Do you think Steinberg is doing enough to keep customers by doing new tutorials or are just trying to be a selling machine, forgeting the former and pussing the later.
Let me hear your thoughts on t his.
Yes
In my opinion it’s not Steinberg’s responsibility to make tutorials. They provide software and manuals. If you need tutorials, it’s one of 2 cases:
- You’re not competent audio engineer/musician, in which case you’ll need a tutorial of audio engineering/musicianship.
- You’re not competent on using DAW software, in which case you’ll need a tutorial on basic DAW operations.
+1
Without intention of making this personal, but I honestly think, you are making this a bit too easy.
We have to accept, that different people have different ways of learning. I work in audio and education,
talents cannot not be defined that way, in my experience.
Should Steinberg do something in the Tutotial/Education area?
Yes, as we can see with Avid/Digidesign, direct support from the manufacturer is very appreciated.
All the best.
Roger
I have been around for a month and im moving on. i just dont think there are any mods or steinberg staff in here to help answer the questions in general, they just seem to pop up when its business related.
I was a little wrong about cubase too and the features im missing for it to be a musical instrument in that its more of a recording tool than anything else. I dont see cubase as the tool to create new music with. Its more of a tool to get the job finished. Still there are features in it that are unclear, how is the workflow really supposed to work, some of it i dont like and i have asked a few questions on the board only to get confirmed from other users that it either cant be done or they dont know. Pretty much I have not gotten any solid answer from any of their employes to have a solid foundation to build upon and know for a fact that it either can or can not be done which leaves me uncertain, which makes me go look for another product.
Sad cause i like cubase more than any of the other daws on the market, i think its the best thing on the pc at least. I might miss some of the features but i dont think it will grow into that great daw that everybody uses just cause they are not around and in tune with their customers here on the board. Its more of a user to user thing, and its very limited, almost dead by the look of it. I have lost interest in working with it. I am sure they have a market share and its not here on this board.
It could also have been better if they developed cubase more against different genres, more templates for different styles and tools, filters, fx and instruments for it to cover more genres of music so people could have more fun with it. Its too much work for a guy whos new with this and have to look around when he doesnt even know how it is supposed to look when its finished. Some people spend years to find a setup that works for them just to be able to get that sound that are hitting the charts. At least thats to me is what its all about. To have to start from scratch without any backup is just too much work if there are no dialog between anyone with how things should be.
Steinberg has to know about industry secrets to hundreds of recordings, they should share more of it and implement it in their daw, I cant figure out if its powerfull or just a toy. It is music production tool after all isnt it? Maybe im wrong.
Which would you prefer? Steinberg’s technical staff answering your questions, or them working on making Cubase better?
Cubase isn’t meant to be a live instrument. Too much in the background for that. What it is meant to be is a creativity suite for recording and sequencing. Several VSTs come with a standalone version for live play.
Create your own workflow. The beauty of computer-based recording is that you can go back and change things easily.
“in tune”. If Steinberg was perfectly “in tune” with every one of their customers, Cubase would be bloated. Also, there is a VST plugin for tuning. 
They’re too busy making music to converse.
VST isn’t just Steinberg. It’s an industry standard. Have you looked at the VST Plugin Zone on the main page? Tons of stuff. Cubase is modular, not a closed package. Want more guitar variety? Look at Pod Farm from Line 6. Another FX? They’re there. Want more styles? Content packs, VST Sound Sets, and VST Loop Sets.
Different styles and genres? Why? Cubase is that flexible and somewhat assumes that you know the fundamentals of the genre you’re trying to create in.
Music isn’t supposed to “look” like anything when it’s done. It’s supposed to sound good to you. Also, the basics of Cubase are:
- Create instrument track using preset
- Record/Program notes in
- Rinse/Repeat
- Music.
Music is an art. Art is discovery. Cubase is professional software. Professional software tends to have a steep learning curve (and lots of discovery). Perhaps something like Sequel would be more suited to you (as I believe it caters toward the amateur end user [easier to learn])?
Have you checked out the “Music Lounge” forum under Cubase? Also “how things should be” goes back to my comment about art and discovery. There is no set “how things should be”, it’s left open to the end user. If Cubase forced you to think and work in a specific way overall, should we be using it?
Assumption. If you develop a guitar effects pedal that makes you millions, are you going to share the secrets?
Cubase is powerful. However, it’s not a closed package. Good professional software is modular so that new methods and plugins can be developed. If it was up to Steinberg to develop all the plugins everyone wanted, we’d have a bloated product and a less refined one in the end.
All in all, Cubase is a daunting piece of software to learn in full. It takes time.
From what I’ve seen of your posts, most of the answers could have been found by trial and error or by reading the manual. You also (in this post) say that Steinberg doesn’t help their customers with their creativity. This forum board is for technical issues related to Cubase. My suggestion: try the “Music Lounge” forum. All that said, it’s your opinion, just as this post is mine.
