PLEASE eliminate hovering in the mixer!

Indeed. The more you try and pack into a UI the more time will be wasted with accidental clicks on things you didn’t want if they are tightly packed together like they would be if they were all shown at once.

Besides - it’s just what I am used to - that’s all. Which doesn’t make it right nor wrong; same way the preference to have it gone is neither right nor wrong.

But you have to admit, calling someone who like this feature an amateur was kinda silly…

Indeed. It’s not very becoming of an alleged professional user to resort to name calling. There isn’t a demonstrable better or worse way for every user in this instance. It’s very subjective.

Load a un-mixed track into 6 and mix it there, it’ll be pretty obvious, and quite quickly too, that having real buttons is faster, try it!

Hovering takes up a bit of time yes?.. say .1 or .2sec each time, sometimes longer, ok, so now do that say hundreds of times a day, the wasted time soon builds up, and that’s apart from the fact it’s fiddly when the mixer is busy with hundreds of tracks and you constantly hit the wrong thing, as i said before, even Steinberg in their own tuturial videos are hitting the wrong thing in the mixer at times!

Calling someone amatuer is not name calling, it’s a fact, that’s your own insecurity calling.

If you’re offended by that then i’m sorry, i don’t mean offend, it’s just i get totally frustrated with this hover thing, i’ve been using Cubase since the Atari days and generally love it but this hovering thing is tiresome and un-called for, it’s lazy design imo. I do a lot of work for multi-media/website companys and there’s a reason none of them use hover buttons on newly designed websites anymore, it’s dated and annoying to most users.

Think about all the time wasted time misclicking if there are individual buttons for everything which would by necessity be are tiny though. I’d say a version where everything has it’s own button and permanently displayed parameter value could well be visually slower to process and far more prone to errors, which would waste more time than a tiny delay in the buttons/precise values appearing.

I definitely feel at the moment there is a happy medium between. Tests such as the one you propose are subject to what the user is used to. It could well be that you are faster with the v6 mixer, where as I may be faster with the v7/8 mixer.

I found it quite a long process adjusting to the mix console but not really because of the hover more the sends pre post fader controls and opening and closing racks but im there now and quite like it.

But here’s some food for thought.

In cubase we have what? Three mixers.
Maybe the third one could be the last mixer we had in v6.
best of both worlds then everyone is happy.

cheers

personally i don’t want to go back to v6 mixer, there are some good improvments now, it’s just the hovering for buttons thing that’s annoying, remove the hover buttons from the new mixer (even as a pref) and it’ll be much improved.

The way you used it appeared to be derogatory, as i’d say it inferred that “pro’s” know better and agree with you. Maybe you are insecure that “amateurs” are in fact faster than you with it, and you haven’t been able to adapt to it or something?

Either way, it’s lame to try and infer you know better because you get paid to use it. I don’t usually get paid to use it directly as I don’t mix for other people as a full time job, but I still use it for between 1 and 12 hours a day, and have no issue with it.

If you’re offended by that then i’m sorry, i don’t mean offend, it’s just i get totally frustrated with this hover thing, i’ve been using Cubase since the Atari days and generally love it but this hovering thing is tiresome and un-called for, it’s lazy design imo. I do a lot of work for multi-media/website companys and there’s a reason none of them use hover buttons on newly designed websites anymore, it’s dated and annoying to most users.

I appreciate your frustration, but just be aware that not everyone agrees with you. I’d actually say the functionality is out of necessity, and a better design choice than a cluttered mess of tiny buttons. Comparing it to far less information dense UI’s doesn’t really make sense.

That’s the thing though, when there are real buttons that you can see at all times you never mixclick!.. it’s something to do with brain muscle memory, when you can see the button your brain learns where it is and can hit it everytime no matter what, it’s when we can’t see the button but only when we hover over it, the brain doesn’t get used to to where it is and will misclick often, brain muscle memory is important and hovering to see things disrupts this process.

At the moment the mixer is like playing whack-a-mole, reminds me of this video! :wink:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVJL9oXgsAA

I don’t want to go back to the old mixer, the new one is faster and better for me. But the buttons that you only pop up when the mouse cursor is near it and is depending on from what direction it is coming from, that gives far to many argh’s and grrr’s. It just takes the fun out of it, if I have to fight the GUI.

Also, have a look in the midi insert pane in the inspector, the real buttons are still there for that section, it’s very neat and tidy and it’s not cluttered at all, this cluttered argument doesn’t stand up for me.

