Boom on, baby! 
1 Like
Technically speaking, clip launcher was invented and initially used by early gen X guys, almost late boomers. So thatâs very outdated too. I want something more modern.
1 Like
A dozen or so years ago when my performing days came to an end and I moved onto production and mixing, my goto was Maschine and Ableton. All well and good for certain types of music, but I pretty soon became frustrated with the Ableton clip launcher, and discovered the limitations of the Live standard workflow, and ended up with Cubase.
As others have said, the likes of Live do a job of clip-based composing and performing, but I canât see any benefit for existing hard-wired CB users to have this functionality added in.
Another thumbs up for the @tompisa âBoomer Workflowâ 
Coincidentally, I see that Kontakt 8 has introduced something called Leap, which appears to be a clip launcher?
I wonder what impact this might have on the future of Maschine?
https://www.native-instruments.com/en/products/komplete/samplers/kontakt-8
1 Like
I agree, how can it hurt? those who donât want to use it simply donât have to. btw, if cubase did have something close to a clip launcher, itâs called groove agent. itâs a good clip launcher too. and perhaps thatâs what they should do and it might keep the purists from torching us all - a plugin, internal one, but I mean a really good one. Something that can take off where loopmash ended and then some.
1 Like
I think a lot of the folks that are just getting into it donât realize Live was designed exactly for LIVE performances. I can still remember the old âliteâ versions that came with a couple things I bought, it couldnât even do MIDI yet. What little linear and MIDI aspect the arranger has in it was added as an afterthought years after Liveâs workflow was well established.
You donât even have a rewind/fast forward in the arranger and theyâre at version 12 now?!?! Itâs all mouse clicks for EVERYTHING. I bought 11 a few years back, loved the way I could manipulate audio so easily in it, but yeah when it got to the composing aspect, it left a lot to be desired. I ended up like six months later getting ANOTHER cross grade to Cubase 11 when they announced 12 was coming and forgot Ableton was even installed. Never once used the clip launcher aspect of it either, because thatâs just not the way I write stuff.
Groove Agent SE even comes as part of Cubase, but that would require people to actually read the manual. Itâs so much easier to just jump on here, suggest that seasoned users are too feeble-minded to appreciate current trends in sound-making, and lobby for the entire application to be re-written to suit their particular requirements.
5 Likes
I know what you are saying but letâs be honest, I donât think anyone is expecting the whole package and the way it works to be changed to suit the âloop generationâ. And it doesnât need to either. Look at logic as an example, They have incorporated a clip launch style arranger which sits along side the traditional arranger view no problems.
Btw, another reasonably straight forward way of achieving something similar is with track versions. Instead of being different takes like most people probably use it for, it could be a whole different style bass line or drum pattern, track versions also apply to the chord track and the tempo track (I think). Switching between them is instant only drawback is its only for audio clips (parts).
1 Like
I voted yes initially, but decided to change the vote to no. I still think clip launcher is a great feature useful for traditional composers (not only loop-based, DJ and EDM crowd) and Cubase should in principle have some flavour of it.
However, after spending a month using Cubase intensively as a new user (who also uses Logic, Dorico and has some Ableton Live experience), I have to say that the DAW has a lot of issues that should be urgently addressed before even considering a clip launcher. Some of the examples:
-
automation UX is inconsistent and the interpolation of ramp and BĂ©zier curves is broken for MIDI CC in both CC lanes and automation tracks
-
automatic tempo detection works very badly. In addition, manual correction during the detection has been broken for years at sample rates other than 44.1 kHz. This feature is extremely important for transcribers and composers. For example, import audio to Cubase, map tempo, export tempo map to to Dorico for transcribing and orchestrating. Manual time warping works really great, but itâs time consuming. Logic Pro does very good at automatically mapping the tempo and itâs very easy to give it a hint when its wrong and reanalyse until the result is perfect, without needing to manually align every beat and bar
-
In order to get stem separation like in Logic Pro and some other DAWs (vocals, drums, bass, other), one has to pay extra 300 for the full version of SpectraLayers. SpectraLayers One, which is shipped with Cubase, can only unmix vocals. Again, stem separations is useful for transcribing. And isolated drums are useful to at least partially help with broken automatic tempo detection
-
UX around audio engine is terrible, at least on macOS. Cubase doesnât properly switch between headphones and speakers,. This constantly has to be done manually whenever headphones are disconnected and connected again. A dialog about sample rate change appears whenever other audio software is open, instead of handling that transparently (possibly in a configurable way). Most other audio programs on macOS deal with this in much friendlier way
-
Touch automation is broken
-
there have been some questions on the forum about hitpoint detection accuracy and recently VariAudio accuracy, though I canât say if those are really significant issues or exaggerations
-
etc.
And the worst thing, there is almost zero communication from Cubase developers/product managers about the issues. And even worse, moderators (not Steinberg employees) sometimes refuse to acknowledge the issues and report to Steinberg, gaslighting the users who present them.
This is sad because Cubase deserves much better treatment. I personally find some significant advantages over Logic. MIDI and audio editing is much faster and more powerful, project organisation is superior, mixing experience is better⊠But all that doesnât really matter when some core functionalities have been broken for years and nobody seems to care. I understand that the codebase is super old, but there is no way Cubase can survive if all that old baggage is not slowly rewritten in subsequent releases, while maintaining the workflow. Unless they want to keep the status quo by selling the software as long as the advantages can make-up for many deficiencies and discontinue it after that.
1 Like
Well the developers arenât under any obligation whatsoever to share any inside knowledge. Yes, other companies do, but that is THEIR choice, its not a law and most of them do not let you know whatâs coming.
Since when are the mods âgaslightingâ anyoneâs issues?? If anything, the moderators here are actually pretty helpful in forwarding your reports over to the team, and Iâve seen it done countless times when someone posts a nice detailed crash description along with the proper logs the team needs.
Its not the mods fault if a user canât accurately describe their issue in a manner so the rest of the forum can help, but everybody here certainly does try.
2 Likes
What I wrote is just my impression about Cubaseâs current state and I would really like to be wrong about it.
Iâve done gigs with cubase & groove agent as the clip launcher . You can also use the Media Bay & route it out a different output. But I would love a Live mode. Groove Agent is great too but Cubase needs something with advanced modulation Drum Rack.
I just want ReWire to work again. I get that propellerheads dropped it because reason is now a VST (that I havenât used once inside Cubase) but I still find myself using reaper with C11 this way and would welcome back being able to use ableton this way, etc.
Cubase should be Cubase. There is a reason many of us have been using it for 25+ years now⊠let Ableton be Ableton. I think many folks would just like them to talk like they used to, and there is no reason that shouldnât be possible on a modern computer.
I donât see why they could not just keep it simple and integrate what Sequel 3 already has with performance pads:
You are not changing much except adding a feature like chord pads, but another playback mode. They already have the code. Jam that into Cubase.