Why are the EQ knobs in reversed order?


I get regularly confused when I use EQ knobs in CC121, because in Cubase the EQ parameters from up to down are:
GAIN - FREQUENCY - Q, but on the CC121 its reversed. I am just used to have GAIN up and Q down. Is this a model-specific issue, or can you make an software update, which permits to invert the EQ knobs like in Cubase software, please?

By the way, the new features in version 1.6 are great, I was waiting for some of them.
All the best.



Nice to see the same topic all other month :laughing:

Is a real annoying thing since beginning and SB was not able to, at least, give the user’s a hint, when it will be fixed.

Just wait some years…the next generation of CC122 :question: will be correct of sure :stuck_out_tongue:


I prefer it the way it is - don’t touch it Steiny!

Whichever way round it is, should be the SAME on screen and on hardware. I mean, DOH!

If some people enjoy having them flipped, then make that an OPTION in software.


Hey RokGeetar, that’s a joke, isn’t it?

That means, if you have a guitar with strings vice-versa, you just believe it and turn the guitar to play with the other hand :laughing:

Or you just have too much time to always think on mistakes the manufacturers made.

Just think about it :exclamation: If you really mean, what you stated herein, SB will never ever made a quality control for their devices, because the users will anyway adapt the behaviour on their mistakes :exclamation: :question: I can’t believe that.


No joke man - I never used the Cubase eq much before I got the CC121 (UAD Cambridge, which is still mostly used in mixing, with Cubase eq used mainly for tracking). Using the eq knobs on the unit is much more intuitive - gain is the most important knob for my use of the eq, and it’s the first one there to reach for. I’m used to how the CC121 works and don’t need it changed - by all means change the software to match, or create a preference, but I just wanted to make the point that not everyone feels the same way about everything! :wink:

So please don’t go telling me to agree with you, cos chances are I won’t! And you know nothing about me as far as what I would/would not accept from a product/manufacturer. Believe me, if something’s wrong with a product I am most vociferous in trying to get it fixed - I ain’t no shrinking violet! OK with that? :sunglasses:


To get the point:
The CC121 has been sold as an accessorie to the Cubase platform, right?
If the EQ is related to the SW, it should fit. Full stop!

If it’s not, the supplier has to modify it. That’s life!

I really use the EQ knobs on the CC121 and watch on the screen and this does not fit :exclamation:

So, the statement is clear enough…there must be a revision of the firmware of the CC121 to make this issue solved.


Nope - they would have to change the hardware too! Alongside the rotaries are G, F and Q, and they represent what the knobs control. If they only change the firmware then people will complain that the knobs don’t do what the legend tells them! :unamused: And Bredo and I will complain that we didn’t want it changed in the first place.

Solution is to add preferences in the software: easier to implement and less confusing.


Fully agree with adapting the changes to Cubase, but

  • what version? 4.5 / 5 / 6 / 7?
  • a lot of users don’t have the CC121. Why should they change their work procedure?

More easy to change the CC121 firmware (if you want to do it) and have the “wrong” naming on the left side of the EQ section. I don’t care anyway on this naming.
(Don’t forget, it’s the device, which is not fitting to the software)


It would be a ‘preference’ so they wouldn’t have to change their workflow! If it was incorporated in firmware we would have to install it as it would probably be part of a larger update. The unit is working as designed IMHO. You may not be worried about the letters down the side, but what about new users?

Anyway …

I think we need to agree to disagree here - moot point anyway, as nothing will probably be done about it either way! :wink:

I’ve written numerous threads about this on numerous forums including the old Nuendo forum.

The fact is for users of the CC121 and Cubase/Nuendo the EQ knob order should match. Lets not reinvent the wheel here… controllers should be in the same order on screen as well as on hardware.

So, The best option to resolve this blunder of a mistake is to simply make a preference in cubase and nuendo that allows the eq order to match cc121.

Why this situation exists nearly 2 years after the cc121 release completely baffles me…Steinberg fix this already!

Absolutely agree :exclamation:

So… return to the music…

:laughing: love the controller, still waiting for a preference ‘match EQ order to CC121’. Not that hard, unheard for years now :unamused:

so far for anyone with an analog knob feel, the CC121 EQ section is unusable. the scaleing of the frequency knob still feels wrong (slightly better than at the beginning) and the gain/q flip is a joke. my guess is that steinberg tries to hide an apparent ill-design. someone just did not pay attention when making the CC121. and changing it would be like admitting defeat. i am really angry about this. even more because the channel EQ is soooo much better sounding than sony oxford or uad cambridge. to be able to set it with the controller would be such a killer. after all this time i am still using the mouse… :frowning:

cubase is a superb sounding software and it would be great to have a well-working controller. so far, its only half way there. and i dont understand why there is no change… from a programming point it should be a matter of days… we´re only talking about swaping rotary encoders and a different scaleing…

Oh, what discussion have I started…

Actually, this one would be the easiest option, to match EQ order to CC121. I am absolutely sure, I would use this in software EQ and hardware controller as well.
By the way, CC121 isn´t working with the Cubase Studio EQ, isn´t it? Should do that too…

All the best.


The update from CC121 to CC122 will be a new, changeable aluminium panel with the parameters printed the right way…
:wink: All the best.



If we have to wait for another two years until this mistake is fixed by SB, of sure, we are no more able to operate the CC121 in the “right” manner, as it should be… :laughing: