Nuendo + Cubase no NEK

If everything is coded to begin with and is simply not activated when not buying NEK, then does that mean there is anything besides money to save by not buying it? After all, all the code is still there. So if that’s the case, how much are these post people saving? 150 dollars? That’s less than what a reasonably successful post house charges for an hour I’d say. It’s peanuts. If you’re a hobbyist making beats then it’s a fair amount. Not if you’re making your living in post with your own studio. It’s really nothing.

Here’s why it doesn’t make sense though;

Let’s say a whopping 70 people out of 100 buy without NEK: 70250=17,500
The remaining 30 people buy Nuendo with NEK: 30
400=12,000
That’s a total of 29,500.

Now pretend Steinberg came to its senses and sold Nuendo with NEK, with no option to exclude it. One version, that’s it. Let’s even pretend they sell it at a $100 discount compared to now. So all 100 people pay $300 for it.
That’s a total of 30,000.

Throw in the added work needed to separate the two and it’s probably even less profitable.

So why does the NEK exist? For post-professionals to save $150? At 70/30 you could sell it for $100 less, make a bigger profit, everyone would save compared to buying the whole thing, and the lower saving (compared to now) for post-pros would be only be $50.

Or is it for technical reasons?

It just makes pretty much no sense.

Agreed. Include it, charge a bit more if need be, and move on.

Isn’t the point though that people who own Cubase AND Nuendo STILL have to buy NEK for Nuendo even though they’ve paid for those features with the cost of Cubase.

Surely there must be an easy way of letting Nuendo use those features as they’re already installed and authorised on the machine.


My view on the whole NEK thing is: Nuendo should include everything in it’s price and just have options when installing to NOT install things some users won’t need.


MC



MC

I think SB has done a fantastic job of developing Nuendo over the years. I was at the AES in '99 when N1 was premiered and I’ve been a user since N2. It easily remains my first choice and continues to provide well conceived facilities that, taken as a whole, exceed what 99% of users will ever fully use.

That said, the concept of NEK is in my opinion, frankly, ridiculous. It defies logic to have a flagship product that costs 400% what the “bread and butter” product costs, and yet charge extra to add features from the lower range product to the higher range product. You could buy 4 copies of Cubase for the same price, yet you do not get some important features of Cubase ???

While, in the abstract, I can appreciate the very creative efforts of SB employees and moderators to defend the policy, in the end it’s just a bit silly. Please give me an example of another company charging 4X the price for their flagship, then charging extra to gain features that exist on another product from their own company for 1/4 the price. Hint: There are none.

I/we have no issue paying a 4X premium for Nuendo over Cubase. We each have our reasons. Frankly, (not to sound weird) I make enough money that for me the issue with NEK is certainly not the $$$. It’s just maddening to have such an innovative software company as Steinberg create and maintain such a thoroughly illogical policy. A policy that seems designed to unnecessarily irritate it’s premium user base.

I do not get it. The “logic” defies me. I would wager that someone within SB made an ill considered decision some time ago and will not correct it due to emotion, not logic. And I’ll wager that most SB employees secretly agree with us users about this issue.

Come on… just correct it. You’ll feel better in the morning !!!

Yes exactly.
Owners of both Licenses should have NEK License included.

Well, Steinberg might acctually have to pay 3rd party developers if part of the code in NEK is licensed from them. In that case it would make perfect sense to limit the amount of users. Also there seem to be quite a few users who buy both Nundo and Cubase plus all the updates for both products.
Steinberg has been in business for 30 years in a technology market. There have been ups and downs as we all know, but I trust them to be able to do the maths.

Ollie

That makes no sense. You’re basically saying that Steinberg chooses to include a licensed technology because it’s good for the users and then turn around and try to not get too many users of that technology because it’s too expensive! Yet they include it by default in the software that sells the most (Cubase)!

You really think they wouldn’t charge the users back for it?

I don’t see how that changes anything I said.

