Cubase 10.0.30 is out with ARA 2 support!

[ionekvr]

Read the thread, "video engine for Nuendo maybe in 10.1 (free), for Cubase we're talking maybe in 10.5 already", not amused, still the "Nuendo this/Nuendo that" excuse (hey, we got VR, but can still only work with 5.1 surround while Nuendo got a Auro-3D and 22.2 support! Current surround standard is 7.1 - heck even S1 and LPX can do that natively). Back to hoop-jumping workarounds it is.

Thanks David W.

...But at least right now, with this maintenance patch, they are following through. Hope this pattern continues.

Been with Steinberg for 25 years. I always hope that they follow through, but in the end I regularly have a sour taste left in my mouth. Also - I do not trust the "Codebase for Cubase and Nuendo is the same now".

YMMV.

It's true Steinberg has had its ups and downs -- seen the whole roller coaster. Some nice ups, some pretty frustrating downs. So I wouldn't even begin to defend some of the missed promises and mistakes over the years. But I also think they've been on point recently -- including better communication. When there has been a delay, they've explained it pretty well IMO. And then they've delivered on Cubase 10.0.30 and Nuendo 10.1 pretty close to when they said they would. Of course, it could all go down hill, but I think (or maybe hope) they have learned some important lessons with the heavy competition out there in recent years, and they are making some good progress TBH. I also think they are genuinely proud of their recent work, like on Nuendo. There seems to be a sense of pride back in Steinberg IMO, judging from what I've been hearing... that's a good thing for us. But who knows, I could be very wrong.

I do think they are over-ambitious in their estimates, over-ambitious in their feature goals, have a frustrating update cycle sometimes, and have often delayed things and released things that should have stayed in the oven a little longer... BUT having spent so much money on so many other DAWs over the years, Steinberg isn't close to the worst of the pack. They're generally somewhere in the middle IMHO, and right now on a good upswing... the best they've been in years. I just upgraded to Nuendo 10, and it's really quite good... the best release in many many years so far for me. But I get the sour taste thing though. Cross fingers we don't have that again any time soon.

BTW, S1 Pro (which I also own) does NOT support surround at all. Not sure what you're referring to, maybe I misunderstood you. Very few DAWs natively support surround in that price range, at least very well. And while Logic does indeed support 7.1, Cubase has some really excellent tools for up to 5.1 that very few DAWs come close to in its class. And if you're making money with surround work, you'd be working most likely in Pro Tools Ultimate (which is very expensive) or Nuendo anyway. I'd even take Reaper over Logic for surround TBH, considering some of the other great features in Reaper. And right now, if you think about the incredible cross-grade price for Nuendo, it's a no-brainer to jump into Nuendo if you need more than 5.1 -- it's the biggest no-brainer in the post world right now. The Nuendo post feature set is really world class, unparalleled in some key areas that may or may not matter to you, notwithstanding its shortcomings in other areas.

As for Logic, I have no love for Apple, and there's also no way I'd be locked into their platform again, no matter how good Logic is (and it is good, I'm not cutting it down). Logic was my tool of choice back in the Emagic days before Apple bought them out and dumped Windows users in a hearbeat, but if you love Logic, it's a great, mature program, go for it. But it doesn't compete with the post features of Nuendo or Pro Tools Ultimate -- totally different products. But let's not confuse S1 with a surround-capable DAW, etc.

[Compyfox]

The following might come along strong and negative, but please bear with me. I'm just frustrated at this point.

I also think they are genuinely proud of their recent work, like on Nuendo. There seems to be a sense of pride back in Steinberg IMO, judging from what I've been hearing... that's a good thing for us. But who knows, I could be very wrong.

That is a big issue I am having - Nuendo... Nuendo, Nuendo, Nuendo... oh and Dorico now.

Without Cubase, there wouldn't even have been Nuendo in the first place. Nuendo has been treated as this "ultimate tool" as of late, while the Cubase users have been treated like beta users for Nuendo for years. "Let's introduce a new feature - oh it's buggy? Let's iron it out - FOR NUENDO - and sometime down the road for Cubase as well".

This is more than frustrating.

I do think they are over-ambitious in their estimates, over-ambitious in their feature goals, have a frustrating update cycle sometimes, and have often delayed things and released things that should have stayed in the oven a little longer... BUT having spent so much money on so many other DAWs over the years, Steinberg isn't close to the worst of the pack. They're generally somewhere in the middle IMHO, and right now on a good upswing... the best they've been in years.

You're IMO defending not really great tactics towards longterm loyal users.

