Make folder tracks = Group tracks

I have a mixed feeling on that one. Presently, the folder tracks appear in the arrange window, but NOT in the MixConsole. Secondly, the group tracks appear in the arrange window as any other tracks type, beside its specific header icon. So, rather than making folder tracks as group ones, I would actually like to see :

  • folder tracks in the MixConsole, even if they appear with a much less width (it would be better, actually), but with the same features as the already existing ones, especially the ability to expand/shrink the tracks content included in it.
  • Grouped tracks with a track header indentation in the arrange window, as the ones included in a folder, to make more clear that they are actually routed to a group track instead of the default Main Out.

I think that both these would solve most of the issues concerning the group vs folder tracks debate. YMMV, as usual… :shushing_face:


Exactly. We think very much alike.

From a while ago:

And for groups:

One of the problems with group representation in the MixConsole is… track order. The folder=group thing solves this by cunningly (like an illusionist) packing tracks (to be channels) within a folder, i.e. right next to each other. Then, it’s easy in the mixer to do a slide-out of the channels included. :mage:t3:

With regular groups, it’s easy to have channels 1-4, 12, 18-20 and 32 to be sent, or output to a group. Well… how to elegantly “spill” them if they’re so far apart in the mixconsole? That’s the big question. Can you just re-order tracks dynamically? Surely that shouldn’t be too difficult, but then what happens with control surfaces? :wink: Right now, we’re supposed to use bursts of “Show Connected Channels/Undo Visibility” for beautiful and quick viewing of connected channels, I wish this could be expanded to any selection of channels.

And the same for group tracks in the project. Right now I don’t find them useful in the least (in the project window). I lock them (so I don’t accidentally change levels by mis-click) and hide them. I prefer to insert plug-ins from the MixConsole instead. But if I had more features like in the link above, I would prefer them visible.

1 Like

I’m not sure that an equivalent of the ‘Show connected channels’ would be helpful for any tracks selection. But it would sure be helpful for both group and folders.

Concerning the latters, I don’t use them much, actually. Sure, they can have an immediate use for grouping some basic commands, such as mute, solo, record, but well… I would use them more if :

  • they were visible in the MixConsole
  • there were for them commands such as ‘Channel visibility agents>Show/Hide channels for the selected folder’. This would be also useful for group tracks, in fact…
  • The tracks list in the inspector wasn’t buggy : here, it is vertically truncated after the two or three first tracks, even if there are, in example, eight of them in the folder (I don’t know if it has been reported yet…).

At the end, I actually use much more group tracks than folder ones (send purposes, common volume adjusting, etc.). I’m still not at ease with Cubase VCA implementation : seems rather cryptic to me, but it’s another debate…

1 Like

This entire discussion about ”things are going to break if folder tracks are implemented” or ”it’s going to be a mess” is a moot point.

Since it is optional to add the feature to any folder NOTHING will or can break for those who don’t use it.

If Steinberg at least could let us use folders and rearrange channels in the console I’d be a lot happier.

1 Like

Can I add having two rows in the mixconsole track title for windows users…

Gonna say no on this. Coming from Ableton, I like that folders are simply folders. I like my group tracks in a folder as well. Also, Cubase implementation works best for visibility show/hide only groups.

And you could go on working like that since nothing would change for you.

Sometimes, we should all be striving to work in a similar way. Some of us write with our right hand, some of us write with our left hand, some of us write cursive, some of write block… but we all strive to write in a legible manner in an established language the other person will understand.

Having a DAW where there is a million different options, doesn’t create a universal workflow across the community.

But I do think I’m developing an idea maybe that would be better than this… In which Group Tracks have a header button that non-destructively shuffles all tracks connected to it into a folder like container based around that group track. Clicking the button off, would simply return those tracks to their previous position in the project. This is more like, “momentarily Make Group Tracks = FolderTracks” rather than “Make Folder Tracks = Group Tracks”

No to this.

Although it sounds good at first. I think it’s good to be able to separate your visual organization from your actual audio routing. To compromise, maybe there could be a an optional preference where Group Tracks operate like folders, so that they can hold collapsable tracks within them, and those tracks will automatically have their primary routing set to that group track… and perhaps another optional preference for moving audio tracks to the appropriate sub-folder after being routed to the group/folder track…

maybe this could all just be a separate track type called… Group/Folder Track or something like that.

but whatever happens, we should have the ability to keep them separate for those of use who are more advanced and use more advanced routing.

It is optional in most DAWS.

Take Studio One for example. You can put your tracks to a regular folder say string section. Now if you want, you can switch that folder track to a bus track and can process the strings as a group with inserts, sends and automation etc without creating an extra bus again to route them and do all of it. You can also still route any track in it to another bus if you want.
You can anytime turn it back to a regular folder track and scrap the whole thing. So it is a flexible system that do not force anything.
It is understandable that some users do not like it but it is a fact that it is also a very handy workflow for people that use it or used it in other DAWs.
As long as it is optional I do not see any harm done.

Imo, that sounds like an unnecessary confusing operational mess if multiple people are working on the same project file in a studio.

But let’s hypothesize for the sake of argument, that everyone in the studio agrees to do things one way and not the other.

I still don’t really understand the purpose of this and Steinberg putting man hours into creating this.

If someone was that indecisive about their routing, I’m not sure I would have them work for me. It just seems like such a redundant pointless feature request to me. Okay, you could convert a folder into a group routing all tracks in it to itself… or you could just open the folder and select the tracks and use the key command ‘Group Channel to Selected Channels’ .

At the most, if people want to be able to ‘Group Channel to Channels inside folder’, that’s the most I could compromise I think.

A lot of things in Cubase are pointless or useless to me but I wouldn’t slag them or deny anyone those features because for some people they are vital. Like the chord track for instance - totally useless to me but loads of people love it and use it extensively and guess what? Steinberg has put loads of man hours into it - and I am ok with that.

I am leaning towards going back to Studio One or even Pro Tools for this reason (and a couple of other things). I like Cubase, it was my very first Daw on Atari ST back in the day (even Pro16 and Pro24 before actually) and Cubase has many cool features, however whenever I dig deeper into them I find flaws that always prevent me from using them the way I would like to. Like the Configurations that you can’t lock or the solo feature, which doesn’t work properly if you have automated mutes. That plus the missing Track folder feature just annoys me every day.

Of course every Daw has it’s drawbacks and Cubase has a lot going for it but right now I feel there are more things annoying me than making me happy.

I am sure however that a lot of people are really satisfied with Cubase but I work 8-12 hours a day with it and these little things have added up for me. Having invested in Cubase and its eco-system I am really on the fence.

1 Like

… then why on earth would you suggest eliminating them as a “feature request”? If you don’t know what they are for, then don’t use them – simple.


To clean up/sort things/hide that dont need routing together ?!
Like a part of your project that is about pre process audio samples you want to use afterwards. But when you are finished you want to hide that section altogether…
A bunch of sampler tracks you want to hide ? Could be anything.

Well I cant use folders unfortunately since they overwrite my tracks colors…

1 Like