P.S. My experience with Cubase is just a little bit with Cubase AI 5 (although I have Cubase 6). I found it really easy to use.
Not in my opinion. If someone needs tutorials/education, there’s plenty available. It’s not Steinberg’s job. Steinberg makes software.
Do you think your car dealer or manufacturer should give you driving lessons?
Some do, Porsche for example.
Unless you have the music Cubase is nothing is what im trying to say Shinta.
Im just stating the facts and the reason why im leaving, its just the experience and what im left with. doesnt matter if its right or not, its a fact in my situation. you dont have to argue on every one of my opinions about it. and about Cubase either supporting their customers on a msg board or using their effort to further develop it. i mean, is it that hard for them to find a few experienced voulenteers for their msg board so new users can get some straight answers?
I could start arguments over what ever is being said, you should take note and get things straight when people are unhappy with your product, the good way to resolve issues are by solutions and not arguments. im simply searching for facts on how things should be. still think cubase is just fine as it is, its just missing a vital part to get people up to “tempo” at the start.
I know cubase fairly well since i have been on and off with daw and sequencers since the 80’s. I know for a fact that all daw’s are all evolving in to the same “thing”, and “live” is just a name on how good the features are implemented in the workflow.
You can of course, create your own template. If you don’t know enough about the genre you’re writing in to do that then you probably had better find a different style. The beauty of Cubase is that you can customize it with third party VSTi’s and effects to meet your specific needs. I think that the question of this thread is really: “How much is Steinberg supposed to do in getting us started?.” Is Cubase powerful? Have you opened it?! It’s a beast!
As far as the topic, I have to agree with Jarno on this one. I think we deserve a manual and a few tutorial videos (I don’t think Steinberg will get away without including a manual in Wavelab 8 
) to familiarize us with the basic functions of the program. I think we should leave the rest to third parties, who always have done a great job at providing us advanced documentation. If Steinberg will make the software, everyone else will write about it, or in Wavelab’s case, figure it out.
Thats just the thing Bane. Even if you DO know enough about the genre, it requires too much from you to make the connection inside the daw. Take me for example, i was stuck at the very beginning finding out Solo Editor is operating on a window state rater than a Solo to Instrument/Track setting, well, i asked around but couldnt get a straight enough answer to know if i was doing it wrong, its not supposed to work that way, or there are other things involved, i just couldnt get a straight answer which just leaves me confused, which kills any interest i have. These things are important! If i had the hit i would rather just put it on a piece of paper, record it with a cassette recorder and send it off to a studio for production. Good music are not necessary good gear and tools, the best of notes takes only a good ear and good taste in composition to make, the tools are just in the way if they are to evade your workflow with non-understandable functionalities, i know from experience.
Take any hit that has been made, its a combination of the gear that has been used, the persons technique and knoweldge, and last his “setup”. It can take several YEARS just to get to that very sound. Like for example when sidechaining first came around, its just a little trick, people now give tutorials on how you can create it in your daw by examples… where are people left when they are given their DAW and they are new with it? I dont even think they know what it can turn into. The tools are there but the tools are nothing if nobody is there to tell them, or at the best, as i think they should be used in situations that gives you a Visual and Evidently result so that the user knows what he is working with and masters them, not a life long search of finding out.
I could go around the web and purchase RnB and HipHop templates for cubase, i know how they are setup, on a DVD with specific samples to the genre and channels which are setup in specific structure, might be some advanced settings there with ins and fx’s. But what i think is, who knows better than Steinberg on how for example a “JP8000” can be better integrated into the daw to get the most out of it? Why should Cubase just be that editing tool out of the box when its not? They could basically turn their daw into a total solution and replacement for alot of gear if they let their daw speak the language at the very start. People are paying alot of money for that,half of it are on dreams that some of their newly bought gear will just push forward some new tune that has enough definition for them for it to be recognized for the creation of their ideas with. I think Cubase lacks it. You say people protect their techniques because of money, i thought the whole idea and advertizement of the daws was just to make money. Why not integrate it and beat out their competitors with it then? i know Steinberg dearly tries to get it all covered, this is just the thing that makes business which in return gives money.
I was a little wrong about cubase too and the features im missing for it to be a musical instrument > in that its more of a recording tool than anything else. I dont see cubase as the tool to create new music with. Its more of a tool to get the job finished. Still there are features in it that are unclear, how is the workflow really supposed to work, some of it i dont like and i have asked a few questions on the board only to get confirmed from other users that it either cant be done or they dont know. Pretty much I have not gotten any solid answer from any of their employes to have a solid foundation to build upon and know for a fact that it either can or can not be done which leaves me uncertain, which makes me go look for another product.
1 Cubase is DEFINITELY not a musical instrument. It is, exactly, a recording tool. If you know anything about engineering, or even seen an engineer work for any length of time you’d have an idea about what it is and what it’s supposed to do rather than what YOU think it’s supposed to do.
