Just finished my trail of c14 love the new features but don’t really what to buy 2 update every year , So gone back to Nuendo 13 for now, be interesting to see if c14 really did feel faster (m3max)
looking forward to N14 
This would probably mean more work for Steinberg which means higher cost which means either lower profit (probably not what they want) or higher upgrade price (probably not what we want).
I’m fine with things being the way they are. It is the most logical approach I think.
3 Likes
Yeah, I think so too. Probably announce on Tuesday the 21st…or maybe they’ll wait until Thursday the 23rd, which is the first day the exhibits themselves open.
At any rate, the Yamaha/SB ballroom is my first stop on the 23rd.
Rock solid pretty much on my underpowered and aging Windows 10 PC.
1 Like
You’re probably right =)
It’s just… after the release of Cubase 14, it became painful to work with Nuendo 13, knowing that there were already new features that were very important for me, psychologically painful to use the old ClipGain and convert 4k video to 1080p to make it work in the project, well, and other features would not be superfluous either!
1 Like
It’s an interesting thought, but I would prefer the current release plan TBH. But I get your point, and in a perfect world I WOULD agree with you. However, as past releases have shown us, like it or not, Cubase usually has some rough edges when a new version is released. That’s to be expected, and people can choose when they feel it is solid enough to put it into production. For some people that’s right away, for other people, that’s 6 months later. This is true of any major developer, and some Steinberg releases are better than others. C14 has been pretty good IMO out of the gate, so it can go into production earler than C13 could, IMO. But everyone’s needs are different.
I typically upgrade right away and start using it right away on new simple projects and to learn the new features, since I already know I’ll run into various bugs that will frustrate me. Once I take it through its paces, I’ll determine the best time to fully migrate other projects so I avoid any showstoppers or frustration. But I usually don’t switch any important existing projects over until a few patches when I have more confidence. I keep the PRIOR version of Cubase for any mission-critical projects or projects that were already nearing completion. ESPECIALLY paid client projects that have deadlines coming up!!! But I like getting the new version of Cubase early to at least get a feel for the new features.
However, with Nuendo, the projects I do there are almost all mission-critical and with paying clients, so I like Nuendo to be better baked when it comes out. The lag time between Cubase and Nuendo gives Nuendo a chance to absorb some of the early patches of Cubase, and I welcome that. So I’d prefer Steinberg to stick to that cadence.
And when I do get Nuendo, I still hold off a bit for another patch or two for production, but by then it’s in pretty solid shape for my uses. I cannot afford to have showstoppers on most of my Nuendo projects.
Anyway, I get your point though, and in a perfect world where there are no bugs, I’d agree with you 100%. But since we live in a very imperfect world, I’d prefer a lag time so that Nuendo can at least absorb some initial bugfixes. My opinion only of course. Cheers!
3 Likes
I feel your pain. However, it’s far more painful to miss a deadline for a paying client on a critical Nuendo project due to some half-baked issue or early showstopping bug!
I think Steinberg realizes, on average, more Nuendo users probably prefer stability as a higher priority compared to Cubase users. Over the years I think the product usage demographics have been shifting to become more similar though, BUT I think there’s still a divide, such that more Nuendo users are probably in more “traditional” production and business environments than many Cubase users, where a showstopping bug will perhaps more frequently have some serious financial ramifications.
Please note I’m not saying that Nuendo users are more “pro” than Cubase users at all, and I’m not saying that Cubase users don’t care about stability… but I AM just saying that I believe more Nuendo users are still more sensitive to stability in a production environment than Cubase users. However, again, this demographic is probably shifting since in recent years, the cost of Nuendo has come down significantly, and the lines have been blurring, also since the days when Steinberg started including all music features in Nuendo by default (there was a time when you paid separately for the music features, formerly called the Nuendo NEK, if you didn’t already know that). That’s ancient history, though, I know, and in recent years more Cubase users “upgraded” to Nuendo for the extra media-related tools in our ever-changing market, but there is still a lingering demographic imprint from those earlier days, especially since Nuendo continues to be so post-production oriented. So therefore I believe a larger number of Nuendo users are likely going to value stability over new features IMO. Hence, a little more time to polish off Nuendo, hence the lag time cadence.
Just a thought.
And BTW, Steinberg also fully knows that there are people like you who are eager to get all the new features of Cubase in Nuendo, and so you will be tempted to maintain both licenses (as I do for various reasons!) which means more revenue for Steinberg! Can’t fault them for that either! Business is business. If people were MORE patient, then we’d all just wait it out and stick with just one license of Nuendo instead of maintaining both! So Steinberg gets to benefit a little more from our impatience, or from whatever reasons we have for maintaining both licenses. All of this is just personal choice BTW. We can do what we like, there’s no “wrong” way about it. Cheers!
1 Like
We, too, are eagerly looking forward to the 14th. I mentioned March for several reasons—one of them being that it aligns with the financial year-end. Typically, you deliver all your projects by November, incorporate any changes by December, and payments usually arrive three months later, around the financial year closing.
Since we have some downtime, we’re focusing on optimizing our workflow for maximum creativity and efficiency. Here’s what has been working best for us:
Dialogue with Picture Sync : Fairlight on Linux
Sound Design : Bitwig (Grid) on Linux
Finalizing : Nuendo on Mac
Of course, having Nuendo with a node-based Grid available on Linux would be a dream come true.
-
I got a spare update code for Nuendo I purchased over a year ago.
If I activate my update code to 13 now, will I get Nuendo 14 for free or do I have to wait until Grace Period announcement? -
Also I’ve been out of the loop for a while, what’s with the end of e-licenser? I see that my Nuendo licence is only on e-licenser. Do I need to transfer the old license? And apply the update code I bought later? Or is the order irrelevant? I just don’t want to lose my product and buy it all again because I miss a deadline.
-
If I activate the update code is it going right to the new licensing service?
You should wait until Grace Period announcement
I would contact support as once the e-licenser services goes down, upgrading from it may cause issues.
Yes
1 Like
That makes sense, thanks for the input. I looked up what I actually bought, it was an update from N10 to 11 bought in March 2022 and didn’t activate it.
Wondering if I actually would get to N14 if I use the licence code now vs. using it in the grace period. Or am I stuck with N11 in that case?
I genuinely don’t get why owning Nuendo doesn’t give you access to a Cubase license. Isn’t Nuendo just Cubase Pro PRO? While I wait for Nuendo 14, using Cubase 14 Pro without having to pay for it separately would be really nice. Anyway, I’m sure it’s been explained at some point in another thread and someone might point out the reason here.
That’s a good question. I guess the business model isn’t like Nuendo and Nuendo Pro. Or Cubase and Cubase Ultmate. SB had to do its homework and choose according to its market.
If you use it now, you should have access to version 13. Upgrading from version 10 to 13 depends on the license server for verification and the transfer process. However, I am uncertain about how the verification process will proceed once the server is no longer operational.
There are a few additional factors to consider. For instance, the system requirements for version 14 have not been disclosed yet. It’s worth noting that version 13 introduced experimental AI features for dialogue and ambiance tools, which could indicate further advancements in version 14.
1 Like
Nuendo already includes the full version of Cubase, eliminating the need for separate installations or additional licenses. Additionally, this integration bypasses unnecessary licensing restrictions, allowing the software to be installed on up to three machines.
For optimal workflow, it’s advisable to maintain separate, dedicated setups for tasks such as scoring, music production, mastering, and post-production work (dialogue, ADR, and ambient sound design). This focused approach streamlines processes and ensures maximum efficiency across specialized areas.
At least, that’s how I believe Steinberg envisions this offering.
Nuendo is not Cubase Pro PRO, BUT your question is excellent and I think Steinberg should probably come up with a really good answer one of these days. My personal answer to this might be very different than Steinberg’s answer, but this is how I personally look at it:
Cubase and Nuendo have been historically different products for different markets, and if you trace back the history to their origins, branding, pricing, marketing, demographics, and evolution/updates over the years, you’ll see what I’m talking about. To the point that even today, from my understanding, they still have different internal teams inside Steinberg, AND I recall one of the Nuendo team members mention a few years ago that even their financials are separate, that Nuendo sales/profits are folded into Nuendo development for the most part. Of course where they overlap in features, I assume they allocate resources to the different teams as appropriate. But in general, my understanding is that their internal development teams and budgets are still separate. I could be completely wrong though, and/or maybe something has changed in recent years.
