Some of the issues faced by users are way, way more than “nuanced quirks”. They may seem this way to you if they do not effect your workflow but to other users, they can be showstoppers
There’s composers I’ve been talking to who are all considering moving to Cubase from PT and Logic. It all comes down to how fast you can work, esp with big templates. A lot of folks will stick with Logic because it’s what they’re used to, but when it comes to top end productions you’re seeing more and more composers with Cubase out there because they can all share projects easily without having to translate stuff.
Then I expect to see them all on this forum discussing unfixed bugs then. 
Ha 
Yes
Love it! 
I find “People can’t handle technology” patronizing and this exactly what I’m complaining about. Don’t get me wrong: I use Cubase and I still want to keep using it because it has certain things that other DAWS don’t have (runs on Windows, track versions, MIDI routing, large MIDI editor, click patterns), however as a musician, I expect music software to hide or translate the technical complexity of a computer to me. It is not an impossible task and Logic or Ableton do a much better job than Cubase at this.
Some examples: Download Assistant (solution: normal download link from your private online account), plugin scanner blocking the DAW (solution: background scanning like in Bitwig), video playback not supported in old cards (solution: warning and detection of this issue during the installation not a message thread in the forums), plugin crashing the DAW (solution: sandbox the plugins and display a message this plugin has crashed the DAW), DAW hangs/crashes (solution: generate a bug report with an option to send it to Steinberg when you open the DAW again like Ableton) and I could go on.
Well, I’m 38 so I just made it! I used Logic while I was at USC 15 years ago and on some of my first feature films in 2008-2010, but pretty quickly got back to Cubase which I had used before that.
Expression maps were what drove me back initially, but right now it’s the fact that I can score entire films and TV series in a single session without having to worry about session corruption or just general issues with a screwed up timeline due to misbehaving bar copy/paste operations etc. That reliability is absolutely huge, and something I wouldn’t trust any other DAW to handle based on my experiences with them.
Just the fact that I still see crazy undo bugs fixed in Logic’s release notes today tells me I would be forced to go back to cue-based workflows with that (I had multiple undo-related session corruption issues 10 years ago with it, and it seems they’re still struggling with it), and unless some DAW really nails a shared instruments workflow (basically DP Chunks + V-Rack but much better), that’s just not going to happen. I prefer to spend my extra summer time boating, not loading cues!
Isn’t Nuendo more suitable for post production (film) than Cubase? I think it’s between Pro Tools HD and Nuendo when it comes to post production. Pro Tools is still “the standard” for major studios.
If Steinberg can get rid off their eLicenser system, it will be much better IMHO.
As a fairly recent Cubase user – less than 2 years, I have found it peculiar in the extreme that nobody has been able to explain (in a way that I understand) what the purpose for Nuendo is, distinct from Cubase. That tells me Steinberg has a real product management problem here. Why are there two lines? How does that serve anybody’s interests? Surely there should be a better way to rationalize all that technology. It seems like there is a 95% functional overlap between the two and the other 5% has no clear purpose.
I understand one product for composers and one product for live performers. But that’s not what Cubase and Nuendo are.
I understand one product for music production and one product for movie production. But that’s not what Cubase and Nuendo are.
I understand one product for entry level and one product for power users. But that’s not what Cubase and Nuendo are.
What are they? They seem almost completely redundant.
I think Steinberg should have named Nuendo “Cubase Ultimate”… 
Dunno if this helps?
Haven’t watched it myself
Yes, very helpful. It discusses 27 differences. I didn’t watch every second of the video, but I think 26 are cases where Nuendo has a function missing in Cubase, or a function that is more elaborate in Nuendo. I saw only one case where there was a Cubase feature missing from Nuendo.
About half the differences are simply plug-ins. The others are built into Nuendo code. Maybe 40% of the differences relate to features that would be needed more in sound design, movie scoring or video game scoring, but the rest are all things that could be helpful to the average Cubase user (additional automation capabilities, much better cross-fade support, etc.)
