Page 3 of 3

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:56 pm
by galvinstephen
mozizo wrote: [i think with new Daws around cubase should be redesigned to appeal for future and new/young costumers.(and old ones too.. just have to get used to it) now its seems a little bit lame and bugy here and there but its a new born so it will take some time until its stands still on legs. Good luck ! ;)
sigh... a strange world we live in. Age, mozizo, has nothing to do with it.

Somewhere in the world a boy wakes thinking he made the world himself, then was surprised to find others had been here before him.

That is a poetic way of saying Cubase is not a new program, some of us have been using it for many years in a professional capacity and we do know the program well. Lame? bugy[sic]? No, that is not good enough and should not be good enough for you. Can you imagine buying a stratocaster and the tuners were sticky, or a piano with missing strings. Being a software company does not exempt that company from producing high-quality tested products. Good grief. :roll:

So getting back to the mixer. My main complaint with it is its look and feel, too fiddly and ugly to boot. Back to the drawing board guys! Time for 7.0.3. Hmm.. :D

Re: Anybody else like the old mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:23 pm
by skug
OldFecker wrote:It's a bit like demolishing, redesigning and rebuilding your entire home while you are still living in it, whilst simultaneously wanting everything inside it to work without interruption or problem. Yes it can be done, but it takes more effort than a straight-off rebuild and for many years you are living in a construction site and getting brick dust in your coffee. In order to retain full functionality of everything during the revamp-in-place process, there is much redundant development effort required getting the new bits to work with old bits that will be thrown out soon anyway.

A better idea is to build a new home from the ground up, and then move in when it is all finished. The new product will then be more consistent within itself, and the old working one wasn't compromised during construction.

So if you're going to rewrite the whole thing, then do it from the ground up, otherwise you will end up with FrankenSequencer <cue: lightening flash and thunder>
Very nice story but the metaphor does not equate because for a "new home" you would need a new program and some might argue StudioOne is Cubase but without the features so while other DAW's roll along and follow in the footsteps of Steinberg, I will be spending my money with the one true leader.

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:30 pm
by galvinstephen
One good rule to have in any busienss is not to alienate your existing customers. If you want them to come back.

Mcdonalds introduces a 'Triple-fat Camel Burger With Hashish', but keeps the Big Mac on sale. :)

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:34 pm
by BriHar
Everything changes, it is the natural order of things, change is universal, change is inevitable,
Resistance is futile,
Welcome to the Borg
STEIN BORG
:lol:

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:39 pm
by galvinstephen
Sounds like you have been trained well. :|

Actually the whole point is that change does not need to be random, and pointless - 'Change for change's sake' but 'Change for the better'. In the process it is important not to destroy the good things. sigh... Does this really need explaining? :D

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:47 pm
by skug
galvinstephen wrote:Actually the whole point is that change does not need to be random, and pointless - 'Change for change's sake' but 'Change for the better'. In the process it is important not to destroy the good things. sigh... Does this really need explaining? :D
Obviously SB are wanting to appeal to new customers, and good on them because it means more great features like the chord track (already I have secured new clients who can't be bothered transposing to their voice).

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:54 pm
by mozizo
galvinstephen wrote:
mozizo wrote: [i think with new Daws around cubase should be redesigned to appeal for future and new/young costumers.(and old ones too.. just have to get used to it) now its seems a little bit lame and bugy here and there but its a new born so it will take some time until its stands still on legs. Good luck ! ;)
sigh... a strange world we live in. Age, mozizo, has nothing to do with it.

Somewhere in the world a boy wakes thinking he made the world himself, then was surprised to find others had been here before him.

That is a poetic way of saying Cubase is not a new program, some of us have been using it for many years in a professional capacity and we do know the program well. Lame? bugy[sic]? No, that is not good enough and should not be good enough for you. Can you imagine buying a stratocaster and the tuners were sticky, or a piano with missing strings. Being a software company does not exempt that company from producing high-quality tested products. Good grief. :roll:

So getting back to the mixer. My main complaint with it is its look and feel, too fiddly and ugly to boot. Back to the drawing board guys! Time for 7.0.3. Hmm.. :D
youngsters are the future.. ;) well im 40 but u know !
anyway about the new MC i think the concept is better then the old one, and i dont think its ugly, just not complete yet with graphics and workflow, for instant the old mixers one click approach to open plugins and vsti editors,pre/post send button,bypass ins,sends,eq from fader area..! i miss it and need it for better workflow, but new design aside of this for me is better.
hopefully they hear us and sort things to be more quick on MC, but the functionality on new mixer much better for me than the old one.
i agree that they could wait few months for the release, but with every ver is like that. cubase 5 wasnt better in that regard, it was my first cubase. (worked on sx3 in commercial studio before.)

or maybe steinberg should change the name for the new contracted cubase to " cuborger" :mrgreen:

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:55 pm
by galvinstephen
Yes. So new features can be added no problem. Removing good features is quite a different kettle of fish. :D

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:57 pm
by skug
galvinstephen wrote:Yes. So new features can be added no problem. Removing good features is quite a different kettle of fish. :D
It's par with the course when you introduce a new module in software, I think DaDa said it a few posts back here:

http://www.steinberg.net/forum/viewtopi ... 25#p227875

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:08 pm
by mozizo
skug wrote:
galvinstephen wrote:Yes. So new features can be added no problem. Removing good features is quite a different kettle of fish. :D
It's par with the course when you introduce a new module in software, I think DaDa said it a few posts back here:

http://www.steinberg.net/forum/viewtopi ... 25#p227875
off topic !!!
skug how do u refer to specific post like the link to DaDas post ?

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:11 pm
by galvinstephen
skug. When you get to my advanced age [107] complaining is a lifestyle...

I think it is just simpler than that. SB has some new design staff who are trying to get ahead by getting things done and hoping nobody will notice their mistakes. Happens a lot in big companies especially where there is no opportunity for customer feedback. Ever heard of Microsoft? They just need to be told, politley and firmly where they are going wrong and why. Occasionally you find a company where the staff actually listen to and respond to their customers. Usually a small company that is trying to get ahead of the competition by innovation, efficiency, and creativity.

Well... lovely weather? 8-)

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:12 pm
by galvinstephen
mozizo wrote:
skug wrote:
galvinstephen wrote:Yes. So new features can be added no problem. Removing good features is quite a different kettle of fish. :D
It's par with the course when you introduce a new module in software, I think DaDa said it a few posts back here:

http://www.steinberg.net/forum/viewtopi ... 25#p227875
off topic !!!
skug how do u refer to specific post like the link to DaDas post ?
copy the url. :D

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:17 pm
by skug
galvinstephen wrote:I think it is just simpler than that. SB has some new design staff who are trying to get ahead by getting things done and hoping nobody will notice their mistakes. Happens a lot in big companies especially where there is no opportunity for customer feedback. Ever heard of Microsoft? They just need to be told, politely and firmly where they are going wrong and why. Occasionally you find a company where the staff actually listen to and respond to their customers. Usually a small company that is trying to get ahead of the competition by innovation, efficiency, and creativity.
I have to say you are wrong, Steinberg aren't a big company so the notion that it's us against them or some David & Goliath situation is playing out is quite simply absurd.

If you search DaDa's posts you will see that he has said many times that SB aren't a big company and why, cause he's met them.

Even if you take what BriHar has said about the youtube video from Helge, then it's obvious it's a planned strategy and not the whim of some newbie in the development team.

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:25 pm
by galvinstephen
Well let us face it. One cannot be right all the time. Actually I did not say SB is a big company, at least not yet... Cubase is a great product, just the mixer design was hasty and ill-conceived.

Planned strategies can be flawed which is why planners and strategists consult experts skug. 8-)

Ugly too. :|

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:31 pm
by skug
mozizo wrote:skug how do u refer to specific post like the link to DaDas post ?
click on the link in the persons post and it will scroll them to the top of the page, then copy the link in the normal way

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:39 pm
by mozizo
skug wrote:
mozizo wrote:skug how do u refer to specific post like the link to DaDas post ?
click on the link in the persons post and it will scroll them to the top of the page, then copy the link in the normal way
A test
http://www.steinberg.net/forum/viewtopi ... 50#p228524

Thanks ;)
Edit: Well it works haha

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:09 am
by DaDa
Huu ... what's going on, here ???

Looks like all the Mixer-Design threads are melted into one !
:shock:
8-)

Some corrections and additions :
- I repeat : While I understand why we have all those shortcomings in the new mixer,
I really don't like it. It's harder to see needed information.
And I hate 'more clicks' !
Like many other users, making a living with Cubase, I'll stay with 6.5.
... probably for a long time.

I'm quite surprised, that so many people prefer the new design.
They seem to think, that white letters on a light grey, fancy 3D, background
can be better, than black letters on a plain white background.
( just an exaggerated example )

Regarding the 'size' of Steinberg.
I'd say they are quite big, today.
They were a small company, when I used to visit their first headquarter,
30 years ago ...

What really matters, ( and what I keep on pointing out ),
is the disbalance between the number of products and the available resources.
Though fixes often come quite fast these days,
the overall development speed still seems comparably slow, to me.


Jan

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:32 am
by skug
DaDa wrote:What really matters, ( and what I keep on pointing out ),
is the disbalance between the number of products and the available resources.
Though fixes often come quite fast these days,
the overall development speed still seems comparably slow, to me.


Jan
If an update every two months is slow then how was it in the SX/SL/SE3 days?

Remember the canceled update? I mean we can laugh now but I know with a final 6.5.5 update in the pipeline even if it doesn't work out I'm still in front because I can always fall back on 6.5.4 (which according to Helge is stable).

I am quite comfortable with how SB operates now days particularly since the acquisition of Syncrosoft.

For example if I lose a license there is a much greater chance it will be replaced and besides I think there was a post by one customer who was able to obtain a refund so all complaints aside let's not allow this forum to degenerate into a negative mud slinging situation but rather support the company who is developing the products we have paid for.

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:58 pm
by marQs
Hope dies last! There is a chance that Steinberg gets a whole bunch of things right in the 7-lifecycle, they maybe just don't know where to start that process :mrgreen:

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 9:57 am
by Guest
marQs wrote:Hope dies last! There is a chance that Steinberg gets a whole bunch of things right in the 7-lifecycle, they maybe just don't know where to start that process :mrgreen:
sack the graphic's team and hirer a new one , that would be a good start :o :D there has been absolutely no news from steinberg about the graphic's issues even thou there are 10's of posts on the forum ,so it's not just a user error here ,steingy need to wakeup and deal with it !

Edit : and if the new complete 7.0.2 install solves all these issues then it should be stated by steinberg to roll back and install the complete installer .
The mixer does show great promise in a few generations of becoming better but how long do we have to wait ? till just before c8 is released ?

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:26 am
by marQs
filterfreak wrote: The mixer does show great promise in a few generations of becoming better but how long do we have to wait ? till just before c8 is released ?
... wouldn't be unusual :cry:

Re: Old or new mixer better?

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:26 pm
by marQs
... or this even happens while 7 is current and 8.x could be begin to get useful again.
:lol: or :cry: - sometimes I don't know :mrgreen: