C8.5 issue processing

Cubase
1

I raised two issues in January this year, each of which causes significant disruption to my workflow - and time is not only money but also wasted creative energy . . .

Neither of these issues has even been verfied and put into the Collected Bugs section and so it seems unlikely they will ever be fixed. Experience (over my 25 years or so of using Cubase) tells me the Steinberg is busy working on an upgrade to C9 to sell me some time soon . . . But PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE take the time to do something about the 417 festering topics in the Bug Reports forum . . .

Thanks

Richard in sunny France (I lie - it’s pi**ing it down)

2

Steinberg is working hard, doing all they can to make it all good. The usual impression from them is that all is going as planned, everything is under control. So, really, what you observe is actually their best. You can hardly expect much more from what it is now.

3

Sadly sonicstate what we observe does appear to be Steinberg’s best, but we can and should expect more. This is a PRO product and as a pro using it I need it to function well, and if there is a problem I have the right to expect it to be recognised and fixed within a reasonable timescale. One of the problems I reported resulted in me sending a client the WAV masters for a CD with instruments missing from it . . . He was NOT impressed and neither was I

4

You simply have to carefully re-listen every mixdown. Or even better, phase-invert mixdown and re-render it again together with realtime mix (ideally this would output silence, but it rarely does), and check those parts that you can hear after phase invertion (modulation effects can render differently each time, dynamic effects too). If something is missing in mix, it will really stick out in re-render with phase inverted mix.

Cubase output can be unreliable, it was reported before, and I personally experienced it too. I think only way to be sure is to record output to another track. Bounce/render works 99% ok, but sometimes it just doesn’t, sadly. It is random, you can bounce 20 tracks fine, then 21th will have something missing. Then you bounce that 21th track again, and suddenly it will be fine. :unamused:

Another example, builtin EQs sometimes simply doesn’t process, like audio would not be passing through EQ at all. Analyser in EQ shows no signal on track, although you can hear audio, there is audio on track. I must click on analyser window, then suddenly analyser starts processing and EQ starts working to. It is completely random, and not repeatable. How can anybody make a bug report of such thing, no way to repeat it. Still, it is there, and it can ruin mixdown. I’m not rechecking every eq everytime I open project - what if some are working, and others don’t?

Steinberg would have to invest crazy amount of energy to be able to track such bugs, I doubt it is financially practical for them to do so, or if it is even techically possible. It is simply unrealistic to expect that such bugs will ever be tracked down, it will simply never be fixed. Best that we users learn to live with it and learn how to protect our mixdowns against it. Something is wrong/lacking in Cubase development and I think Steinberg knows very well what the problem is. Another thing is if they are able to fix it or can afford to fix it. Seems not, otherwise they would already do it.

5

Sorry sonicstate but are you a troll? “You simply have to carefully re-listen every mixdown.” Er - no. If I thought for a moment that that was the view of Steinberg then I would drop Cubase, today. Non-realime audio mixdown is a basic, fundamental requirement for audio software today and it has to work 100% of the time - no relistening to mixes to make sure every detail of maybe 100 tracks is OK - life is too short. I do that incrementally when I am mixing. And by the way the bug I reported is 100% repeatable, not a random artifact related to my setup or a specific project.

My general point is that it seems that Steinberg appear to be investing their effort in new developments (a good thing and a commercial reality) but at the expense of providing a rock solid professional baseline product. The last bugfix release was in June of this year and there remain 52 confirmed bugs unfixed and 417 bugs reported and not yet classified. If or when version 9 comes out there will be NO fixes issued for version 8.5 - if I want bugs to be fixed I have no choice but to pay for the upgrade and hope that the bugs have been addressed therein, along inevitably with a host of new bugs introduced with the new development.

Note : this is not a frustrated rant from an unreasonable customer, simply an appeal from a professional musician to his supplier to reapportion some of its resources away from the search for new clients back to responding to existing clients’ needs. If Steinberg’s financial model cannot support this then there are 2 honest options : stop pretending to be provider for pros, or move to a paid support/subscription licence system which can (and will) pay to support the product. I’d be happy to pay!

6

As a relatively new user (coming from Pro Tools), I have to agree with rborsey. Once in a while my mixes have come out missing something or being off, as well. I do music professionally and at an extremely fast pace with very tight deadlines, etc, and it’s not cool to have to worry about it, and I certainly do not have the time to listen back through every output (I’m talking sometimes many revisions a day per cue, if the video cut is changing).

I, too, would be happy to go for a subscription model if that’s what it takes to get these incredibly important things fixed. I’m not sure what I’m going to do at this point. I left Pro Tools because Cubase leads the way with its feature set, but as far as CPU use and other issues such as the (even if it’s somewhat rare, it’s major) output one mentioned here, I’m concerned. :frowning:

7

It’s getting very tiring, as the software seems to be designed to always be at the edge of taxing the cpu now. And then you can lose work or have a corrupted project occasionally, not fun for anyone.

Since v 7 I think. I realise some of these issues are created by Windows 10, so I can’t blame Steinberg for any of that.