I am still left with the same wonderment. It still appears that the products are >90% equivalent and it still seems like a really redundant effort maintaining two separate products versus having a unified product line with a “Producer’s edition” or something like that. I guess the calculation has been that there is a small niche of users willing to pay a very high price for this particular combination of tools, and if it were positioned as part of the Cubase line, they wouldn’t be willing to pay an extra $400. But I doubt that niche holds up today with as much competition as there is in the DAW space.
Moreover, while the “movie producer” night may be getting smaller, I bet if they rolled it all together as part of a unified product line (I don’t care what you call it, maybe Cubendo) a lot of Cubase users would go ahead and spring for the top package even though we aren’t likely ever to score a move or video game.
Agreed. I am one of those ppl who just want the top package of everything. I am thinking to myself that it’s better to have it there when I need it.
I am the same way most of the time. And if you look at that video mentioned above, there are at least 5 or 6 features I would appreciate. But I’m not going to witch to Nuendo because I don’t believe Steinberg can or should sustain the investment to keep both platforms abreast of the competition.
I am just stunned that you are seriously advocating for more marketing with regards to Cubase. This is quite frankly the last thing needed here. In order to stay competitive, Steinberg needs to urgently address the massive quality problems in Cubase. Hitpoint detection…seriously? Sample rate conversion…absolutely the worst on the block. General instability, performance issue, inconsistent GUIs and workflow, topped with unfinished thus unreliable features at a premium price tag has taken its toll for sure…and rightfully so.
I mean, they are literally marketing great new features, such as new, resizable Macro windows. It is mind boggling.
If Cubase would become musical OS then everything would work much better. Could be created using linux or unix as a backbone. Or could be written from scratch. It wouldn’t run anything else. Such proprietary OS-Cubase would allow for much higher performance, more stability, lower overhead, and more opportunieties to inovate. From the moment you start you machine, you choose SOS (Steinberg OS), and it boots you straight to proj selection window. That would be a dream come true really if something like this would happen. At some point it will, but maybe it won’t be made by Steinberg.
RTLinux for example has been around for a long time and could’ve been used for something like this. But honestly at the end of the day, outside of a few specific low-latency scenarios (tracking etc.), the benefits are negligible, with huge downsides for practicality. Consumer operating systems are mostly good enough for audio work, so it’s hard to see the market for something like this.
Cubase is by far the best tool for film composing. No doubt.
Logic becomes more and more a toyish tool for beat and young loop producers. This is a fact.
By the way… you don’t seem to know this never resolved catastrophic latency mega bug in Logic…
Logic does not appear to compensate this for automation correctly. If you have a plugin that causes latency and automate parameters on it, then all of the automation will be out of time for the previous plugins.
Have a look, you definitely cannot work professionally with this issue:
Logic CONS:
no Folder in Folder
-limited customization
-no multiple midi CC view
-very complicated way when dealing with Multitimbral instruments!!! (aaargh)
- no channel strip FX
- 1 Movie per Track (oh man)
e.g.
When adding plugins there’s a very tiny bar for you to select.
labeled ‘No Plug-in’ to remove a plugin.
You can’t select it and hit delete. You can’t swipe it off.
actions like ‘Remove DC Offset’, ‘Reverse’ and ‘Normalize’ are only available in the file editor.
There’s on a single controller lane in the MIDI editor.
Logic has no easy ways to adjust butted midi notes, selections of midi notes or any other major ways to adjust MIDI data.
Logic has no Macro facility. There’s no integrated way to chain commands together to be triggered by a single key press.
Track folders, which are purely organization tools, can only be 1 layer deep. That means you can have a folder with tracks. You can not have folders within folders.
. You can not have summing stacks with summing stacks in them without some hacky workarounds that aren’t worth the effort.
I butt heads with this one constantly when working in Logic. Especially so when dealing with drumkits where I want a ‘Drums’ summing stack, and then a summing stack for snare (top/bottom mic) and kick (kick in, kick beater, front-of-kick). I want those kick and snare summing stacks inside the drum summing stack. No can do in Logic.
There is no way to search for a track in a project. If you want to find a track in Logic then you have to scroll, scroll, AND SCROLL.
No mixer reset, Can’t left/middle/right zone mixer channels, Tiny faders.
Logic does not appear to compensate this for automation correctly (see posting above). If you have a plugin that causes latency and automate parameters on it, then all of the automation will be out of time for the previous plugins. Bummer.
If you solo a track in a summing stack, then you hear all the tracks in the summing stack, not the track you soloed.
There’s no way quickly bypassing a row or column of plugins. There’s no way to bypass all plugins in a project either.
You can already adjust the gain of a clip by adjusting the ‘Gain’ box in the track inspector, but that is not very convenient.
Single layer VCA’s only.
Communicating with Apple about issues with Logic is basically not possible unless you are a tester. You simply submit your issue in to a black box and wait. Rarely you may get a response, but that almost never happens…
Generally I find that both DAWs can accomplish the same things but…
I find Cubase to be more intuitive, particularly with multitimbral instruments and advanced MIDI editing.
I find the built-in channel audio tools to be more useful; EQ and compression are more transparent sounding and the saturation tools are quite good.
One BIG difference is audio editing. I always HATED editing audio in Logic but in Cubase it’s quite slick.
Movie bounce sometimes making the audio all white noise, Logic’s inability to use negative bar numbers without crashing, hard-to-wrangle automation, its wonky way of using multi-timbre instruments, its infuriatingly weird mixer that doesn’t respond to edit window track order, and sometimes the tracks just move to a completely different position and you can’t move them back, the piano roll’s lack of multiple CC lanes, a lack of an elegant way of editing MIDI data, a convoluted process when it comes to moving video or altering timecodes. And way more.
Cubase has note names in each of the roll events (but Logic has this now as well)
C. has multiple CC lanes in the editors
Piano Roll in each Arrange region
C has expression Maps, or rather: Everything related to articulations/CCs/Kontakt/ VI automation seems better in C (except that Logic has “Articulation ID” tags on a per note basis - which would great if it could be used directly with Kontakt libraries w/o third need for 3rd part products)
Better time stretching algorithm - although personally, I hardly work with audio files anymore
ASIO Direct Monitoring
The Control Room feature
Development Speed (there hasn’t been any major updates that’s relevant for what I fond most important in Logic for several years, and the Mac Pro and MacBook Pro development isn’t really happening either)
Audio to MIDI which translates pitch bends /vibrato/volume
Steinberg has a large staff working on Dorico ( new score editor), and Cubase and Dorico will hopefully be integrated
A better freeze which unloads/reloads Kontakt samples + partial freeze
Uncluttered automation view (nodes are only shown when you need them)
Auto Track Colour mode
Can switch/load/save preference files from the pref. area
Cubase seems to have a lot more key commands
And, in theory (and this used to be important to me): Global preset banks for external MIDI gear. It’s just that I only work with sample libraries now - my old synths are collecting dust. So that feature isn’t important for me anymore.
Audio editing IMO far superior in Cubase. I find sample editor in Logic horrible. Multiple tracks fade out in Cubase is as easy as selecting the tracks and dragging. In logic you have to use a tool and you can perform a fade in one track at a time
Variaudio built in pitch correction. No plugins, no offline rendering in the background.
Proper vu meters in the mixer
Offline effects processing (DOP is DOPE!)
Better pitch shift/time stretch algorithms by far (elastique)
For me midi workflow is better in Cubase. VST expression is a timesaver if you work with libraries.
Cubase has Volume adjustment on the audio event itself. Saves me a TON of time.
Cubase has - Expression Maps. No one else does this and they’re so awesome and so invaluable to composers
- the score view. I know many people don’t use this but after diving deeply into it I was shocked at how powerful it is, and how easy it is to get professional looking scores once it’s all set up.
- Notes in the piano roll view. Multiple controller lanes. The mixer. The Media Bay. Track visibility controls. Mixer view sets and visibility control. The amazing export window for stem bouncing. The Logical Editor!
Cubase: MIDI is better, Audio is better, CPU is the same (yes it is with ASIO GUARD (OSX!)
C.
This is also one of the BIG features for pro film composers in Cubase - the wonderful Time Warp Tool:
(can’t live without that)