Regarding 'Maintenance' Updates And 'Improvements'

I have a real bone to pick with Steinberg and the current release system.

Overall, I have been happy with the current update scheme. Because, again overall, it has resulted in a -much- more stable product than back in the day (ie. back before SX4-5 when they started revamping everything).

However (you knew there was a ‘however’ coming) what -really- GRINDS at me is the looooooooooong list of very tiny, but VERY useful FEATURE REQUESTS which have been around for over a DECADE–requests that have had literally -hundreds- of ‘asks’. Even if you didn’t see the post counter next to a user’s name, you’d know they were new here because you see them ask for the -same- darned things over and over and over shortly after they get Cubase.

These are NOT big, sexy things. They are -small- projects such as LOCK LOCATORS or COLOUR ENTIRE TRACK or TRIPLET GRID or minor tasks on the various Editors that are, nevertheless, -tremendous- time savers for power users.

Now, in the past, SB would tend to throw lots and lots of such improvements into each update. And it was a two-edged sword. It was yummy, for sure, but it also contributed to a lot of maintenance issues (bugs). OK, I -get- it. But the current state of affairs is simply too DRACONIAN. Surely many of these tiny F/Rs -can- be done safely with -very- little manpower. There needs to be -some- middle ground.

So to my mind, the customer-friendly thing would be to go to the Feature Request list, pick just one or two POPULAR but small items (ie. not too labour intensive or risky to the project as a whole) and throw that into each new .0 build.

In short, the current policy of including NO new features (or at least none taken from the F/R forum) in .0 releases STINKS. And since the .1 or .5 releases tend to focus now on ‘sexy’ features like ‘sampler tracks’, this means that those small items we power users need simply LANGUISH FOREVER in the Feature Request forum. It’s a joke and a slap in the face.

I mean: why even -have- a ‘Feature Request’ forum if there is =never= a reasonable chance that anything good will ever come of it?

NOW NOTICE I WROTE ‘POPULAR’ ABOVE. I’ll see the odd ‘improvement’ in the update PDF. Fine. But whenever I read this I wonder exactly -who- these ‘improvements’ were made for? They almost -never- map to suggestions in the F/R Forum, so my -guess- is that they were ‘requested’ by bigshot users (Hans Zimmer, perhaps? :smiley:) or the b-testers. That ain’t exactly market-testing, guys.

My suggestion, would be tp give us power users what we want: the odd, -occasional- improvement to editing which -we- request here… the kinds of improvements that don’t make it into marketing adverts and just as importantly, make us feel a bit HEARD. There should be -some- reward for putting in almost two decades of loyal service (beyond ‘you got the product, didn’t you, sonny?’)

I don’t want to go back to the Dark Time of unstable releases. But I -do- want to find SOME way to get the backlog of tiny (but important) Feature Requests actually -done- before I’m too old to work a keyboard.


After reading this (and I agree wholly) I had a thought. Maybe the strategy of posting here is wrong. Observing the results of requests for long-standing and reasonable F/Rs in these forums does appear to fall upon deaf ears. Perhaps an email campaign appealing to Hans Zimmer might get more traction.

Just sayin’…

Steinberg has, in general, become so ‘transactional’ it’s ridiculous. ie. “You paid your money, you got your product, we owe you nothing else.”

Case in point: I tried to take advantage of the recent Wavelab Upgrade discount. My credit card was blocked due to the common thing where American banks consider Euro transactions suspect. So I contact AskNet, then they refer me to Steinberg, who doesn’t get back to me. So I try to contact Steinberg NA and it turns out THERE IS NO STEINBERG NA PHONE NUMBER! So I Google it, and find a number for Yamaha in L.A. I call there and the guy promises to call me back. Which was a month ago. And this is… wait for it… when I’m trying to give them money.

So I find their Public Relations guy and reach out to -him-. And he promises to help. And…?

Now -that’s- customer service.

My guess is that the only reason they have customer phone service in EU is because they -have- to. I’m sure this seems ‘expansive’ and unfair to some, but companies that care about their customers don’t behave like SB. They talk to their customers on a regular basis… even if its only on back channels. It takes a LOT to alienate guys like me with almost 20 years in.


I think they could maybe be focused a bit more on the main product lines, as we know now there likely won’t be another update for around 6 months? Then there is the situation where the Cubase pro line get’s split into .0 and .5 versions instead of just supporting a single version…
Maybe consider dropping Mac support too?

I don’t know,it has been a massive amount of posts about Steinberg concentrate on bug fixing and not introducing new features.
Personally I would love to see some small improvements making their way into updates.

Psychologists often speak of “All Or Nothing Thinking” as a classic sign of clinical depression. We all can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Anyone who reads my post carefully will note that I -mostly- support the notion of the .0 releases for bug fixes. BUT I believe that SB should include one or two SMALL improvements from the F/R Forum which have languished for YEARS in each release as a sign of good faith to long-time users.

The current scheme almost exclusively puts SEXY features on the .5 and 1.0 releases so the F/R suggestions almost -never- get implemented. And if that’s the case, WHAT IS THE POINT OF EVEN -HAVING- A F/R FORUM?

What is the point of having an altar if the gods will never deign to answer the collective prayers of the faithful?


I wouldnt mind versions like:

.1 - .2 - .3 - .4 - .4.5
.6 - .7 - .8 - .9 - .9.5

a “.1” every month with bugfixes and little workflow improvements
(like when you press the “<” key with the keyboard and you have to use the mouse to click into the text field of what instrument you want and then go back to the keyboard to type the instrument name) - pressing “<” and directly typing in the inst. name makes more sense…
or a proper audio editor with scissors…
or a fader tab in the key editor or audio editor…
or this or that…

  • the .5 and .0 versions can come along with major new features, cowbells, whistles etc…:stuck_out_tongue:
  • i have millions of improvement ideas to make cubase more mature without changing the workflow you already use… - just enhancements mostly- all little things… (and some big things of course…)
    all out of the power users perspective. (except when im pooped… then i dont make requests or anything else for that matter… lol)
    Anyway, they have all been requested … I cant do more than shine a light to illuminate the path while i am still on this planet…

other than that - Cubase 9.X has been super stable so far - and thats wonderful…=)

So thank you Steiny=) you are appreciated - I am grateful to you - you have a wonderful DAW and I really hope that you are doing all that you can to make Cubase the best it can be. =)

Again, Thank you =)

love@all steiny family members (users, devs, the whole shebang) :slight_smile:

I get what you are saying, I even would not mind if say .5 upgrades only included those small but powerful features.
Well, hopefully 10 or 15 of them :slight_smile:
Even if only the PLE finally got some more commands and flexibility, it would solve a lot of workarounds.
I’m afraid the roadmap is already planed out for the next few years, we are only passengers on this train to ?
That is the main problem, we don’t have even a hint on how Cubase will evolve, not even a broad statement of goals.
That said Cubase has really improved quality wise, and I could wonder if that would be the case if more features had been added.