I think you underestimate the ability of theirs to make a bad decision and sticking with it. Either way, how is the math I showed wrong?

While I completely agree with you on the absurdity of the NEK relative to the overall pricing scale, the one reason I can think of that they would impose this on their “premium user base” is precisely because they don’t mind as much.

Considering the overall costs of maintaining a post facility, a +/- $500 upgrade is actually peanuts in the overall budget. Try to do something like this on the larger “less-premium” Cubase user base and they’d be all over it flooding these forums with complaints…

Lydiot,
I still think this makes sense.

Let’s say they buy the aaf filter fom company A and a vst synth fom company B and develop the core programme in house.
Now they can sell Cubase to musicians and don’t have to pay company A and Nuendo to studios and don’t have to pay company B.

Nuendo is way more expensive because it’s aimed at a nieche market. Everything about the NEK makes perfect sense if you see it that way. The only problem is that Cubase users get the features quicker than Nuendoers. So what…

I still think it doesn’t.

Any normal company carries costs over to the consumer so that it can make a profit. If you can find out just what these licenses are and how they’re paid I’d love to hear it. Until I do I’ll assume they carried costs over and that leaves us with only the other issue; that the math simply doesn’t make sense.

(Imagine what would happen if everyone bought Nuendo+NEK - financial disaster for Steinberg!)

Nuendo is a nieche market producat and offers ridiculous value for money. Check the market:

PT HD is much more expensive and forces you to buy their hardware. No ADR function and no monitoring matrix.

Sequoia is more expensive and not cross platform. No ADR funtion.

Merging Pyramix? More expensive. ADR also not included.

Fairlight. WAY more expensive.

Other DAWs lack audio post features and cannot be compared.

So, I believe it’s fair to say Nuendo is not expensive at all.

I was chatting to the product manager of another audio post Daw recently and he said that he couldn’t believe his eyes when he heard that the ADR tool was INCLUDED in the upgrade price for Nuendo 6. Nuendo is NOT expensive. In fact it’s piced very aggresively imho.

Ollie

No ones saying it isn’t value for money, the OP’s point was : why when you own Cubase AND Nuendo do you have to buy NEK as well?

As I and many others have said: Nuendo should include everything as default that Cubase does, if you don’t want to install various music parts then don’t. NEK makes no sense to anyone ,and if you own Cubase as I and many other Nuendo users do, it makes even less sense.




MC

Nuendo is way more expensive because it’s aimed at a nieche market. Everything about the NEK makes perfect sense if you see it that way.

No matter the subject, there ALWAYS will be someone that will try to explain why earth is in box shape and not round. your explanation is absurd and got nothing to do with the 100% agreement between the users.

This is not just another topic but a matter of principle. Hard and deep principle. The NEK policy is absurd and not for one reason but 100 reasons.

Instead of unit our consumer force and ask for direct explanation we keep trying to explain to ourselves why and what. Stop that, We all agree the NEK must go through some sort of transformation.

The only way from here is to arrange a proper “issue” post, write all the feelings and thoughts and wait for a proper
answer from Steinberg. This is a serious matter, not just another argument for the buck.
100% of the users defending the policy (god knows why), actually dont use or need their midi tools and they are pure post users OR doesn’t have a cubase and Nuendo. If you don’t have to deal with the absurd with the policy, just don’t - We need it!

Steinberg should explain this issue once and for all. We deserve an answer.

+1 Nicely written.

How Steinberg have handled this NEK things is on the verge of comedy.

When we were on Nuendo 5, they said this was the last time we saw the NEK…(in this form, they later added).
The only difference is that it is now integrated in the installer (not a seperate installer), leaving the option to “open” the NEK stuff for the license at hand.
Not exactly a “Get rid of the NEK” Revelution IMHO :confused: :frowning: :astonished: :blush:

There’s no logic in the logical logic here, I might add :wink:

You can read about NEK here. Unnecessarily problematic.

Where is the Facepalm emoticon when you need it :laughing:

I like that :slight_smile: