The problem with the new mixer

Nuendo
1

Been thinking about this, from the perspective of working closely with a number of software developers over the last 25 years. I think the issue is…developmental compartmentalization.

Here’s what I mean. I would bet heavily that the Mixer is developed as a distinct subunit/branch. There are many signs of this. It has similar to, but not actually the same paradigms and constants as the Project window. So coming from the Project window, behavior is often close to, and yet still different than what is expected, which makes the experience challenging. Actually, it makes the experience illogical and less productive.

It seems that SB is attempting to unify the paradigms between the different windows, which could be great. However, the way in which it is being done is counterproductive because of the lack of unity in the development process. The traits I see indicate that 2 different people/teams are separately pursuing the same general philosophy in Project vs Mixer, but each with their own take on what is “better”.

An easy and illustrative example:

  1. The behavior after selecting multiple tracks in the Project window versus the Mixer.
    A. Press “M” key
  2. Project: all selected tracks toggle Mute condition
  3. Mixer: only one track toggles Mute condition
    B. Press “S” key
  4. Project: all selected tracks toggle Solo condition
  5. Mixer: only one track toggles Solo condition

The reason I point out 2 separate commands is because that indicates a decision, not a mistake.

So which is the “better” behavior? I have my opinion, but that is not the point. The point is that there is NO reason for the deviation in philosophy within a single application. The end user should reasonably expect a unified approach to such conventions between windows.

Until this developmental schizophrenia is resolved, all of the various other complaints/preferences/requests regarding the Mixer are somewhat irrelevant, in my opinion. Window focus issues, unexpected behaviors for reason “X”, redundant info displayed, etc are all dependent upon a unified philosophy, or the lack thereof.

Many other examples exist. For instance, if rolling the mouse over empty inserts in the Mixer displays “Empty”, then why not in the Project Channel Edit window? And so on. (Of course, most/all of us think it is not better.)

In my opinion, this is the root issue with the Mixer complaints. Addressing individual preferences one at a time will never be able to correct the bigger problem

Alright then! Thanks for letting me get that off my chest. And Dear SB employees. I have great respect for your efforts and use Nuendo to good effect daily. Please notice that this is posted here on the SB forum, not complaining on GS. I/we appreciate you considering my/our thoughts and suggestions.

2

It has been said, for Cubase 7 cycle, that the new mix console (and control room) is the first step in an overhaul of the app. Leaving the project page for the next phase (Cubase 8).

I think this is relevant to the Nuendo 6 and N7 cycle.

IF so they have a MAJOR job ahead of them. If the Project page will be developed in the same direction as the new mixer, I am afraid I have to permanently find another solution.
The amount of clicking and hovering for info CAN’T be anything like it is in the Mix Console and Control Room.

I guess we will see which direction Steinberg is planning for Cubase and Nuendo when Cubase 8 arrives, not so far away on the horizon.

PS. And the “Focusing issue” (inc some key command refinements) has to be fixed. A deal breaker IMO.

Hovering DO NOT need to tell me that a slot is empty (No effect or No send). I kinda see that :wink:

Why need to hover to see simple info like send level etc…?
You don’t need it to be in Alarming RED. You are not able to see that info across more than one track at a time, which we should be able to just by sweeping our eyes across all tracks visible on the screen.

Naaah, I gotta stop :frowning:

3

Luckily I seem to have a lot of work for the rest of the year. Hopefully I’ll be patient and busy enough to not get into 8.0. Looking forward to 8.1 :laughing:

4

Kinda what I was thinking too :smiley:

5

Another example:

The brushed steel effect I hated in the mixer has gone, but is still present in the channel faders of the project inspector.

More proof for the OP.

6

This may the best example of what I mean to say:

Project track: Record button is on the Left, Monitor on the Right

Mixer channel: Record button is on the Right, Monitor is on the Left

Such a small detail, and obviously, it’s a million miles away from a deal breaker. But one must ask, why? It may seem silly to point out, but it’s hard to see how that inconsistency would not be noticed and resolved in a single, unified team effort. And I believe that is how we got to the Mixer and Project windows not playing nice together.

7

I didn’t notice before… :slight_smile:

8

You are quite right - It is little things like this that raise the stress levels slightly.
:unamused:

9

Just noticed that they are the wrong way around on the Project window Inspector as well - If the Left-hand positioned Record Enable button is activated on a Track, the Record Enable button on the corresponding fader in the Inspector lights up on the Right; and if the Right-hand positioned Monitor button is activated on a Track the Monitor button on the corresponding fader in the Inspector lights up on the Left! - Actually, in N5 these buttons were not the same either - in the Inspector they were one above the other rather than side-by-side, which is not half as bad as being the opposite way around as they are now. And importantly, the shape of the buttons was the same in the Inspector and the Mixer. It would be nice (and logical) if N6.xx also had matching buttons. As it stands now, the N6 MixConsole screen looks like some alien, rogue screen from some other piece of software that has somehow become mixed up with Nuendo.