That is not correct.
Things that take longer, take longer.
Add to the above arguments :

  • Comparing of values on different channels
    ( I do that constantly, when setting up headphone mixes, or with effect sends ).
    Nothing can be faster, than seeing all values at a glance.
    With the hovering, I have to move the mouse to all values, I want to compare.
    If I take it away to the next value, the first vanishes.
    I have to keep it in mind …
    That is as bad a design as it can get !
    :neutral_face:

  • Mouse acrobat.
    Currently, you have to do acrobatic mouse gestures, to make the mixer show multiple values in a row.
    Maybe some high end game players can be as fast, on the hovering mixer,
    as an average ‘mouser’, on a standard mixer.
    This again, is bad design.
    :neutral_face:

Missing buttons, due to them being small, doesn’t hold.
As You can read everywhere on this forum, that missing buttons is a big issue, on the current mixer.
I can assure You, that there where near to none threads about missing buttons, prior V7 !
AND the hovering problems have nothing to do with free adjustable mixer sizing.
Talking about buttons …
Another big step back to ‘bad design’, are the buttons are all looking the same.
Different shapes where way more intuitive and faster to find.
Add the low contrast labels and you’re slowed down even more !
:neutral_face:


Jan

Well, at least those, that make a living with Cubase … ?!
Those that need to work fast, with minimum ‘brain overhead’ …

Errr … what necessity would that be ???

Jan

‘brain overhead’ is a good term!:)… that’s exactly what it is, when you go back to a mixer with real buttons it’s like a weight has been lifted and you can concentrate on the sound so much easier, as you don’t have to ‘think’ about where the buttons are, this relates to my brain muscle memory comment earlier.

I disagree. I have no trouble remembering where the hover buttons are despite them not being on permanent display. I believe i’d be more prone to misclicks if multiple buttons were squashed together in the channel width.

We just need to agree to disagree. :slight_smile:

There is of course far more room on the inspector than there is on the mixconsole. That’s the difference! One channel on view of course has more scope to display more information at once that a whole screen of them.

Are you telling me you’ve never mis-clicked on this mixer v7/8??

Well then at least remove the hovering on the inspector, that alone would be massive improvement.

You’d need to show which one takes longer though. What may take you longer may not take someone else longer. You can’t speak for everyone.

Add to the above arguments :

  • Comparing of values on different channels
    ( I do that constantly, when setting up headphone mixes, or with effect sends ).
    Nothing can be faster, than seeing all values at a glance.

With the hovering, I have to move the mouse to all values, I want to compare.
If I take it away to the next value, the first vanishes.
I have to keep it in mind …
That is as bad a design as it can get !
:neutral_face: >

  • Mouse acrobat.
    Currently, you have to do acrobatic mouse gestures, to make the mixer show multiple values in a row.
    Maybe some high end game players can be as fast, on the hovering mixer,
    as an average ‘mouser’, on a standard mixer.
    This again, is bad design.
    :neutral_face: >

That’s an idea that neglects the practical issues of showing all values at once though rather than showing what the parameters actually are.

You should be thankful it even shows you the value when you hover. Most DAWs only show the value once you open the plugin.

Which DAW mixers show all their parameter values on the channel strip? Certainly not the major ones from my knowledge. C8’s maxconsole is the most informative at a glance I can think of.

Missing buttons, due to them being small, doesn’t hold.
As You can read everywhere on this forum, that missing buttons is a big issue, on the current mixer.
I can assure You, that there where near to none threads about missing buttons, prior V7 !

Well of course there weren’t complaints about missing buttons prior v7, as they were all on display. The complaints were about the cluttered mess that meant.

AND the hovering problems have nothing to do with free adjustable mixer sizing.
Talking about buttons …
Another big step back to ‘bad design’, are the buttons are all looking the same.
Different shapes where way more intuitive and faster to find.
Add the low contrast labels and you’re slowed down even more !
:neutral_face: >

To the contrary they have everything to do with the freely adjustable mixer sizing. If the channels were of a fix wide width there would be no problem having permanent buttons. It’s precisely because the channels can be made so narrow that hover buttons are required, since multiple buttons can’t be effectively collapsed to fit a narrow channel width.

From memory channels pre v7 were of fixed width weren’t they? I know i’d prefer scalable channel width and i’m happy to have hover buttons to make that viable.

As I say, there are those who work faster with the new mixer, so your point doesn’t stand up.

Errr … what necessity would that be ???

The practicality of the variable strip width and it’s ability to be very narrow so not having room for multiple buttons on one slot.

It does take longer, you yourself admitted it takes an extra bit of time to hover (.1 or .2sec), so the simple fact is it does take longer.

Also, you can have proper buttons even if it is scalable, you can have proper buttons until you’ve narrowed the mixer down a lot that it becomes impractical, then the hover buttons can come in, but the problem is when you’ve narrowed the mixer that much the hover thing doesn’t work properly anyway as the buttons overlap with the adjecent channels and you never hit the right thing.

No, but that doesn’t mean I would misclick less if there were more/smaller buttons.

[quote=“barryfell”]
There is of course far more room on the inspector than there is on the mixconsole. That’s the difference! One channel on view of course has more scope to display more information at once that a whole screen of them.
[/quote]

Well then at least remove the hovering on the inspector, that alone would be massive improvement.

I’m not so sure. There are typically 4 buttons rather than 3 in the inspectors inserts, along with the parameter name and a value bar to display. I can’t think how it would be better if it was cut up into four separate buttons.