It would make organization of tracks so much easier.
Please let it be part of 10.0.30…!
It would make organization of tracks so much easier.
For those saying no - please actually go and look at Studio One’s implementation of this - all folders load by default as a normal cubase style folder track, but at the click of a button it turns into a ‘group folder’ which also acts as a bus, routing everything contained in the folder through it… I also sometimes use folders only for organisation, so wouldn’t want it switched on all the time either, but surely you can all see why this might be super useful for many users?
… just because it has not been mentioned yet, in the MenuBar–> Edit–> Macros–> “Selected Tracks To New Folder And Add Group Channel”.
Not as requested but maybe usefull to some.
It’s of course a useful macro but it has nothing to do with the request and doesn’t add the functionality and organizaitional benefits of the requested feature.
All workflow must be easier. In many ways.
1 Group track should work as a folder track and appear above the grouped tracks. Why should I go to folder with grouptracks and search the track I need every time I want to change something for the group? And group tracks should be able to contain any type of tracks. It’s perfectly made in abletone with help of “external instruments”. For those who are too conservative should be an option to use it like it currently is. But
2 Any automation parameter envelope should appear on timeline on the same track after clicking on it.
3 If the tracks are already selected their faders should work like one without any more keys pushed. I already made a selection. Why should I add Alt+Shift to move their faders as one?
4 One should be able to add a description for Marker just double clicking on it.
5 Why not use a key command to add a marker and activate it to enter its name after adding?
Currently all is too complicated. It’s overloaded with rare on use functions, but common and simple functions realized in a really bad way.
Exactly what I was contemplating just last week. Like in Logic - Group (Folders) can be automatically summed to a bus (or not if you choose), and any other midi or audio track from outside that you drag into the group gets automatically routed to that Groups output bus.
I would love to use Cubase more often, but just these simple things makes life easier which is why I cannot use cubase for may day job.
Simply create a folder with a group track at first position and then add all the audio tracks inside. Use a console to route all the audio tracks inside the folder to the group.
I personally, like to keep groups and tracks separately. Also, it’s very useful to have 3 console windows - one for groups, one for audio tracks and one for FX-tracks (it’s possible by using filters in the console).
I hope Steinberg read this thread.
We really need this functionality to enhance the workflow.
Do you really think that it’s simple!?
To (create a folder with a group track at first position and then add all the audio tracks inside. Use a console to route all the audio tracks inside the folder to the group)
instead of just:
select tracks+key command to create group.
It’s even easier to say or write.
Are you serious? Even keeping in mind that there will be an option to have groups and tracks separately, and fx tracks and all that stuff that makes you lost in all those options and screens… All of that for me is a real mess! Tonnes of tracks for other tracks and options for options…
I want it simple. I don’t want to loose time for that.
I really hope that Steinberg are wise to make changes.
This could be an useful feature.
The “simple” solutions people against this feature offer are not simple and, moreover, you end up having much more tracks.
I mean, one of the things I don’t like of Cubase is that you need A LOT of tracks to do simple things like… markers, time signature changes, tempo changes, MIDI/Return in racks/itracks. That’s another one, why we have instrument tracks and racks? They are almost the same but no one of them is able to work perfectly fine because it would need features of the other kind of track. I mean, why not a track who cover both worlds?
Steinberg should take this kind of things into account and rethink the track system a bit in order to allow faster workflows without quitting the old school workflows. Yes, it sounds ambitious but Cubase is in fact an almost 600 € program that charges us 50-100 € every time they add a feature or two (which is in the .5 updates) and Logic X, Studio One, Digital Performe, etc… are 200-400 €. I mean, I love Cubase but I don’t like this things.
I’ve been wondering about this for a while. The ability to have your group track acting as the folder track, hell even better The group track could even be a VCA fader as well as the folder track? This would save me at least 20 channels on my template. Anyone from Steinberg taking any notice?
Dumb idea, really
I don’t want my tracks was in groups they are routed in.
Go use FL Studio. It has just the one track type. Everybody is happy.
How is combining the functionality of folders into a group track a dumb idea? It wouldn’t affect the usability of both features negatively in the slightest?
The speed/workflow would be improved and you’d have one less channel for each group… sounds like a win if you ask me.
Everybody at this forum are so greedy for fast workflow (honestly, just being lazy and don’t realize that their workflow aren’t gonna speed-scale forever) that they started to take already fast Cubase’s workflow for granted. Go and try other DAWs and then come back to talk about workflow speed. What other daws do you have experience with?
I don’t see any point to discuss some whistles and bells while Cubase is lack of some essential functionality which makes it behind other DAWs
And this breaks the consistency. Cubase doesn’t have hybrid tracks, And I think it shouldn’t in the future,
You’re talking but nothing is coming out of your brain that shows any real understanding of why different people like different things. Why not have the feature? Why is it so offensive to you that people who spend a lot of time with large templates and smaller screens could use a little boost in their workflow? C’mon dude show some respect. It’s not about being greedy… this forum has been put up with a feature request section in it for this very reason…to discuss features/pros/cons… if you don’t wanna discuss them, f*ck off.
There’s nothing wrong with FL studio, either.
But nobody are using it for multi-track recordings fyi.
I’m discussing it, ain’t I? I’m studying neurophysiology and I really knows well how people differs. But check out the problem: the really needed features are not the one, people are crying the most about at this forum (especially unskilled people (fiy I don’t doubt ur skills, just saying)).
You won’t deny that there are more “noobs” than “PROs” in the world, simply because being a PRO is hard. So noobs will get together and will shout their noobish ideas. And PROs will shout theirs, but they will always be a minority.
So whom Steinberg should listen too?
I’m here not to say your idea is bad. I am here to say there are some more important problems to solve in Cubase.
And you can have a test: if you can name a few bigger issues Cubase have, I’ll consider you as a man who knows what is he talking about.