Shouldn’t the zones feature in the channel selector on your mix console be integrated with your folders?
Example:
Create 3 audio tracks in the project. Then in the mixer select the 3 audio channels, then right click and select “move selected channels to new folder.” You now have 3 audio channels in a folder in your project. Rename it “Audio Folder.”
In the channel selector, go to zones and select the right side so all 3 faders will show up on the right side of the mixer console.
All is good until when working in your project you want to add another audio channel. Unfortunately when you right click “add track” in your project… even when right clicking inside the created audio folder, the new audio channel is going to show up on the left side of the mixer console by default.
Wouldn’t it be logical when adding a channel which is created inside the audio folder to also be created with the same zone selection therefore automatically added to the right side with my other 3 audio tracks?
As it stands now, there is much more mouse clicking to achieve this. I don’t even want to keep the channel selector open once things get set up.
Am I missing something here? This is all about simple clean workflow, and it’s not happening for me like it did with 6.5.
and another issue with the new mixer…
bring back the 6.5 mixer, at least as an option!
Working with the new mixer is like killing time none of us has left over…
That’s not how software development processes work unfortunately.
Once gone, it is gone but maybe the good news is if there is a supported 6.5.x update in the pipeline then you will have robustness of application support well into the future.
It just seems this issue would follow logic common sense. If you create a track within a folder in the project window, wouldn’t you want that track to reflect the same in the mixer?
It’s tiring every time I create a track to maintain organization in this new mixer. The number of mouse-clicks to achieve organization is ridiculous.
Less workflow…more clicking.…and who wants to wager the next update will be another VSTI or improved EQ or anything else that 3rd parties can often do better.
Ahhhh … because they are in a competitive business?
After riding with Cubase since SX3, disappointment in v7 mixer finally lead me to take the Pro Tools plunge.
Pro Tools has long had the type of mixing environment Cubase 7 is trying to implement … but it is so refined comparatively.
Plus there is Transfuser … without a doubt the most incredible ‘beat making’ VSTi ever. Imagine Reason, Stylus RMX and Ableton all rolled into a single multitimbral, multoutput instrument. Tasty! I know not everyone is into these things, but for creating rhythmic beds, it is the king.
I’m still loving Cubase and it’s midi implementation leads the pack on anything that runs on a PC … so I’m not sticking it in the trash basket.
My irks with Pro Tools are that it is incredibly finicky to get setup and some of the deeper mixing and editing tools are not part of the basic software … you have to get the very pricey ‘production’ upgrade to have all features in native … essentially the same soft as runs on the new HDx cards. I’m intrigued with the cache feature, which has a x64 sub-engine that permits your entire session to be place in RAM for instant responsiveness. I’m finding simple things like color coding the entire channel panel, key commands to make fader groups hide or appear, routing, etc. have made the basic version very worthwhile to me and a great improvement over Steinberg’s schemes.
Yes, I’ve too tried all those as well as Acid Pro … which is still useful for time stretching and transposing loops for a stem.
I’ve concluded: there is no perfect DAW. You gain … to a point … by concentrating on one platform. But then, there are just somethings certain ones do better than others. I’ve concluded for midi, composition and arranging, Cubase is king. But for recording and mixing, Pro Tools is king.
So, I use one for one purpose and the other for another.
I’d add one other point about audio editing. Cubase is very powerful and very deep. I used to scoff when I’d hear people say ‘Pro Tools is the best DAW for audio editing.’ But that’s because I didn’t fully understand the differences.
Which are, Cubase is a morass of sub windows and tiny menus, powerful indeed, but not very intuitive to work with. Pro Tools is a single edit window with your project in front of you … there is no separate audio editing window. It is very intuitive, straightforward and … once you have the key commands under your fingers … extremely easy to work with. I now understand what Pro Tool fans meant by “best” and if that means efficient, intuitive, straight-forward and powerful, I agree.
I said that primarily as a joke, as it seems for a time everyone was trying Reaper with it’s demo an identical, uncrippled, untime-limited, full featured version of the program … and how can you lose at the price? So I then bought the ridiculously inexpensive license and nuked the nag screen.
I really liked Reaper and would recommend it to anyone as an inexpensive entry to a full-fledged, professional DAW. I found the interface and routing a little kludgey at first … but very powerful. It’s greatest feature over Cubase is audio track to audio track routing, so use of VST 2.4 plugin that permit external side chain are a snap. Yeah, you can do that in Cubase with the Quadro tracks … and no longer need to with VST3, but I like the power of Reaper’s routing.
I was almost going to go all in … but I had issues with my UAD2 DSP not running well … so back to the mother of VST.
I agree about the audio to audio as Live offers excellent routing, and it came in very handy, but the timing was poor and unreliable. Cubase offers Bus recording which solved the problem; also spot on timing.
Reason is too ubiquitous to be a serious remix tool and no proper DAW functions.
So here I am. I am a writer/producer not a studio so I work autonomously, so personal workflow is more important to me.
right so thats 2 daw’s that you think are better than c7 …any more you want to add to the list , i mean don’t let us hold you here im sure reaperville must be missing you …
the mixing consul maybe clunky and bugged to death atm and im sure when steinberg realise a lot of people are against the new long workslow they will do the right thing and adjust the workflow back or maybe improve it even more … IMHO
i for one am happy you’ve found the 2 daw’s for you but there as only ever been one love in my life and a relationship you have to work through the bad times to reap ( lol )the good times … anyway best of luck to you on your new daw conquest
[quote="Como Baila]
It might help if you read the thread?
Bit touchy, are we?[/quote]
i read the original post and that is the one that counted and then just scrolled through the bla bla about other daw’s is that what the OP was about in the first place ???
i read the original post and that is the one that counted and then just scrolled through the bla bla about other daw’s is that what the OP was about in the first place ???
me touchy ? only with the right person [/quote][/quote]
If you want to accuse me of hijacking to divert from your rude and sarcastic response to what you thought I said, which would have been an unwarranted and uncivil response even if it was what I said, be my guest.
I subscribed to this thread back in the day as I was contemplating upgrading from 6.5 to 7.0 … but was unhappy with the changes in the mixer development direction. I’d been unhappy for some time after learning about the functions of the Pro Tools mixer. I subscribed to all the then current threads regarding the new mixer and if you care to search by my user name you’ll see a lot of activity on my part.
In the meantime, about a month ago, I decided for several practical reasons beyond the mixing advantages to purchase Pro Tools 10.
When I received notice on today’s new thread activity, I read it and started off disagreeing with the very agreeable ‘Wiredup’ about his observation as to why Steinberg should even bother trying to please the picky customer. That lead to a discussion between us about our experience with other DAWs and our impressions of them.
Obviously when you interjected you had not read the thread … or you wouldn’t have had to go back and read it to see whether in your opinion you owed me an apology depending whether I was ‘on topic’ with the OP.
You can equivocate and deflect all you want, but in my opinion your comment was rude and uncalled for.
I am hardly going to demand an apology. Anyone reading can reach their own conclusion.
I’m going to presume you’re having a bad day or are nursing some sore spot. I bear you no ill will but would respect you more were you to offer a little ‘oops, sorry.’
Good luck with your use of Cubase, one of my three most favorite programs of all time.
