An open plea to Steinberg

Clearly their beta testing system just isn’t’ cutting it at the moment for what ever reason/s… so why not enlarge the beta testing group or even… dare i say it… release public betas? :astonished: :astonished: :astonished:
QA and testing just seems to be getting worse and worse…

I hear what you saying…but all the new features is first released in Cubase and then later much later in Nuendo so it seems to me that Cubase is the testing ground for Nuendo and always was. Yes they had one maintenance update maybe because all the beta testing is done with Cubase and they only needed one.

There also seem to be much less “noise” in the Nuendo forum…

To try and spite a powerful company like Yamaha with not paying for upgrades is silly and won’t work, they are a multi billion dollar conglomerate.

I think by just bit ching here relentlessly will do it and hopefully they will release another maintenance update soon so we all can go back to make and produce music in “silence”

Personally I will see what happens in the next 6 months and If version 8 cant be as stable and reliable as 7.5 I’m jumping ship to Nuendo and take it from there.

I could be mistaken, but I think the reason Nuendo is expensive is the post production features and the expensive licenses related to those features. Remove the licenses and post production features, and you have pretty much the same as Cubase? More resources are needed for core functions, workflow, and bug fixes. IMO Pro Tools is caught in the cycle too, but still has the advantage of “industry standard.”

Not wanting more complexity.

I was thinking a new DAW built from the ground up with the objectives of working with 3rd parties for that deep integration. I’m not a programmer, but I like the words “open source” to an extent. The DAW manufacturer focuses only on it’s own core DAW functions, workflow, and few bugs. No eye candy. No competing built-in features that are usually done better by 3rd parties. The focus is on the core DAW functions and it’s ability to integrate at a deeper level with major manufacturers. I’m currently dreaming, but as the market continues to expand and grow in different segments for hobbyists vs. pro use I think there is potential.

So many assumptions, I have been around long enough to know avid has issues, and Thanks but I am aware of the product line up, my suggestion is very different and addresses purpose, could care less if the flagship is called professional that’s just semantics and not an argument, the argument. curious, tell me a time when Cubase was worse in your opinion in terms of reliability? In my case it just isn’t so.

SX3 to 4

So many assumptions,

just thinking out loud, rightly or wrongly. let’s all pull together on this.

I can’t remember if I started on SX, It was around 2003,

Agreed, we all want generally the same thing, I remember Lydiot from years ago , an old timer who has a proven voice so maybe this thread will be a wake up call.

I can’t remember if I started on SX, It was around 2003,

Agreed, we all want generally the same thing, I remember Lydiot from years ago , an old timer who has a proven voice so maybe this thread will be a wake up call.

amen to that,

2003 was SX2 I think? I started out on CubaseVST5 after using Opcode Vision prior to that, never did the Atari thing. More long term users that chime in the better.

All the best to you.

No, I’m on Nuendo and I’m telling you that’s not the case. By and large you could maybe argue that Nuendo users get fewer and less severe bugs, but the problem is what happens when we get a quite severe bug, and we now have at least one. With a corporate culture such as the one they have they’re now ‘stuck’ so we who do pay a premium are stuck as well. How many months do we have to wait for our new feature that we paid specifically for will be fixed? That’s my point.

Our issues (yours and ours) are tied together. Either the culture and primary goal is to sell more first and address only a small amount of issues when time permits, or it’s being an honest manufacturer that cares about his customers and actually does mean “prioritize” when they say they’re “prioritizing” fixing severe issues. You guys are suffering bugs for exactly the same reason we’re suffering them. It’s all the same company and the same mentality.

Of course. But even once releases have been stable and bug-free for a while you’re not seeing a lot of participation in that section. There are far fewer users. And, no offense, but there are far fewer hobbyists using Nuendo, as a percentage of its user base compared to Cubase. And I think that has a huge impact.

That’s “childish”? That’s a pretty strong word. Yamaha is a billion dollar conglomerate exactly because they have long term vision and care about profits. If Steinberg isn’t making a profit then Yamaha has to question why they should own it. Why should it? If it’s a drag on its financials then there’s no reason to, that’s the way capitalism works.

