I always wonder about things like this. Is this number based on software programs sold which include all the upgrades,
different programs, people who bought once and then moved on to another brand, or people who bought and then quit ‘using it’ and moved on to photography. Possibility it is based on the number of daw sequencers sold. Does users = number sold. Is this number auditable? The point is, numbers like this have little true meaning due to the fact there are no rules as to what it represents. As far as bragging rights, there are few folks who don’t stretch the truth when they brag. The boys in marketing by nature of their craft will stretch reality to produce the biggest numbers. I do find it interesting that Steinberg stated
“…more than 1.5 million users worldwide…”. I do like being part of something big, however, I would never buy on that point. Also, to pic nits, the question was ‘registered Cubase users’ and I still do not feel it would be in Steinberg’s interest to reveal that kind of specific info.
Understand, I am pro Steinberg and Cubase, I just don’t take much stock in these type of numbers, yet, I do find them interesting.
That would probably be the easiest metric to start with.
It’s probably derived from the number of Steinberg products (not just Cubase or Nuendo) sold since day one, balanced against the number of viable user registrations.
It’s always going to be a general number because it’s always in flux, for many of the reason you mention.
Even with the massaging, rounding and guestimation, it indicates a pretty good sized userbase.
Bigger than I thought, anyways.
QuBe.
I did read one blurb that said Digidesign had revenues of $200 million (not sure what year) and Steinberg had revenues of $17.5 million. That sounds about right to me. It does not necessarily reflect the distribution of DAW users, however, since Digidesign makes a lot of money (unlike Steinberg) on hardware, too
Now these are the kind of numbers I can sink my teeth in. Revenues, P&L statements, Balance Sheets…yeah baby, bring it on!
When buying, I do like to see that the company is healthy, however, they do not have to be the biggest dog in the kennel. The fact that the likes of Yamaha bought Steinberg, I am able to sleep at night knowing my DAW company will be healthy in the AM.
Knowing marketing spin that’s no doubt going to be the number of units. Many customers have used and upgraded through many units over the years, so the actual number of users could be a lot lower.
… and some swear that they bought their last Steinberg product years ago and moved on, some stopped playing, some died, some got into knitting, some bought all Steinberg products but never use them, some bought an acoustic guitar instead.
I figure actual active users is probably around a third of that.
Not to bad…
But I couldn’t really give a monkeys…all I care about is if the software works the way I like.
Avid has $629 mill gross rev but that has no impact on the fact that I find PT like trying to do music on a word processor. I could learn it (I slowly got the better of Photoshop’s antediluvian workflow), but it would just take more time than I’m willing to invest.)
