See my other comment above. Both programs share a common sequencer code basis, but on top of that, the code is getting more divers.
Well, the easiest way to switch between all applications is a subscription model. Would you consider that for your daily work?
[Ironical & in official mode on] Well, I strongly recommend your new studio partner to look at PT’s forums to learn more about their customer policies [ironical & in official mode off]
The limitation issue regarding DLL/VST plug-ins is currently investigated and a fix is scheduled end of January/beginning of February.
The increase in the number if cue sends will be a topic for future releases. At first, we focused on increasing the number of inserts (which will of course also come to Nuendo).
To be very honest, I would have to investigate the status of this. If it didn’t make it into Nuendo, there must be a good reason for it or, for whatever reason, it felt out of scope. With very few exceptions, we port 99% of all features from Cubase to Nuendo (but only very few from Nuendo to Cubase). The only reason for not porting over feature is, that Nuendo might have a different technical structure for the very same feature (like VCA).
Yes, that’s exactly what I’m advocating for as well. A dongle with a Nuendo license on it could open a similar version of Cubase as well (up to the same update level). There would not be a separate Cubase license for anyone to sell.
This gesture alone could ease a ton of the frustration users feel with the release schedules not lining up I think.
And thanks for all your responses!
That is good news Timo, thank you.
With regard to cue sends, will the expansion still be within the N8 life cycle as originally stated?
To be very honest, I’m not sure yet. I know it’s important for you. So it’s not a “no”, but I don’t want to make a promise.
Can’t you simply let Cubase launch if it detects a certain Nuendo license? No need to send out additional licenses that one can sell.
This is technically not possible, unfortunately.
Absolutely! That would be very welcome, and would probably eliminate a lot of moaning on the Nuendo forum.
That’s pretty much all I was saying. Users have a certain perception, and you and I both agree that it would be good if those features in question ended up in Nuendo earlier.
Having said that, this isn’t such a big issue for me personally since I focus far more on post, I was just trying to make the point that there seems to be a disconnect between how you at Steinberg think the situation is perceived and how some users perceive it.
(I think the first “must not” really means “doesn’t have to be”, correct? In US English it doesn’t read as logically as it might seem to a German and it looks like you wrote “It has to not be a Nuendo product”)
Anyway, all I’m saying is that if you provide a separate paid product for VR/AR then I can imagine that some Nuendo users (me at least) very likely won’t be interested. Obviously time will tell, but it seems to me these features should be integrated.
More importantly though, this is part of what makes me wonder about Nuendo’s position. You produce so many things, a Cubase product, a Nuendo, a bunch of VSTi, a Nuendo Live, a notation software - and you say it’s hard to find developers. So, one has to wonder: Is this the best way to spend your development Euro - from the perspective of a Nuendo user? Every time there’s an issue with Nuendo and there’s a release of something much “lesser” and cheaper while we wait for a fix I cringe. It completely sends the wrong message. Now, you could of course say that you have your development cycles and so forth so once your train is in motion that’s it, but I would argue that being more agile and throwing us a bone is the better long-term approach.
That’s good to hear.
Come on, don’t be so negative.
Sorry. After the insanely long time it took you to fix VCAs (still not 100% correct) for v7, and the rocky v8 release, I’m just jaded and cynical I guess.
Well, not economically desirable is what you mean, correct?
After all with throw particles into each other at the speed of light and analyze petabytes of data to find new particles in the universe, and manage to measure gravitational waves… so, you know… one license for two softwares?.. It’s not astrophysics…
Yes, my fault. My bad english. Well, a separate product makes no sense for Nuendo users, agreed. But we have all options at the moment. One of them being a separate product and a toolset for Nuendo.
