That is basically what I was saying earlier.
Yes – except that with Waves it was relatively expensive and somewhat confusing, and it was always a nightmare with the licenses whenever I switched computers. Since I have four DAWs in my studio, it led to utter chaos trying to figure out which license belonged to which computer. I’ve been using Waves’ subscription model ever since – with the downside that nothing works if you don’t pay on time.
Please excuse me, there was no malicious intent. I didn’t have time to read all the comments and only skimmed them.
No worries, just meant to reinforce your point.
A subscription model is out of the question for me. But that doesn’t mean I think the idea of smaller updates and new features between major releases is a bad one, or that I’m fundamentally opposed to subscriptions for others.
There are models that offer a subscription option, but also allow you to purchase a new version annually, just as before.
Since I’m not a full-time professional who needs these smaller updates, an annual version would suffice for me, just as it has in the past.
But why shouldn’t Steinberg offer both options? That way, everyone could benefit. The subscription model would allow certain professionals to have more influence on development. I mainly need the Cubase functionality. However, Nuendo has some features I wouldn’t want to do without, especially those for 3D audio and the ability to produce particularly high-quality exports via WaveLab—I’m talking about SACD projects. Now, integration with the VSL 3D Panner is apparently supposed to run more smoothly.
Those are the things I need.
For the record, Steinberg is not considering a subscription model. Can we just leave it at that? 
haha…. some conversations will never die 
At any rate, Nuendo 15 lands day after tomorrow…and then on to Spectralayers 13 Pro.
Well, that’s not what he actually said. He said:
He said subscriptions won’t be offered instead of, or replace perpetual, not that they are “not considering it.” He seems like a man who chooses his words carefully; particularly around this bunch. I didn’t see anyone ever say “subscriptions should replace perpetual” anyway. The more options the better - though people will certainly still complain about it either way
Although I myself would hardly ever sign up for a subscription, I think a combined model with a subscription option would be beneficial for Steinberg if handled skillfully.
I also “only” have Office 2021 and not Office 365. I’m happy with that; I don’t need cloud group features, etc. But the same would be possible with a Nuendo subscription for Steinberg and professionals with multiple Nuendo users.
Steinberg Marketing would also be able to create synergies, integrate other third-party providers into the model, and expand as a result.
I’m not expressing my own needs here, but I’m still glad if Steinberg can survive in the market. I can understand clinging to the past—that idyllic era when no one had to worry about Cubase/Nuendo sales.
I liked that era too, but there are signs pointing to the fact that the time has come to secure our position and break new ground.
That felt a bit like a 14.5 update to be honest….
A thing I’ve always missed, since you’re looking into automation, is to suspend R/W on individual inserts. So that when you turn global or channel automation on and off it stays the same.
I do think the best option is current one (perpetual license + upgrades), but there should be a Support plan option.
Support plan means paying an annual support cost (let’s say 400-500 EUR, that is around double the annual upgrade price) which gives you: a customer Bug report and bug tracking system; priority for fixing bugs submitted by Support paying customers; all upgrades as long as you are on a Support plan; a number of support tickets assistance, etc.
This also means a more intense upgrade cycle, and maybe monthly builds available to everyone, which include the bugfixes generated by the Support paying customers.
This is not a subscription: when someone decides to not pay the Support plan anymore, they keep their current perpetual license and when the next version comes, they upgrade by paying for the upgrade as usual.
I think that would be poorly received. Very poorly. It would look like you have to pay an extortion fee to get bugs fixed. Why? Because first they would be advertising a feature, then you find out it doesn’t work, and then they would effectively be saying “Oh, well if you actually want it to work you have to either wait until next year or pay more money”. Right or wrong that’s how it would be perceived. People already have a problem having to pay for more than one version for things to work properly, add this to the equation and it would be a terrible look. And to make it clear: I’m not arguing about the cost, I’m arguing about optics.
Semantically I think “support” should be limited to actual support. If there was a support plan I would expect it would give me a phone number and personal guidance to resolve my issues. Not generic bug fixing.
I totally agree Mathias. I certainly would not be happy paying Euro 400-500 per year given that my usage is very low now.
I’m currently 78 years old and think that, as I’ve been buying Steinberg updates for over 40 years now, I should be treated as an old age pensioner and be provided with all future updates free of charge as some sort of pension. Or I could actually just stop buying updates and stick with the version I currently have and pay nothing more. That actually makes some sense to me, but a keep getting tempted by the possibility of bug fixes in new versions.
The problem with that scenario, is that you are also stuck on the same OS version, unless of course you wing it and install the DAW software on a system it wasn’t designed for.
I know V14, is solid on my business grade laptop with Windows 10 ESU, yet again Steinberg have created a platform that is stable and efficient, and has no issues with the security part of the OS.
As I’m already 78 years old I’m unsure how much more time I have been allotted before being recalled to Base for reassignment, so the PC/OS I currently have may well suffice!
I haven’t tried this, but, if you disable “write” in the plugin does it stay disabled or does it follow global?
Yes, then a Support plan wouldn’t be for you.
It’s a thing that’s useful to actual businesses.
That’s a problem of the culture of audio post production / music production software world.
Paid customer support (that includes upgrades) used to be a common thing in the software world. It still is with some high end and enterprise software (and I consider Nuendo to be part of this), for example with CG apps.
Quite the opposite, it would be an accountability mechanism.
If I post a bug on the forum, most likely nothing will happen.
If I submit a bug as a customer on a support plan, they must get back to me. And when the bug is fixed, everybody benefits.
So you are on a support plan. Something’s not working. You call support. They discuss with you and conclude that it’s a bug.
What should they do? Should they put that bug higher on their list and have it fixed in the next 0.20 release or should they just do nothing and keep the bug in the list with the same priority?
What about just fixing the bug (if technically feasible) and have the bugfix in a weekly (or daily/nightly) release, available to everybody?
Today is my last day using Nuendo 14. As always, I’ll be switching to the new version as soon as it’s released. Thanks to Steinberg, Timo and the whole team. My next post will be short. It’ll just say, “It’s done.” I’m now using Nuendo 15.
Michel Blanchet (High functioning Autism and Nuendo is my world)
Just a thought…
That is a reasonable model. It preserves ownership while creating a clear incentive for users who want priority support and faster fixes.
If executed well, it could improve stability and update cadence without forcing everyone into a subscription. The real question is whether the company can consistently deliver high-quality monthly builds and meaningful bug fixes. Without that, the support plan becomes difficult to justify.
When I upgraded to Magix Sequoia, support was not the issue; AAX import and export were, and they were never properly addressed. I eventually migrated to Nuendo, and it felt like a homecoming.
Nuendo itself has gone through periods of uncertainty in the past, particularly around version 3 during the Pinnacle and Yamaha transitions I jumped from 3 to 12 as one shot replacement for PT/Sequoia comb. That is why consistency in execution matters more than the model itself.