Ah, I missed that somehow thanks!
Needing to wait 3-4 months to get an update for stability that Cubase already has is the kind of thing that frustrates however.
hint, see AR/VR support below, we’ll get it as a paid for add on
right, well, backwards, Nuendo is the flagship DAW, Cubase the cashcow, very clear what the priorities are
"new development branch (substructure)"?? plain English please, are we getting it as an update or a paid for upgrade?
Already 24 months behind the curve on this, still pushing ‘brand name’ immersive audio over an open ended ambisonic bus, so we are still turning to Reaper as the primary VR audio DAW.
Yes you can, highlight it more effectively by delivering improvements on time and with relevance to developments in the market place (VR,AR,360)
markets always move fast, nothing new there, that’s why great companies employ foresight.
Taking his words out of context along with this passive aggressive moaning will accomplish nothing. They’re already working on the tools you need and taking steps to speed up the development of features related to new market demands (such as AR/VR) by reorganizing and adding more people to the Nuendo team.
Both Cubase and Nuendo are considered flagship DAWs. Neither is less important than the other. Cubase just happens to usually get new features first, and they’re sometimes not flawless. Cubase 9.5 is perfectly usable for making music right now, but I can’t imagine how angry people would be if the bugs from this first release made it into Nuendo.
The two things users seem to be seeing with regards to the above is:
If these are on different branches and aren’t easy to merge, and Nuendo is the flagship, why not prioritize Nuendo? If you don’t do that it seems that you’re diluting development resources for the sake of Cubase.
If it’s not possible to prioritize Nuendo, then if the features in Cubase are going to end up in Nuendo anyway, why not just synchronize the version numbering AND give Nuendo users a Cubase license as well? We’ve said this for years now. Just give Nuendo users a Cubase license so that they can start either Cubase or Nuendo on the same dongle, and a lot of users would be happy because they’d get some of the features they’d want when they’re available.
In a way I think some users are starting to feel that they’re paying a premium for post features (which is fine) but then have to wait a long time for the music features from Cubase - which negates that ‘premium benefit’. The solution seems pretty easy to me technically, so really what’s happening is that you just don’t want to do it. Money is most likely the issue, but as with the NEK division I just have to wonder just how much more money you’re making by not including an ability to open both Cubase or Nuendo with the same dongle/license. I’m guessing not a lot.
I think it’s a tough sell to ask Nuendo users to spend more money on this. For those that don’t want to pay a lot there’s Reaper. And for those that are willing to pay there’s Pro Tools. Either integrate it into Nuendo or make it free.
Still wondering what the deal is with Dolby and Auro though. Dolby seems to have no desire or plan to make their expanded feature sets available to Nuendo, which is… unfortunate.
I’m not sure if I’m more hopeful than terrified…
Hang on, let me get this straight, the words of the Senior Manager of Marketing & Business Development, for Steinberg, a Yamaha subsidiary, and a corporation in the business of making money, were “taken out of context”?
We pay money, they are supposed to get stuff right. It’s very simple. If they don’t get it right, we spend money elsewhere.
DTSR, please stay polite and keep this discussion respectfull and mature.
I must say that I agree with this whole-heartdly. Timo, I’d love to hear a comment on this aspect if you’re able to give one.
I will answer all of your questions tomorrow.
That sounds promising thanks!
Thank you Timo, I too look forward to your answers. Cheers, john
Thanks…this is probably not the most fun part of your job so I have to say I appreciate you diving in. Hopefully, you will be treated with respect, and if not, I hope a moderator (looking at you, Fredo) will jump in if needed to clean things up.
Fellow users…please keep this professional and respectful. That is the best way to continue the flow of information. Plus, it’s the right thing to do, despite the world having generally lost its manners on the internet.
Thanks Getalife2. And here I thought I was too hopeful
Since Timo will answer “all” our questions I wanted to sneak this one in.
@Timo, are there plans to replace the unflexible eLicenser dongle with something more modern that fits today’s needs of mobile studios and users using multiple machines? https://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=276&t=127485
"2. If it’s not possible to prioritize Nuendo, then if the features in Cubase are going to end up in Nuendo anyway, why not just synchronize the version numbering AND give Nuendo users a Cubase license as well? We’ve said this for years now. Just give Nuendo users a Cubase license so that they can start either Cubase or Nuendo on the same dongle, and a lot of users would be happy because they’d get some of the features they’d want when they’re available.
In a way I think some users are starting to feel that they’re paying a premium for post features (which is fine) but then have to wait a long time for the music features from Cubase - which negates that ‘premium benefit’. The solution seems pretty easy to me technically, so really what’s happening is that you just don’t want to do it. Money is most likely the issue, but as with the NEK division I just have to wonder just how much more money you’re making by not including an ability to open both Cubase or Nuendo with the same dongle/license. I’m guessing not a lot."
For sake of clarity. I remember Steinberg’s statement several years ago, that thanks to a [then] new modular coding structure, Cubase and Nuendo share the same code, which would allow an efficient parallel development, and that Nuendo would always have all Cubase features.
Now, your statement implies that it’s no longer the case, and that you basically have to code the same features twice.
My question is, did you abandon the modular approach? Otherwise, what is the difficulty of merging both programs.
From this user’s perspective it looks like your core application is Cubase, and Nuendo is just Cubase with Post extensions. A Cubase Post Package could easily be packaged into a separate product (with an appropriate price tag). Wouldn’t this solve most of the problems with Nuendo’s slower development cycle? We would be updating the core functionality with regular Cubase updates and the post features with Cubase Post Package (or Nuendo Tools or whatever you want to call it).
Some things are still not clear in the way the cubase-Nuendo relations goes.
OK, We understand those are 2 different branches but I want to ask more about the policy.
NEK is dead (thnx god almighty). There is the Nuendo cycle which is later than Cubase. Why not letting Nuendo users work on Cubase when needed?
PT HD users can open PT LE - PT HD users payed the extra money, mostly devoted pros. In analogy, Nuendo users are the same.
Cubase users should be in the position to WANT GO NUENDO, Nuendo should be the promised land for Steinberg users.
Now days Nuendo users want to go Cubase.#
For me, Im also an educator. i have Nuendo and Wavelab licences but in most schools with most students I need to work with Cubase - i cant do it.
Bottom line - I think lots of users here, want to have a clearer sight about the grey area between N to C.
So many things Steinberg can earn by let us be free within the platforms and licences. How can one, not understand the Nuendo users endless frustration with this - drooling for 8 months over Cubase releases, not knowing what is up with their “should be amazing in the near future” product.
Im moving to a new studio now with new partner. We had the PT-Nuendo argument again and he said this - “I know Nuendo is amazing. I know Nuendo is the best product but with PT, you always know what is what, right and wrong”
He talked policy and not “sound quality”
Thanks for the information Timo.
Could you please also comment on when we can expect to see some resolution to the problems of the limitations on the number of DLL/VST plugins that can be installed in Nuendo on Windows systems, and when we can expect the promised increase in the number of available cue sends?
just to highligt my previous post, thks to my collegue Romain, a « macro maestro «
@Timo - One thing I noticed is that Nuendo is still missing the new function to create shared copies when dragging on the center of the right event side. (I believe this was introduced for Cubase in Version 9.0 a year ago).
Are those things just features that are still outstanding integration, or are they too complex to integrate because Nuendos code base for displaying the Event Views is too different? If that is the case, are there plans in place to make sure features like this also make it into Nuendo? As the end user it feels frustrating paying almost 4 times the price of Cubase Pro and then having some features not making it into Nuendo at all.