Survey suggest Steinberg considering subscription model

An subscription model would be a absolute deal breaker for me…

I don’t have steady income, only a solid base whith sometimes a boost that I use for “nicety’s”. It’s enough to pay my bills and so on, but I cannot afford to have a monthly subscription on top of those I already have. I buy my software (music or otherwise) when I get payed some extra for completing whole projects (I do computers/networks and am also a graphical artist). This can be a few times at any time of the year, but certainly not monthly.

If Steinberg should introduce an subscription model, I would stick with the latest non-subscibe software and stop buying anything from Steinberg. I simply have no other choice. At this moment I have Cubase 7.5 and a few instruments/soundsets, and that is more than enough for the years to come. I would like to keep my software updated, but only buy the upgrades (and maybe some extra’s) at the time it is possible and affordable for me to do so.

In short - If Steinberg goes for an subscription model they have simply lost an costumer…

I really love the product, if it does turn into a lease I’m gone, been here since Cubase SE
:wink:

this would be interesting with regard to pro tools. too many pro / post facilities have invested too much into their rigs, it seems avid could get away with some chutzpah scheme like this. not steinberg i’m afraid, there is still too many an option to switch to another daw.

I agree with most of the posts here. I wouldn’t object to a subscription model if it was optional, but users need a choice. If they do away with perpetual licenses, I won’t be subscribing.

I use Adobe products for my work, and was disgusted when they went Cloud-only. I’ll be sticking with CS6 for as long as possible, and then looking into competing products when CS6 is no longer compatible with new hardware. I don’t need all the latest and greatest upgrades, so hopefully that’ll be a good few years yet. If SB go the same way, I’ll just stick with whatever version of Cubase is current, then look into alternatives when it becomes necessary. I’d really rather not have to switch though - I like Cubase best out of all the DAWs I’ve tried.

Software companies need to realise that many people want to upgrade on their own schedule. I’m self-employed with an unpredictable income, so the last thing I want is another fixed monthly cost. I’d rather just put the money aside for upgrades as and when I want to. I also don’t want to be left without access to my files if I can’t continue subscribing for whatever reason (assuming projects using newer features wouldn’t be backwards-compatible with older versions of the software). Another problem that I’ve seen on the Adobe Cloud forum is that when the inevitable glitches happen, and people can’t run their software, customer service isn’t always as helpful as it should be. This is annoying for anyone, but is a threat to the livelihood of professional users with client deadlines. Would Steinberg’s customer support be any better?

With a few exceptions (anti-virus & the like), software as a service is a horrible idea, IMO. Some might say ‘it’s the future’, but that’s only true if customers allow it. Businesses will do whatever is most profitable for them, so we need to vote with our wallets. At least SB is asking for our input in advance. Hopefully they’ll listen.

I’m using Cubase since the Atari times, so for more than 20 years it’s a part of my life - like an old friend.
The subscription model would alienate me, and it saddens me to have to consider switching to another DAW.
Nonetheless I’m with you that it is a deal breaker and I would definitely be one more old loyal costumer whom they would loose.

One, I agree with curteye, that eventually there won’t be a choice. Unless people vote with their wallet, which they won’t, because… well there it is.

Two, the people comparing the current model with a subscription model is not correct, IMO. It depends on a number of factors, but the primary difference is that my credit card would be at the sellers disposal, and another account on which to maintain the keys to our banks. This enables them to come up with schemes that normally would not be feasible. Imagine for example, paying per patch. This not only keeps the door open to your dollars, but it opens one to your pennies as well. :wink: And then the banks start charging you for each transaction, and it goes on…

It is not so much a physical thing as a psychological thing. If you disagree, then consider why is everything moving this way? If there is no inherent difference, then why the change?

Why?

If there were more specifics to the subscription model, I would have some thoughts, but right now it is speculation.

I will say that I am usually a .5 to full version behind current development cycles because the bleeding edge brings issues. I believe I am skipping version 7 all together like I did with version 4. Too much to worry about in my case because work flow and client relations can be jeopardized and the last time I dealt with steinberg support, I was being aided by an amateur that was of no help. This is not comforting on the bleeding edge. If a subscription impacted my behind the new release type of “protection” of my business, I would definitely not go for it. I would rather own my tools as well.

