That’s exactly what I did. Yes, it looks much better that way. 
Like the others have said, I like how crisp it is compared to C5, but agree that the window issues that have been complained about for years now need sorting. I am on the fence about the transparent events. I’d really like to see a mixer that can be toggled between track ordering in the project window, and whatever I want to configure… some of my colleagues who use other DAWs laugh at the track ordering being tied between the project window and mixer. I have to agree.
My 2 cents.
Personally I think that C6 was a good change in general appearance. There are dozens of tweaks I would prefer. I’m also on the fence about transparent events. I worked with them exclusively for ages, so it’s jarring to not have them. I HATE the black selected coloring. I think it is ridiculous that you have to restart the app to see color changes to the interface. I want an interface like H4. I want to have a usable interface for setting complex track coloring schemes and have them available on ALL projects. + about 30 other things. But, in general they have gone the right direction IMO and C6 is absolutely rock solid to use.
I agree too. The mixer is a shame as it is. It has a lot of room for improvements. it’s the weak link of the program IMHO.
Aloha
I also agree that C6 is now gorgeous as a DAW.
To quote Lasso:
Cubase before: ugly beyond reason.
Cubase now: great looking to me!
+!
{‘-’}
Yes, I 100% agree about the window handling. It’s just obnoxious. Cubase is doing SO many things right at the moment, and the people at Steinberg should be really, really proud of the direction they’re heading–it’s making it easier and more fun for me to make more music, more often. But, the niggles remain, and window handling is definitely one of them. Docking would be fabulous!
Also, true fader groups. I know this has been mentioned before, but something like a ‘palette’ of, say, 16 fader groups that you could click on to select, ctrl + click to set… why, this’d be marvelous! No linking and unlinking of channels!
As I mentioned in their hardware forum, I think the CC121 seriously needs to be opened up. It’s a tough, solid controller, but it’s damn near useless to me in that I can’t make my own subtle tweaks to it to ensure that it works the way I want it to. For instance, I HATE knob acceleration for infinite rotaries that can’t be made less extreme. The acceleration algorithm just makes them unusable for me. It’s either a crawl or +40 dB of gain in a quarter turn. Horrible. Also, the transport controls are damn near useless. I NEVER want to jump randomly in a huge leap to near the beginning of my project, which is what the |< button does. WHY?! Who designed this?? Do they do music? Why not just have it jump to the left locator? Or allow us to set it for that?
I mean, Steinberg is doing so much right, right now… why don’t they just go for broke and take this opportunity to OWN THE MARKET? They really could if the brightest minds there got together and decided to listen to each other and listen to us… those of us making sense, anyway. 
I agree with the above and most of the things mentioned before that as well
Are you serious or is it just a provocative statement ?
Beside this, OK, it seems like a lost battle, but I’ll keep on thinking that the C 5.1 had the best GUI, though, and I already said why.
More specifically, What I don’t understand is the praise for the ‘shadowed events’ implementation and the black selected zone, and here, I’ll join Waclav in his original statement, which is what this thread is all about. What does it actually brings, beside a hyped, Logic 9 like, ‘professional’ look ? Sequel has the same… It is just tiring to use after few hours with it.
And what about the black selected zone ? If a color had to be choosed, I would have much prefered a white one. At least, what is in the selected zone would be easily viewable.
To be clear, I’m for a sober and effective GUI, not a ‘shadow’ like kaleidoscope with useful features removed one by one (transparent events, automation nodes…), and the 5.1 one was exactly that. I’m wondering What they are they going to remove in 6.1 or 6.5…
Yeah I’m not a fan of the black selections, and the colours of the buttons (blue and white for selected and not selected) are a bit confusing I find. Other than that the GUI improved a lot though imo.
I believe he is 
But in all seriousness, not everyone will agree with every change made to a GUI. That would simply be impossible. However, as you can see, the great mayority of people (at least from what we see here so far) think Steinberg made most of the right choices with the new Cubase look, and that is a BIG plus for them since that is a HARD thing to do.
Beside this, OK, it seems like a lost battle, but I’ll keep on thinking that the C 5.1 had the best GUI, though, and I already said why.
