Use group tracks as folders

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 :poop:

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.

Because I don’t necessarily use or know about features that you do, it doesn’t mean I don’t know what I’m talking about. Now you are really being offensive. I haven’t the time nor the energy right now to think of issues I have with Cubase. In fact there aren’t that many that really bother me.

I’d quite like things to be just a little more intuitive and smart. And having the option to add group tracks/folder tracks wrapped into one to save endless moving around large project files when it can be less confusing. If you have to navigate less channels, does that not give you more time to enjoy making the music?

I would quite like the time/pitch algos to be as good as say, ableton though. but this again, is quite minor. Why make life harder when you can make it easier?

It’s not entirely impossible to achieve this in FL though.

Mate, do you know what legacy means? Some things will stay like they are - forever, get over it.
Like it’s not not impossible to mix a band if FL Studio, so it’s not not impossible to live without group-tracks-as-folders. Because the efforts aren’t worth the rewards.

Mate, do you know what legacy means? Some things will stay like they are - forever, get over it.
Like it’s not not impossible to mix a band if FL Studio, so it’s not not impossible to live without group-tracks-as-folders. Because the efforts aren’t worth the rewards.

Do you just talk for the sake of talking? Get over yourself. You act with entitlement and superiority. Your tone of writing and words just seem to condescend and belittle people.

I’m not losing sleep over not having group tracks as folders, it would just be a welcome feature. Other Daws have implemented this, and yes, Cubase may be superior in many other ways, but again, I beg you to ask yourself the question… Why the f**k not have it?


Simple and straightforward answer: because implementation of this duplicate functionality will take time, resources and attention away from the more important things. And some FR really triggers me because of how irresponsible people makes up feature requests.

If you are looking for a way to improve Cubase, maybe you would like to say something in these FR threads:

Some great requests in your list but lots of opinion on this stuff will still be subjective. I will delve into some of these issues and discuss a little more in detail later on, but again if the devs at Steinberg ever had the time to implement the smaller things, they would still be welcome to a high number of people… noobs or not! p.s by the way I really hate pros calling people noobs… You were a noob once… don’t be so hard on those starting out. Better to educate them than to rant/get triggered.

Cubase has it too, it’s called Instrument Track. But it’s half-baked.

Now we have Instrument Tracks and Instrument Racks, which are essentially the same and overlap in a lot of features, but at the same time they lack some features from the other.

Instrument Tracks are half baked, but Instrument Racks are neglected. You just have to watch the “output” icon, which is the same of the Instrument Tracks but bad placed. Also, you can’t save outputs as presets and outputs are not persistent (which means you can’t update your instrument, because you’re going to lose all the settings you did in the outputs).

I mean, aren’t you able to see which is the problem and why it is important?

Maybe you don’t use this kind of tracks, which is perfectly fine, but I think you would agree with me in one thing: They should “end” what they started (Instrument tracks) and don’t let the old way die (Instrument Rack).

Of course, Steinberg has the last word and I don’t know if they read this forums a lot. Well, they do read the one about the exporting video feature, promised for 9.5 and now for 10.5.

This is already a bit off topic, but it shares the same soul than the OP request. Improve the workflow. And are related in a way, you have to use two tracks to do what could be possible (and better) in just one track. Especially for larger templates.