I agree here. I would like to see an SSL emulation as part of the mix console, fully integrated.
Switchable EQ types (SSL, etc…)
New SSL - style compressor, new compressor types for use as bus compressors
New module for the channel strip: Console colouring emulation (like the VCC)
And, PLEASE, open the mix console to 3rd party developers.
Can’t say I disagree more. Cubase is not a ‘all in one’ emulation DAW - if that is what you want you should look at another DAW that does specifically that.
Cubase greatest feature is that it performs so well with VST plugins and 3rd party software and still performs fantastic.
I really don’t want to see emulation built in.
So there you have it; clearly the guys at Slate-Digital are passionate about their algorithms and emulations, and i hope Steinberg will take a page out of their book and look-after us Cubase users along the same lines.
I respect your opinion but Cubase does look after us by allowing for 3rd party plugins like Slate-Digital to co-exist in the Steinberg ecosystem. That is all that we need, we are free to build are palette of plugin flavors however we choose to.
Lets not have Cubase decide for us which flavor is best, please, leave that to use and continue to support 3rd party plugin developers do what they do best.
What you are describing is precisely a ‘niche’ DAW. What you get what you add this kind of things you lose somewhere else. There are other DAW’s that are already dedicated to such tasks, I don’t think it is right for Cubase.
There is no comparison between real studio desks and a DAW, that is a apples to oranges comparison and any real Pro will recognize the attributes of every single piece of gear or software and know what each one is good for. Any piece of gear no matter how good or how bad is more or less exceptional at one particular thing. DAW that support 3rd parties are good at being extremely versatile, because of what 3rd parties have to offer.
Anyways, Cubase already has some emulation built in and I’m sure they will expand on that in the future but already so many users do NOT use the built in emulation in favor of customized plugins and workflow.
I wouldn’t mind some more filter eq options myself but I don’t want the whole Mix Console to be configured for the ‘built-in’ options.
don´t feed the troll…it´s not his first attempt to tell us what >we< want…
Totally agree. I’d rather have Steinberg devote their limited resources to creating new capabilities that I can’t obtain by purchasing a plug-in (and of course also fixing bugs).
And while this is strictly an opinion, I absolutely believe that someone like UAD is going to produce a better SSL emulation than Steinberg. It is after all their bread-and-butter.
This is true (at least in my case).The world is in a strong crisis and the money does not fall from the sky.This is not a secret: the majority of the musicians are poor.But there is some users here who already have all the plugins that they need(maybe more) and prefer to see cubase more oriented with the workflow and the stability(wich is not wrong).In my country (France)some journalists from audiofanzine have also declared that the most expensive version of Cubase was well below the concurrency in terms of supply plugin (compared with the competition).But i don’t believe “better plugins equal better music…”.Keep your money and see what is the best for you…
“traduction google…”
Cubase is getting a lot better lately.
Problem was always, in my opinion, the lack of a proper channelstrip (solved with version 7.0) and the lack of a proper algorithmic reverb (solved with version 7.5… and no, convolution is NOT for everyone, it’s mostly useful for the virtual scoring stage, but close to pointless for everything else).
Before 7.5, Cubase wasn’t “complete”, as in “useful out of the box”, because a good quality reverb is important even for someone who just doubleclicked on a DAW icon for the first time, so basically it was like “give me Cubase, but also give me a channel strip and a reverb plugin, so I can really use it”.
Of course, I would never trade my 2C-Aether or LexRandomHall for Revelation, but it was the right thing to do and exactly the right reverb to bundle with a DAW.
(I wonder if the reason for the late addition of this “must have” was that programming a good reverb is so complicated that only a handful of people can do it?)
Having said that…
…many of us would like to have options in the channel strip. I agree that it’s not necessary to include console emulations, because this is for people who already know what they want - but opening the channel strip to third party developers and especially giving them the option to replace the EQ (I seriously prefer the sound of the SSL native plugin over anything else, because it sounds so… hm… 80ish) besides the other parts of it would be the right thing to do.
I imagine having a “The Navigator mix console configuration” which is based around a SSL Duende Native implementation, but enhanced with the input stage from a Waves NLS channel “Mike” implementation (to make it all more Gilmourish / Waterish, which is, of any colours I like, the colour I put my money on, so I can breathe all the time, while I dream of playing a great gig in the sky, during a solar eclipse, on the dark side of the moon, with us and all them lunatics).
thought i had seen this post before.
if today I was say age range 16…30 years, just starting out and i decided I wanted to buy a DAW, there are other products out that will get the vote for my money… so I painstkingly agree with OP. (have used and other daws in various shapes and forms). but being a seasoned steinberg user, i prefer for them to concentrate on making the core functions better and improving on what they are good at, rather than spend dosh on such things that Sonar, etc, has… which will be transferred to my pocket, believe me it will be dumped on the consumer whether you think so or not. the way forward for me is not the plugin route and as there is nothing else for cubase to introduce or improve on? errr oh yes there is!!! maybe not for you, but for an array of individuals out there all over the world including me!
I would prefer a stable flexible and intuitive daw giving me more options to be creative and takes 99% of what you throw at it. it should not cost more than it should. leave me to decide what major plugs I need, and i can configure my mixer to my understanding and preference.
so as not to sit on the fence, if you want sonar/reason/bitwig/maschine … then use them, they are all good in their own rite- hey u can even mix and match.
personally I prefer the way cubase is going that is why I came back to cubase after ten years absence. just felt right like coca cola, Heinz,Kellogs…
(have to mention though - bugs, not so much!)
oh sure, those were the problems with Cubase. Not the impossibility of re-arranging track in the mix console, not the missing undo for the mix console, not the impossibility of saving mix console scenes, not the impossibility of preserving mono tracks when exporting stems (unless 1000 clicks), not the missing of a bounce in place function, etc…
And still in 2014 we need to manually copy files with the settings, etc… as we don’t have an open dialog window where to choose our preferences/settings/etc from.
but sure, what Cubase was missing was an algorithmic reverb…even though many 3rd party products are better.
dr4kan, those problems are all real.
But, still, a DAW without a proper channel strip and a proper algorithmic reverb is not complete.
I want the track rearranging as well - and the undo in the mix consoles and all the other things you mentioned.
Right. The lack of “bounce in place” is a very bad omission.
Hmmm … 
I’ll crawl back under the bridge now.
Eventide UltraChannel ($249) is free through the 8th july
eventideplugins.elasticbeanstalk.com/ultrachannel.jsp
they ask for your ilok account name and a mail adress.
Within a few minutes I had this plugin up an running on my DAW 
Steinberg does read these, however this one has too many different requests to be understandable. Moving to lounge…
Isn’t the cubase mix console a “flavor” right now?
I don’t want to speak for TheNavagator but I’m hoping the main emphasis is “open the mix console to 3rd party developers.” I have been saying this since day #1 of C7. Has Steinberg ever seriously considered this?
I would love to have an SSL emulation instead of the Steinberg code. Others would love to have an API or Harrison console. Sure many seem to be happy with just the basic package, but IMO a great DAW is about customizing it to the user needs. And opening up the mix console so the user could purchase a 3rd party package and customize is what would make Cubase a truly great DAW. Just imagine if Waves, or UAD offered integrated packages for the Cubase mix console.
Hi, do anyone know that Cubase console is? It’s their own algos? Or they take it from somewhere as emulation? Specially strip EQ… I guess maybe it could be from Yamahas consoles? Any word I can’t find about it…
Navigator is correct, the MixConsole should be completely modular.
Mixing should not be proprietary affair but rather one which is open to other experiences and most of all interesting and fun to use.