Cubase 12.0.20 maintenance update available

There is considerable externality in software like Cubase - you are running on two different versions of each of two different operating systems, using numerous libraries, relying on countless drivers and attempting to work with thousands of third-party plug-ins. It is overwhelmingly likely that all these dependencies are not bug-free. Indeed, the toolchains (compiler and linker) might contain output affecting bugs.

I think you underestimate the number of lines of code in a major application such as Cubase/Nuendo, also how long it takes an outsider to become familiar with the layout of a code repository.

Code review speeds of more than a few hundred lines per hour are impossible to achieve with any quality. Code review can be subject to confirmation bias, especially on dealing with subtle bugs; I have found bugs in colleagues’ code that has been through multiple code reviews over several years. Indeed, I remember looking at one program where the parameters to the very first operating system call in main() were incorrect.

Steinberg have internal testers (look at the credits) as well as beta testers. However, there is only so much that can be done with an ever-moving codebase.

Zero bugs in a codebase of many thousand lines of code written by human software engineers is mathematically implausible.

3 Likes

That’s not going to happen. My last project had over 50 ppl in the USA, UK and India all writing different parts of the code and it took 3 years to implement. For one person to learn it all would have been unrealistic. For one person to go in and start pointing out errors and fixing them would have been a total disaster. Anyone who does project work knows what a nightmare it can be when someone new starts thinking they can fix things. New ppl do not know why things are coded the way they have been, they have to understand the history of the code and discuss this with the current coders. That slows down everyone’s work. For us, well we would only hire someone who knows the software we use and had worked in our field of business before.

So for Steinberg they would have to hire a DAW programmer, that sounds like a very select group of ppl to hire from. I imagine there are so few of them in the world that Steinberg actually knows who they are. But they have to poach them from another company and then it’s all the disruption that will causes training them up again.

It’s never a case of hire a programmer and just let them get on with it unless the thing is very very generic. A DAW does not sound that generic. So there is no quick fix for a DAW.

3 Likes

Yet those who use other DAWs say Steinberg stands alone/out, and not in a good way.

You folks who say “nay” to hiring dedicated bug fixers … do you have any optimism that things will get much better?

1 Like

What I’m saying makes no difference, I do not work for Steinberg and only those ppl, and quite high up, get to say who they hire. And those ppl probably do not read any of this ever so it’s just hot air.

In my opinion, and that’s all it is, but what we think will make zero difference. We can say what we like but there is no one from the company that will be reading this and thinking “oh we never thought of that before”. It’s not that simple.

I’m guessing this forum was not put here for users to tell anyone how to run a company. That’s for owners and shareholders.

I have Ableton, Pro Tools, Logic, MPC Studio, Luna and Cubase .

I prefer to use either Cubase or Ableton, depending on what I am doing. But I do not have any less issues with the other DAWs than I do with Cubase. And Cubase 12 has worked perfectly for me.

If your collecting opinions on a forum where ppl have issues your going to find ppl with issues lol

And there are sooOoooo many ppl with anecdotal evidence of 20 studio owners they know that are all having the and issues lol. It’s like my aunties, uncles, cousins cleaners son knows someone with exactly the same issue with C12. And also studio owners on here that think there option is worth that of 20 other ppl because they own some run down hut with a mixing desk in it.

Cubase is as good as any other DAW, they ALL have issues. Go to Pro Tools Expert website and read the comments from pro tools users under the new Pro Tools release articles. Then tell me how much the other DAWs are all loved by their users.

4 Likes

please let us use the 12.0.30 update <3

I went to check Pro tools forums out of curiosity.
The main things PT users complain about are : in order of importance

  1. Please add this functionality (because X daw already has it),
  2. I have performance issues (but the issue is in reality related to specific hardware configuration and is extremely sporadic)
  3. Various graphical bugs (X thing not displaying since the update but in fact it had to be turned on again)
  4. This functionality isn’t working at all (generally minor editing functionalities and key commands, but only on certain tiers of PT)

Now compare this with Cubase and its huge list of bugs and inconsistencies, and it’s worth to mention that the list is in reality much bigger than this.
In Cubase you simply cannot execute even the simplest actions without running into a bug.
Then when you try to find out what is triggering the bug, you run into another bug which is directly related to the previous one. It is just never ending !
They are not just sparse are rare bugs, they are everywhere and can be reproduced by anyone, because they are all hard-coded into Cubase ! Those are absolutely not user mistakes !

1 Like

I prefer to make sure reported issues are 100.000.000% fixed and avoid even more bugs before releasing the update. No need to rush it and make things worse.

That wont happen. It usually a better strategy to release often. But the real bad way is to mix new features with bug fixes.

No disrespect but I do not think you have compared to two forums in any great detail. Mainly because of the sheer volume of complaints on both. That’s what the forums are for.

I happen to know that the version of Pro Tool about 4 versions ago was very unstable for Mac users. There was a lot of issues with it, like not even being able to load the plugins to even get to use the product. It took me about 3 days to get it to open and a lot of hassle. Then 2021.12 came out and resolved a lot of issues.

Now they released 2022.4 about 3 to 4 weeks ago. Then pro tools 2022.5 was released but why ? If pro tools has no issues why release a version so quickly ? It was bugs that they had to fix asap, sounds a bit like C12 and C12.0.10 doesn’t it.

But check out this list of bug fixes for 2022.4:

Those are bugs users complained about that you could not even find on their forum. I’m not surprised, it’s a big forum.

And see the comments at the end of that article from pro tools users. They are all complaining that the list is no where near all the bugs in pro tools and when will the rest of the bugs be fix? Sound familiar.

I use pro tools so I know how many times it just closes without warning on me. Same with Ableton, it just closes then you can recover your session. So far I would say that C10 to C12 had been more stable than both of those for me, but my hardware likes them, yours may not. I have not really had any issues with C12, I do not like the way audio can be warped in the main window, so I just do it the old way. But that’s the only thing I do not like about it now.

I did have an issue of course, probably not DAW related specifically, which turned out to be one plugin which was Wavefactory Trackspacer. As soon as I removed that from my projects I got back 50% cpu. I can live without that one plugin. I like that plugin a lot but it’s to intensive now so I’m not going to use it anymore. Now I could have not investigated that and blamed C12 and logged it in here. But I spent some hours testing plugins until I discovered that using 7 TrackSpacers on my project cost me half my CPU but using normal side chain compression cost me almost nothing, I replaced them with a waves C1 side chained in classic mode and I was good.

It’s no one DAW, they are all like it, it’s a software thing, if it had a facebook status it would read “it’s complicated”

2 Likes

I suggest you look to sell your Steinberg licences once the facility to transfer Steinberg Licensing licences is launched, as Steinberg software is clearly unable to meet your high standards.

Have you ever looked at the bug database of a major software project? If not, there are plenty of bug databases for large open source projects online. Indeed, open source projects put their entire code repository online. I have reported bugs in an open source system that have sat unfixed for years even though the project had paid developers working on it. I wrote, organised beta testing for and then contributed a significant feature myself, because that feature was important to me but overall was not a high enough priority to attract paid developer time. I have worked as a software engineer, so I know all about the competing pressures for developer time.

There are only so many developer hours to go round. Writing DAW code is difficult - you are writing near real-time code running on operating systems that lack features which guarantee real-time operation. As @RTT1 notes, the pool of developers experienced in this work is pretty small and onboarding an external developer takes time.

Cubase/Nuendo 12.0.20 does not work well in some people’s environments, mine included. I cannot run Nuendo 12.0.20 without it crashing and I can’t step back to an earlier version of Nuendo 12 because there isn’t one (the first public release of Nuendo 12 was 12.0.20). For now, I am using Nuendo 11 and I expect 12.0.30 to be a significant step ahead.

I suspect 12.0.30 is close - maybe this coming Wednesday (Steinberg often drop new releases on Wednesday). However, it is important that the release is tested so far as is possible in the available time. 12.0.30 will not fix everything, but I am sure it will move us closer towards where we all hope to be.

A lot has changed for Cubase/Nuendo 12 - notably adding Apple Silicon support and the new licensing system, but also some other important ‘under the hood’ changes such as support for the more modern WinRT MIDI API (and hence Bluetooth MIDI) on Windows.

I simply fail to see what good your repeated managerial suggestions to Steinberg are doing, other than perhaps revealing that you have little or no experience of major software projects (commercial or open source).

2 Likes

Well thank’s for the explanation.

Judging by the insane amount of bug fixes in each Pro Tools updates, and by the frequency of these updates, this proves that Pro Tools is heavily tested internally. I bet the great majority of those issues have never been evoked on the forums.
Unfortunately this does not seem to be the case for Steinberg as they mainly rely on user feedback (that is my personal point of view).

My hardware has absolutely no problem running Cubase and I’m extremely happy with it.
What I am talking about is that many bugs have been there for many years and are still present to this day, whatever hardware you are using. I know crashes can be caused by plugins and things external to cubase, but that is not the question, I’m talking about highly disruptive bugs that occur during the basic handling of the DAW.

Let’s try something :
There are two issues that concern the Frequency 2 plugin, released with Cubase 11 (issues 5 and 6 in the list whose link is in my previous post).
None of the two bugs have been fixed in one year and a half.
What are the chances they get fixed in 12.0.30 ? 50% ? 10% ? Or 0% and let’s wait another two years ?
Seriously, what is going on with this ?
Those are easy to fix issues, they are not complex issues related to a specific model of CPU and audio interface combination ! I’m not a programmer but you can perfectly understand what I mean here.

They release or update a plugin that is already having bugs, then it never gets fixed ! Do they even try to fix it ? Or are they even aware of the bugs ? Or do they even thoroughly test their own stuff before and after the release ? And finally why do they even release something if it’s not bug-free ? They’ll maybe try to tell us that on their machines there was no bug, then the bug is due to user configuration ? The heck.


My high standards are telling me that when I buy something I would be able to use every basic core functionalities without experiencing any issue, which is not the case here.
If Pro Tools receives more frequent updates and more bug fixes that maybe means there are more people working on it actively ?
Still I won’t sell my Cubase license because I really love Cubase.
I don’t care about performance and hardware related bugs, because new issues will always be introduced every time new hardware get released, and I am well aware of this.
I just want the basic stuff to get fixed once and for all.

Your assumption about pro tools is not correct. They are fixing bugs in previous releases that customers are using. So the bugs are out there, even now there are more.

You cannot say on the one hand they are excellent at testing their software because they fix bugs, but on the other hand those bugs got through testing without being noticed when first released.

Also you have no idea how long those bugs have been in the software. They do not fix all bugs from previous releases, they are fixing bugs from months ago and years ago and new ones they have just found. but not all of them.

Bug are reported on pro tools forum all the time. I have reported a licensing one not so long ago so I know they are their. But also Avid have a very business like support portal.

Cubase always has a list of bug fixes in it too, every release has them.

What they are doing is much the same as all other DAWs.

Your right that those little things that are broken in their eq should get fixed, that’s a reasonable expectation. I don’t use it so it’s not something I care about but maybe they have bigger fish to fry this year.

Also it might be very difficult to fix issues that seem minor, no one knows that except the coders. It’s not reasonable to say your not a programmer but…….I have customers telling all the time how easy it will be to fix a defect and they are never correct. That’s not to say it’s not easy sometimes but the customers explanation of how they think it works is usually so far from the actual code I wonder why they even try to guess an estimate.

Your right to want things fixed, maybe raise a ticket to ask if it is in the list of future fixes at all.

But I would not use this forum to get something fixed, I would raise tickets. I treat a forum as something I go to after I raised a ticket because I want a work-a-around.

2 Likes

RTT1 for the most part I agree with you. We own and utilize most major DAWs here at our studio and each of them have their quirks…and bugs…some that have been around a long-time, some new.

The same is true for hardware drivers, plugins and other audio production software.

In my experience the rate which bugs occur, their number and the time needed to squash them has increased over the past few years.

As I have stated previously, I believe the rate of technological change has much to do with this increasing problem. The developers and programmers are dealing with revolutionary changes in processors and other computer hardware and operating systems. Modifying existing complex code to deal with these changes while at the same time adding new “features” demanded by marketing departments to bolster sales and at the same time trying to make their products compatible with all the other software vendor’s products is a monumental task!

I would prefer that all the developers stop adding new “features” and concentrate on bug squashing for at least six months. Adding new “features” to software that is already buggy is not the most beneficial for us users.

I realize that some developers must release point updates to generate income periodically and that most users would not pay for an update without new “features”. I for one, would be willing to pay for a point upgrade that dealt with just bug fixes and compatibility upgrades that did not include any new “features”. More reliable DAWs, plugins, drivers and other audio software is worth paying for in my book.

2 Likes

Yes I think a lot of this is not so much about adding testers etc, the bugs have been reported already.

It’s about priorities and maybe that is measured by how many users have reported a bug or if the bug has a knock on affect to something more integral. It’s hard to say how they are judged. But for every bug that’s fixed there are some happy users who won’t come to this forum and unhappy ones we will see on here because theirs was not in the new release.

I would like to see a release of just bug fixes but I think in 6 months not enough would get done. There could be 3 months of development work, 1 month of unit test, 1 month of end to end and regression testing and then 1 month of user testing. So really we would get 3 months of bug fixes. It would probably need 12 month to fix enough to satisfy ppl.

But then Steinberg would have to ask users to pay for a major release of just fixes. Some say they would gladly pay for that but a lot of ppl will not. It’s like saying “hey the software is broken and now you get to pay for us to fix it”. That is a very hard sell. If it was released free as an update then Steinberg would forgo update money for almost 2 years. That would include the year the bug fix update is released and then it will not be until the end of the following year until there is a new Cubase version released with new features. That’s a long time with no additional revenue coming in.

I would love to see a pure bug fix major release but I’m just not sure how feasible it would be. I get it that having bugs in something that do not seems to get fixed is not great. But it’s not specific to a Cubase or any particular DAW.

It’s all so complicated, The software, the hardware, everything is in constant flux. Next year there will probably be a whole new raft of CPUs and motherboards with new chipsets and OS’s and then plugins and it all starts again.

I can make a track using a lot of dfferent plugins, I can get by, that’s enough for me right now.

It’s kind of like flying across an ocean, we have forgotten the miracle of powered flight, now we are just angry as hell there are no peanuts left on the flight lol

It’s a miracle we get these DAWs that work at all….of course I would be angry as hell if I was one if the ppl where C12 didn’t work at all. :slight_smile: but I can over look a few things that are not perfect if I have a work around.

A major bug fix release would be nice but I’m not sure it would happen. But that’s just my thoughts on it.

But if they could make it run 30% better on the CPU I would pay a lot for that as an update, no other features needed ! I guess we all have things we want.

1 Like

I agree with you that many users believe that bugs and compatibility issues “are the developers fault” and that they should not be paid to fix their mistakes. That thought process is not correct however, many bugs are actually compatibility problems that were not able to be anticipated by the software developer and were not found during testing before release because in the wild there are many more potential compatibility issues.

I am amazed that audio software works as well as it does.

I would be very happy to pay every one of the developers of my audio hardware driver and software developers for a real, comprehensive bug and compatibility update. I would also be willing to pay into a fund to allow all the major players to work together to squash compatibility bugs.

