Introducing Steinberg Licensing, and what it means for Dorico

Hi Daniel,
Thank you for the reply! :slight_smile: Yes, I’m always supportive and no doubt that the team deserve to spend time with their families! :slight_smile:
I wonder one more thing?! Is already there any significant improvement on the AudioEngine?
I’m having issues with loading and running the BBC SO Pro template. There is some problem related to multi-processor and multi-core (more than 8) computers.
Would be really nice If we can conduct some test with Ulf to check if this is fixed before the official release of Dorico 4. :slight_smile:

Best regards,

Whichever copy protection one prefers (or dislikes least), this marketing (‘A New and Exciting Era Begins at Steinberg’) does seem quite annoying. It’s s Steinberg rather than Dorico thing though and it’s bound to attract some attention. I know nothing about marketing; perhaps it’ll be effective.

Sorry about the misunderstanding. My wife tells me the same thing all the time. :grinning:

1 Like

@dspreadbury Something to consider - why exactly is a minimum number of licenses relevant, as long as it’s >= 2? Nobody would buy two or more licenses unless they are representing a group of some kind, and obviously Steinberg makes money from the multiple purchases.

I suspect it’s in the name you use “Enterprise/Institutional” makes you think of this in terms of big companies and such, but calling it “Enterprise/Institutional/Studio” is equally accurate, and includes us small studios.

Said differently, if you have a lower limit for these groups, and given that no individual user would buy multiple licenses, then those of us that have between 2 and 3 (5, 10 or whatever is arbitrarily picked) are in a no mans land.

No need for a reply, I know you’ve heard me on this issue but clearly this is important to some subset of your users.

I certainly wouldn’t say that. I made peace with the dongle but I’ll eagerly retire it for a system that permits two installs. My machines are connected to the internet, however, so I don’t foresee any issues. For me this seems a massive upgrade.


I do have a technical concern with such a system. At my work, we bought a “perpetual” license for other software that “phones home” to check that the license is still valid - however, some months ago it stopped working. For security reasons, they changed their activation website to only allow the latest TLS version to connect. The older program version that we had did not support the latest TLS version, and so it became impossible to activate unless we paid to upgrade it to a version that did support the newest TLS. Although the latest TLS version is in wide use currently, I could see this happening in the future again if it is supplanted by another newer TLS version.

This may not affect me as I would plan to upgrade Dorico regardless to the newest version, but I am wondering whether “Steinberg Licensing” will be a separate thing from Dorico and Cubase, its own installer like the eLicenser. If it is separate, then it would theoretically be possible to upgrade the “Steinberg Licensing” for free without having to pay for a Dorico upgrade in the event of a TLS update becoming necessary. If on the other hand it is built into Dorico as a component, then when a Dorico version stops receiving updates, the “Steinberg Licensing” component could stop receiving updates. I imagine probably it will be a separate thing, but just wanted to confirm.

If you read the announcement carefully, you’ll notice that it’s a separate program that gets installed alongside dorico as a part of the dorico installation package.

1 Like

Ahh, thanks. I did read the announcement but must have missed that.

It’s a bit subtle, but the faqs refer to the “steinberg activation manager” [as its own entity]

Would have been great to have it with wavelab 12, but at last « single-user licenses can be activated on two computers »

3 posts were split to a new topic: Future Dorico workflow

I sound a note of caution - I upgraded to BFD3, which is now owned by InMusic. It’s been over a year and the “phone home” authorisation system is still flawed. To the extent that as far as I’m concerned BFD3 is abandonware. Hundreds of posts on the subject on their forum. Cannot re-authorise my rarely used BFD as I often go over the 30 days and, well, we know the rest. I’ve had sessions that I’ve had to rebuild with Slate or other drum apps (or the older BFD2 which still works very well)

So I truly hope Steinberg get this absolutely right on day one. Absolutely right, on day one. No excuses.

I hate this system, and part of me thinks it’s really a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. Lots of great software I use comes with a far simpler and trustworthy (and trusting) licensing system and these companies are still in business. Waves to name but one. To be blunt I think we allow these large corporations far too much leeway in determining how we may (with their gracious permission, granted monthly) use their software.

It’s interesting, isn’t it? the lengths software behemoths will go to protect the software that we use to create the music that another billion dollar industry then pays us next to nothing for.

Same as it ever was!

1 Like

I read somewhere yesterday that for the annual “allowance” only a single install will be permitted, unlike the two installs for monthly “allowance”. Could anyone confirm Steinberg said this?

If this is true, then the annual allowance isn’t at all similar to the current upgrade cycle as I’d assumed.

The team will have to confirm, but I think you’re right but with a twist: I believe that one annual license is permitted, but you will still have a second, non-annual license that can be used on a second machine. That’s how I read the release data, anyway. You are permitted usage on two machines (more than that, technically, as long as you shift licenses around whenever you need to access the third or fourth machine) but one of your two licenses can be put on an offline machine for a year.

Thank you. I think I might have read this on the Cubase forum but for the life of me I can’t find that thread. I’ll wait for confirmation, if any will be forthcoming. This is an additional limitation, if true, and a little puzzling…

I don’t think so. There was a post (by Daniel?) which I can’t find at the moment, that the license activation on a second machine is only possible if both machines use the 30 day activation. If you choose the 365 variant, you’re bound to a single machine. But maybe that’s still a detail to be discussed by the team.

I sure hope this is not the case. Is it two computers or isn’t it? It would seem to me that if you are permitted to use it on two machines, and you allow one to have the 365 install, then you would still have one sub-license left over, and should still have flexibility with that. This will be a real disappointment if I’m wrong.

As currently announced, it is indeed the intention that if you use offline activation to lock your license to a single computer for a period of one year, you will not be able to use online activation for another computer.

However, before a handful of you begin gnashing your teeth, please allow me to point out that the offline activation part of the system is not yet fully implemented, and is not part of the current beta testing that we are doing for Dorico 4 and Cubase 12. As such, it may be that we make some changes to the way this works.

Indeed, I think it’s safe to say that although the introduction of the new Steinberg Licensing system has been well received by most users, if there is a single sticking point it is the policy that in order to enforce the terms of the license agreement, the software should contact the activation server to renew its activation. We have heard this feedback loud and clear, and we are talking internally about what, if anything, to do about it.

If and when we determine that it is appropriate to make any changes to the system as announced, we will both update the existing information that we have published about it, and also make further announcements via the forum, our social media channels, and elsewhere.

Steinberg Licensing is a big project that has been years in development. We are absolutely committed to delivering a simple, reliable system that meets both our business needs and our customers’ expectations as far as is possible. We are definitely open to considering changes in some of the details of how the system will work in practice, but please be patient while we discuss the feedback internally and then make any decisions that need to be made as a result.


I’m going to close this thread now. We will let you all know as and when there is any further information to be shared.