Cubase 7 - What do you want?

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by 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.

I want better performance from iPhone apps on my Droid phone.

Get it?

How old are you? And FFS, I hate arguing with a faceless, anonymous internet user.

[norbury brook]

i think the point is, you want better cubase performance on the Mac,however this is outside Steinbergs control in a lot of ways so compared to other feature requests this isn't one they can do anything about.

Any performance increases will come from apple and benefit all DAW sofware on OSX.


MC

[e-are]

Originally Posted by Mike P

No offense but I have a hard time believing that 90% of the people that responded have ever even used Cubase or read the manual.

The ability to color individual tracks or Group tracks? Better names (Duh, you can "name" everything!). Automation? Instantly creating tracks to the same group? Group editing? These things have been available since 1999 in Cubase VST 5.0!



I'd suggest going to YouTube for 90% of these "problems".

The ability to color the entire strip. Protools does that. It does make a difference.

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com

[muziksculp]

This is my guess as to the reason Cubase runs better on PC than MAC.

Mac OSX uses 'Core Audio' to communicate with audio devices. NOT ASIO.

Steinberg products use 'ASIO' , So I think the issue here is that there is another layer of translation going on between the ASIO and Core Audio Drivers to accomplish the link between the two driver systems.

On PCs Windows works directly with ASIO drivers, no intermediate translation to communicate is needed.

This is what I feel is the main issue with Cubase 6 on MAC. OSX.

For example the new Presonus Studio One Pro DAW, runs on both Mac OSX and PCs Windows. It can use Core Audio Drivers on the Mac side. This is not possible with Cubase. Maybe Steinberg can offer Core Audio Driver support to Cubase 7 in the future to improve performance. (Not sure if this will ever happen.)

Please let me know if this makes any sense, or I'm totally mistaken to think that this is the real issue here.

Thanks,
Muziksculp

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by e-are

The ability to color the entire strip. Protools does that. It does make a difference.

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com

That's already been demonstrated.

And as a Steinberg user since 1997, I'm very happy that my entire mixer doesn't come in pastel colors.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by muziksculp

Please let me know if this makes any sense, or I'm totally mistaken to think that this is the real issue here.

Thanks,
Muziksculp

The real issue is that Apple does not optimize their computers for audio.

Quite frankly, I don't know why someone would choose a Mac over an optimized PC for Steinberg products. It's been well known for years and years on the Steinberg forum that their products run much better on PC's than on a Mac. It has nothing to do with PC/Mac wars but actual performance tests.

[e-are]

Originally Posted by Mike P

That's already been demonstrated.

And as a Steinberg user since 1997, I'm very happy that my entire mixer doesn't come in pastel colors.

Ok. Your opinion and I respect that. Mine and others are we would like to have it. Wow!!! Respect our opinion!!!

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com

[muziksculp]

Originally Posted by Mike P

The real issue is that Apple does not optimize their computers for audio.

Quite frankly, I don't know why someone would choose a Mac over an optimized PC for Steinberg products. It's been well known for years and years on the Steinberg forum that their products run much better on PC's than on a Mac. It has nothing to do with PC/Mac wars but actual performance tests.

What part of the Mac System (OSX) ? Hardware ? Core Audio ? needs to be optimized ? and why would Apple not optimize their systems for Audio if they can ? Would they compromise other components performance in their system if Audio was optimized ? ie. Graphics ? or ... ?

For example, Cubase on Mac does not offer 'Direct Monitoring', but it does on PCs. This imho is again attributed to the ASIO vs Core Audio issue on Mac OSX.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by e-are

Ok. Your opinion and I respect that. Mine and others are we would like to have it. Wow!!! Respect our opinion!!!

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com

How did I "disrespect" your opinion?

And why would you want Cubase or Nuendo to look like Pro Tools? Just use PT and be done with it.

[robotpriest]

The performance problem could definitely be from some sort of cross platform layer like muziksculp is talking about. The thing is we don't really know. I figure it's like if your car has a problem. It could be a problem with any of the integrated parts, but you still would go to Toyota or whomever the manufacturer was in the case of a recall.

If there is some change that Steinberg needs from Apple, they are the ones who will have to request the change. As users, we should put the burden of responsibility on Steinberg.

I'm a believer in improvement always being possible; it just takes a little willpower and sometimes a nudge to get started.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by muziksculp

What part of the Mac System (OSX) ? Hardware ? Core Audio ? needs to be optimized ? and why would Apple not optimize their systems for Audio if they can ? Would they compromise other components performance in their system if Audio was optimized ? ie. Graphics ? or ... ?