Granted, this is not a multi-billion USD company like Apple, where updates can be (mostly) free. And thank the holy spaghetti lord, that they're not doing paid dot-to-dot upgrades (as in .1 to .2, etc - looking at you, ProTools!). Not yet!!! But this yearly "paid upgrade" game has left a lot of bad aftertaste as longtime user. Most notably around Cubase 7 and 8, the time they introduced ASIO Guard and the new Mix Console. This was also the time they put so much more focus on Nuendo as well - and even jumped a version number. (there was no Nuendo 9 - and then Nuendo even got the "Songwriting Toolkit" for free - so what will be removed from Cubase?!)

I mean... let's look at Presonus - why can they create .5 versions without any unnecessary additional financial investments? Unless you want some cool features that will be in the next full .0 version anyway. They did this with v2.6 IIRC (they called it "Add-ons", and IIRC - they found their way into v3.0). Now with v4.5 as well (a way bigger Batch Export engine). So if you can wait another year until v5.0, and you can live without just this one feature, it's actually a nice deal.

Now I already hear you saying "but Steinberg does this as well - don't need it, don't update". This debate pops up ever so often and results in pages on end. The thing is - Steinberg did this bait and switch a couple of times where there have been features, that could have been in .0 to begin with - free of charge, yet it went "oh you want this? Pay us 50bucks - also - we're now doing one quick fix patch - please wait 4 months - then we're done with .0".


The point is:

I am a Cubase user - I am not interested in Nuendo. But I am seriously annoyed that the focus seems to go away from the tool that started it all. I mean - this host is 600EUR (Cubase - full version)! And I pay 50EUR every odd year, and 150EUR every even year - just to stay up to date, or get things fixed that have been broken/removed throughout the years / have not been addressed in a .0.x update.

Like... page focus, and (in this particular case) the "Render Audio in Video" feature.

And while Logic does indeed support 7.1, Cubase has some really excellent tools for up to 5.1 that very few DAWs come close to in its class. And if you're making money with surround work, you'd be working most likely in Pro Tools Ultimate (which is very expensive) or Nuendo anyway.

I'm not after the shipped tools (in fact, I try to not use them as much as possible - since you never know when something is removed - see the A1 Synth by Waldorf, or the other synths in Cubase 5, I'm even scared for the Fraunhofer ProCodec and iZotope Dither in Wavelab), I'm after the general capability to begin with. I can use way better third party engines anyway. For example - Nuendo has things like AnyMix and the Auro-3D Panner. I'd use Nugen Audio and (if I want to mix for a dome) New Audio Technology's SAD instead. The latter, which has specifically been made for pretty much any host - to give everyone access to Surround and "Binaural" mixing. But setting up even a basic 7.1 channel (nowadays standard! Heck, even mainboards ship with 7.1 ports!) in Cubase is just not possible - it is stuck at 5.1ch. And the argument against going 8-channel is this is why Nuendo exists". Come on, Nuendo can go up to 22.2 - is an 8-channel Cubase really a threat? Plus... there is the routing (only forward), the on-the-fly switching of the channel amount per channel strip (from mono to stereo). All of this is where Cubase lacks behind.

"If you mix surround, you most likely work in PT Ultimate anyway". This is true if we talk Cinema Halls, or producing for a Planetarium Dome. But if you push VR/Gaming and Binaural Audio even in your quote-unquote "entry tools" (again, Cubase is not entry-level!), then pretty much every host should suffice. Saying "only Nuendo should be able to do this", is nonsense IMO.

Again - Logic can do this (multi-channel - only a matter of time until VR will be a focus as well - plus the integration to Final Cut Pro) - and aside of it's insane price drop years ago (from initially 599EUR to 200EUR!), it's not the least bit "non-pro" in terms of audio editing or scoring music for trailers, commercials, movies, etc. Heck even a 225USD/200EUR host called "Reaper" can do this. Or are both Reaper and Logic considered to be "non pro" as well - because of their price?

...if you think about the incredible cross-grade price for Nuendo, it's a no-brainer to jump into Nuendo if you need more than 5.1 -- it's the biggest no-brainer in the post world right now. The Nuendo post feature set is really world class, unparalleled in some key areas that may or may not matter to you, notwithstanding its shortcomings in other areas.

No - I don't want Nuendo! I want to use Cubase - period.

I don't want to be treated like a child or a "noob"/"entry level user" because I'm still using Cubase Pro (emphasis on the word pro). Again, without Cubase, Nuendo wouldn't have even existed. However, now I get the full impression that Steinberg wants to fade out it's core Cubase users.

The thing is... if Cubase is now considered the "entry tool", then why does Cubase AI/LE/Elements, Artist and Sequel still exist? What is this "crossgrade to pro" type nonsense?!

