.
First of all, there’s all sorts of problems with the proposition and clearly you don’t use FolderTracks much. They also aid in editing, ie, you can use the Split tool on folder events to split all audio events within that folder without engaging ‘Group Edit’.
Where does that go if you turn a Folder into a GroupFolderAudio Track?
Why make things here more complicated? If you need a group, create a group track. If you need FolderTracks to organize or condense large track counts, use a folder track?
Tell me the need for making this more complicated?
Advanced Users are using PLE to target track types in which group track and folder tracks are differentiated and this is very important if you are dealing with 1000 track projects.
So, we’re going to have Group Tracks, FolderTracks, and now FolderGroupAudio tracks?
I’m aware of all the folder functionality you just listed and I still don’t follow how having the option to use it as a bus breaks any of that? Is it the folder track display that concerns you? Just have a togglable display option on the track controls. It could be default display as it does now, but have a button for automation. That’s one option of many I’m sure Steinberg’s own employees can figure out.
On the contrary, I think having to make my folders and busses separately is over complicating things as I have to waste twice as much time setting it up. Once again, no one is forcing you to use it, and given that Cubase already has 16 different track types I don’t think adding one more is going to confuse anyone.
Great so now you see this is a much more complicated feature request than what appeared and would require all sorts of design, solutions, compatibility, etc and at the end of it all… my question is still, why?
It takes no time to setup Folders and Buses. It’s two key commands. You can even make it one key command via a macro.
Actually, someone is forcing me to use it, if they send me their project
Basically for example you have 2 kick mics. You put them in a folder track you edit them as one and also tidy up. In other DAWs , if you want, with just a click you can have that folder track has inserts and sends so you can process them as one too. In Cubase you use folder tracks to put them together and add group track to process them together so to me this looks more complicated than it is done in Logic Studio One Protools and Ableton. And I don’t think adding this feature will disable Steinberg developers to do anything else for the next 10 years. Basically Cubase is the only one left without it.
No I don’t see, which is why I asked what exactly implementing this would break. Literally adding any feature to a program is going to require designs, solutions, compatibility, etc. so how about just don’t ever update Cubase and problem solved for you?
If people are sending you projects with it then that just proves even more that it’s something people want and will use.
No I strong disbelieve in this oasis ideology that every feature that anyone can think of should be added just because.
Consistent topology and universal workflow is an important concept. This is why certain models of SSL consoles became popular, because engineers and producers would only book studios that had that certain model of console.
This concept is a feature in itself and it’s better to design a constricted workflow an entire
community can learn, rather than create a multi-directional hodge podge of every feature under the sun.
Sure, Layer Track. The point of the post is to give the user the ability to create groups with similar functionality to folders. I, and probably most of the people who want it, don’t care what form it takes but that it can be done. It’s simply a concept that Steinberg could implement however they see fit. Nothing is threating the “universal workflow”.
just don’t fk with my FolderTracks and Groups, I spent nearly a year perfecting a template in which PLE, Macros, Visibility are daisy chained and essentially coded using PLE to facilitate my workflow… and really entire business and studio topology and it’s complicated enough I can’t offhand even remember how I pulled it off. Last thing I need is a bunch of “unneeded” features breaking and changing everything.
Simply “Make folder tracks = group tracks” is a terrible terrible idea and I would burn down my studio if that happened as a 1:1 conversion.
But all in all, in terms of resources management… this isn’t really needed.
I’ve already written in another thread, I’ll write here again.
The way this feature request is presented (Folder Tracks = Group Tracks) gets a NO from me. I don’t want one word to mean different things.
I think Cubase can improve upon existing functionality to achieve the same function. Group/FX/VCA tracks could be improved to do more with sources/targets. Apply their own independent visibility agents on the spot, facilitate routing from/to them, one button spill for the project window and the mixconsole, show data (in their background as if you had made a render of the bus and looked at it on another track), this type of thing.
@LoveGames , thank you for showing me that Cubase could do the pack folder thing. The name was misleading me (Because it says “move tracks”). But now I know.
About the folder-bus thing, I really think it’s more the fact you don’t want to see it than any other thing. I mean, it’s by no means confusing or silly. Actually is pretty intuitive and it works really good. Basically, it’s having a group attached to the folder and you control its parameters in the folder track.
In Cubase, the equivalent thing would be having the group next to the folder. It wouldn’t change a thing, but it will be faster and you will have less tracks inside the project.
An alternative could be make folders adding a premade macro “group the tracks within the folder to a new group track named after the folder”. Which is basically what people is asking. Maybe can you do it with the Logical Editor?
I have it assigned to Shift+Ctrl+Alt+G. I don’t think it’s possible to make one  PLE preset that will handle the naming as you suggest, although it has been requested before. You would have to make lots of presets, each handling the name of one group.
For example. If container is folder and name is Strings and track type equals group then replace name with Strings. (VERY crude, I am not at my Cubase PC at the moment). What you want, and makes sense, is if the PLE could substitute Strings with X in the above, so that it would just copy the name of any folder and paste it into any group.
But what happens if you need a track to be in one folder, and output to different groups? “Don’t use the group folder then”. Ok, but when those two styles are used heavily within a project, doesn’t confusion ensue? (If I have a band, and Alice is singing and playing her guitar at the same time, I might want to have a folder named Alice that contains both tracks, but her voice will go to group 1 named vocals, and her guitar to group 2 named guitars. I might even have a group named Alice, so that I can quickly adjust cue more-me levels.
Of course, there’s also “Show Channels connected to the First Selected Channel”
You must assign a key command to it, it’s very powerful. When you select a group and give the command, all other tracks are hidden, and you are left just with the tracks that are connected to the group in any way! That’s awesome. The cons are: You can’t do it to more than one channels/tracks at a time. (boo) You can’t use the same key to go back to where you were as a toggle, you have to follow with Undo Visibility.