We're only allowed 4 votes. Let's make it count

Voting isn’t important, as you can see we got some features that no one requested, on the other hand lot of topics with many votes are old 4-5 years… So I wouldn’t pay attention to that tbh.

Votings a fraud anyway , look at the worlds governments :joy: :joy: :crazy_face: :see_no_evil: :see_no_evil:
Seriously thou , i f there were tags on voting subjects and you were only allowed one vote per tag that would seem fairer but would be a PITA the implement

Well, voting doesn’t mean Steinberg is going to introduce the feature or issue we request. Voting means Steinberg will review what we’re discussing. However, if you’re suggesting that Steinberg doesn’t actually read things that are highly voted, then nevermind. I will state that Studio One has responded on their forums to some things with many votes.

Just treat voting as being your top 4 wants. People can’t collectively come together in this idealistic fashion as everyones wish list is different, so the voting system kinda makes sense as it is.

But, I doubt it makes a huge difference anyway, as the larger changes which receive most votes will likely require multiple depts, which requires significant planning to see a project through to completion… And as a result it goes on the back burner.

I think this is why we see so many plugin additions with each update, they’re much easier to push through as somewhat isolated projects. And it’s an easy way to add value to a software product.

You only have to consider something like improvements to the articulation system, and how involved it would be to bring in 3-4 different departments in sync with each other, and out of other projects that they could be working on more independently.

Smaller teams can respond much better, and this is why you see other DAWs able to quicker respond and make changes around community feedback. Reaper being a good example as it’s only a few guys who work on that on the main.

You may be right and it doesn’t bode well for Steinberg. This voting system is effectively pointless then.

To be honest, I think the voting was a discourse feature that they’ve ran with, having good intentions for it. But, it all comes down to resources at the end of the day.

Well, I’ve only been in the Steinberg community for a couple years. So I wasn’t sure exactly what’s going on. I seem to have a better idea now…

@raino 's suggestion seems the most useful. What’s the point if we suggest things (that Steinberg cannot confirm or deny that they are a) great b) already working on c) indifferent (not agreeing with what Cubase is/wants to be) d) just a bad idea and then vote? Big deal, one hundred votes, so what.

On the other hand, a poll with 3-4 options (also countering the feature request) and a minimum target size (say at least 200) could give a better picture overall. Maybe some stuff are unanimous, so safe to implement no matter the difficulty. Maybe some stuff is polarizing, better not touch these at all. Etc. etc.

And keep in mind votes are not something Steinberg thought up. It comes with the Discourse forum.

I have voted for two features and if I hover over the vote button I see I have 4 votes left. I have 2000+ posts created (sorry!) so maybe you get bonus votes for post creation?

By the way I’ve also voted for the “how to create a bug report” apparently :scream: :rofl: It took a while to figure out how to remove that. You try to vote again when you have already voted and then the [remove] button appears …

I’ve seen Studio One handle this and they use some boilerplate language acknowledging that they’ve read something. After that point, it is up to us, the users, to assume that the company has to make a final decision on these topics.

Additionally, I’ve seen companies (a gaming company) outright create a voting structure for features. I don’t see that is being too easy for Steinberg to do. I think that is daring but still worth considering.

For example, Steinberg could create a voting system for usability improvements and we can vote which ones are priority. I could go like this:

  • Steinberg has a list of usability improvements they’d like to make
  • They provide this list to us
  • We vote/communicate on which improvement is higher priority.

I think this approach allows them to avoid the competitive mess surrounding features. Usability improvements are not the same as new features.

It’d be nice to just see some issues tracking database put up, that can be directly referenced to on release notes when fixes are made. Like there used to be,

That feels a much more pro-active way to operate to me.

I get what you’re saying, but it depends on the company too. It would be a blessing if somone with the pockets of, say, Ubisoft bought Cubase (that deep in digital content I mean). I’m guessing that animating a horse for an Assassins’ Creed game might receive as high a budget as that for Cubase and Nuendo together.

I mean ok, who wouldn’t want polyphonic variaudio? Automatic tagging using AI for tempo, key, instrument, spectral content in Mediabay, a modular interface that would allow us to flip from vanilla Cubase, to loop based non-linear Cubase, to Cubase Lab (Halion+Spectralayers sound design environment), who wouldn’t want OCR for music sheets and automatic extraction of MIDI from them, or any audio file?

It’s difficult to ask for groundbreaking features (in my opinion). That’s why most people ask for improvements and quality of life tweaks to what Cubase already is. That’s my interpretation.

And even those, they have to be prioritized. And what’s more, we can shout requests faster than Steinberg can play them. And, what finally gets in Cubase also has to go in Nuendo too. It’s very complicated.

But I agree that votes don’t do much, and it’s very good to discuss how it’s best to get our ideas across.

Making topics and support tickets have some weight but voting not so much and focusing votes wont do much, but your idea is good and personally like it but its naive in practice. Let me put this way:

  1. Disable mouse fader movement in the mix console 70 votes / 2018
    SUM: 5 years to make it happen

  2. Switching mono to stereo 37 votes / Actually this was requested back on old old forum (2 forums before this so around SX/SX2 era) but I remember there were thread with lot of replays on old forum for Cubase 8.5/9 so around 2015 if i recall correctly.
    SUM: lets say 5 years to make it happen but if I would said 10 no one would take that salty.

Those 2 threads are one of the top voted (keep in mind that there were more votes but ppl undo votes since we have that in 13 finally!)

So from devs perspective how hard would be to implement that? I wont bother to list all things and features that no one asked that we got in those 5 years and yet those two above were totally in dark corner for how many 5 years??? Lol

Please find if there are any request for new vintage Compressor or Equalizer and if you find see how many votes it has I will tell you 0 and yet here we are.

Only sense I see would have voting between Bug fixes bug fixes and more bug fixes and features. Other than that current voting system is close to nonsense imho.


Man, it’s hard enough keeping up with the dishes & laundry, now I’ve gotta be a vote accountant too?

Honestly I think the feature-request tag is much more important than the vote count. Those get tracked & presumably the devs can look at it and figure out what they want to do without needing to take any votes into account.

No one who’s been on the forum awhile really needs to look at votes to know what suggestions are popular or not. The posts themselves make that pretty clear.

That’s the impression I got when the forum migrated.

1 Like

I think so also.

1 Like

Cool. Then never mind. I think they should consider removing the voting then.

1 Like

Totally agree. It only seems to cause confusion & mixed expectations.

1 Like