As for Logic, I have no love for Apple, and there's also no way I'd be locked into their platform again, no matter how good Logic is (and it is good, I'm not cutting it down). Logic was my tool of choice back in the Emagic days before Apple bought them out and dumped Windows users in a hearbeat, but if you love Logic, it's a great, mature program, go for it. But it doesn't compete with the post features of Nuendo or Pro Tools Ultimate -- totally different products. But let's not confuse S1 with a surround-capable DAW, etc.

I've been there when Emagix dropped Windows in a heartbeat (Summer 2002). I was also there when Steinberg dropped Windows and said "we'll not return" (Cubase VST3.x and VST4 - which was Mac exclusive!) - then people spoke with their wallet.

My only grime with Apple is their overpriced hardware. Windows now went the same route as macOS - and I only wait for the day that every OS update breaks 90% of the tools you use. In fact, I've yet to see an official green light for Windows 10 rev1903. I also wait for yet another installer update that ultimately refuses to install on certain OS (happened with Windows XP vs Win7 and I think... Cubase 5 or 6?).

I actually prefer Logic for certain features - the MIDI editing is so, so much faster. I also like the dragging over power buttons, solo and mute (something that ProTools does as well, on top of the Horizontal Bypass - can't speak for S1 - I rarely touch that thing). And again, AAF and "Render Audio in Video" just works, without jumping hoops, without extra fees.


In 2017 and 2018, I was actually using Logic Pro X more than Cubase. So Cubase 10 was refreshing - but come on... stop treating it like a throwaway product and focus on Nuendo only. Is that really so much to ask for, for the price (incl. maintenance) of this thing?

[codec_spurt]

Looking forward to getting my full verson of Melodyne working in Cubase.

But then again, looking forward to how well VariAudio works.

Compyfox, sorry I've not been back in touch about that stuff we talked about. It's still on.

I'll get you up and running as soon as I can.

[Compyfox]

VariAudio is really good at this point. And it doesn't need a third party piece of software.


Else - my PM inbox is open.

[ionekvr]

The following might come along strong and negative, but please bear with me. I'm just frustrated at this point.

...

I hear you, and I probably would have written something similar a year or more ago. And then 5 years before that. And then 10 years ago. And then.... etc.. I've seen the whole roller coaster, right back from the beginning like you, and it sounds like we've had a similar experience, only we're out of sync here and there. Right now I'm pretty optimistic about Steinberg. I just came back from a good but ultimately unsatisfying detour to Studio One Pro after being very disappointed with Steinberg for a while.

This was probably the third or fourth time I've moved away from Steinberg in a big way, and then back after a year or two time focused exclusively on other DAWs. I took a big break from Steinberg. In those times over the last couple of decades, I've ended up buying pretty much every other DAW on the market, and I've always been blown away by the great options out there. But in the end, I find myself coming back to Steinberg for various reasons.

Most recently, I came back to Steinberg due to Studio One's lackluster 4.0 and 4.5 updates, which were a bit of a disappointment in several key areas for me, personally. Initially I was very happy with S1 4.0, and I moved several paid client projects over. And it did very well. Some projects were not really down Studio One's alley, but I pulled them off and my clients were happy. But I discovered some shortcomings that bugged me, and I started to miss some of the tools from Cubase/Nuendo. Everyone is unique of course, so there are great features in there for other folks, but it didn't work out for me the way I hoped.

I don't want to get into details and go way off topic, but recently, I decided to move a big project of mine back to Steinberg and since I made the move, I've been pleasantly surprised. Especially with Nuendo 10. I do post production the most anyway, so I also have Pro Tools, etc, but Nuendo has really impressed me lately. It's like they finally hit their stride with Nuendo 10. And who can complain about the new price?

And BTW, I don't think Cubase is a second-class citizen to Nuendo... although I admit it has appeared that way in the past in terms of Steinberg appearing to treat Cubase users like beta testers for Nuendo. But I don't think that was intentional -- I think that had to do with the slower pace and different approach and market of the Nuendo team. The end result was perhaps unpleasant sometimes, but ultimately I think they realized they needed to sync the development calendars better. They're different programs for different projects. Where people might get frustrated in terms which app to use, I think comes down to borderline projects that could theoretically be done in either one. You just have to decide which side of the Cubase/Nuendo line the majority of your projects are on, and then go with that app. Forget the name. They are essentially the same. One is for music production. One is for post production. The gray area -- admittedly very large gray area -- is where it gets frustrating. When in doubt, spend the money and go with Nuendo. I think Steinberg's new approach -- if they can be consistent -- with the synchronized release schedule and same development branch, will bolster both apps in the long run. The simultaneous release of C 10.0.30 and N 10.1 was IMO a good sign.