It is also not a teaching tool as you cannot use it realistically if al you do is “beats”.The learning curve is quite steep even for time-served angineers with letters after their names.
If a user can’t find anyone here who knows about their problem than generally they don’t understand the answers or they don’t know what questions to ask or the problem is not a Cubase one.
Other products will be exactly the same or worse as when you get an answer from the devs at the other sites the likelihood is that whatever problems you have they still won’t be able to fix.
To think that a MOD is more likely to solve your problem is to suffer from “white coat disease” ie: Anyone in a white coat is a doctor and therefore knows what he is talking about (converse is no-one else knows what they are talking about).
To a certain extent you can “self-program” Cubase to your ends. There’s a lot of options. Answers out of the manual are much quicker to find than asking vague questions here. But it will take you a couple of years to learn.
It’s good enough for Sir Paul who calls it a simple program.
And I can tell the real engineers on here because they never mention “workflow” at all. 
And if they do see workflow mentioned I know enough engineers to know that they just wouldn’t bother answering as they’d just be told that they didn’t have a clue.
Use plain language rather than the latest high fashion jargon (I see “awesome” is out of fashion this month) and you’re more likely to get answers as engineers are really seriously unfashionable creatures.
These things are important! If i had the hit i would rather just put it on a piece of paper, record it with a cassette recorder and send it off to a studio for production. Good music are not necessary good gear and tools, the best of notes takes only a good ear and good taste in composition to make, the tools are just in the way if they are to evade your workflow with non-understandable functionalities, i know from experience.
Excactly right. If you know how to use that cassette to it’s best and the material suits AND the material is good then use that. For all Cubase is a bag of great toys and a LOT of learning it is not THAT much better and certainly anyone listening through a car stereo won’t care what it was recorded on.
Cubase takes some years to learn. If you need product out NOW then by all means use something that you know.
911!? I keep getting robbed by a man armed with UPDATES!
There are some Steinberg official vids:
And here as well:
There are a lot on youtube of course, but more than a few are of subprime quality … whereas the ones put out by Steinberg (I am a Greg Ondo fan!) are always top shelf. I was just thinking the other day of posting and asking Steinberg to release some more!
+1
We are all entitled to our opinion, of course, and Steinberg is kind enough to provide us with a forum to discuss it. But, unless one holds a vested interest in the company, it is irrelevant to talk about what they should or shouldn’t do. The wonderful thing is that we have a free market and we get to decide which products we buy and which ones aren’t worth the price. I am happy with my purchase.
J.L.
There are (IIRC) video tutorials on the Cubase install discs. As to the more elusive stuff, maybe users should be more proactive. The net is good for that. Here’s a user (coincidentally) training other users in real time over the net.
http://www.livestream.com/homestudiotrainer
Maybe some of the senior members here could do similar. Obviously, reading the manual helps.
The tutorials are a bonus. A free bonus. Thanks Steiny 
Off subject, but I need say this… I use several DAW formats, I think Yamaha customer support is lacking in caring and skill. If you are talking about support per company, Motu is direct contact w/a much more hands on support (both hardware-software). Muse Receptor hardware support is direct contact also, Vienna instruments answers all question within a days time, Sounds online slower but also better, UAD is incredible etc . I have had a case open with Steinberg for several weeks. I sent PNG screen shots, 4 days later I heard back from customer support couldn’t open this format can I please send in standard format. I sent again as zipped JPEG they couldn’t open that. Then support asked if I could send screen shots to his personal email. Never heard back. During setup of new version of Studio One a similar call took 1 day to resolve. Am I a expert in computer programing “NO” But I do know hardware/software/networks/engineering/and have skills in C+ etc. I also know customer care and service and my experiences with Steinberg support are definitely disappointing. There are so many great instructional products available, done by pros… I would hate to see what Steinberg would do after trying to use the manuals they provide lol
Cubase is a system with the purpose of enabling us to make music. It is not the responsibility of Steinberg to teach us how to make it. There is an operations manual that explains the functionality of the system. Read it to the point of understanding, before complaining that it is hard to use. A person who chucks out $500 and then blaim Steinberg because they cannot operate it, have some serious reading to do. The tutorials are bonus material!
It is my sincere belief however, that there are software companies, in the same line of business as Steinberg, that keeps peddling their software with basically no regard for their customer base, other than getting their money. Some are even trying to make Steinberg fail, by action or inaction, being in cahoots with each other or some other Steinberg competitor. (It’s amazing then, by the way, that when others team up, it’s a strength, but when Steinberg teams up with Yamaha, it’s a union made in hell.)
So, are Steinberg trying to sell their software? Absolutely, it’s necessary for survival! Are they neglecting their customers during the process? Absolutely not, that would counteract sales. Are they doing enough to keep their customers? That is a question only Steinberg can answer. Are they doing enough to keep me? Yes, more than enough. 
- 1