So important: In the project window automation lanes we need to be able to see what we've named sends

Let’s keep this thread focussed on this specific issue only. Thanks!

This has been an issue for many years: In the Project window’s automation lanes you can’t see what you’ve named your sends. This makes for very significant pain (no exaggeration, especially when you’ve come from or used any other DAW) when you have multiple sends like most people do.

I put a Feature Request in ( ), but who knows if that will work since I’ve seen other FR’s for this for the past few versions of Cubase.

It’s a very basic “feature” that every other DAW I’ve used has…it’s not even a feature, but rather something that should simply have been there from the start. It benefits the vast majority of users, unless one prefers to do tons of back-and-forth with the mixer, or project window up-and-down, just to figure out what, say, “Sends9” corresponds to. Try that with a session that has 46 sends (my most recent movie score)! We name sends for a reason: So we know what they are. We should 100% be able to see what we name them in the automation lanes, not just Sends1, Sends2, etc.

I can’t for the life of me figure out why this very simple request hasn’t been implemented for years now. Let’s definitely get it in on the next update. Thank you for listening and implementing!

Yeah I commented on that FR thread. I’m really surprised more people aren’t piling on, its such a major problem that affects every user. I’m pretty much a brand new Cubase user and this also has me scratching my head as to how it hasn’t been fixed in years. Maybe many users here have only used Cubase and don’t know that all other DAWs have this basic thing? Hopefully more people will get on the bus!! :slight_smile:

Every user??? It may be a major issue for you and even for many but not all of us.

Fair enough, but when fixed it would only serve to improve the workflow of every single user. If for some reason not, I would be very interested to hear the reason why it wouldn’t.

This hyperbole detracts from what might be an otherwise valid suggestion…but please do tell me how it would help my workflow as I can’t see how it would.

It’s a valid suggestion, for sure (though I didn’t make it, originally).

OK, how many sends do you use in a typical project? Do you use send automation in tracks that are using those sends, and do you ever need to figure out what, for example, Send 7 or Send 13 corresponds to on a track that you’re editing the automation on, then have to go the mixer and scroll around or scroll up and down in the project window to find it? If none of these things, then you’re right it wouldn’t help you, but regardless it’s a very valid point IN-Stereo made, that is in other DAW’s for a highly useful and simple reason!

Look, there will always be some people who won’t benefit from a feature (but again, this isn’t actually a “feature” but a basic building block), but I believe that the vast majority will with this, and might not realize it until it’s in there. :slight_smile:

(I edited my original post to reflect this – I agree that it’s wrong to say “every user”).


Two - three.


No, since I only use 2-3 I don’t have this issue.

I can see it would be a major pain for those that have loads of sends.

And thanks for keeping the discussion good mannered! :slight_smile:

I’m not sure it’s the vast majority but hopefully we can agree to disagree on that. :slight_smile:

I can see it would be an incredibly useful feature for those that use considerably more sends than I do. Thanks for editing and keeping the discussion so civil!

Onwards indeed.

I’m a little stunned that this hasn’t received more support from the community! All of the composers I know who use Cubase complain about this, as well as a friend who just does little projects for fun (like, maybe 5 sends at the most), as does the film mixer I now know who is on Cubase (Nuendo).

It seems like such a dead simple fix, though I could be wrong – it’s simply being able to see what we named the Sends, in the automation lanes. It seems like a total positive and something, again, that every single other DAW I’ve ever seen or tried has built-in. Not a “feature” at all, just being able to see the right information where it should be.

Instead of “Sends1”, it could say: “S1-(whatever you’ve named the send)”, for example. I personally wouldn’t even need it to say the “S1” part if it had what I named the send, but that’s for those who would still like it to be there.

Count me in as amazed, too!!!