Well, it’s not exactly the case. In reality, you will find many developers with a special focus. We have great developers who are
totally music oriented, we have the Dorico team in London who are devoted to scoring. And we have a specialized pro audio team, for
post-production and game audio features (and more in context of VR etc). We hire people with specific knowledge and passion for a certain topic. So, a fix for a specific Nuendo feature doesn’t have to wait for another team. For instance, we have been providing constant AAF maintenance over a period of more than 3 years (and still going on) with people focussing on that type of work. However, there is one exception. If the fix is related to the core sequencer code, it needs to be synchronized with the different development branches and product lifecycles. In that case, the pro audio team needs to synchronize with other teams, which takes time. Example: fixes related to the user interface graphics.
I hope I could shed some light on this.
No, it is technically not possible. Really.
Without elaboration it is a bit hard to understand how this is not possible.
It’s also a little confusing because you wrote that if this is what we meant then you could get behind it. Now we say ‘it is’, and you say it’s impossible.
It sounds like a terrible waist of resources. Having to port Cubase features to Nuendo instead of maintaining a single application (yes… like PT). This certainly explains why we have to wait so long for Nuendo to catch up with each development cycle.
[SARCASM]You know, in theory, two groups could talk to each other to avoid doing the same work twice.[/SARCASM]
Abso-freakin’-lutely for my part. If my N8 dongle could also open the current version of Cubase, that would be a gamechanger for me, finally ending the awkwardness of the Tick-Tock of the update cycles. If that involves loading a seperate sub-license on the same dongle only, I have no problem with that. There is no desire for trickery or something-for-nothing. Just the desire to have access to Steinberg’s top DAW features when paying the 300% premium for Nuendo.
If you can get that approved, I/we would be ever so grateful!
And again, thanks for all of the answers. I know it takes a little time, but it makes a big difference for me.
One may hope that with a new and more flexible licensing system in the works (that hopefully doesn’t rely on dongles), this could be a required use case of that system?
First of all, thanks for all the responses.
Exactly. I meant visual organization of many multi-track sound effects. So they are easier to find in a big project, easier to manage and rename. You mentioned folders, which is one way. But folders are not active, you cannot render folders. I don’t know what you mean by sound blocks but it would be nice for example to being able to quicker render a multi-track sound effect. Select all events and then…? Bounce in place renders each of the clips individually. Render selected events does the same, just to disk instead of the project. There’s only the normal audio mixdown process, which is tedious as you have to set the L and R locators, hit render, give it a name, import it again. SFX cannot be handled like stems, or whole tracks. They’re individual bits of several tracks of layered audio material. It would help for example to handle the folder events (the events that display when you close a folder) as real events you can render in “render selected events” or “bounce in place”. Put several tracks in a folder, close the folder, select that folder-event and hit render selected event. That would be such a time saver to render out many multi-track SFX.
Maybe some Cakewalk people are willing to move
Oh this is truly music to my ears and I can’t wait to see this implemented.
This is also great to hear as I’m losing my mind over this daily. Having an eLicenser AND an iLok doubles the chance to just lose one of them. So I mostly leave them in the studio, and could then pull my hair out when I would desperately need them on the road. It’s a real productivity killer. I could open Logic, Reaper, Studio One, Reason, use my Waves and Native Instruments plugins, fix something with RX and use Ozone and Neutron, … but I cannot open Nuendo to get any work done.
I hope long-term doesn’t mean decade but a product cycle or two :-/
On July 21, 1969 Neil Armstrong put his foot on the moon. Then he managed to get back here to earth.
Fly-by-wire: a380 carries max 850+ people and a 1.25 million ton weight… computers…
But more on-point: If it’s possible for you to somehow allow me to run Nuendo v1-6 using my Nuendo v7 license, but not v8, then how on earth is it technically impossible to re-write the code so that I could also run Cubase? (though not both at the same time obviously)
Sorry, it may seem like I’m being needlessly arguing this, particularly since I have no dog in this fight, but I really find it incredibly hard to believe it’s technically impossible. Time travel is technically impossible, as is traveling faster than light. I don’t think this is. I have an extremely hard time seeing how this is anything other than an economic issue.