Appealing to Steinberg to keep the CMC current viable?

I started this topic with the hope it would stimulate, not only people expressing their desire for the continuation of CMC products but all potentially viable Steinberg Hardware products. I was thinking about the history of hardware support vs software support from the same company (in this case Steinberg).

First of all I, personally think that Steinberg develops darn good hardware for their software, better than anyone else. I’ve been a faithful Cubase user since the Atari days. I feel I made the right chioce for the long run. I was one of the “Houston” faithfuls until I realized it’s demise was real. I will stay focused an Steinberg products but will mention, as most know other software companies which put out hardware support products, also end up with short life spans - the hardware that is.

From a users stand point we feel that “viable” means as long as the hardware can be improved through software updates, Steinberg should “want” to do so. Was the Houston a failure in terms of hardware design? Was there any indication of this? Or was it a matter of marginal economic loss or gain?

Those of you who are much more technically astute than I am can educate me on this, but it seems to me what is lacking with hardware long term viability is the same as what we actually, as consumers are willing to do for the software : pay for improvement updates. I know this point is debatable, please don’t make this an “all improvements should be free” thing.

If we are willing to pay for software improvements, shouldn’t we also, perhaps even more be willing to pay for hardware updates? Strictly my opinion, but I would gladly do that. Not only for the hardware but the software as well.

Those of you with more technical knowledge have mentioned desired improvements to the CMC series. I would like to see the AI knob, one example, respond to whatever the mouse points to. There are software companies ( one in particular) which offer annual subscription rates so that improvements/enhancements are made.

I, for one, would gladly pay, to know my hardware remains viable to the extent of the hardware’s capabilities as the software evolves. If you agree, let it be known…

The following is my biased opinion: I don’t want new softsynths, effects, as incitements to keep Cubase profitable. How many have fully, really fully explored what they already have? I don’t want the next “great thing” which replaces the CMC series, (or the MR816, or CC121) any more than an acoustic instrument player would want to replace their instrument simply because it wasn’t the latest model.

It would be wonderful if someone from Steinberg could chime in here, without being criticized for their opinion, but maybe from a business policy standpoint that isn’t possible.

So what is your opinion regarding monetary support for improvements to Steinberg’s hardware?

Theyre not going to. Its not in their business interests to disclose the profitability expressly

However the fact remains that if these controllers would not be discontinued an in fact in active development they’d be here screaming it out loud.

The only statement from SB is of the “as far as I know” variety so…

Having Steinberg comment is beside the point I’m trying to make,which is: how many of us Steinberg consumers would be willing to pay for hardware updates? One way or another we do it for the software. I don’t expect Steinberg to ask us to do this,but if enough interest was expressed from the user side to pay to keep hardware viable, maybe these devices would have a longer life span than previous track records indicate.

As I indicated I for one would be willing to pay,say a subscription fee for instance, rather than having the hardware support diminish then end after a comparably short cycle of use.

What you’re asking will never happen at least in that form. SB business model is more straightforward and is not based on separate support revenue. Support is there to shift the new or current units not to create a revenue stream on legacy ones. When the units no longer shift or sourcing becomes an issue, it’s bye bye time

SB does not do apple care

Thanks for adding to the conversation, and the helpful point of view. I don’t know anything about Steinberg’s business model. I have no reason to doubt anything you mentioned.

So the CMC series, assuming the series will be discontinued -HOPEFULLY THIS IS FALSE - the life cycle has been less than 2 1/2 years since product announcement. Perhaps there may be some kind of “support” for another year? I think what’s becoming clear to me, is that investment in hardware from a software company is only viable to the consumer as long as the software does not advance beyond the hardware’s capability. Perhaps the answers lies with getting off the upgrade merry-go-round and living with the limitations, not the promise, of either the hardware or software.

I’m sure SB doesn’t want to look bad in the eyes if people buying these units as they’re the same ones they will have to sell the next controller they come up with. To retain some credibility I’m sure they will provide the bare bones Cmc patches to guarantee compatibility w upcoming cubase version but who knows after that. The annoying thing about something like the AI is that it’s completely useless outside Cubase

(The PD and QC on the other hand are quite universal cc boards)

But the whole point is rather that the Cmc will likely go down the history as a short lived product if it’s the end of it now. Some would call that a failure but I’m more optimistic

I’ve said it before, I’m really happy with this purchase and of late have got two other local studios all keyed up to invest… only there are no units for sale.

I’m only just opening up the full workflow benefits, but am very sold on the idea that these units are totally the way forward.(I have them placed where I need them around the studio without having to have all functionality in one big horrible box.)

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE Steinberg, don’t drop these units or your support of them. I’ve used lots of other kit in the past but these win, outright.