I’m not saying people will boycott updates and upgrades of Cubase and Nuendo, because people never do, I’m just saying that if they did then it would matter, because if there’s something that people “get” in large corporations it’s numbers on a spreadsheet.

No way. This happens repeatedly. Release. Bugs. Complaints. People buy anyway. Complaints. Feature requests. New features. Bugs. Complaints. People buy anyway… over and over… Complaints here change nothing. That’s been my point.

The only way I seemingly got any traction and response was posting at Gearslutz in the post-production section calling Guillermo on his inaccurate statements about Nuendo. Then there were “questionable” responses. But even then we’ve seen zero results from this “priority”, except the Cubase release, which of course is the definition of not having the stated priority.

If stability is an issue for you with Cubase then I would first look into the workstation configuration as a whole, and, if that doesn’t fix it and if it is an issue that other users suffer I would recommend not upgrading until you are sure other people have reported the issue gone. By switching to Nuendo all you’re doing is waiting and spending more money. We’re consistently about 6 months behind Cubase, and our feature set includes that of Cubase anyway (plus the features you don’t need), so if you’re going to wait that long why not just wait for the latest release of a stable Cubase and save your money? It shouldn’t be unstable seeing that we’re getting the same code in Nuendo, so if Nuendo is stable so should the latest version of Cubase.

I don’t think there’s that much potential. There’s already a few apps out there that are more barebones, but people want and actually need a relatively high level of complexity. For simpler stuff people could get the cheap Harrison DAW for example.

As one persons cool feature might be added bloat to another, Im thinking a more modular approach could be the way for cubase to go in the future. If implemented correctly, a solid core system with ability to add/disable features or functions would be welcome in my view. For instance VST Transit is of no interest to me, though I see how it could be for others but personally I’d rather not have it taking up resources and add to further cluttering menus/screen space. Just an example. Similar situation with Score Editor which I don’t use much but which I know others rely on heavily.

In a way, this is already implemented with the distinction between Nuendo and various levels of Cubase but having more ability to turn off different sections of the program and its associated resources, screen space could be useful in a lot of ways, might even help tracing down bugs.

Just a thought, Stephen

Amen and +1 to the OP


I might be old but i always thought updates were supposed to fix things and be free and upgrades were to add new features. A “Point update” isn’t an upgrade (it’s an update) and should never be paid for. The extra’s should be kept for new versions. And only released after heavy Beta testing / QA. Then it’s an upgrade and you pay for it.

I think that is a great idea. Presonus does a lite-version of this with StudioOne Artist. A user can purchase the barebones starter version then add “modules” for things like MP3 export, VST/AU hosting, etc., at a reasonable cost (something like $20). That way a person can buy only what they need with an option to grow. What’s needed there is a way to reflect those purchases in the upgrade price to the pro version…the more invested the more credited when you go pro.

I’ve been a serial monogamist when it comes to DAWs over the years. I’ve probably tried them all (on the Mac side) at some point and used them for a year or two at a stretch each time. All DAWs can pretty much do 90% of whatever its competition does. Different workflows maybe, different key commands, but there is very little that’s really unique. I really like C8 and C8.5 tremendously. And as I am beginning to do this stuff professionally now, I realize that it really comes down to how well I have learned the tool.

That said, there are some shiny new objects out there (specifically StudioOne) that would be a serious alternative IF it had a video workflow worth a damn. It doesn’t and likely won’t any time soon because that isn’t what Presonus is focused on. But I’m glad to see Steiny sitting up and taking notice and trying to learn from the competition.

Don’t dare complain on gs. Lol

This update makes me upset.

+1. Just make it work.

Fix bugs, polish GUI, optimize workflow.

So, what were the issues? I’ve been using Cubase Pro 8 for 6 months, and have yet to run into a major bug. The prog froze on me once when I renamed the folder that I was saving my projects in. Not trying to be a jerk, just seriously curious why everyone is so up in arms.


if it weren’t for the MIDI possibilities dept in Cubase i also would have changed to something else … In fact intend to try out Sonar soon, to see what that has to offer … - F