I think you’re mixing things up. There was an update very recently, and Timo said (I think) that the update with Cubase 6 features would be early summer. And after that Timo said that they’d been working for a week on a specific problem and that it was going to be fixed, but I don’t think he said whether that would be an update before the summer or rolled into the summer update…
Yeah… I was afraid of that…
Anybody else having trouble getting this page to load?
http://www.steinberg.net/en/support/downloads/downloads_nuendo_5.html
Hilarious. The “marketing experts” here suggesting to a company to drop their strongest selling brand Cubase. 
Also if someone states “SB is not known for proper planning”, all I see is a handful of Steinberg forum users who are not known for proper forum manners and are not discussing in a factual way. I still don´t get how certain users can keep on b*tching about Cubase and/or Nuendo for years and simply not move on if they are constantly unsatisfied with their software and the company behind. No one forces you to “torture” yourself if you feel like that.
Regarding Nuendo I still see the strategy behind like:
Cubase → Music Production Tool $
Nuendo → Post Production Tools $$
Nuendo + NEK → Flagship for all purposes $$$
Perhaps the naming scheme could have been “Nuendo” and “Nuendo Plus” or “Nuendo Complete” instead of introducing NEK, but honesty what do I care about names, I downloaded the licence and it works, so what.
My only suggestions are:
- NEK users should be allowed to post in Cubase forums to have access to the larger user base
- NEK license on an eLicenser should allow to open same generation Cubase
- NEK users of the current generation should receive a free time limited license to open next generation Cubase, which is only active until to the point Nuendo gets the upgrade.
And why is Nuendo coming out later than Cubase? SB needs to fix and REFINE NEW FEATURES which get introduced to the larger (less commercially oriented) user base of Cubase, so they have a certain timeframe to improve code and offer it to Nuendo users later, but at a more reliable and improved state. Also, you might have guessed it; additional programming and refinements need some time and ressources.
By the way, does anyone else appreciate the fact that we are getting ALL refined SEQ 6 features plus more, FOR FREE in less than half a year?
I would be happy running Cubase but when my clients say “do you have protools” (which the all do) and I say “Cubase” that think “oh used that it’s not a professional recording app”. If you say Nuendo they usually say “Never heard of it. what’s that”.
So I’m stuck using Nuendo because of a branding issue, yet I get stuck with year old features.
D/
I think the point probably was to use one brand instead of two. Your point is well taken though.
That didn’t really contribute anything to the debate either though, right?
The strategy is not profitable. The division between Nuendo owners without the NEK and those with is roughly 70/30. Now do some simple maths and assume 100 people own nuendo:
(70 x $250) + (30 x $400) = $17,500 + $12,000 = $29,500
Now compare to Steinberg selling Nuendo with the NEK features - i.e only one version of Nuendo - for less money:
100 x $300 = $30,000
Relatively speaking a $500 increase in revenue. Try $350 and you get a $5,500 increase in revenue! This doesn’t even include the lower costs due to easier production / distribution (i.e boxes, software development etc).
It also doesn’t even talk about whether or not those extra $50 in increased cost for the post production professional to reach the “break even” point is really of any consequence. If that money amounts to more than two hours worth of billable work for the average post-pro I’d be surprised…
So the strategy clearly isn’t good from a financial standpoint.
I do. I think that’s great for owners of Nuendo 5.x. Kind’a makes me wonder when we’ll see Nuendo 6 of course, but that’s sort of irrelevant to the point you’re making I guess…
So who do you complain to when the best tool for the job isn’t quite good enough and no other tool comes close? One wonders who’s torturing who.
The problem is that many feel there’s no where to move to. I’ve tried them all now, and nothing is perfect, all of them have their strengths and weaknesses. Now if money was no object, and all the best features of all the DAWs out there where rolled into one… don’t poke me; let me dream for a moment… 
well said, that’s how I feel. For the most part, I know I’m using the top of the line, I work quickly with few hang ups. It’s not perfect and it never will be. N5 workhorse supported by PT9 delivery system, there is no where else to go for post.
Haha! Just stepped over your post - SAME here 
Thouh I am currently using C5 and my current clients don’t care, they are all using C5 so we are highly compatible OR just don’t care - but I will happily go back to Nuendo soon
Same here… Well I do have and use PT too, so that gets that out of the way. I will work in any of them. The most recent artist said “Use what you prefer to work with.” Which is totally cool by me. I fly using Nuendo and Cubase. Pretty happy with Nuendo as long as it doesn’t crash, LOL.
As far as branding issue… get PT9 native. It is cheap, will eliminate any stigmata and get more people into your joint, and that is the honest truth in music recording and production. The selling point once they come and visit your place is your work. The software will not be an issue then unless you have to be compatible… then you will since you now have PT!
Hi Tom,
it is planned that the Cubase features will be available in Nuendo further on.
Thanks,
Timo
Huh?
there were new features introduced in Cubase 6… these features will be given to us for free in Nuendo 5.5.
rsp
I have not stated that they are for free. But yes, they will appear in Nuendo 5.5.
And no, we will not take 149 $/€ as we did for the Cubase features (NEK) in the Update
cycle Nuendo 4 to 5. Also, we know that this kind of leap-frogging (one and a half year after Cubase)
has to be avoided and will be avoided. Currently we still expect to see a 5.5 version sometime
mid of the year. But I expect that there will be at least a small handling fee.
Thanks,
Timo
Hold on a sec - so now we are being asked to pay for leapfrogging? This is getting better and better by the minute… 
VP
No. I would call one and a half year “leapfrogging”. And the update price in the past
was even higher. There is and will be a time delay between new Cubase and Nuendo
updates. The goal is to keep this delay as short as possible.
Our aim in this product cylce is to reduce the “time delay” by one year, meaning to make the
new features that were introduced with Cubase available in Nuendo 6 months later instead
of 18 months. And our goal is not to take 149 $ again for these features, as we did in the past.
So I’m talking about a handling fee here, not about a $100 update.
Thanks,
Timo
Timo,
Leapfrogging is leapfrogging regardless of time…it especially hurts when that time frame is real short - to wit…
I (we) purchase Nuendo 5 in late June (call in July 1), 2010. Then a scant 6 months later (Jan 13, 2011) Cubase is announced with jazzy new features that we obviously want/need in Nuendo. Are you trying to tell me that in the time between July 1 and Jan 13, 2011 - ALL of these new features did not exist and were written from scratch to solely benefit C6? With no nod of ever having them in Nuendo?
And apologies - but I do not understand the need for a “handling” fee in the age of digital delivery.
This is very disappointing and I am sure the rest of the gang will have a field day when this is more common knowledge.
VP
Bruce,
this is not as simple as it seems to be. Version numbers are one story, the code basis is another.
Cubase 6 was developed one a partly different code base, a new, fresh one. We could simply
do it like some other vendors, just adding features and let the code base get old. In fact, with
every new Nuendo/Cubase update, we are constantly renewing large parts of the code (and I
don’t mean the new features only).
So the first build of Nuendo 5 and Cubase 6 are not on the same development branch. That’s why
“simply adding features” is not so simple in reality. Nuendo 5.5 will also be based on the new
development branch, but that cannot be done “overnight” and requires some time. That’s the
technical reason.
Thanks,
Timo
Appreciate the update and know that I am looking forward to N5.5 - free or otherwise
VP
Hi Bruce,
thanks for the discussion and your understanding. As I mentioned, it will only be a rather
small fee. And the update price from 5.5 to 6 will also be reduced, later on.
Plus, in advance of Nuendo 5.5, we will release another big maintenance update including
64bit support on Mac + some other improvements (of course without any costs).
A good weekend to all of you!
Thanks,
Timo