Nuage uses it’s own specific mixer views.
So although the Mixer redesign was somewhat needed for Nuage, the Nuendo Mixer layout has no relation to it.
Fredo
f
So, all this was done to us without any factual constraints?
Just a brain-child of somebody who thought it might be a good idea to design it this way?
Prost-Mahlzeit… Thanks a lot! Is the Hanseatic fish market closed?
However, it hit the wrong nervs at my bottom…
Big K
Well then, this tells us that there is no hindrance to having some of the things we’re missing put back.
Thank you for finally clearing that up! And although I appreciate the input, like many others here, I really would like to hear some more from Steinberg about these changes and whether some of our concerns about previously available but now missing accessibility/functionality will be addressed.
Kind regards,
Ray
After spending some time on N6, I agree with the request of this thread.
I do like a lot of the new features of N6, but I want a mixer that is clear in use and in feedback.
Thank you.
I’ve been saying this for a long time - 4 Studio Sends is just not enough for a professional DAW. As there are 8 Inserts and 8 Sends available in Nuendo, it should be possible to develop a system where 8 Studio Sends can also be provided within the same Rack design space. I have no idea why Steinberg completely ignore all suggestions to increase the number of Studio Sends available.
“might”? Why would you first say that “although the Mixer redesign was somewhat needed for Nuage, the Nuendo Mixer layout has no relation to it.” only to now seemingly taking that back?
When I use a control surface it usually has two things: It has a physical controller (knob, fader or button) and some text describing what it does with few exceptions. So if I want to control, say, which monitor source I’ll be using, I’ll be looking at my control surface, find the group of buttons that control Control Room, read the text beneath the buttons, find the right one and push it, right? What does that have to do with tabs in the Nuendo CR GUI? Does the Nuendo mixer redesign for Nuage necessitate tabs in CR? Why does Nuage’s knob require Nuendo’s CR to use a slider???
Fair enough. A solution needed to be found. I’m certainly not arguing that all of the GUI is undesirable. I can absolutely see a need for a tweak of the GUI to account for current and upcoming features. However, and for example, in relationship to what you just pointed out, why would the edit window need the design it did? It fits well within most resolutions simply because it’s a lot smaller than the mixer as a whole. Just look at the comparisons posted by another poster between new and old and it simply seems weird to cut information/setup options out of the edit window rather than retain them and add more to it.
You do this from time to time when you’re talking to me for some reason. I did NOT say the basic concept of the mixer is a “big mistake”, so don’t go imply that I did. It’s annoying.
Yes, in principle the above would be correct. The question is what happens when most users seem to be “concentrating on” pretty much the same bits? Because it seems to me that most of the criticism ends up being about roughly the same handful of things missing, not a big “pile” of things.
It’s quite telling that Steinberg remains silent and you only respond to general commentary. Take for example using the near universal symbol for on/off two different ways; in one place it’s actually on/off of a plugin, and in another it’s bypass. You were free to comment on that as was SB. Neither did. That has nothing to do with the screen real estate or resizing, just crappy design (because it’s inconsistent).
If you and Steinberg are right, then why not communicate the ideas to us so we understand why there’s a reason for all the tabbing in the CR, for now being required to select a mixer section before using key commands (garbage), for symbols to use inconsistent fonts and be used inconsistently, etc.
I’ll just note that you have absolutely no problem with people talking about the mixer GUI in that other Nuage thread as long as they are making positive comments about it (e.g. csd), or as long as it’s you yourself commenting about it. Forgive me for saying that I find that line of moderation is unimpressive.
I’m not going into politics, neither will I try answering the specific questions for what reason this- or that has been done/changed/redesigned. Simply because I don’t know all the answers myself and because one can’t give a yes/no answer to most of the questions. I don’t believe for a second that the developers “just did something” without thinking about the consequences. It simply is not as simple as an “outsider” thinks it is. And I think that is also the reason why you don’t see any participation from the Steinberg people.
Fredo
I find it curious that you have absolutely no problem stating things as fact or ‘most likely’ or whatever, but whenever someone questions that you reply with something like the above. In other words when you make a claim it’s sort of ‘ok’, when the rest of us do or question yours it’s time to “not going into politics” or “not try to answer specific questions” etc.
A very convenient way of discussing things, particularly as a moderator.
I would feel more comfortable if Steinberg issued comments about their intentions with the mixer. I am hoping that they really will fix most of the problems that have been outlined and quickly but the silence creates some anxiety as is evidenced here in many threads.
Dean
You seem to forget that I do not work for Steinberg and that I can’t talk on their behalf.
I only express my personal point of view and I share the little information I do have.
As said, there is no simple answer, and when things are looked at through a magnifyig glass, it makes it even more difficult.
So any answers I (or Steinberg) can possibly come up with, always result in a politics.
And I have decided that I wouldn’t take part in these kind of discussions anymore.
Been there, done that. Life is too short.
Fredo
Dear Fredo
This is just a little too short …
Consequences are that SB looses customers and gets bad words from their very own existing users.
That is probably the least thing any “normal” company needs.
And I am a friggin’ insider, too. I sit INSIDE my studio and keep being annoyed by the changes they made.
It seems, some around here do more thinking then they do at SB and that is what scares them from showing up.
And… wasn’t it once: He who pays the piper calls the tune?? Who pays ??
Anyway, Friday I start the next major project. Not on Nuendo, but on Presonus Studio One.
Just to find out how it rocks. If I get along with it, I won’t be seen much around here, anymore.
Big K (after 23 years finally fed up with SB’s attitudes)
First you say the mixer layout has nothing to do with Nuage coding and then you say the opposite. I point out your contradiction and it’s politics?
You’re right. Life is too short. Perhaps you shouldn’t say anything then.
Hello,
the Nuendo 6 mixer has been developed in parallel to Nuage. We planned for the renewal of the software mixer already for quite some time. When the Nuage development/design became more concrete, it also became obvious that an adaptation of the mixer would be required to guarantee seamless integration with Nuage. Things like window re-sizing for different screens have been part of the Nuage requirement list and found it’s way as permanent feature into Nuendo. Other things such as Block Mode are features just for Nuage users. The Channel Strip, for instance, has been a planned feature within the Cubase/Nuendo software development scope right from the beginning and wasn’t based on the Nuage development.
We recognize that certain aspects of the new mixer aren’t smooth to operate; however, with the latest updates we have achieved some progress. Nuendo 6.0.6 is in the making currently, again fixing and improving things related to the mixer and many other program aspects. A detailled list follows.
Thanks,
Timo
And what about Control Room?
Thanks for getting back to us Timo. It helps.
Dean
Thanks for commenting, Timo. But I see nothing in the list about giving us back the full transparent view of the virtual mixer, including plugin enablers, and (optionally?) taking away the hover buttons which drive me mad. These changes have wrecked a workflow, hence I am still with N5.
The whole point of the on-screen mixer was to give an easy overview of the mix - to mimic a classic console. This was also necessary when using the system with control surfaces that only allow parameter access to one channel at a time. All of this info has now been hidden and you have to go searching for it. It seems madness. Sorry.
I don’t know why I bother. I should know by now that anything you guys contribute with will be stuff only vaguely related to what we ask you about, and not a direct response. Only think I know is that I’m increasingly irritated by Steinberg’s avoidance of certain topics Timo.
+1 , then, +1, then+1
+3000