  • and the faders in the Inspector still have the brushed metal effect, even though it has been removed from the mixconsole.
10

it does start to feel more and more like a patched up pastiche of different pieces of code. what feels curious is how on one hand there is some obviously challenging and expensive r&d happening for nuage, the application it’s driving feels like it’s about to fall apart. (yet a lot of the issues seem rather trivial to fix, compared to the manhours that must have gone into nuage.)

11

This drives me mad all day. I posted about that some time ago because I thought of a bug or something is broken (in N5.5 and before it worked in the mixer the same like in the project window) - but there was not much interest.

I often use that toggle stuff to A / B tracks… bunches of tracks. Quicklink will not do it. I hope that will be fixed in the mixer, not “broke” in the project window…

12

A dumb decision. Clearly they either don’t have a strategy, don’t check the output, or don’t care, or a combination.

But given how little they participate here, and given how much any questioning of what motives are behind their inexplicable decisions is deemed ‘playing politics’ or ‘just wanting to argue’ (or whatever) we likely will hear no reply from anyone about it.

The context that’s interesting to me is that Steinberg keeps piling on resources on add-on software like guitar VSTi’s or whatever rather than making sure the host applications are top-notch. Silly and annoying.

13

Absolutely right, …
and together with poor labeling, this hovering stuff and what ever else …
this irritating, illogical and simply weird accident of a mixer is
raising … the … S T R E S S … L E V E L S … a … LOT.

Just get rid of it … :exclamation:

Big K

14

I has been said that the big mixer overhaul in the C7/N6 cycle is the first step in an entire overhaul. Leaving the project page up for next :confused: . So what can we expect?

If they fix/change the project page to follow the conventions (or lack there of), there can be some hefty discussion in these forums when the next major cycle is released.

Me personally, are afraid that Steinberg don’t “listen to anyone”. What exactly is necesarry to change in the project page, except some tune-ups?
My suggestion is to leave the project page alone, while taking two steps back with the mixer and control room (please make the free-standing Control Room a MIXER again).

And the “focusing issue”, plugin hiding behind the mixer (even when set to AOT), clicking and hovering to see vital knobs and info, is all “killing” me.

When Cubase 8 arrives, I guess we will see what path Steinberg has chosen.

15

I often forgo upgrading simply because I have better ways to spend my money and fixing something that is already working for me. But it’s been quite a long time now that N6.XX has been out and I just find it sad that the complaints have been so convincing that I’ve stayed with N5.5. Which WORKS. It’s starting to look like I’m going to miss the V6 cycle entirely. In the meantime I’ve been teaching myself ProTools which I got for $600. N5 is still my goto DAW, but when the day comes that it’s just too far behind and SB hasn’t found its way back to the path of a reasonable GUI…I will be sad about it. Nuendo WAS a great product. this company has mistakenly prioritized “new” over “fixing” again. And most mistakenly it seems taken the advice of a few post professionals by overbuilding the stock tools when most use third-party plug-ins anyway…apparently at the expense of fixing the GUI.

And the same problem remains when it comes to confusion over the “flagship” product versus the music production product. If Steinberg honestly expects professional music business is to rely on their product then they need to step up and provide a truly professional music product. That means including every single feature in Nuendo that could be useful in music production into Cubase. Or…stop hiding behind the excuse that nuendo is for post production.

There hasn’t been a significant upgrade to the Crossfade editor since I started using Nuendo in version 2. And yet it’s still better than none at all. I can’t imagine trying to edit together acoustic piano takes without it.

Yamaha and SB need to do an analysis of everything that changed in ProTools when Avid took over. It is that level of core improvement that’s needed throughout the SB line.

I’ve also been learning logic since it was only $200. Is anyone at Steinberg ever compared how easy it is to record, quantize and manipulate MIDI data in logic versus any of their products? The Steinberg quantize engine has always been awful and it remains so.

C7 / N6 was a bad misstep when a good step was really needed. The competition is incredibly well funded and they’re using their considerable resources. if Steinberg doesn’t step it up there going to get left in the dust. For God’s sake start licensing some of the great stuff that’s out there. Presonus beat SB to licensing Melodyne! Unbelievable.

Here’s a tip. Pay Guido anything he wants for GSI audio and lock up hands-down best Hammond in the business. His Electric piano instruments are better than SB’s too. Stop trying to sell all the good stuff separately too. have you been through the 34 gigs you get for $200 with logic?

Sorry, but it all pains me since I do like N5 but it’s slipping into history.