Over the years I had gone back and forth with Steinberg, and like I mentioned, I bought pretty much every DAW and used them quite a bit... I use several DAWs simultaneously right now, but Nuendo is in the top spot for me right now, covering most of my projects. That might change again, of course, but I've basically made peace with the reality that no DAW is ever going to be perfect. No DAW will be perfect for each kind of project I do, and sometimes a particular DAW developer is in a frustrating slump. So I keep several DAWs up to date, and use each one depending on the project or client needs, or personal preferences.

In the end, though, I've noticed I've come back to Steinberg products over and over, more than any other DAW. Warts and all. And I really do understand some people's frustrations. It's just at some point we have to get the work done, right? And we have to pick the tool that will best suit the situation, even if it or the company that makes it are flawed.

Maybe in your case, it might be worth it to take a break from Cubase and spend more time in other DAWs that inspire you more. Personally, I have loved experimenting with BitWig for example, and I plan to keep that around and updated for a while. Not saying BitWig is right for you (it's obviously a totally different kind of product than Cubase!) But I'm just saying, maybe let Steinberg work out the issues that bug you and check in on them maybe next year, or in 2021. Don't even go to their website or read articles about them... take a complete break. Their upgrade pricing is pretty fair IMO, so if you skip a version or two, you won't get hurt, and meanwhile you can get some of your music/sound done in another DAW and maybe get some breathing room and inspiration that we all want for our creative projects.

In my case, I don't get as bothered by the ups and downs as I used to. I just try to get on with the project. Life is short. The fact is that any of the leading DAWs are simply amazing tools, with all sorts of creative potential and yes, issues too. If I think back to where we started with DAW technology, it's sort of miraculous what we can do now. I just have to decide which one to work with and move on. I do genuinely think that Steinberg is in an upswing right now, though, and I'm happy to be back using Steinberg for the majority of my projects right now... I think they are really working better as a company than they have in many years. Cross fingers it lasts! And as always, YMMV. Good luck!

[Compyfox]

To close things out:

The thing is still - the focus on Nuendo. I mean, I'm not against this DAW. I've seen it evolve throughout the years (I still remember using Nuendo v1 compared to Cubase SX!), but it's definitely a bit pricey for what it's doing compared to Cubase. Through granted, I think this is related to the bundled tools (AnyMix, Auro3D, etc).

The thing that bothers me the most, and what you brought up as well, is that the lines are super blurry. Meaning - you can pretty much do the same in both - but why do I have to invest at least twice as much for Nuendo, just because I get 3-4 features more that could be slightly enhanced in Cubase. Like... the ADR Text feature (which could be used as a limited Songtext feature in Cubase - something that has been requested since SX days), or the 22.2 (while Cubase in comparison has a measly 5.1 - 7.1 wouldn't be a threat at all, considering the push to Auro 3D and MPEG-H/Object Based Surround - again, see my argument with Logic, Reaper and even ProTools "Standard", which has multi-channel support per channel strip - but not "surround mixing" like Ultimate - hence tools like NAT SAD). I don't care much about VR to be honest - this is currently just pushed "because it's the latest fad", while I'd rather focus on plain Binaural (the age-old "90% of listeners use headphones" statistics/argument). And Binaural Audio rebranded under various names is on the rise


Add to this, that I'd need to invest 400EUR just to crossgrade to Nuendo. And then what... invest way more for maintenance updates every year. That is so not worth it to me.



Trust me - just like you, I stepped away from Cubase so often, yet I always came back. I'm currently mostly happy with my setup (I also incorporated MuTools MUX for modular FX creation), and I mostly use it for audio editing these days. It's just always the fine-print that is annoying me. And the two major thorns in my side are: "Render Audio in Video" (I might have found a solution with soundspot's ER Media ToolKit - but I need to test things first) and the Batch Processor for project setups (individual track export: mono channels are rendered in stereo - you have to jump some hoops to actually get mono tracks only).

In Wavelab, it's actually the non-existant good(!) surround support (something that has been requested for ages) and possible multi-track recording (ditto). Personally i also miss some configuration settings for ITU-R BS.1770-x based metering, especially in the Batch Analysis tool - but oh well. Wavelab also (sadly) missed the train in terms of "Blu-Ray Audio" creation (remember - you could create DVD-A with it once - but DVD-A was not as accepted outside of Asia, yet everyone has a BD-Player these days). In fact, I mostly only touch Wavelab these days if I beta test a new piece of software, need to create a quick DDP setup, or render something in a very, very specific M4A format (because of the built-in Fraunhofer ProCodec). Which is a real pity.



I'll see how the recently discovered workaround helps better than what I currently do (use Magix/Sony Vegas Edit)... there is really no use in lamenting about missing/broken features - if there is a different solution, even if I have to jump a couple of hoops, it's still better than not being able to do anything. And if the new solution means "only 2 hoops instead of 6", I'm game.

The rest is down to the old waiting game.