I recently purchased the CMC QC and CMC PD and am very happy with them. I also hope the steinberg keeps supporting the cmc units for a long time, and of course does not discontinue the cmc series.

They were reduced by 50% in fall 2012 what does that indicate… I heard that they weren’t selling as expected before the sale… Companies like Yamaha don’t manufacture products for too long. All I care about is that they keep releasing updates for future cubase versions. The day they stop will be the day I stop updating until my gear becomes too old. Keeping in mind Apple’s future updates also…

Thanks for posting this topic I will stay on top of this…

:exclamation: Then it would be a grave mistake to even consider the Nuage Desk A lot of Money to throw away on a product that will have such a short life expectancy. :wink:

Your joking ,they only sell them ,Steinberg aren’t interested in what you or i think , that has been proved a lot in the past .
You have a very very long wait if you think Steinberg will chime in on this thread :wink: :smiling_imp:

I first reported this annoying midi connection monitor crap bleeping every second on the midi monitor and was told they would look into disabling this annoying feature but nothing ever happened , no update ,no communication , all bull shite !

Yeah…all this is very strange? :unamused: :confused:

Steinberg has made a fantastic modern hardware product that are both popular and have wonderful future possibilities. CMC-Series could improve even further and new functionality with it? I’m really a fan about CMC-series. I use it daily and it works great. But instead of evolving CMC-series, Steinberg decided to end their CMC-series instead?

What was the problem, was CMC-Series too good and too popular? Both I and their distributors have no idea why they ended a so popular and demanded product? Its a shame for sure!

One thing is for sure, its a terrible bad business decision. I will think twice next time I will invest in any hardware from Steinberg. As for now, I’m pretty sure I will never invest in any hardware from Steinberg anymore.

Thanks Steinberg and keep up the good job losing potential customers! :bulb:

Best Regards

I was so happy with CMC-series so I have looked into for some months of investing into the new Yamaha/Steinberg Nuage-system.

But after seeing what happen with CMC-Series and all the stories of other Steinberg hardware’s that just suddenly disappears in a very short period of time I have now change my mind.

Best Regards

It’s still a bit puzzling that perfectly good hardware wouldn’t be updated, even at a cost to the consumer. So Steinberg,or should I say Yamaha dumps a hardware product once it achieves a certain profit margin. I’m assuming that margin isn’t that great compared to the software. So why create the hardware in the first place? The hardware seems to be treated like a “loss leader” - enticement to buy more software? No update for Mr816 but the UR series have been. If they were a superior product it might make sense… Some will say the CMC series is beginning to look long in tooth, that is old. Oh really. Customer loyalty doesn’t seem to matter as long as customer gullibility keeps growing as it appears to be.

Yet the CC121 which is an older product is still being sold. Go figure…

I still see CMC controllers being sold in my corner of the world (Europe). Even the shop which I practically mugged for every CMC controller, is having new ones in stock. There is still hope left? :confused:

You must be living in a CMC hotspot :mrgreen:

Everyday you breathe there’s hope, but in Steinberg’s case… well… i’m about to chime in with the general misbelief in this thread… Thinking about it for a while ain’t going to make me understand this Yamaha/Steinberg-hit-and-run-phenomenon we all in here have experienced to different degrees…

I know a few really good programmers, and one in particular that made the CMC’s available for Reaper… and with astonishing result’s to the functionality from scratch to finished working solution in only 2 Weeks.
Yes he hacked the communication between the hardware and computer and wrote a new driver…

I also can see WHY steinberg don’t release any SDK ( even if i pray this would happen in a near future) to these controllers as it would kill sales on new products for along time. A fact that is painfully obvious is the way this company always seem to strive to get new shiny coins in their pockets despite of how current cosumers react… they know there will always be new users eager to fill in the blanks where old grumpy users sit on their asses waiting for them to do what’s right… so why bother about countless of longtime, loyal users? " Let’s quadripplef*ck them in the @ss–weehaawww"

Well… i purchased the update, filled their pockets with coins, just to realize iv’e been f*cked again, this software STILL isn’t going to make me work faster…Steinberg don’t want us to be happy and work fast, they want us to fill their pockets with gold and therefor won’t make this a fast, nifty tool for musicproduction… they make it a relatively fast doughbucket so they get more time to develop new doughbucket features to keep the weels spinning… i see it now but just can’t commit to it.

I also know everything that’s written in here is totally pointless, but hope is hard to kill.

All the best fellow CMC’ers

I think Steinberg should stay in software innovation, and focus on the next step : “Touch”, but not a “adaptation” as something that just…work (as Cubase work for me) !

well I began with Pro24 on atari and it was so new perspectives (well for me)…Well I can do so much…now with a computer…
Ready for next…Jump…

CMCs are the best designed and well thought out hardware controllers I’ve ever used.

It’s as simple as that.

Please continue to support them.