I am not sure I understand what you mean by “entered” since it’s the users who submitted these countless bug reports, requests and suggestions, and the fact that they’re listed in a forum does not mean Steinberg acted or will act on them, or that they have even been acknowledged. How would we know that we are not being ignored?
The fact that simple bugs like, for example, BON-16608 introduced in 8.5.10 are still present 8 months later, and not even knowing if these are going to be fixed before the next paid update has really made a lot of us look for alternatives.
Simple options to turn mixer AOT back on, or to disable the border popups menus or the new time ruler and cursor changes? Nothing.
Just stating once or twice a year that this or the other issue is being looked at may be reassuring for awhile, but then years go by and we hear nothing back.
We’re talking about simple stuff here, not RnD heavy projects. Very simple tasks.
After a relatively short transition period I have found my DAW alternative. There still are things about Cubase that I will miss and I might get back to it in the future if I see Steinberg changing gears. Until then no more cash from me.
Hi Fabio, thanks again for replying. I’m sorry this thread turned into a negative thread … that’s not what I wanted even if it was bound to happen.
to be more specific about the points I brought up, the batch export/convert feature of Reaper is extremely fast and powerful when it comes to extracting every single clips in a session. You select any audio/midi clips, you open the batch export menu, you chose what format you want and it will convert/export around 10 clips (with or without effects) in 2 sec. From what I understand, most of the sound designer I work with design their sounds over the animations. They either use a video track with all the animations one after another and design the sounds to match them, or they do sound design for a trailer which is similar. They often end up with 100 clips in their session and they want to export them all without wasting too much time. you can see how fast reaper is at that specific task in this video at 4:10 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsTlp1-qhrI
A sound designer also told me that the way you can load separate plugins on clips directly and tweak them ect is amazing for what they do since they don’t need to create new tracks every time they need different effects.
About the performance, we just loaded plugins while watching the meter with CPU load until it would either max out or crash. Reaper tends to crash when too many plugins are loaded but the max amount was significantly higher in Reaper. TBH we didn’t really do other tests so Cubase might be better in different situations, but it convinced some guys to make the jump
When it comes to post prod and video (I’m in that team btw), if you could just bring back edit mode in Cubase, pro tools will be useless.
Also, having an option to split stereo tracks to dual mono when exporting OMF would be great! We have to provide the video team with OMF but some DAW and video software won’t support stereo tracks in OMF for some reasons. I’m talking for my team right now but I’m sure a lot of people are still using OMF and would like that little feature. (it’s in the export to AAF of Nuendo btw). Thanks again and have a great week!
I’ll bring the Edit Mode topic up. FRs can be posted in the Forum (where especially Guillermo browses and forwards the requests) or sent via a MySteinberg support request. About performance, if you think there is anything to check, I’m always interested in this - you can send an e-mail to my attention or PM for further info.
@Karlito: Issues posted on the forum do no enter the bug base on their own, it takes someone to reproduce and create the official issue. And quite some are found and entered by either us or QA, the beta testers or even the devs themselves before the users report. BON-16608 is part of a bigger hover improvement task; according to the system, it’s in 8.5.30.
The Nuendo-exclusive Edit Mode has been being requested for years in Cubase, and was even present (by mistake) for a moment. It was removed then, and that would appear to be an unambiguous message about where SB thinks it belongs.
Adding it to Cubase would be a huge positive for users. Nuendo has so much more going for it than it had years ago- ADR, loudness stats, Conforming, which makes Edit Mode less crucial as a value adding feature now, compared to before these newer features were present.
I seem to remember there being a promise to fix the QuickTime issue (i.e. remove the QuickTime dependency) before the release of C9, hopefully this will be it. I for one wouldn’t mind waiting longer for C9 if video could be fixed.
I’m pretty sure it was present until 7.5.0 … As someone stated, there are a lot more Nuendo exclusive features now that would justify the purchase for people that have the means. The clip package option, Network features, Wwise integration are mouth watering for me.