HOWEVER, in recent years, they have ALSO been converging more and more in many ways, including closer pricing, eliminating the NEK add-on license, more similar release cadence, etc., etc., etc., and not to mention their target markets have become somewhat blurry out there in the real world in some areas and sub-markets too, as the whole industry has been transforming… and so I think it is natural to be confused by the current situation! I’m guessing even Steinberg developers have asked themselves this question! I imagine one Cubase developer emailing a Nuendo developer, “Hey man, I thought YOU were supposed to fix that bug!”
A few years ago (I might be misremembering so forgive me if it was sooner or later than I remember), I noticed Steinberg did a big promo for Nuendo and basically offered it as a quasi-“upgrade” to Cubase users, and I immediately thought that Steinberg’s wording of their promo was going to cause even more confusion, because from one perspective, it gave the impression of exactly what you mentioned, that it was kind of like a “Cubase Pro PRO.” They didn’t use that language of course (that would have caused chaos!), but the wording did blur the lines IMO more than they have in the past, and the branding message went a little off-track IMO… so I do think they need to refine their branding at the very least!
So I think, here we are in 2025, and yes, the lines are more blurry than ever in some ways, and I totally get why you asked that question.
Like I mentioned, for me, I still look at it historically and still see the differences in the target markets, so I’m satisfied with how they are doing it. And I have my reasons for maintaining both licenses BTW, and if they were both released simultaneously, I would likely have two licenses of Nuendo for my studio, instead of one Cubase and one Nuendo.
For most people, it’s more logical to own one or the other, not both. The Nuendo-specific features are still generally targeted to a specific post-production market, etc., BUT sometimes they have some great features that would be cool in a music/composing/producing context too, so it can be very tempting for some Cubase users to jump over to Nuendo. I get it. But in the end, the Nuendo market is still a different market IMO.
AND YET there is still confusion, and so at the end of the day, I think Steinberg should come up with a good explanation OR figure out a way to differentiate them even more, instead of blur the lines even more.
And BTW, there is a simple solution that might help resolve the situation for some people… other people have implied or mentioned this in other threads, etc… My personal take on it is that they simply offer all Nuendo users the ability to launch the same version of Cubase. Simple, sweet, and done. Let the chips fall where they may on that.
You will still get lots of people who will be impatient because Cubase will come out first with new features… and the solution for those users is simple too… as it is today, which is 1 - They need to be patient and wait it out for Nuendo to come out… or 2 - They maintain both licenses like they do today!
There will still be complainers, but consider that Steinberg has limited resources (they are not as big as you might think), and we can’t expect them to keep the current pricing and cadence AND perfectly satisfy the dual-license-wielding Nuendo+Cubase people too. We are a subset of a subset… so it would likely be easiest for them to just let Nuendo 13 users run Cubase 13, and Nuendo 14 users run Cubase 14. Simple, by comparison, to other potential solutions.
That’s my take on the situation. And again, I totally believe Steinberg needs their marketing/PR department to come up with some polished statement about this since you are totally right that the lines have become blurred.
Cheers! My opinions only. I don’t have any inside info from Steinberg on this topic.
4 Likes
You get 3 for either product now days but I crossgraded long ago from Cubase to Nuendo and I have never looked back.
I get excited like everyone else when new features are released but patience is a virtue, and I am patiently waiting for N14 but V13 is working just fine so the new features can wait because I cannot have any downtime when there is already enough caused by interactions between the software and OS, in particular when updates for the latter are released.
1 Like
Yep, but I often need more than 3 activations for convenience and for where I’m located, laptops, studio, etc… and I don’t like juggling activations. Anyway, for most people, I agree they only need one license.
Well said, agreed 100%. For my Nuendo projects, I can’t afford any downtime at all. I’m willing to risk it a little more for simple and light Cubase projects that don’t have pressing deadlines though, as I’m testing the new features. And like I mentioned, the new C14 features are excellent this round. Looking forward to them in N14.
I’m ok with the way things are. I always own current versions of both Cubase and Nuendo, running up to 5 slave pcs in the synchronized system.
I generally delegate a couple of Cubases to the midi-only/effects-only slaves, and Nuendo to the other 3 systems, varying the overall setup depending on the project. One system alone is dedicated to tape machine ports.
It’s not very expensive to upgrade each every year, the 6 licenses are useful…esp compared to the old elicenser days options buying multiple licenses.
No need for Steinberg to give the store away…imo.
This conversation is soo far off topic
4 Likes