Nuendo + Cubase no NEK

Hi everyone,

Simple question.
If you have Nuendo and Cubase authorized on the same computer, but no NEK extension kit:
is it possible to open the score in Nuendo without NEK ?
Do you have to buy NEK for Nuendo in order to benefit of the “extras” you got by buying Cubase ?

Thanks for your answers.

I believe that if you want total compatibility between Cubase and Nuendo,
you will need to purchase NEK as well.

Doesn’t sit very well with many users.

When I was trialing Cubase 7.5, I was able to open and use Groove Agent SE in Neundo 6
with no problems. The new synth in HSSE was also available.

I run Nuendo6.07+Nek6 here.

On the same topic.

If I have N6+NEK, and I want to update to N7, I must upgarde also the NEK or it is just an option?

Nuendo 6 Expansion Kit: Cubase Music Tools for Nuendo, is what they call it.

For users who have both Cubase and Nuendo, it would be sensible to be able to use those “Music Tools” in Nuendo as well. They should open it up for use in Nuendo, as it is installed together with the app. anyway (only a license teqhnical thing).

This should be a no-brainer IMO. Kind of payed for the tools via Cubase already :unamused:

Thank guys,
For the little things ( but great like the crossfade window, AAC import, more than 1 marker track ) that Nuendo brings to composers, it is a very very stiff price to pay, and many don’t do it because it is about $1,500 more than Cubase !!!
If NEK was a free option that would not clutter the Post Production guys setups, Steinberg would probably sell more Nuendos.


The feature set for which composers have little or no use for will keep on growing in the future.
So it’s fair to reverse the question: would it be correct to “attract” composers to using Nuendo without the intention to actually build specific features for them?

If the additional features of Nuendo are worth their money is different for each and every individual.
The same goes for the NEK and Post-guys. Very few can make good use out of the NEK features.


Here we go again

No we don’t.

If composers want the more professional features that Nuendo offers, then it is worth the money.

If they don’t want a particular feature, they don’t have to use it. This whole NEK thing continues to make Steinberg look ridiculous. It would be less serious if Nuendo wasn’t so far behind Cubase in some features and so far ahead in others. It would make more sense if there was one application that was modular, rather than two piecemeal ones, but this discussion has happened time and time again, so I doubt that Steinberg will change their collective minds.


Actually, for the first time since SX1 and Nuendo 1.6 I can clearly see the border between the Music and Post. With the Cubase 7.5 and Nuendo 6.5 (upcoming) cycle that is.
The long and winding argument from Steinberg finally seems to be valid (or at least getting through). BUT…

… But. Steinberg should draw the line between Music and Post tools a bit more to the left (or right?) :confused:

Let’s put together a list of what we consider Music tools, as much as Post tools, that are not in Cubase (and go the other way). I will start with some things I think should be a natural part of Cubase, for Music Production:

  • The forth Mixer
  • Some automation features
  • Extended Fade Editor
  • Extended Routing

These are NOT Post only features IMO.

Please fill in what YOU think is just as much a Music tool within Nuendo, that should be included in Cubase.

If Steinberg would follow up that list, you would get rid of me and many other music only producers from Nuendo.
And you post guys were not to listen to as much complaining (inc about the NEK) in here :wink:
Oooh what a peaceful world :smiley:

Then give the Music Only Producers the few things from Nuendo, that makes them go Nuendo instead of Cubase, ported over to Cubase (see starting list in my prior post).

Of corse the Nuendo user base will be much smaller (I would certainly go Cubase only).
But as long as Steinberg would finally get their music vs post message through, they will/should be willing to pay the price of fewer Nuendo users.

It is a small price for keeping their pride :smiley:


I partly agree with you.
The problem is that it is impossible to draw a line between Composers/Musicians/Jack of all trades/Post production editor/post production mixer. The grey area has little or nothing related to being a Music Only producer and a “I do everything” producer. It all has to do with the level of (my apologies for the wording) professionalism or skills of the user. A good example is the automation system. It was voted (with overwhelming numbers) by the Cubase community to not adapt the “Post Pro” automation style in favor of the “old” system. While more skilled users can appreciate the advanced -and more complicated- automation features, they are simply to complicated to many other users.

Same the other way around. Very few post people will ever use anything that is in the NEK. But if the Post-guy is skilled, then he will most ceratinly use a VST intrument to create some funky effect, or use a Sample Library.

So that “grey area” is personal. It’s up to the individual to choose if the extra money is worth what he can get out of it. Even if it’s for the bedroom/hobby composer only satisfaction to play with the same tools as a Hollywood Dubstage.

But there are sure a couple of Nuendo things that would benefit Cubase, and a couple of NEK things that would benefit Nuendo.


And I partly agree with you :slight_smile:

But come on, the forth mixer should be an easy task?

On my part, my Nuendo journey ends here (with N5.5). I will continue to use Cubase 6.5 as my main DAW.
I don’t care much for C7/7.5 (mixer and control room), even though I like the new Track Version very much. I also like the Track Visibility.

As I said, with this last versions going (C7.5/N6.5) I finally got the feeling that these are, two different apps for two different tasks (but can of corse overlap).
This time around it was an easy choice for me (as a Music Producer/engineer/mixer only). Earlier on it only led to some degree of frustration.

I certainly can do fine without the forth mixer (but it could be handy). I certainly can do fine without the extended automation (but it could be handy) etc…

I can do fine mixing in Reaper, Studio One and PT as well :wink:

Well then there should be a CEK extension for the composers who write to picture.

Film composers are natural Nuendo people. They need most of the N feature over cubase.
WE need to use music features AND to have full compebility with our Post colleagues. AAF is a natural field of Film composer so as multiple marker tracks.
I need to have the options to work with a viola player working with cubase and be able to exchange material with the sound designer without a hassle.

I will keep say it every time this topic will be on (and it will be coming up like most situations where something is ridicusly wrong) - SB, give us, Nuendo film composers OUR midi-score features back! Keep the NEK to those who need extra VSTi.

There is no place to argue over this. The NEK idea is ridicules, no dancing around it.

I still fail to see how NEK makes financial sense for Steinberg or anybody else. Come up with a number of non-NEK Nuendo users (I believe it was said to be about 30% in the old and now deleted forum) and do the math. It just doesn’t make sense financially. It’s just nonsense perpetuated by stubbornness.

For Nuendo 6, the NEK is installed together with Nuendo itself.
It is only a License techniqual thing that seperate whether it starts up or not, so I guess it will not cripple anything.

Not that I want to support Steinberg on this issue, but Pro Tools is not cheaper. |The amateur version of PT has many fewer features than CUbase, but is around the same price. In order to get the “advanced” features (which are still far fewer than Nuendo) you have to get HD, which is not at all cheap.


Remembering when NEK came out: the NEK + Nuendo was the same price as the original, integrated version, and sans NEK was (and still is) less.

I don’t personally have a dog in the fight (am NEK all the way), but do wonder why the price breakdown aspect (not the debate about whether there should be an NEK at all, or if we should be granted Cubase licenses with our Nuendos) continues to be an issue. If there “must” be an NEK, then the pricing scheme seems logical to me. And I know a few post people who have bought into Nuendo sans NEK who are glad that option exists.