3 weeks have passed, where’s the promised bug fix release?
The code of SL 12.0.0 might be made (partially) by an AI and they still try to understand what’s going on there…
Do you have any evidence to support your suggestion/speculation?
1 Like
It’s just a hypothesis, based on the observation, that the version 12.0.0 contains so many bugs and glitches (just read the form on this…), that, imho, an experienced devolper simply would not make.
I am not talking about the quality of unmixing alone, but rather on the little and larger bugs of the gui and the algorithms to do the mathematical calculations in the background.
a hypothesis? are you an experience developer? bugs can have many many reasons but claiming it ‘might be made (partially) by an AI’ is just trolling imho. bring some evidence or say nothing.
(and yes I’ve read the posts here and yes there are issues that need to be fixed). but give the dev’s some time (during a vacation period) to figure this out properly instead of ‘hypothesising’.
" A scientific hypothesis must be based on observations and make a testable and reproducible prediction about reality, in a process beginning with an educated guess or thought."
2 Likes
Robin has mentioned a few fixes slated for patch 1. At no point have I noticed a specific date associated with patch 1.
The patch will release when it’s ready to be released.
Patch 1 may…or may not…address any particular specific bug you yourself may be having (as you didn’t mention your specific issue).
2 Likes
Well, maybe it’s summer/vacation time…
We are talking about a very bad release of an ingenious piece of software in the year 2025 by a renowned company called “Steinberg”, not a 5 man software shop!
Where are the fixes???
V12 is a great release, working flawlessly on my win 11 pro 24h2, nvidia systems.
Patches will arrive over time for systems that need them.
3 Likes
I guess you’ve proved my point: you don’t really have a point. You are dissatisfied (which I understand : you paid for an update and want a fix, I get that I do). But if as you claim they are ‘not a 5 man software shop’ then they probably didn’t use AI for their newest release riddling it with bugs. right? If they did, that would be terrible practice.. but I see no evidence anywhere.
Sincerely, just be patient, roll back to V11 and work with that in the meantime.
1 Like
Great to have proven your point…
Have a nice day 
You too!
Then the software should have been released AFTER everyone is back from holiday, only a cowboy would release buggy software then shut up shop for the summer…
Clearly only Windows users were part of the “100” beta testers. I’ve moved to the darkside (MAC). I thought support would be better (baring in mind the lack of SKU’s compared to Windows machines/CPU’s/GPU’s etc.
My issues are SLOW unmixing, appalling quality too. A 5m20s song takes 48s in DEMUCS-GUI and 30+mins in SL12. A simple, modern house track split a piano in to Piano and Other but then added a single percussion hit into other too so I can’t even merge the piano and other as I’d also have the percussive hit. It’s a proper $hit show imo. I’ve offered track examples openly but Robin is staying quiet. The lies about Apple being the reason there’s no GPU support (so mac’s haven’t had parity of features since V9) is shocking. If RipX/Demucs-GUI/REBEAT can use the MAC gpu, the SL developers have NO excuse.
the old timey golden rule of computing:
“we spec our hardware to run certain software; and not the other way around”
The landscape has been this way since the inception.
Case in point: Logic DAW…No one is running Logic on Windows and they wouldn’t even try.
On this forum, the mac latest GPUs were discussed often over the past year.
Further, is SL really the best unmix software for music? Numerous discussions on this forum about the subject.
Anyway, I should really to get back to work using SL11. I, personally, purposefully decided to wait through the teething period of SL12 and continue using SL11 daily. I want to test run the SL12 trial on my current hardware before attempting to update from SL11 (“upgrades” are for non-Pro versions)…because I might need to upgrade my hardware first.
I mean, even if all mac and AMD users wait patiently, still might not get what you want from SL at the end of the day. Early adoption often bites users on the backside.
Hopefully Robin can sort something out soon.
1 Like
The problem with skipping a version/upgrade with Steinberg is that they financially penalise you. I have reasonably asked support to refund me, and agree not to penalise me if the next version sorts the problems and Mac disparity out. SL NEVER has bug fixes past 12 months, and it NEVER gets new features or features during the year, they are saved until next July when you’ll be asked to pay again. If a bug isn’t fixed by the end of June 2026, then you’re SOL.
2 Likes
“update” and “upgrade” mean different things at SB; update for the Version (Pro in this case)
there are currently three “update” tiers and three “upgrade” tiers…what is extra for waiting? 10 currency units? 40 currency units? Early “update” adopters are paying the most, are they not?
If I was coming from SL10 directly to SL12 that costs 130cu; early adopters from SL10 ro SL11 to SL12 would have paid just around 150cu with the discounts. Impatience costs, that’s just the way it is.
Let’s say a user came in at SL8 and goes straight to SL12 3-4 years later; Whatever SL8 was at full price, let’s say 250cu + 150cu update cost equals 400cu. Early adopters would have spent much more, let’s just go with 70cu per update:
SL8 new at 250cu and 9, 10, 11, 12 is 280; well, that’s 530cu…early adopters always pay more
I’m no SB fanboy, I’m new here because of SL…and that has got me using Cubase (plus my DAW is very long in the tooth).
As far as bugs, man, that always depends upon the release of any software.
If your hardware isn’t supported, you may never see improvements