no it doesn’t, but, ambisonics has gone from a fringe spatial/immersive audio solution to center stage in less than two years, Steinberg has been slow to repsond.
yep, which has significant implications for the use of ambisonic tool-sets
offering users a new bus type, let’s call it a ‘64 channel matrix bus’ (IO configured as one wants up to 64 channels, in fact why stop at 64?), really isn’t a big ask, it’s rudimentary at this stage. Deal with the “next level” concerns as the market matures, that can be an optional ‘bells and whistles’ product/add-on for those who want it.
This is one of the reasons why the features that have been introduced to Cubase should appear
in Nuendo. I agree that it’s the preferrable scenario to have them in Nuendo way earlier.
Ok, but here’s where I completely start to lose faith in your company.
You have a bunch of users turning to a different application because it allows for a 64-channel bus, making it suitable for ambisonics. Then you say it’s easy enough to make that happen in Nuendo. Then you go on and say that you don’t feel like doing that because it doesn’t make Nuendo a “next level” VR production DAW. Well, honestly I think that’s just silly.
Users here have repeatedly over the years asked for a more flexible routing system as far as channel count goes. If I remember correctly early versions were far more flexible than what we see today. And once that changed you stuck with the channels you decided were good enough for us to use. And if users said they wanted another count, or enough for Ambisonics, you just decided that we didn’t need that. Apparently what we need is something else (undefined) which may or may not show up at some undefined point in the future. So, sorry, but that doesn’t cut it for me.
While you sit and think about this stellar future VR integration/application, users will get used to Reaper, and its responsive flexible management/development team will put out new features. Users will get used to it so why switch?
What this tells me as a user is that your company’s “visionaries” are pretty stubborn. Users want 64-channels for Ambisonics, a technology that more and more people are using and not only Reaper but the main post-production competitor is catering to? Doesn’t matter. What matters is that you have some sort of planning in your mind or on some sort of paper, and it must proceed.
The smart thing to do in my opinion is for your company to be at least somewhat agile here. Just bite the bullet and include the necessary channel count. It’s no big deal, even you say that. Do that so people can use Nuendo and not have to look at Reaper if that’s what’s happening.
Heck, I’ll put it a different way: What do you have to lose?
Sometimes you guys are just incredibly stubborn. I know I’m repeating myself, but your argument above is why I don’t find Steinberg inspiring any longer, or why I feel like I want to invest more money into your product. For the most part there’s almost no communication, then users get fed up and the noise is too much for you to bear, and then there’s a bug fix (VCA only after massive complaints) and some appeasing talk, but really it feels like the same stubborn leadership and corporate culture.
There is no stubborness. All this doesn’t come up overnight in someones brain. It is well discussed and reflected with many leading companies in the field of VR production and VR platforms. The VR industry is not yet about making profit. It is not about winning over as many users as possible on a specific platform. It is about creating partnerships and finding solutions that will work in the long run. Else this 3rd attempt for VR will end up like the 2 before. And beside all these considerations , yes it is also a matter of resources and prioritization.
There are fields of applications in post-production beyond 24 channels (Nuendos current capability), but we are getting few requests on that end…
Matthias, you are free to believe whatever you want. I tried to be very clear with a lot of topics in all of my recent posts and I hope
that I brought some clarification to the most urgent topics. However, I’m not going to further discuss specific details of our product
strategies, which I hope you understand. Thanks for the discussion.
Hi sugar,
My comment was more related to a few cases in the past. I cannot think of something
related to the current C9.5 features that would not be ported.
You can say that all you want, but the fact is that the industry leader in post-production catered to this and you didn’t, and on the other end of the spectrum there’s Reaper.
based on this then, one should assume that HOA asset production - for use in game audio, VR, and 360/immersive video - is simply not something Steinberg thinks is a priority.
There is plenty to do to make Nuendo even better DAW for film and TV like location recording workflow etc. I don’t know about Reaper, but main competition for Nuendo is Pro Tools and while it is also a great DAW it has great flaws as well like the video engine etc. I’m glad that SB isn’t trying to ride every horse in field…
I agree that some fixes have taken way too long and I’d love to have more company level interaction here but still…
Nuendo is a great tool (greatest IMO) so while so much whining is going on I’d like thank Timo again for participating here and really hope to “see” you more often.
Whining? Just seems like users expressing their concerns over valid issues.
I’d like to add my voice to the “thank you’s” for feedback from the dev. It does help.
I’ve been using Nuendo off and on since v5, and my question for Timo is when will Nuendo have a realistic ability to export audio/video? Prior to v8, it was a kind of clunky “replace audio in video file”, and now there’s not even that option. I know there are workarounds using 3rd party software, but often, very often, I need to just highlight a section and quickly fire off a chunk of video with audio for approval. I can do this in Pro Tools, Logic, DP, or Reaper, but can’t do it in Nuendo. I understand the video engine re-design, QT being an end-of-life technology etc, but for me, this simply forces me into other hosts, especially if I know I’ll have to do it quickly and regularly.
I like Nuendo, and accept it’s flaws as “works in progress”, but for me at least, this makes it largely unusable in it’s current state. Other issues with N8 have been widely spoken of, and I hope those will be addressed soon as well.
Thank you very much for this questions. Video Rendering is the next topic on our list regarding the further video engine development.
Replacing the QT engine has been a major task for us and there are still some open feature requests that are currently adressed.
Video rendering is another big topic which will take some time to be realized properly. It is definitely scheduled for Nuendo 9.
Timo,
will Video Rendering come to Cubase as well? It’s one of those features with a universal appeal for both music production and post.
As a film composer I don’t really need any of the postproduction workflows, but I do need the Edit Mode, Multi-branch Undo, Advanced Crossfade editor and… Video Rendering.
I just read through this thread with interest. I’m a recent Cubase 9.5 user, and really want a few of the features in Nuendo (edit mode, mostly, which is absurd that it’s not in Cubase), but with Nuendo always being behind the great new features of Cubase, I’m not going to do it.
This, to me, is not smart of Steinberg because I’m sure there are many in the same boat as me. I would highly recommend, from a business standpoint, that things be arranged to get them both on the same release schedule.
Not only is this the best and most insightful comment that I have ever read on any Steinberg forum in the last eighteen years, it might be the best and most insightful comment that I have ever read on any forum. Sadly.
Isn’t that just a wee bit cynical? It all depends on who you are explaining a thing to, I would think.
Proverbs says: “The wise store up knowledge, but the mouth of a fool invites ruin.”
In my experience, just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so valuable information only appeals to those who wish to learn. Sadly, that is not everybody. But it is somebody.
Thank you so much for quoting me completely out of context, I can only guess what you are trying to achieve.
This quote was taken’ out of a response to why the Nuendo automation system is different to the Cubase system.
I said that I explained the differences many times before and that I wouldn’t repeat it in this thread.
The reason for not explaining the differences again is because everybody has his/her own truth, his/her own personal view on how things should work. Therefore any argumentation/explenation that is brought forward for why things ahve been implemented (or not) in a certain way, will automatically generate a stream of political arguments pro- or contra. I will gladly explain any technical thing, but I stay away from political discussions. Been there, done that, bought the T-Shirt.