cubase 10/9.5 sounds different than cubase 6!??

hey so i just downloaded and ran cubase 10 and 9.5 trial with plans to upgrade from 6 and i did a mixdown comparison. Shockingly im noticing a difference in mixdown between the cubase versions loading the same project and using same mixdown settings. Its subtle but i think im hearing in cubase 10 and 9.5 more upper mids/highs or less lows making mix sound slightly less warm and natural so im preferring 6. Heres 2 different small parts of the song i mixed down and compared.

How is this possible? What would explain this??

Finally that one again…

I know it sounds stupid but i wouldnt bring up if i didnt hear difference. Dont you?

I don’t have time to measure the files or listen, but from memory I recall that there were at least two bugs involving EQ in various versions of Nuendo (and thus also likely Cubase).

It could simply be that between versions you’re experiencing differences with the same project file. I.e. the plugin in question ends up with different settings.

That’s a different thing than the versions of Cubase sounding different.

Sure, it‘ s just that this comes up at least once after every new version release. There was a change (not a bug IIRC) in the EQ at some point.

eq changes would explain it, thanks

I think a little note when loading older project files could help users figure out the why of different sounding projects, of course only between the versions with EQ algorithm change.

My experiences with reviving projects made in older versions has almost always resulted in a ‘different than it was before’ feeling. Mostly very subtle but still different. The thing is also that software evolves and becomes more efficient and new options are added and with this the sound could also slightly differ and become cleaner, less distorted, etc ? Also ‘Processing Precision’ 32 vs 64 set in the VST audio system screen which was not available in versions before CB9.5 may result in a slight difference?

It’s probably very unlikely that it has to do with some sort of “efficiency” or 32- vs 64-bit processing.

Go back and search the forum for issues with the EQ in various situations and I’m willing to bet that’s got a lot to do with it.

Basically I’d expect any difference to be because bugs were fixed. Any redesign changing the sound of the software should have been clearly noted by Steinberg.

Despite what people think, they’re constantly changing/improving the audio engine. Download SX3 and you’ll hear an even more dramatic change. It’s a more subtle change each major release. Jump back 10 or 20 years and it become super obvious to anyone who has decent monitors and converters. Usually it’s a change for the better. However, whatever they did in Nuendo 4 was interesting and I wish I could select the Nuendo 4 audio engine in Cubase to mix on every now and then.

I’m not surprised you will notice a difference from Cubase 6. It’s about 10 years old and there are even documented changes to the mix engine since then. New mix engine has been a feature in a few versions of Cubase since version 6. It’s not a secret.

I don’t know if it’s the mix engine or just how it communicates with the asio drivers or whatever but over the years they’ve gone from 16 to 24 to 32 to 64 bit so obviously there is going to be a difference. Generally speaking, you get more detail in each release of the audio engine but sometimes it would be nice to hear the old mix engine. People will try to disprove this by bouncing out audio from each version and phase reversing it. Sure they bounce out the same but that doesn’t mean what you’re hearing is the same. Put a highly detailed mic in front of your speakers and record the same session in across different versions of Cubase and I can guarantee they won’t phase reverse each other out. I might do it for a YouTube video in the future.

Anyway, yes they are different. It might take a little while to get used to but technically speaking, it has more information so if your song sounds worse, it’s just more stuff you need to fix.

Yeah it does. Stop spreading nonsense.

This was done to death, the afterlife and reincarnated several times a few years back… It was down to tweaks in the EQ algos circa C7/8 iirc.

Then how do you explain the advertised official 9.5 new 64 bit audio engine feature?


“the new pristine 64-bit floating-point mixing engine you will no longer need to compromise when it comes to quality, precision and realism. The advanced audio engine calculates your summing, mixing and effects processing with double-precision accuracy, performing each task with the utmost level of detail, dynamics and transparency.”

That reads like a change to the audio engine to me.

I’m addressing what you wrote. If something “bounces out the same” then it is the same and it will sound the same. It will never, ever in a million years sound differently.

As for the summing engine being 64-bit float instead of 32, which is a separate statement, I’m willing to bet the difference is so small you won’t hear a difference. It’s actually an interesting question, so maybe I’ll pull up a mix from before and export it in different version and measure it just to see where the difference is, if there is one to begin with.

For any other difference just read the post above yours, as well as the ones earlier…

Run this script on the two mix-downs and see if the RMS is 0:

At around V7 or maybe 7.5 (I can’t remember) there was a filter slope change - this will most likely be what you’re hearing - you can of course put the old behaviour back.

So how do you explain, What’s going on inside the software?
Would this change substantially in the future versions.

I believe it is just different settings in the plugins of Cubase that makes it sound different in different versions.
When the settings are the same in both the versions than the file would sound similar in reality.