I was pointing out the futility of pigeon-holing.
And jazz, also, was described as “jungle music”, in it’s early days.
Can you imagine being there and seeing the old-timer’s heads explode when guys like Coleman and Coltrane started doing ‘their thing’??
No, I can’t. That sounds like a fantasy. Do you seriously think only “old-timers” were reacting to people like Coleman, Monk, Davis, and Coltrane–and not their peers from the same generation, or the younger musicians who were directly influenced by them?
My objection wasn’t referring to the “trendy bubbly” part, though.
What I meant is I don’t see contradiction in someone finding flat “efficient” and skeuomorphic “stunning”. 
But even if, there’s nothing “bubbly” about Reason’s GUI either. Neither “bubbly” is skeuomorphic, unless you prefer bathing your electronic gear in liquids. I don’t 
The problem happens when you claim software A is bad because of skeumorphism and how it’s silly to have software imitate old interfaces then say software B is great because it imitates old interfaces. You’re defending opposite points of view.
Bubbly interfaces weren’t real physical things.
Skeuomorphism imitates real physical objects, not computer GUIs:
Liking Reason’s skeuomorphic GUI (and frankly, it’s very stylized unlike plugins from e.g. Arturia, or Pulsar to just name two) and disliking MaxOS X’s “bubbles” or Tahoe’s “glass” aren’t contradictions.
But then you’re making your own user interface, many of which I had to tweak for my own personal use due to poor readability, wasting multiple pages, etc.
Every year we complain about the UI and the terrible color scheme and every year Steinberg does nothing about it. My girlfriend is a visual arts savant just have her do it. Call up somebody who is gifted with visuals and have them cook up an ingenious colorway. It shouldn’t be that hard. Maybe if we post about it in German they will listen.
Having the vision is one thing. Having the ability to transfer that into reality is another.
Unless it really is.
This is a very strange statement 
.
Well, as a matter of fact, Steinberg changed quite a lot GUI wise over the past years/decades.
There will always be one group that wants to keep everything as is and another group that prefers the new design.
I can understand both sides and I also see room for improvement with regard to readability or useful scaling/colour scheme options.
However, I believe that Steinberg listens to their customers by trying to find the best possible vision based on surveys and their experience. Ressources are limited and can only be allocated to a limited number or prioritized projects. Sometimes, it aligns with your priority no.1, sometimes it doesn’t. At the end of the day it’s up to you to go with it or not.
This is the the kind of comment that I find a little niggling. It seems that it’s quite common in this forum that if an opinion is shared by a relative small number of other users here it is assumed it’s the whole Cubase user base that agree.
I wonder how many people there are happily using Cubase in their day to day music making that have never even thought about looking at this forum.
In a nutshell No “We” don’t complain every year about the UI. Many of “US” might be quite happy with the UI.
If Cubase is not for you fine. ..Shut the door on your way out but don’t just assume you speak for everyone.
I have not complained about this. Yet you said “we.” Didn’t we just have this chat last month or was that someone else? Are you somehow representing me?
I’m not implying I like or don’t like the proclaimed “terrible color scheme.” I have my own subjective opinions. But I take exception to your “we” because that kind of makes me feel left out like I’m not part of the club.
Did she apply for the job?
Thanks for not proclaiming you have 30 years experience in graphic arts, therefore you know that it’s “easy.” From what I have heard…it’s not very easy especially with an annual company budget and a very long feature request list.
However by all means, if there’s an opening, make sure she applies for the job.
Actually, could you explain “terrible color scheme” because from what I have read here, which might represent 1% of all Cubase users, it’s not just the color or the scheme.
Cubase is Cubase.
There’s no need to force yourself to use it if you don’t like it. There are so many other choices.
I have been pretty critical about the GUI since Cubase 13. But I do think many of the recent changes are a step in the right direction (more or less) in my opinion, however the following areas deserve careful consideration moving into the future:
- Readability and text legibility
- Contrast and accessibility
- Clear outlines, borders, and visual separation between interface elements
- Thoughtful use of gradients to improve depth and hierarchy without adding clutter
- More user customization options for text size, colours, contrast, and overall appearance
- Additional built-in colour scheme presets, offering a wider range of professionally designed themes (e.g. high-contrast, dark, light, neutral etc.)
- Consistency across Cubase, Steinberg VST instruments, and plug-ins.
- Finding the right balance between iconography and context menus so features remain both discoverable and efficient
- Careful consideration of when knobs provide a better user experience than sliders, and vice versa, depending on the parameter being controlled
User Interface Strategy Analysis
Current Interface Challenges To ensure long-term product consistency, Cubase would benefit from establishing and adhering to a standardized Graphical User Interface (GUI) framework. Given the application’s immense complexity, executing a comprehensive graphical overhaul in a single release is inherently difficult. However, the current strategy of altering the design philosophy across release cycles frequently results in a fragmented user experience, where recently updated modules coexist alongside visually outdated legacy components.
The Case for Design Standardization Over recent iterations, the development team has successfully transitioned toward a cleaner, flat design aesthetic. Permanently committing to this unified visual identity would mirror the strategies of leading global brands. Organizations with strong market presence consistently leverage strict standardization of fonts, logos, and design languages to build enduring brand recognition and user trust.
Industry Benchmarking: Ableton Ableton exemplifies the commercial and functional benefits of a stable visual identity. Ableton Live 12 retains the fundamental GUI principles established in its earliest iterations. This steadfast approach to design consistency has not hindered market performance; rather, it has sustained strong sales and cemented the software’s interface as a highly recognizable industry trademark.
In other words: KISS ‘Keep it simple stupid’
If you dont need to focus on GUI, you have more time to focus on bugs and development of the applications functionality.
Sort out your dress sense, get your hair cut, wear the right shoes, then focus on your personality, a well dressed nutcase is better than a scruffy person with a bad taste in haircuts and shoes, who has it together mentaly.
1st impressions count !!!
Ferrari make red cars, Johnny cash wore black for 60 years on stage, coca cola comes in a red tin…
Cubendo → flat design and minimalism for a very complex piece of software in the background.
I have Live Intro or whatever it’s called, I opened it, closed it…just not into the My Little Pony look and non-musician workflow.
I think the important question to ask is this:
What do you have against old video games?
Another one:
Should Cubase look like a new video game?
Exactly. I don’t get some people. I NEED my cubase v.-300 to look just as it does. I have all my open screens just the way I like.
Still using 12 here for this reason. I don’t plan using 14 or 15 anytime soon even though I paid for the upgrade