Unfortunately, I may be the only studio owner who would be willing to pay for a pure bug and compatibility update. lol

2 Likes

For me a developer is a person that do write the code. That does not match your? It is companies that is release their products. And what the developers do and not do is usually not decided by the developers them self. In big companies like steinnberg/yamaha there is often directive from the owner, in this case Yamaha directing Steinberg. Of course not in details. Usually that is sell more. And in Japan that is “add more features”. And looking in to this forums there is a lot of requests for new features! (And everyone expect them to work flawlessly.) And in reality you need to both. New features sell. However bad reputation is killing sales, but the ones that already have bought the software wont buy the same again so it is low priority unless it is so bad that it is giving bad reputation. (And bad reputation is relative to competition. )

2 Likes

The vast majority of bugs are inherent within the software, they’re not compatibility issues at all.
Look at the wiki which was posted ealier:
Cubase 12.0.20 - Issues Wiki

This desire to focus on fixes comes from the top, it’s only when people start walking away from a product and new customers don’t fill that void will anything be done.

The 12 month cycle of focusing on new features is clearly working for them, or else they wouldn’t be here today.

1 Like

There are always a list of bug fixes in every release, it’s not just new features, there is a release document which mentions fixes in every release.

Also there are only 21 fixes on that list and they are NOT from Steinberg. So we have no idea how they manifest themselves. These items need to be confirmed by Steinberg before they can officially be logged as bugs. If they have been then great but it might be that only one person has called out those so they will not get fixed sooner than a bug that has been reported by 2000 ppl. Sometime things that are noted as bugs are simple user error or a misunderstand on how the tool works. So Steinberg have to confirm something is a true bug.

But it has never been just new features, it has always been new features and bug fixes. It’s just that some that ppl treasure more that others do not make the list.

Just to be clear, I’m saying that there’s inherent, repeatable bugs that go unfixed due to the priority placed on developing and testing annual “Saleable” features.

No-one cares what their internal models are, but people do care when there’s bugs over 10 years old still going unfixed in their software. Last few maintenance updates have gone through testing with objective bugs observed on all hardware across both Mac and Win operating systems and it adds to the pile.

I’m a bit sick of it, to be honest. When you use other DAW’s and it runs better, smoother and without pauses in playback you just wonder why you’re sat here waiting several years in the hope that SB will improve or fix something.

The gap in features is practically nothing now, they’ve dined on their past well. But the current generation at SB need to push and innovate as their predecessors did. To me, they’re just falling and stuck in this 12 month sales cycle.

Look at the state of the new licensing, can’t resell it, products like HALion appear to be held back as they want to sell us updates, can’t release a locked machine yourself, yet it’s been hacked almost on release. Monumental balls-up, really.

Saddest part is I was genuinely excited about C12 and the licensing, thinking it was a new era. Now I just feel concern, in all honesty.

4 Likes

I have C12 running perfectly well on my system. There might be things have yet to find but I am making tracks with it no issue for me. It run fast and it’s better that C11 for me.

Bugs in C11 will not be tested as part of a C12 release unless they are items mapped to be fixed in C12. Ableton do the same, if you point out a bug in their latest beta which is already in the current release version they tell you it’s not a bug in the beta because it’s not part of the release.

I know of NO DAW that doesn’t do exactly the same as Cubase and that doesn’t have similar bugs that are not fixed in a similar way.

But your right about getting things fixed. No one who disagree about that. How to do it is more of the question I guess.

How do you know that Halion will be a paid for upgrade to the new licensing system ? Wavelab was a free upgrade to the new licensing system and Apple Silicon, the same is true to GrooveAgent. Those twos free updates happening in the last 3 weeks. There was also a note included on how codes will be distributed to more to the new licensing from elicense. There was also a server upgrade last week which might well be part of the more for other product.