For example, Cubase on Mac does not offer 'Direct Monitoring', but it does on PCs. This imho is again attributed to the ASIO vs Core Audio issue on Mac OSX.

There are literally hundreds of thread in the now archived Cubase.net forum and threads at Steinberg.net. It's not really worth anyone's time to revisit an issue that's already been recognized by Steinberg users in the Steinberg forum.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by robotpriest

The performance problem could definitely be from some sort of cross platform layer like muziksculp is talking about. The thing is we don't really know. I figure it's like if your car has a problem. It could be a problem with any of the integrated parts, but you still would go to Toyota or whomever the manufacturer was in the case of a recall.

If there is some change that Steinberg needs from Apple, they are the ones who will have to request the change. As users, we should put the burden of responsibility on Steinberg.

I'm a believer in improvement always being possible; it just takes a little willpower and sometimes a nudge to get started.

This has been discussed ad nauseam in the Steinberg forum for a decade. Apple will not open up their code, especially their Core Audio code, to a direct competitor.

Would you?

Yamaha/Steinberg can request all they want. Apple said no. That's why the overwhelming majority of Steinberg users are on PC's. Better performance.

[muziksculp]

Originally Posted by Mike P

This has been discussed ad nauseam in the Steinberg forum for a decade. Apple will not open up their code, especially their Core Audio code, to a direct competitor.

Would you?

Yamaha/Steinberg can request all they want. Apple said no. That's why the overwhelming majority of Steinberg users are on PC's. Better performance.

Yes, That's true, the majority of Cubase users are on PC's and for a good reason. But... What about all the other DAW users running on Macs, Are they all running at below optimal performance due to Core Audio and Apple's closed-code policy even for writing Core-Audio drivers for audio interfaces ?

I wonder if there is any statistical study conducted as to what percentage of Audio DAW users are using PC vs Mac in 2011 ?

It would be interesting to know.

Interestingly, I see more PC DAW users migrating to Mac these days, especially on forums like GS. But not that many Mac DAW users migrating to PC.

Thanks,
Muziksculp

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by robotpriest

Is it just me or does everyone imagine Mike P as some guy absolutely terrified of the existence of other people different than himself. Differently "colored" mixers. People whose operating systems swing both ways.

He possibly has a closet full of only black clothes. This color has been "proven" in internet personal attire forums to be 80% more stain resistant. Anyone wearing a different color is a "moron".

Last post, sorry guys for going ad hominem.

That's the great thing about Gearslutz. Anonymous internet users can attack anyone without recourse.

Nice job.

[Marcus909]

Originally Posted by Mike P

And as a Steinberg user since 1997, I'm very happy that my entire mixer doesn't come in pastel colors.

LOL +1!

[Arksun]

As a long time Cubase user since pre VST days, I think its about time we finally got automation lane curves. Just draw two points and bend the curve between them, rather than having to have lots of little points making a kind of curved-ish sweep.

So please Steinberg, finally give us the bezier curve option. Its the one key thing I miss that most other DAW's seem to have now.

[Kimakaz]

Originally Posted by Arksun

As a long time Cubase user since pre VST days, I think its about time we finally got automation lane curves. Just draw two points and bend the curve between them, rather than having to have lots of little points making a kind of curved-ish sweep.

So please Steinberg, finally give us the bezier curve option. Its the one key thing I miss that most other DAW's seem to have now.

Yes good point, automation curves!

[robertshaw]

Id like to see speed/efficiency.
I had to switch back to Cubase 5 for some projects
since 6 is so slow. I also noticed Cubase 4 can handle
more plugins and tracks than 5 or 6 too.

They should simply the GUI. Also loading projects is really slow
on large projects compared to Samplitude.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by robertshaw

Id like to see speed.
I had to switch back to Cubase 5 for some projects
since 6 is so slow. I also noticed Cubase 4 can handle
more plugins and tracks than 5 or 6 too.

They should simply the GUI. Also loading projects is really slow
on large ones compared to Samplitude

This sounds like a computer or OS issue to me.

In no way, shape or form is Cubase or Nuendo 4 faster or more capable of handling Vst's or plugins than C6 or Nuendo 5.5. The video engine for 5.5 and 6 has been completely rewritten and actually works (as do other features).

