![]() To put this into perspective, here are the supported controllers in Cubase 12 and the year of their introduction to the market: That should allow getting rid of shims written in Bome MIDI Translator, Max and similar. The better approach IMHO is the one suggested by - implement the support you seek in MIDI Remote. Now that MIDI Remote is here and the Cubase 11 release was 18 months ago, I think the request for the old SAC 2.2 support to be reinstated is unlikely to succeed. I understand the frustration when a new release breaks support for a much-loved controller at the centre of your workflow, but when that controller has been out of production for many years and the remaining population in use is dwindling, there is a point where dropping support is a reasonable decision.īringing back support for the Houston on a ‘no promises, no support’ basis when that was requested shortly after the Cubase/Nuendo 11 release was easier to justify as the Houston was a Steinberg branded product and MIDI Remote was dropped from version 11 just before release. It is possible to support a generic Mackie controller in MIDI Remote and the same should be possible for other MIDI-based controllers. When it comes to controllers, it seems that the medium-term aim might be to move all controller support over to the new MIDI Remote capability other than CC121, EUCON and, for Nuendo, Nuage support. It is clear that Steinberg has taken decisions for Cubase/Nuendo 12 that are aimed at eliminating technical debt - getting rid of old code that poses a maintenance and testing burden but is not seen as a core part of the product anymore (such as dropping four older VSTis and the deprecated Rewire protocol). Whilst I understand the intent behind your request, I think you are likely making a doomed request.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |