We already have Cubase ‘Pro’ and I see that Wavelab ‘Pro’ is on the way. Does this indicate that we will eventually get a professional version of Nuendo too?
Man, I hope not. The more ‘Pro’ they’re trying to make something, the less ‘Pro’ it usually is
it will be too weird. Nuendo known as a PRO product by definition. I dont think I EVER saw a young green “sound guy” or Composer whos just wanna play with it.
i wish i could know how many Nuendo users are out there. Not as many as in other DAWs for sure.
Nuendo won’t get the addition “Pro”, as there is no need to distinguish a “pro version” from an entry level product version,
in opposite to WaveLab or Cubase. Since we have released Nuendo 7 less than 6 months ago, Nuendo 7.5 won’t be available sometime very soon.
I was only joking, but when do you think we will see a fix for the VCA stuff (my N7-Trial period is running out and it would be better if everything was working as it should before I update)?
Strange, no answer.
Ubrigens, ‘anytime soon’ ist besser als ‘sometime very soon’
At one side I fully respect Steinberg decisions about releases and releases date.
On the other side I feel little disappointed with facts that I cannot use new VSTi or effects in current Nuendo for free until next release witch is out of sync with Cubase.
It will fine and at least nice move if for example Retroluge 2 will work for users with Nuendo 7 + NEK licenses
Happy Christmas to all!
Agreed. Nuendo users seem to get the short end of the stick in this regard.
At least until the new version of Nuendo is released…for us loyal Nuendo users (please)
I nuendo loyal friend, just downloaded nuendo 7.1 feel very stick, I ask nuendo 7.5 will be released this year, what time? Because I just bought nuendo 7, if released if I can successfully upgrade?
Nuendo 7.5 is scheduled for Spring 2017. It will concorporate all Cubase features that have been released until
then and of course some very cool, new Nuendo-exclusive stuff in areas such as Game Audio, TV/Film Post-Production,
Audio Processing and probably Virtual Reality, alongside the final integration for Dolby Atmos/RMU.
I know you are being deliberately vague here but will we see a field recorder workflow (audio conform) solution?
I’m afraid that it won’t make it into 7.5, but at least it will come with 8.0 or even in between 7.5 and 8.0
@Oliver Can you describe the Field Recorder Workflow? I don’t do field recordings a lot, but I’ve read articles mentioning a field recording workflow, but I’d like to know more about what this is out of interest.
Field recorder workflow is Avid/PT lingo to be able to match and replace audio events with matching metadata.
Example is that when the picture editor cuts using the mix track and later in post you can semi-automatically replace that with any of the iso tracks (descretly recorded microphones). This will be done by comparing and matching the metadata in the various audio files.
Well, if the trend continues and more and more editors start using FCPx, there will be no reason left to have a Field Recorder Workflow …
if this was true it might be a reason to implement it today rather than in Nuendo 8, wouldn’t it?
Also, it might be a thing that is different in Belgium. I have also seen people staring to move away from AVID here as well, but over here people seem to go to Premiere. I have not received a single project coming from FCPX. (and I don’t know why this would mean we don’t need a conform feature anymore, but you might be able to point me in the right direction here and shine some light?)
Anyway. All I am saying is - For me it is the single biggest thing in my daily workflow.
If there was a 3rd party solution that worked reliably for Nuendo I would easily shelf out 2k Euros tomorrow just for that one feature, because I know that I get the question with EVERY project and I know that I will spend the entire next week just conforming audio semi manually for 10 episodes of a new series I will be working on.
There are features that would be nice to have, but this would actually save me thousands of Euros/weeks of my time and I do not know a reliable and convenient solution that works well and efficiently with Nuendo.
Also, I am very disappointed that Nuendo still fails to read out/display (or even split multichannel files without losing) the extra data from field recorders such as character names. This is something that shareware for under $80 can do. It cannot be rocket science and would help a lot every day.
On a side note I would still like to thank Timo for being so open about this.
Unless I am mistaking, and as far as I know, FCPx and the third party X2Pro tool to export AAF’s are simply ignoring all the BWF metadata in the audio files. Which make it impossible to conform the project.
I wonder if Apple are betting on the openness of its FCP XML format. In theory you can read out anything from there. That’s how X2Pro has to do it, right? Otherwise it would not be able to read data and transcode the audio. I don’t know if FCP will do it. But FCP with a solid and great working 3rd party solution is OK too. It would of course be preferable to have an export function that exports industry standard files for post.
All I can say is that I’ve read many many stories by now online of editors coming to FCPX and really liking it. I do some small YouTube stuff and indie game trailers from time to time and man, I love the way FCPX lets you edit. I used Premiere a long time before that but I would never want to go back. I think for editing (increasingly under time pressure), especially shows / episodes, FCPX is a great and fast tool - as long as you don’t depend on a whole process chain like external color grading and audio post. Then it gets complicated. I hope FCPX will learn some tricks for Pro Exporting in the coming versions so we don’t have to complain anymore . Exporting in FCPX is a nightmare. Even its own FCPXML format. I got a project as FCPXML and wanted to open and edit it in Logic. It was a mess. We used X2Pro for AAF and that worked. Luckily it was a very small project so I didn’t have to rely on metadata. But editing in FCPX is a great experience.
Not if FCPx doesn’t read the BWF metadata of the audio files it pulls in …
Without that metadata, no conforming (field recorder workflow) is possible.