Hi Erik,
Iām really not sure why! I can only assume that youāve inferred ātoneā that wasnāt intended. Itās easily done on forums, in texts, emails and so on. Those who know me will tell you that Iām a nice guy to talk to face to face 
No, Iām neither. I use Cubase every day and have been using it for many years, alongside, less frequently, Pro Tools and Logic, amongst others. Iām also very interested in the ability of Cubase (and other DAWs) to support alternative ways of working ā which was really my whole point. I prefer that Iām not forced into a certain way of working and some people seemed to be saying that because one method exists (which I donāt consider perfect) then there should be no alternative method. By that logic weād only be able to add tracks when in the Project page but not the Mixer ā itās perfectly possible to have two means of doing the same thing!
I realise that, mostly because Iām among those who use multiple outputs on a regular basis. But letās not get onto the handling of multiple outputs, as this is an area where Cubase currently lets me down (eg inability to have External FX share physical I/O with inputs/outputs, and the poor system of recallā¦)
Some of it can be, but not all. It is still one more layer of complexity, one more switch of windows I must make and so on. And itās an invisible one in some circumstances too ā I canāt see anything of the Control Room features in the Mixer while Iām using the (excellent) loudness metering; I have the choice to see that or the Control Room in the Mixer, but not both at the same time. And as I use the loudness meter a lot, thatās a problem. A problem that would be easily solved either by the presence of a mono button on output channels or the ability to see both Control Room and master metering in the Mixer at the same time. I do not understand why people should object to anyone requesting such features ā I mean, I get why they might not wish for the same features, but implementing such things wouldnāt impact on any existing userās ability to make use of the Control Room.
Thereās no need to be angry or patronising. I read the thread before and I have a firm grasp of the issues being discussed. But Iāve re-read it, seeing as you requested that I do so. Iāve found nothing to change my opinion. Perhaps next time youāre so affronted by a comment, you might take the time to consider whether your inferences are likely to be correct, and refrain from using those inferences to establish false assumptions?
Itās funny you should mention that: there are precious few reasonably priced hardware monitor controllers (Drawmer MC2.1 is one) that allow you to monitor in true mono (a single point source rather than dual mono), and even fewer software systems. Totalmix doesnāt do that, and nor does the Control Room. But I digress, as thatās not the purpose of this threadā¦
My main system uses an RME interface and itās associated Totalmix software, yes. But I have more than one system that I use regularly. When in Cubase, I prefer to keep things simple, staying where possible in one window, and having keyboard shortcuts assigned to common tasks. Iāll do edits and arrangement work in the Project page; switch to the Mix window for mixing, recording automation, back to the Project page for detailed editing of automation. And so on. I prefer where possible not to have to switch from these main views, as I find it much easier to navigate and thus a more efficient approach. To have to switch between applications, or switch windows within an application simply to switch stereo to mono for a moment seems to me to be an unnecessary step.
Whether Steinberg feel that it is a feature thatās worth spending time on is a matter for them; itās their product after all. I wouldnāt say that addressing this was a huge priority for me, but I do feel it would be useful and only a small change would be required to achieve it. You might not find it at all useful ā just as I donāt so many of the features suggested here ā but as it doesnāt inhibit your way of working, thats hardly a reason to argue against it.