Nowadays, most DAW have the edit mode feature (including reaper)
Of course, but this only applies to the bug reports, which is a much shorter list, and many of these never make it to the collected issues list.
20000 is a big heroic number indeed, I am just not sure where it comes from.
Me too.
For myself, there are a lot of smaller issues, most of them workflow and inconsistencies that show this DAW being changed, deleted, altered etc…not to mention all the new features that some wish would be lower priority until bugs and better workflow are addressed. Some things seem to be not thought out very well.
Workflow:
For example there is a key command to open the history or export window but no key command to close it.
If you use multiple video monitors there is no way to directly focus any of them.
With the preference on, I can click anywhere on the project page and the curser follows. Thats wonderful, but it doesn’t apply to key edit or drum edit pages. There are lots of inconsistencies between the project page, key, and drum edit pages.
It’s taken Steinberg too long to get fast workflow midi editing in the key editor that is comparable to PT. Sadly, based on feature requests, it seems many users still don’t know about new key modifiers that make working in the key editor much faster. It would have been nice had they used similar modifiers that PT uses, but at least they exist now.
(skip to 2:00 for key editor)
I’m not even sure if it is fair to compare C8.5 to PT because one is a huge feature-rich production environment while the other is more of a tracking/mixing tool that is more easily exchanged in studios. Only recently has Steinberg addressed this issue, and they have a long ways to go.
I’m just a lowly film composer without the need for full post production tools that Nuendo supplies and this function would help my workflow significantly. I’m amazed HZ hasn’t requested this.
I’m not sure why there’s no crossgrade between Cubase and Nuendo so my only option is to pay the cost of a full Nuendo license for that one feature.
If Steinberg can improve performance, that would be welcome. Cubase is ok overall tool, you can make whole song in it. Otherwise there are other tools out there, which may be better choice for those who need maximum performance or some very specific workflows. It is too much to expect everything from just one DAW. Just get another DAW or two next to Cubase, and use it. DAW makers don’t care if you use their product just 10% of your time - as long as you pay you are welcome.
Without links/data supporting your claim, the OP for this thread is just pure hyperbole. Likely to draw attention to your own personal frustrations. We all have them…
Personally, I’m not happy with the 8.5 GUI performance on mac (compared to 7.5), but the shortcomings have yet to outgrow those of competing DAWs.
I do think Steinberg need to do more to encourage the use of Cubase in college curriculum. This is where ProTools continues to get the stronghold. I had to recommend a Cubase operator for a show running playback in Cubase yesterday. I couldnt think of one producer within 50 miles I know of who is a competent user enough to recommend.
Surely you understand that, as “unfair” as it may seem, when there is a vacuum of little to no information coming to the users from the developer - human nature is to fill it with some other information, even if it is misinformation.
Steinberg has said they are way too busy to be communicating very much here on the forums. Well,that is certainly a business/personnel allocation decision they can make, but a consequence may be that people will try to fill in the gaps, possibly with inaccurate information.
More communication from Steinberg would almost certainly keep the incorrect rumors and statements down, IMO.
I have always assumed giving more information could compromise their strategies since the competition is pretty fierce.
Also you could say “yes that bug has been fixed in C9” but then at the last moment beta testing shows it’s not fixed. Then you end up back-peddling to a lot of unhappy users who were “promised” a fix that didn’t happen.
On the flip side, they certainly could be more present on this public forum even if they said “we can’t discuss that yet.”
I see too many instances where a thread is started and dozens of users participate for weeks but no participation from Steinberg employees or a moderator.
And what is worse is when an employee or moderator finally addresses the post and says “this is by design” with no logical explanation, and then never participates in the thread again to answer questions. That is bad and it happens too often. Perhaps the moderator doesn’t know more himself, but if that’s the case it would seem the very least he could do is try to get an answer or reply that he doesn’t know.