And you have the right to think the way you do, but so do we
More specifically, What I don’t understand is the praise for the ‘shadowed events’ implementation and the black selected zone, and here, I’ll join Waclav in his original statement, which is what this thread is all about. What does it actually brings, beside a hyped, Logic 9 like, ‘professional’ look ? Sequel has the same… It is just tiring to use after few hours with it.
And what about the black selected zone ? If a color had to be choosed, I would have much prefered a white one. At least, what is in the selected zone would be easily viewable.
Most people would agree that Logic Pro 9 has one of the best looking GUIs in the DAW world. I’m not sure what is considered “professional” these days, but it sure makes it a pleasure to work with. The same applies to Cubase 6. It is inspiring and doesn’t get in the way of my work. But again, it would be impossible for everyone to feel the same.
I guess the black selection doesn’t bother me as much as you guys because in Sonar it’s always been that way. But I can see how that could be bothersome.
To be clear, I’m for a sober and effective GUI, not a ‘shadow’ like kaleidoscope with useful features removed one by one (transparent events, automation nodes…), and the 5.1 one was exactly that. I’m wondering What they are they going to remove in 6.1 or 6.5…
I can’t comment on this since I’ve never used anything from Steinberg until Cubase 6. However, one of the reasons I hesitated to make the switch to Cubase was its GUI. To me personally, it looked like crap. I know you don’t agree but that’s honestly what I thought about it until now. It was too 2D and 1999 for my taste. I’m glad they’ve changed that
Take care!
OK, Jose
So, let’s agree to disagree… 
Different points of view but, as I am using Cubase since the SL/SX2 days, I’m maybe too much conservative. For a musical application, I have rather a 2D approach, but well… I still think that the 5.1 GUI was the best that Steiny released. The only real lack was the windows management, but that’s another story already discussed to death…
Still hoping for improvements about transparent events, selection display, info bar size and automation nodes, though. And these shouldn’t interfere with any new brand look design. About the ‘shadow events’ display I would like, at least, an option for this.
All the best,
Agreed
I also do agree that Steinberg should give us more options as far as customizing the Cubase GUI goes. I think the info bar size has more to do with current screen resolutions though. A lot of people are now using screens with HD resolution, so making things smaller would also cause them to be hard to read by default. The automation nodes will be fixed in the next update according to a post by an admin I read somewhere in this forum. The window behaviour is simply a logical next step in GUI design for Cubase (judging from the other applications) and I’m sure we will see it implemented soon.
Anyway, I wish you the best as well. Have a nice day!
I suppose it makes sense not to have too many of these threads running, so I’m not too sad that the one I started about invisible fade handles has been locked… the thread is attached below
Can we just draw a distinction here between what different folks mean by GUI?
Many of the positive replies in this thread are really saying they like the colours and design of the GUI. I’m fine about it, the look is pleasant enough.
When I talk about the GUI i mean the manner in which I have to communicate with Cubase. THAT’s what I don’t like about the GUI - it’s considerably harder to use than earlier versions and slows me down unnecessarily. Most of the critical replies in this thread have that focus too.
Apart from the hidden fade handles and automation points, does anyone else find the GUI just slower to use than previously? Just selecting clips, moving them, colours changing (that awful black) - it all just seems stickier and slower than before (or than Nuendo 4, which I also use all the time)
By GUI, I mean the same thing as you (looks and functionality). I obviously can’t compare it to older versions of Cubase, since I started with C6. But in comparison to my previous sequencer, Sonar, I find Cubase to be a great improvement in workflow (even with Sonar X1’s better window managing system). I mean, Cubase is YEARS ahead in both the Audio and the MIDI department.
In my case, the grass was greener on the other side, so that could be the reason why I find C6 as great as I do. For someone who was already using this great program, the new look may be a step backwards and I understand that point of view as well. I’m all for improvements and welcome them as much as possible though. For example, I totally agree with your OP in that thread about the automation nodes. That seems to be bugging more people than not, so it would be something for Steinberg to fix or have as an option. From what I understand, it seems that this will be adressed in the next version (which I think is great!).
In any case, I would like to read about how other Cubase users feel about your questions.
Take care!