Too much existing functionality breaks after a new update

With this new update to Cubase it has become very clear that new bugs are not exclusive to new features. A heap of problems are added to features that worked fine in previous versions. This is a major problem.

For us users, we can’t trust a new version to be capable with our existing workflow. But worse than that, if every new release brings this many problems, then this means that for each new feature that is added, multiple bugs needs to be found and fixed, and thus an exponential amount of work is created. One step forward, two steps back is not a healthy way to develop software.

This all is not subjective. A glance at the bug reports/Issues forum:

Key Editor - Colors wrong in Chord Track mode
AudioWarp/Quantize glitches
Mix Console Top Menu Bar Disappears
Entering values on floating Transport Panel does not work.
Link settings not saved on importing trackarchive
MIDI ‘Editor follows event selection’ bug
MIDI Devices Setup Import Not Working
Cubase stops playing when switching windows

My point is that for Cubase to progress, there will need to be new features and overhauls. For one thing, automation right now is lagging behind the competition. But if smaller additions than that, like those we got in Cubase 9, already break so much old functionality, then can we realistically expect Cubase to receive large updates and keep evolving at all?

This is my main worry for the future of this software. There will need to be development focus on making Cubase expandable without this many issues. If anyone has more thoughts on this, please share.

So is this lack of sufficient quality control of the type you reference isolated to Steinberg/Cubase, or is it “the industry standard”? I’ve only used this sequencer (Cubase), so I lack perspective about others.

Over using a pretty wide variety of software, my experience is that new versions will have bugs but not in completely unrelated old areas. I don’t think this is a matter of quality control but the health of the program’s codebase.

If the Sampler Track has a few bugs because it’s new, then that’s expected. But if there’s a new feature and then Audiowarp or Chord Track coloring stops functioning, then this seems indicative of a bigger issue that I’m not used to seeing (to this extent).

Understood, thank you for the perspective of having used other DAWs/sequencers.

By “quality control”, I meant releasing products with bugs that reasonably would have been expected to have been identified and fixed before release. As this kind of thing isn’t new with Cubase releases, I have always assumed they didn’t have enough beta testers to catch them in time.

The alternative, perhaps what you are suggesting in the bolded portion of your reply?, is that problems of the sort you listed were known to Steinberg at the time of release, but they decided they couldn’t be fixed because of some problem with the “health of the program’s codebase”. That would imply they decided user benefits of the new functionality outweighed the negatives of the newly introduced bugs. I hadn’t considered that before.

I presume the reason why the bugs aren’t fixed before release is because the deadlines are so firm. Even if problems are known, by December it’s going to be released no matter what. Having more testers doesn’t matter if there is no time to make fixes.

The core issue though might be that too many bugs arise from code changes, and then the overall complexity makes fixing these slower. Just imagine if the bug fix causes another thing to not work properly…

I noticed every time there’s a major GUI redesign there issues. Remember Cubase 5-6.5 solid, Cubase 7 had lots of issues but 7.5 was rock solid. Cubase 8 is also solid but 8.5 was overdone.

Cubase 9.5 and 10 should be more solid than 9. Hopefully :exclamation:

The major window handling revamp was Cubase 8 though. Compared to that, not so much changed in 9.


The driving motivation here is profit not quality. And this is the downside of a profit-motive based economy. :frowning:

With all respect, I think it’s more complicated than that. There are many for profit software companies that deliver products that work as intended and advertised. Some users here report that other DAW sequencer companies are like that ( I can’t address that personally, have only ever used Cubase).

Legal or not, there is a definite cost to companies (measured in goodwill, resulting positive word-of-mouth advertising and the like) that advertise one thing, deliver another, and then don’t engage the customer base to address the issue. It’s interesting to see how different companies factor those more intangible things into their bottom line financial calculations.

I Agree in general a dreadful release not ready by a long way

BTW Key Editor - Colors wrong in Chord Track mode

That’s just a symptom, the bug is much larger

The chord track scale no longer “talks” to any class of track breaking a great deal of Cubase performance and compositional functionality, many of which were the much featured difference between Cubase and the composition.

How this could be missed during testing is astounding.

I noticed its symptoms within the first hour of use.


I agree. I don’t think this is the only factor – but certainly an important one.

I agree here too. Steinberg – for the most part – is certainly one of these companies.

I couldn’t have said this better myself. And this was the motivation behind my post. I think Steinberg should tweak their “bottom line financial calculations” by focusing more on quality than on profit for the very reason you alluded to above: producing a high-quality product leads to higher profits.

And to anticipate any misreading of my comment above, I’m not saying that Steinberg’s products are of poor quality. On the contrary, they’re great. However, in my opinion, more effort should be spent on correcting existing problems and being careful not to cause new problems when introducing new features. And I’d argue that both of these would be facilitated by not setting a release deadline in advance. Cheers…

To be clear, the point of my post has more to do with the importance of improving the health of Cubase’s codebase, maybe hiring on dedicated programmers to help with this. The finanical/marketing topic is another story and something that is already being discussed a lot.

I was about to apologize for steering your thread in a different direction, but then noticed that I had quoted you. :wink:

Anyway, I get your point. But practically speaking, delaying a release (to allow known bugs to be fixed) seems easier than “improving the health of Cubase’s codebase.” And that’s why I mentioned it.

HaHa …
they’re doing this “1 step forward, 2 steps back” - thing since soo many years.
It obviously works. Thus, it will stay …
( This time, it seems more like “half a step forward, 2 steps back” though :sunglasses: )

I only ever skipped V4.
Looks like V9 will be next … (maybe last …)


The chord track issue came to my attention after about 2 hours of playing with the new features. Why would I think to check if the chord colors got broken if Variaudio or the Chord track wasn’t even updated? I use this on almost every single session. And its not like I know i’m not going to need it before the session starts so to be on the safe side, i just open up Cubase 8.5. I have yet to record a session in Cubase 9.

This is not like going to the store, buying a phone for example, going home for a few days and realizing it’s shit so im gonna go get my money back. I spent $100 on an “upgrade” that im not using and I can’t even return it nor does anyone from Steinberg give me at least an eta when it’ll be fixed. Those $100 could have gone to a UAD plugin I was waiting to buy during the holiday deals.

Communication has always been bad with Steinberg. Ive been around since sx3. No email letting you know when the updates are going to happen or even after they happen. Almost like they’re scared to see what we’re gonna complain about so they sneak them out on us. I love Cubase and still think it’s the best but these things do aggravate the crap outta me.