Getting a Send FX such as reverb should be a one click action, either choosing an existing effect (FX track) or an additional new effect. Click, select, let go → done. It would choose default settings that would be adjusted from there.
That’s just one example to begin with.
The issue here is one of efficiency. In a production environment where you do tens of thousands of clicks every day it does matter. Anything that speeds up the workflow and reduces the tedium does make a big difference to workflow and productivity. We have production deadlines and timeframes to work with. For example it is common for us to turn a track around for a client in 45 minutes. The less mouse work the better. Keyboard shortcuts are so much quicker. In the business it is I believe referred to as ‘automation’ and by the way automation is one of the main services that companies like Cubase provide to their clients.
Also you need to watch out for RSI on mouse clicks. If some of the contributors to this column are not concerned with such matters fine no problem. How many would also go and buy a computer with a faster processor, more RAM, faster hard-drive and so on? See the connection?
My view here as a professional musician and producer is that yes detail matters and it is in fact attention to detail which makes the difference. Does a guitarist make sure that a single-fret string-bend is precisely tuned? Yes of course. We are musicians so why not make sure we do things right? Simple. No contest. I win. so there… 
I agree with the OP. I think you should be able to click and type ANYWHERE you can set a parameter.
I also agree that some people I’ve read on here are probably not professionals (making MOST if not ALL their living with music) and are therefore content tinkering away at this or that in the software to get it just right.
Work flow and quick ways to accomplish things are of the utmost importance when you’re in the creative “groove” or on a deadline.
You know, some people even buy the software with delusions of grandeur that somehow, just by owning it and opening it up on their computer, they will suddenly be a producer or musician…
Here’s what I believe to be an almost certain reality…
So the contextual and hopefully constructive observation is 100% unrelated to the total power of Cubase. It’s one of the most powerful daws on the planet without any doubt. It’s related to things having nothing to do with that late stage development power and it’s deeper functions in some areas. I don’t comp, use VariAudio, Logical Edit, Drum Edit, score, etc in every session or even half of my production sessions so living without those things in most cases is not an issue. Those other things I actually do repeatedly in every situation pre and post production.
As relates to just mixing, post-editing if really “advanced” editing is even necessary at all… I’d never (in it’s current state) choose to mix in Cubase for the reasons I’ve outline above, even if I do choose it for production to take advantage of some of those advanced tools, if the project requires that.
So some of those people who like and were always loyal to Cubase are suggesting that it could perhaps tighten up some of those things so they can continue to feel comfortable in it and continue along the upgrade path. There actually are, in demonstrable areas, too many clicks, too many steps, too much distraction from the music and I think they - Steinberg - actually do recognize that on some level…
Cubase 6 is about making your music in the > easiest> , most effective way
I’ll wait for the demo to personally quantify the above marketing statement but C5 doesn’t fit that bill at all… relatively speaking. Not even close.
Certainly an appropriate response from someone familiar with other DAWs. And I concur. As stated, Cubase is a very powerful program and can handle audio very well. But the notion that it’s as optimized as it could be is simply rubbish. And I say that respectfully. But I’m also a user of Reaper, and while YMMV, Reaper’s ease of workflow, by any reasonable standard, is better than Cubase’s. And I’ve used Cubase for years and own Cubase 6.
I do love the eye candy appeal of Cubase and the included plugs. But re-thinking some of the workflow aspects of Cubase by SB would be a big plus to users like me. And I think they’re headed in that direction as evidenced by the new, and easy, way to comp. Let’s hope this progress continues.
-Rich
There actually are, in demonstrable areas, too many clicks, too many steps, too much distraction from the music and I think they - Steinberg - actually do recognize that on some level…
Not to take away from the request being made here but how in hell did anyone ever make a record before the dawn of DAWs?
These days nothing is a distraction from the music regarding simple button-pushing.
The request inherent in the thread has nothing wrong with it but trying to gild the lilies with statements like the one above will just make the sceptical a bit more sceptical. And give them a chuckle.
Guitars / keyboards / drums with strings etc. you don’t have to press, push or whack? God it must so take away from the music. Just push the buttons!
Really well said
And then there are those who try to squash any discussion by shouting “Same old, same old!”
Mr Goldsteins proposition has nothing wrong with it and all the “opposing” replies are just pointing out that life’s not really that bad. It’s not worth getting over emotional about as some posters seem to be going.
Otherwise nobody would ever learn to play a guitar with their left hand.
But to try and get positive.
If the thread read “Can these mouse-clicks be reduced?” would maybe lead to less emotive replies.
Programmers need focus so maybe identifying where “crowds” of mouse clicking occurs and how most users might be best benefited by a streamlining in those areas.
Not really productive quoting other programs because they might work, both in the foreground or the background, for the programmer in a very different way.
Aloha guys
I pointed out a similar prob with C5
But as I learned from other forum members the Cubase’s greatly expanded
key command function can really help to alleviate the ‘many cliks’ problem.
I had not used KC’s much before then. Now I could not work without them.
HTH
They’re doing exactly that already, as they should be, so I have no idea what you’re talking about exactly. 
If they’d copied half of the methods from the mixer (or other daw mixers) I’d have updated without even getting a demo… at that price.
See (below) your new C6 “right click to expose envelopes” and your new “Automation Scaler” tool. Direct copies as far as I can tell and good choices by Steiny actually, and apparently C6 users like these “improvements” very much and think they (gasp! the horror!) reduce steps and clicks.
All these native hosts copy methods from each other which is why people talk about them…
Anyway, I’ll stop “quoting other programs” here. I’ll never do it again, that’s a promise.
Best regards.
Ay. Tis a beautiful ting. What does it sound like?
This illustrates the point nicely:
There are easier ways to do things. Doesn’t mean Cubsae isn’t powerful, feature rich, a helluva program, superlative, superlative, superlative.
Just means that it has a lot of room for some workflow improvements.
AudioCave - Your posts are well thought out and always professional across the forums you visit. Thanks.
Thread moved to the lounge.
So does this mean Steinberg doesn’t want to know whether or where, in Cubase, heavy users would like the interface made more smooth and efficient?
Anyway, I’ll stop “quoting other programs” here. I’ll never do it again, that’s a promise.
Thank you. Bout time.
Thanks. I try to behave like a grown up.
It sounds fine to me, they all do. Here’s a “first draft” of a demo mix I’m working on in it currently. The only 3rd party plugs I used were Altiverb and Waves RComp (vocals). I still have probably two hours of work left to do on it to get where it to where I want it. More automation and some dynamic EQ on the vocals among some other things.
But sure… they all (hosts) sound good to me.
There are simple programs for simple users like Sequel and Garage Band that offer simple one click setups. Perhaps you should take a look at those.
Good grief, that’s fu**ing rude.
Did you read the whole thread before posting?
Sorry, I don’t come here to be rude, and it’s not meant to be.
It sounds like the OP is having to an issue with too many mouse clicks. There are other programs that are not as deep as Cubase, thus requiring less setup. Cubase is sophisticated software with many routing possibilities that not everyone needs.
I apologize, I don’t mean to make anyone feel stupid, maybe I am.
I don’t agree that it is too many mouse clicks, but that does not mean there is not room for workflow improvements.
Damn, this automation editing tool looks awesome to use!
What’s that DAW?