Regarding Nuendo 15 and the future direction of Nuendo

Nuendo
1

After this update, I have started to feel concerned about the future direction of Nuendo.

I have been using Nuendo as my main tool in post-production for over 20 years.

I have experienced its evolution firsthand, from the introduction of the timebase synchronizer in v2 to the QuickTime video engine in v5.5.

Since then, features such as ReConform, ADR, and Direct Offline Processing have made Nuendo a powerful tool that truly supports professional workflows—

including areas where Pro Tools cannot compete.

However, the current state of Nuendo feels like it sits somewhere between a consumer product and a professional tool.

Since around the discontinuation of SyncStation, it feels like the voices from professional environments have become less influential,

and the development focus has shifted more toward consumer-oriented features (especially immersive workflows).

In the game audio field as well, I feel that more users are moving to Reaper,

and Nuendo’s former advantage is gradually fading.

I would like to see Nuendo return to a stronger sense of craftsmanship,

independent from consumer market trends.

Some may say, “Then just use Pro Tools,”

but Nuendo has grown alongside my own professional career,

and I still have high expectations for its future.

Here are some specific concerns regarding this update:

• MultiTrack to Mono feature

→ iXML metadata is still not preserved

While standard file import with split tracks retains iXML,

this function still discards it, which is a serious issue in professional workflows.

Additionally, this may be related to similar limitations in:

• Field Recorder Import

• Embedded AAF Import

These workflows seem to share the same underlying issue—

namely the lack of proper transcode-copy handling—

and it feels like the root problem has not yet been addressed.

Regarding SpectraLayers Pro 12,

while its processing capabilities are excellent and I actively use it,

the ARA workflow is currently not practical for real-world use.

As a result, I am forced to rely on workarounds such as:

• Exporting events

• Processing them in standalone mode (batch processing)

• Re-importing them into Nuendo

This requires significant user-side effort to achieve a usable workflow.

SyncStation and SpectraLayers may be attractive features for new professional users.

However, I believe Nuendo should continue to build upon the craftsmanship of audio post-production—

and expand toward consumer markets from that strong professional foundation.

If that direction is clearly defined,

I would be willing to accept a subscription model or higher pricing,

and pay accordingly as a professional user.

I believe Nuendo is not a brand like Avid,

which can rely on its position without meaningful innovation,

but rather a platform that continues to evolve through development.

I look forward to seeing its future direction.

5 Likes
2

I agree with most of your point. There are workflow issues (due to bugs or design choices) that make using Nuendo unneccesarily hard to use (aaf etc like you mentioned).

One small point:

“and the development focus has shifted more toward consumer-oriented features (especially immersive workflows”

I do not see immersive workflows as consumer-oriented. Spatial audio (interactice or linear) are pro fields and demand professional tools. They could be much better in Nuendo.. this is a big market.

2 Likes
3

Thank you for your reply — I really appreciate your perspective.

I fully agree that spatial audio is a professional field and an important market.

However, in my view, spatial audio is an extension built on top of traditional audio post-production workflows.

In other words:

• Proper handling of production sound data

• Dialogue cleanup — which tools like SpectraLayers are now fundamentally transforming

These initial stages are critically important, and this is exactly where I currently see some issues.

As for sound design and music production,

these may be done on the same machine or separated depending on the project scale and budget.

In larger productions, it is quite common to split these processes across different systems and environments.

In such cases, proper synchronization systems become essential.

Of course, there are workflows where immersive content is created entirely within Nuendo.

However, before that stage,

the way Nuendo handles its native file-based workflow — especially at the starting point of audio post-production —

may not be as user-friendly or as robust as it should be.

It feels as though real-world production workflows are not yet fully reflected in this area.

1 Like
4

Thank you guys for the feedback - much appreciated. Generally, we always have to balance dev resources, so we need to be very selective with what can be done. That said, all those are valid points and we are happy to look into them more deeply.

7 Likes
5

Thank you for your response — I really appreciate you taking this seriously.

I fully understand that development resources are limited and prioritization is necessary.

Within that context, I feel that the reliability of file-based workflows at the early stages of audio post-production — such as iXML metadata preservation and consistent import behavior — is a fundamental requirement for professional environments.

I hope this area can be considered for future improvements.

Thank you again for listening to the feedback.

2 Likes
6

“However, in my view, spatial audio is an extension built on top of traditional audio post-production workflows.”
Ah thanks for clarifying: Totally agree!

1 Like
7

So would I, in theory. However, in practice, it really feels to me that immersive audio (Ambisonics and Atmos alike albeit to various degrees) has become an afterthought, or not even a thought at all as the absence of any development (that I could find in the communiques) in that field in Nuendo 15 would seem to indicate.

If Steinberg has decided to de facto freeze this aspect of Nuendo (not increase the supported HOA, not improve Atmos further…) in order to focus on post, this should be made clear so that Nuendo users who work in immersive audio can make an informed decision as to whether to stick with Nuendo.

Conversely, if Steinberg wishes to retain these users by restarting development in this area, this should be communicated along with some further details (upcoming features, etc.).

1 Like
8

One thing that I feel very positive about and that I believe is well woth mentioning is that the Steinies have done a great job listening to users who demmanded less bells and whistles and more workflow improvements.

Look at the way the range tool has improved previously and look at how automation copy and latch prime on stop have been implemented now. The things that can be implemented on a dev cycle are always up for debate but I bought N15 because I saw Steinberg focussing on basics rather than the shimmering things that are easy to sell.

5 Likes
9

Subscription model is no guarantee of frequent updates or higher quality! Please… :roll_eyes:

My counter-view is that I am happy with the current direction of Nuendo. Each DAW has its own pros and cons, and I feel Nuendo is doing a much better job than any other DAW. I do keep my eyes on options (and even own other DAWs), so this is not just a fan-boy comment.

10

I agree that a subscription model does not guarantee better or more frequent updates.

However, I don’t think that saying “Nuendo is better than others” really addresses the current concerns.

When you work with multiple DAWs, you start to see not only the current level of completeness, but also where development resources are being invested — and where things may be stagnating.

Also, even within audio post, it’s a different question entirely which specific areas a DAW is actually optimized for, and where its real strengths lie.

I brought up the topic of cost and development resources because it was being discussed in another thread, but I don’t think the core issue is whether the model is subscription-based or not.

To me, the real question is whether the development priorities are aligned with the needs of professionals.

1 Like
11

In terms of workflow improvements, I think that for post production it will be increasingly important to have a Scripting SDK, which would allow Nuendo to be part of complex post pipelines, exchange better with editing apps etc. It’d also enable much more complex workflows inside Nuendo itself.

ProTools already has this. Also Reaper.

5 Likes