Cubase 7 - What do you want?

[thehightenor]

Originally Posted by muziekschuur

What is a VCA in a DAW? I do know it is a voltage controlled fader. And it does not see audio. But I really dunno what that would do in a DAW?

They're really VCA "style" groups, well in Logic anyway, as opposed to true VCA groups, I think PT has a more traditional approach to VCA's in their mixer - but Logics approach to grouping channels where you can name a "virtual mixer group" and determine what will be linked, including automation edits - it really all I wish for in Cubase.

tht

[norbury brook]

Originally Posted by thehightenor

So in Logic if you have 12 backing vocal tracks and you want all 12 to raise up 1dB on a line and you don't want to group them to a bus you can just edit one channel and automation and the other 11 "linked" channels all reflect this edit.

Try doing that in Cubase 6 - you can't - and it really is an essential feature if you do a lot of moves in a mix.

but my response to that would be how would you do that on a $500,000 neve or SSL without sending to a VCA or group, that's what groups/VCA's are designed for and as a DAW user I work the same way hence the requests for VCA's. I can't imagine having 12 BV tracks in a project NOT going to a group,seems a crazy way of working to have all separate tracks but just linking them! then again I still see people putting reverbs as inserts on all channels that need them

As i said previously people work in very different ways, I've been doing this 30 years and came up through a 'traditional' way of tape and console so approached the DAW in a similar fashion, if i were just starting and had never used tape and a console I'm sure my DAW usage would be very different


MC

MC

[thehightenor]

Originally Posted by norbury brook

but my response to that would be how would you do that on a $500,000 neve or SSL without sending to a VCA or group, that's what groups/VCA's are designed for and as a DAW user I work the same way hence the requests for VCA's. I can't imagine having 12 BV tracks in a project NOT going to a group,seems a crazy way of working to have all separate tracks but just linking them! then again I still see people putting reverbs as inserts on all channels that need them

As i said previously people work in very different ways, I've been doing this 30 years and came up through a 'traditional' way of tape and console so approached the DAW in a similar fashion, if i were just starting and had never used tape and a console I'm sure my DAW usage would be very different


MC

MC

I'm not on a Neve or SSL.

If you have mixed extensively on Logic you'd know where I was coming from.

Take for example drums - personally I never bus drums I always run them direct to the main bus and add sweetening on a channel by channel basis.

Now if you want to bring up a hit for 1 beat - in Logic you just pick one of your 16 drum channels pull up the automation for that moment and all the other drum channels follow the edit - it's very liberating way to edit automation.

And it's definitely missing in Cubase for me.

Now I too came up mixing on boards I've been at this for 30 years!
But I'm on DAW's now - so I work in a different way.

YMMV - but that doesn't take away from my desire for linked automation and VCA style groups in Cubase :-)

tht

[DeadPoet]

- VCA groups
- folder/group multitrack editing that actually works.
- a better preset system that works for group and fx channels as well AND includes channel and send routing



Herwig

[lllubi]

Originally Posted by thehightenor

Now if you want to bring up a hit for 1 beat - in Logic you just pick one of your 16 drum channels pull up the automation for that moment and all the other drum channels follow the edit - it's very liberating way to edit automation.

and how do you deal with your reverbs ?

[thehightenor]

Originally Posted by lllubi

and how do you deal with your reverbs ?

?

tht

[norbury brook]

Originally Posted by thehightenor

Take for example drums - personally I never bus drums I always run them direct to the main bus and add sweetening on a channel by channel basis.

Now if you want to bring up a hit for 1 beat - in Logic you just pick one of your 16 drum channels pull up the automation for that moment and all the other drum channels follow the edit - it's very liberating way to edit automation.

But my point is; why wouldn't you buss drums? in cubase I'd just raise the buss group track for one beat, surely as someone who's grown up on consoles using VCA's/group(Buss) channels is the 'normal' way of working?

hence my request for VCA's like pro tools.

MC

[neilwilkes]

Originally Posted by norbury brook

But my point is; why wouldn't you buss drums? in cubase I'd just raise the buss group track for one beat, surely as someone who's grown up on consoles using VCA's/group(Buss) channels is the 'normal' way of working?

hence my request for VCA's like pro tools.

MC

I'm with you 100% on this one. Bussing the drums gives exactly what is wanted.....

[Blunt]

Originally Posted by Lights

- Logic lets you bounce an instrument to WAV so you can deal with it as an audio file. This is slightly different from a freeze. I want the best of both worlds. I'd like to be able to bounce to WAV and still have the original track in a "frozen" (unloaded) state and have Cubase group the tracks in some nice way (lanes?). So I can muck around with the audio in the WAV editor or in RX2, etc. But if I need to get back to the original MIDI it's right there.

+1 for this!
and Logic's bounce in place is much better than Cubase's bounce selection

[lllubi]

Originally Posted by thehightenor

?

tht

cant follow what you try to achieve with your use of not working VCAs

[muziekschuur]

Originally Posted by thehightenor

They're really VCA "style" groups, .............................Logics approach to grouping channels where you can name a "virtual mixer group" and determine what will be linked, including automation edits - it really all I wish for in Cubase.

tht

The usual automation does that? And bussing gives the sound.... So why this VCA thing? If a channel is assigned to a VCA bus it sound is relatively controlled towards the setting of that VCA bus...

So if channel 1 is at 60% and channel 2 at 70% and both assigned to VCA bus 1 and I turn VCA 1 down from 70% to 50% both levels (post fader) relatively go down... So there is some difference in sound and may be some phase shifting. But that is with a true console. How would that ever be implemented in a DAW?

They would apply the relative levels but cannot reproduce the console with "that sound". And any other console from "that brand" and "that type" can easily sound different due to different components used...

I cannot see the benefit. Could there be a VCA group plugin with some sort of emulation helping you? But I don't think that would help as analog components "age" and their sound changes tru time...

[Ivorydom]

It's surprising how many people are asking for better/different windows management in Cubase. If Steinberg does not change this in v7 then they obviously have no ears!

[thehightenor]

Originally Posted by norbury brook

But my point is; why wouldn't you buss drums? in cubase I'd just raise the buss group track for one beat, surely as someone who's grown up on consoles using VCA's/group(Buss) channels is the 'normal' way of working?

hence my request for VCA's like pro tools.

MC

If raise the level of a bus in Cubase that has the drums routed to it then your relationship to any FX on the drum channels is going to be out. It makes the FX now pre-fader for the drum channels.

But yes, PT VCA faders would fix this for me, although I still long for linked automation for many other tasks I like to perform in Cubase.

Maybe we're talking at cross purposes here?

I personally prefer linked automation for this task on a channel basis, but of course all these things are personal preference.

tht

[steveschizoid]

It will be interesting to see if Steinberg pays attention to the very loud outcry about the disappearing automation points...

However, I'd (1) like to see External FX routings saved with the project...this would have to be relatively easy to implement. I can do it manually if I wish to save external FX files for whatever configuration I want, close Cubase and load it to the preference folder when needed, then reopen Cubase, but what a PITA!

(2) I'd like for projects with variaudio to not develope cpu spikes that force me to freeze the tracks with variaudio.

(3) I'd like for the weird annoying windows behavior to go away - does anyone else experience this? - my project window will often move and become to large to fit in the allotted monitor space, and new projects always begin this way, and whenever I open up an audio or part editor window (in a new project) the windows will be way too large and require me to spend 20 seconds resizing them....it's bizarre. Trashing prefs has no impact, and this bug has been around since C5 for me. Steiny is, of course, no help.

[rev9recording]

even though you can color mixer tracks, im referring to coloring entire channels. think pro tools mixer... way easier on the eyes! coloring fader caps is not nearly enough for me either.

with regard to multitrack editing, in addition to cubase's drum editing, there needs to be a way to edit multiple tracks directly from one of the track's sample editor...

[Blunt]

Originally Posted by rev9recording

even though you can color mixer tracks, im referring to coloring entire channels. think pro tools mixer... way easier on the eyes! coloring fader caps is not nearly enough for me either.
.

I think that looks so ugly it would make me want to break my screens just to get away from it. I wouldn't get anything done...

[Kimakaz]

Note: Im use C5

1) I would love to see a Sampler Track. Create Sampler Track, load a sample, and then be able edit inplace midi events in the project window in either piano roll or drum editor. Kinda like a FL sampler. I mainly have drums in thought for this feature.

2) Better freeze function for VSti. I read some great suggestions in this thread. What i had in mind was simply, that once Vsti frozen, be able to move around the midi clip (along with the audio), once frozen. or is that addressed in C6? Im on C5.

[Joe Cole]

My two requests are :

1- instrument tracks with multi outs
2- window management- tabs would be an idea I could live with.

[norbury brook]

Originally Posted by Blunt

I think that looks so ugly it would make me want to break my screens just to get away from it. I wouldn't get anything done...

Me too, I much prefer the subtler coloured fader caps.

Also cubase drum editor is unique in the DAW world and for me the best way of doing midi drum programming.

as a pro mixing environment,logic's use of external hardware is stoneage compared to cubase.


MC

[enecosse]

If anyone wants to know what's coming, with Window management in Cubase, then a good place to look for clues is probably Halion 4.

They haven't 6.5'd Cubase yet though. So, unless they break with tradition, there will be no Cubase 7 until (at least) later this year.

[claesbjo]

Originally Posted by norbury brook

as a pro mixing environment,logic's use of external hardware is stoneage compared to cubase.

In what ways?

[robotpriest]

I want better Mac performance. I can live with everything else as is.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by norbury brook

Me too, I much prefer the subtler coloured fader caps.

Also cubase drum editor is unique in the DAW world and for me the best way of doing midi drum programming.

as a pro mixing environment,logic's use of external hardware is stoneage compared to cubase.


MC

As a composer, the Cubase Drum Editor is life and time saver. I've created Drum Maps for everything from Superior to Storm Drum 2 to Abbey Roads Drums to Platinum Plus Percussion and beyond. The ability to call up a kit that's already mapped and begin composing is essential to my workflow.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by robotpriest

I want better Mac performance. I can live with everything else as is.

You'll never get the type of performance using Cubase or Nuendo on a Mac as you would with a PC, especially a PC built by a company like ADK that optimizes every single component for efficiency and speed.

[robotpriest]

Originally Posted by Mike P

You'll never get the type of performance using Cubase or Nuendo on a Mac as you would with a PC, especially a PC built by a company like ADK that optimizes every single component for efficiency and speed.

Maybe but that is still what I want them to focus on. I prefer Cubase but I also own Logic and PT. I'm not going to switch to Windows, so if I was to make a change it would be DAWs rather than OS platform.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by robotpriest

Maybe but that is still what I want them to focus on. I prefer Cubase but I also own Logic and PT. I'm not going to switch to Windows, so if I was to make a change it would be DAWs rather than OS platform.

You're missing the point: It's not Steinberg's "fault" that performance on Apple computers is less robust than on a PC - it's Apple's.

Apple decides which motherboards, graphics cards, power supplies, etc. to put in their computer's. That doesn't guarantee optimum performance. On the other hand, if you want optimum performance, purchase a computer specifically tuned for audio and all it's little quirks from a professional audio PC builder like ADK.

Steinberg could specifically program for the latest Mac Pro but when they decide to change graphics card vendors or motherboard vendors, that performance enhancement it out the proverbial window.

If you want high end performance from Steinberg products, buy a PC.

[norbury brook]

Originally Posted by robotpriest

Maybe but that is still what I want them to focus on. I prefer Cubase but I also own Logic and PT. I'm not going to switch to Windows, so if I was to make a change it would be DAWs rather than OS platform.

to be honest I feel it's down to Apple and OSX and the way it works at a deep level. I don't know of any cross platform DAW software that works better on OSX. Even the guys at VEpro have always said use windows for slaves if you want the best performance. I myself have always had much better performance from VI's like Kontak uder windows than OSX. remeber the VI test TAFKAT did? windows slaughtered OSX.

I'm agnostic platform wise and have always used which ever one performs the best and windows still is ahead with Cubase/nuendo/Reaper here. Pro tools 9.06 HD seems fairly equal here between OSX and windows but I'm not a fan of RTAS so don't use pro tools much, maybe RTAS brings windows performance down to OSX level?



MC

[robotpriest]

Actually you are missing the point Mike. The point is I don't care about the Mac/PC wars, I don't care about any excuses. The topic is what would we like for Cubase 7. I would like better Mac performance.

I own Logic and wish Cubase on Mac had comparable performance because I like Cubase.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by robotpriest

Actually you are missing the point Mike. The point is I don't care about the Mac/PC wars, I don't care about any excuses. The topic is what would we like for Cubase 7. I would like better Mac performance.

I own Logic and wish Cubase on Mac had comparable performance because I like Cubase.

Yes, you ARE missing the point.

Aside from the hardware issue, Apple owns Logic, not Yahama/Steinberg. Steinberg products will never have the same performance on a Mac as Logic.

If you want better performance from a Steinberg product, you'll need audio optimized PC. You can "wish" and "want" all you'd like, but it will never, ever happen.

[robotpriest]

Hey guys, it turns out we can shut down this thread. Mike has discovered that wishing for things doesn't make them happen, so this topic is pointless.