AsioGuard does not work for me. I have to carry out all the recommended Mboard things (hyper-threading off etc) to get anywhere near stable playback with a modicum of plugins on a low track count project (maybe 12 audio and 7 or so midi vst’s, multiple plugin inserts and group fx). If there is ‘musical mode’ used on any audio files, it will be even worse.

I’m frustrated with how unstable the automation is in Cubase 8 - 8.5!
Many times it simple doesn’t ‘stick’… I have to do the same moves about 4 times to get it to hold.
Happens a lot in Group channels. Is this a bug? I reported it anyway.

It seems no-one cares there, there is NO WAY to see that issues really get through to the developers of the next version, let alone hope to see them resolved in a patch. In Australia we have to contact Yamaha, and the email may as well go into a void… for all I know it has.

Are people really interested in the 'hot new tool’s as Steinberg might think? Does anyone at Steinberg have to use the software other than for the dev work? VCA group ok too, but linking works almost the same… almost. Things will keep moving, but a stable way to play and create music is more important than a glorious GUI or three or four drop-down new menus in one tab.

Please Steinberg, fix the CPU spiking, reduced Vst fx loading in WIndows 10 (that MS issue), musical mode problems, automation reliabiltiy… if Steinberg want to add something big - polyphonic pitch tuning might do it! It’s only a matter of time before another company takes it up to melodyne.

It just seems we have the promise of being very advanced, but this software is not written with enough care these days (!) to make it enjoyable any longer.

I find it a struggle to get Cubase to do the things I already do know how to do… if that makes sense. I could not do these things without it, but I COULD shift to another DAW which will do most of all of these things in another way, maybe with less pain if I’m lucky. I am swearing too much at Cubase now. I think I might be an abuser of AI, and it hates me for my intolerance.

If I try to open a basic troublesome project in v6 (without any 8.5 tricks like the inbuilt channel fx), it will be about 10-15% lower on cpu at first, but then it will be STABLE and jump around like an arsefly the way 8.5 performance is. Changing buffers hardly does anything, and it has gotten really bad recently with WIn 10. I know it is not all the fault of the developers… the OS updates (and consequent problems) for MS and Apple has been all over the place recently.

WE are the customers who paid money for a product that can help us create, STEINBERG is supposed to offer a reliable product for it’s price.

They are good at what they do, but maybe have cut themselves off from their customers a bit too much these days. There are viable competing products, they need to bare that in mind with the customer relations policies.

It is mostly, too. But it is a bleeding edge piece of software and sometimes dev’s maybe try too hard to stick new stuff in there, maybe because they are under pressure to push sales and maybe to keep their jobs (I’m guessing).

The software has been really quite FLAKEY since v7.5… yes it’s flakey now. Not good chocolatey flake but smelly, fishy bad flake.

Maybe people have been led by the nose with the corporate strategy we have seen from american software giants and even dwarfs (thanks adobe for starting the ball…).

We ALREADY pay for it - Cubase Pro is a sizable sum to purchase, reasonable to update. Don’t think you might be getting a better deal by being forced to pay a ‘small’ monthy fee. Are you a ‘serious user’? Are you now or going to be professional or semi-professional, and need to be able to load your work in inferior conditions, maybe anywhere in the world, even in many years to come? I know the OS will have changed, but there are workarounds for that.

If the program will not load because you either can not make an internet connection, or can not pay digitally any long for it’s maintenance fees… you’re stuffed.

I’m concerned too many companies are thinking they will follow Adobe dwon this dark and fetid track - yes, sometimes subscription is good - short jobs which have no return work and a tiny lifespan - but I want the option to have the software for as long as I like/need, without recourse to a ‘secure connection’ , ongoing payment drains, and even the vagaries of future internet connectivity (it would be odd if it did not become a huge issue for us all in the near future).

What are you going to do with your subscription software in 2032 when you finally work out how to access that vintage SSD, load an old OS onto a computer (whatever that might be) and have valuable material you wish to update, finish or share if:

a. the company is bust/not supporting antique legacy softwares
b. you are living in a desert in a cave or in a bubble in the rings of saturn, and there is no reliable earthly broadband :stuck_out_tongue:

8

Hi manders - and all forum users.

A few points of clarification :

  • I am a pro - I use Cubase just about 7 days a week
  • I too am frustrated that I have paid dearly over many years for Cubase and its many upgrades and that the software has more bugs than ever
  • I am very frustrated that the bugs are not being addressed in a timely fashion
  • I would prefer a solid 8.5 to having more new features

All that said I understand that we live in a commercial world and not everything can be done. Before taking up music as a full-time profession I worked for 20 years in IT, a significant part developing and supporting a software product. Making a product totally reliable at the same time as maintaining and/or expanding market share is a real and difficult challenge. My view (and I think many existing users share this view) is simply that Steinberg have the balance wrong - not enough resource is being committed to fixing problems.

A maybe more contentious point is that IF this is because Steinberg can’t afford it then I for one am willing to pay for support but IF and only IF we get a step change in the bugfix response time.

How about a response from Steinberg???

Cheers from a sadly rainy France

Richard