The 32 bit version of Nuendo 5.5 on 64 bit Windows 7 completely and utterly destroys version 4.

[JSilver]

What I really would like to have in C7 is a sort of Slate VCC integrated in in the mixer that I can enable and diseable at choice on all/single tracks.

[mutilatedlip]

Originally Posted by JSilver

What I really would like to have in C7 is a sort of Slate VCC integrated in in the mixer that I can enable and diseable at choice on all/single tracks.

I'd like some more high quality strip FX/plug ins maybe in cahoots with a great third party renowned for quality FX.

The window management is a pain in the ass. Maybe Tabbed windows is the way forward, I don't know.

Apart from that, I can't criticise C6 for any reason. I love it.

[Ivorydom]

Originally Posted by Arksun

As a long time Cubase user since pre VST days, I think its about time we finally got automation lane curves. Just draw two points and bend the curve between them, rather than having to have lots of little points making a kind of curved-ish sweep.

So please Steinberg, finally give us the bezier curve option. Its the one key thing I miss that most other DAW's seem to have now.

+1. Also the same in tempo track. Forgot to put that in my list.

[norbury brook]

just thought of something else; better colour palette for track colouring, the current one is quite limited.

MC

[The dman]

Originally Posted by e-are

The ability to color the entire strip. Protools does that. It does make a difference.

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com

Personally I would love it if they had colored strips ala Protools.

I'd like to see one track type for audio or midi like every other DAW, Group/EFX and instrument tracks that don't drop down to a folder at the bottom of the project when you insert them, reorderoable mixer channels that are reflected on the the project page. A take list that rivals Protools

And bring back V5 comping as an option

[lllubi]

wonder how Steinberg will convince PT users to switch once VCAs are available
in the 500$ version

if they would offer VCAs in the future why hurry now with the crossgrades?

[matucha]

1) new mixer layout with inserts and sends in one window, logic's mixer is much more logical , and also hiding the unused row of inserts would be nice

2) broader pallette for track coloring would be very nice

3) when new channel is inserted, there is big chance it's going to be displayed in wrong order in the mixer. It's a bug as old as cubase 5. Shouldn't be there, but still is.

4) external effects saved with project (a must)

5) stereo external effects usable as dual mono (why on earth doesn't that work allready???), I have external effects for stereo and 2 mono separately and manually change the inputs/outputs to what I need at the moment. Together with external effects connections not saved in the session, this is one big pain.

6) recording from one side of stereo group into mono track. Why I can only select mono groups/fxsends to record record from on mono track? There should be L and R mono selectable like it is with input channels.

7) better interface for variaudio tuning, it is very unefficient with lots of unnecesary mouseclicks if you switch between cutting parts to be tuned and tuning them. It is also really badly done visualy, because there is very little feedback on what function you're using.



I hope most of it will be done with 6.5 or something like that. Not expecting the mixer there, but the rest??? It's basicaly bugfixing.

PS. CD burning/PQ editing/CD-text integrated would be great, even as payed addon. But I guess it won't happen...

[Chunky Karma]

An anti-suck button.

[Lights]

Originally Posted by Mike P

This sounds like a computer or OS issue to me.

In no way, shape or form is Cubase or Nuendo 4 faster or more capable of handling Vst's or plugins than C6 or Nuendo 5.5. The video engine for 5.5 and 6 has been completely rewritten and actually works (as do other features).

The 32 bit version of Nuendo 5.5 on 64 bit Windows 7 completely and utterly destroys version 4.

+1 -- Cubase 6 x64 is also at least as performant as Cubase 5 was on Win7.

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by norbury brook

just thought of something else; better colour palette for track colouring, the current one is quite limited.

MC

I created a color palette almost a decade ago that features more than 35 colors. I created each color and gave each color a name (i.e., Double Bass, Cello 1, Verse Vocal, Guitars, etc.).

It's completely customizable and can be saved as a default in that screen and along with templates.

Color Button>Select Colors>Insert New Color>Modify Color>Save Current Set as Program Default

-----------------------------------------------------------

No offense to many that are posting but I think that many of you haven't read the manual or spend time at Steinberg.net on the Forums because many of the features that have been mentioned already exist.

It's a very deep program.

[Marcus909]

Originally Posted by matucha

2) broader pallette for track coloring would be very nice

You do realize you can customize the colors right? Thats one of the first things I did when I got Cubase... got rid of the stock palette and created my own custom colors.