The 2024 Mouse Wheel Poll! Come one, come all!

Cubase
1
Choose ONE of the following
  • A. I like how things are right now. Depending on the position of the mouse cursor, using the wheel can change parameter values or scroll.
  • B 1. I like using the Mouse Wheel to change parameter values, but I don’t like having to move the mouse to the proper position in order to scroll. Changing values should be the default behavior, but scrolling should be handled with two modifiers, one for horizontal and one for vertical scrolling.
  • B 2. I like using the Mouse Wheel to change parameter values, but I don’t like having to avoid parameter fields in order to scroll. Scrolling should be the default behavior, but changing values should only be possible by using a modifier.
  • C. I don’t like using the Mouse Wheel to change parameter values. Scrolling should be the one and only acceptable action.
  • D. I don’t like using the Mouse Wheel to scroll. I have huge screens, and other means to scroll. I would prefer if the Mouse Wheel only changed parameter values.
0 voters
3 Likes
2

Voted A… :sunglasses:
.
.
.
[Do not slap…]

2 Likes
3

That’s the whole point! Each one should go for what they like!

I tried to formulate the sentences as neutral as I could, I don’t know if my limited english skills have accomplished the task or if some wording favors one choice over another. I hope not. :grimacing:

4

One could think differently, I guess, but I wouldn’t worry, at your place : you did a good enough job on that one… :slightly_smiling_face:

5

B2 - use a modifier + wheel to change values please!

4 Likes
6

While I voted C, since I never even knew it was possible to change parameter values with the mouse wheel (other than from discussions here when Cubase 13 came out and changed behavior in this area) and can’t imagine doing that personally, I think the wording of that one could be better. In particular, I wouldn’t want to eliminate the option for other users to use the mouse wheel for parameter changes if that is their preferences. So it would be better if choice C was something along the lines of having a preference that would only use the mouse wheel for scrolling (while still offering other preferences to make it only parameter value changing and/or mixed options that involve use of modifier keys to change a user’s default behavior to the other behavior).

In my thinking on this, it would be ideal to have a user preference for default (i.e. no modifier keys) behavior and modifier key options to provide any alternate behaviors. However, it may be that the context-sensitive behavior is more efficient for people who like to be able to use both behaviors (albeit at the risk of being confusing)?

1 Like
7

I appreciate the explanation.

13 didn’t bring a huge change to this feature, except for the option, in preferences, to disable vertical scrolling for the mouswheel and the mixconsole. Of course, this is for the racks section (not the faders part) and I suspect it had something to do with the very popular - from what it seems - new Channel Tab, because otherwise, it could be difficult under circumstances to scroll through the sections without changing values, since it’s a quite narrow zone to maneuver in.

Regarding the poll. It’s just a poll. Just to see how many of us like this or that way. This is not a referendum, this is not a feature request, only a curiosity of mine, that will produce a (probably) minimal set of data, considering the numbers of Cubase and Nuendo users that will not come to the forum to vote.

The options could be A, B1, B2, C1, C2 instead of C, D. Because that’s the main 3 categories I can discern:

A. People that like the current system as is (“smart” contextual dual-purpose.)
B. People that like the dual-purpose, but need a layer of separation between the two. (Think Object Selection Tool, and the Range Tool. We have the Smart Tool that unifies the two some versions now, but for some users it might be faster, easier and more accurate to change between tool 1 and 2 with the keyboard as before, than to precisely place their mouse in order to use the unified smart tool.)
C. People that DO NOT like the dual purpose of the scroll wheel at all, for any reason. (@rickpaul , I’m not suggesting that these people would start a campaign to remove the dual purpose, but rather, if an option existed that allowed them to disable it, they would take it.)

I find it astonishing that the vast majority of those of us that have voted so far really want the dual purpose function of the mouse wheel. I know I love it, but I somehow expected that there would be more people in categories C and D!

So it seems that the main divide - so far - is for, or against the need for a separation layer through modifiers. Between A or B1/B2, that is.

Thanks to everyone that has participated so far! I can’t see who voted for what, this we’ll find out once the poll is closed! Keep those votes coming!

8

Since the MixConsole exists the mousewheel behavior is a nerdy technical implementation and far away from professional meaning.
Now Steinberg said it’s complicated the do some changes on this “feature”.

1 Like
9

I vote for C but not sure if it took it or not.

I think something needs to change with the new preference. If you also feel this needs to be change go over to this link and vote the option so it shows the people at Steinberg that people want this addressed.