Has anyone witnessed the adaption of adobe’s model? How has the adobe community of users felt about it?

Reading this:

I am not enthusiastic about it at all. Thankfully we are not cornered to cubase or Nuendo and there are other options out there.

“I subscribe the product for a fixed monthly fee and have always access to the latest version. When the subscription ends, I no longer can use the software.”

That’s from the questioner. If this is the case, what I have in bold, I will not continue into the era of subscription. I will own the last version before the adaptation.

Steinberg, you have two thumbs down from me on this.

I can see this from SB’s (or any software dev’s) side.

Years ago it was revolutionary to be able to pay $800 to get a software version of what previously cost say, $20,000 – the mixing desk, tape maichines etc., plus the rental or purchase the space to put it in.

Now, in 2014 many older versions of Cubase are complete enough for many users, so updating is not a necessity. Additionally, the way the SB licenses work we can buy and sell our licenses without restriction so a new user can, theoritically, buy a copy of Cubase 5 or 6 and be in business with a rather complete feature set, and SB gets nothing from that sale (and, of course, does not have to provide support.)

I think the model they should adopt (though the pricing would be different) is the one used by Figure 53, who make Qlab: http://figure53.com/qlab/buy/

This can create new revenue, and its implementation would have the side effect of offering an immediate, automated solution the lost dongle emergency. (you could just rent Cubase/Nuendo for a period of time if you could not reach tech support, like on Friday night, 30 minutes before the downbeat of a 3 day run)

Software manufacturers are trying to find a way to make more money without alienating their customers. I thnk they want to test the waters to see how users would react to the idea, and they are getting an earfull from people who already own licenses. People who do not yet own a license would have a very different perspective.

btw image line provide lifetime free updates once you buy their product. they claim to ‘think to’ have the largest user base on the market (that is what i read in a post by their dev anyway).

And they say on the website

Sometimes when we develop something new, like a software synthesizer or other module, we investigate whether to build it into the main application and include it free, or offer it as an optional add-on purchase.

And this:
found in a Steinberg C7 read me file:

“Developing software is an ongoing process that perpetually gets closer to perfection without ever achieving it”

.

It is the ‘ongoing’ part that helps me to finally realize that I am officially ‘hooked on Cubase’;
whatever the current sales model. :slight_smile: :slight_smile: :slight_smile:
{‘-’}

What a load of crap this whole thing is…

What is the difference if I pay $250 every two years, versus whatever this comes out to be per day? The only real difference is that the subscription model increases the risk of us, the customers, getting screwed. Why? Well, how else would they make more money? The only way to make more money is to charge me more for Cubase. That’s it. It’ll become a chase game to get us to buy into more “features” for a few pennies, until we pay more for the entire package, that used to be $250 every two years (an approximation, but you get the point).

On top of that, I might not be able to continue using an older version of Cubase, depending on “the model”. And if I can, them will we get bugs fixed. All that this ultimately result in, is a higher cost for us, for less features. Because this will be extra, that will be extra, and so on, maybe not a very high cost, but in comparison to what we get now, it will be more. Also, since it appear that quite a few people have problems with these upgrades, imagine what will happen when various options require other options or simple won’t work because an option is non-existent.

My guess is that a whole lot less non-professional customers will quit using Steinberg and go elsewhere. Then it’ll get even more expensive, in order to make up the difference.

Lease and subscription are money making routines that ultimately ends up loosing to better alternatives.

One of the nice things in my music life has been that the guitar I bought in 1969 is still … my guitar. As I get very close to retirement and incomes and costs erode my spendable options over the next 20 years ( I hope) I can see things in my current life that must be trimmed back and curtailed if there is to be any form of lifestyle continuity. Recurring monthly charges as they are right now are a developing burden to keep on going or increasing.

For me, a big deal breaker. I still have Cakewalk on 3.5" floppies and a few 10" reels

It is hard to talk about the different models without specifics. For example, if the subscription price was low enough and guaranteed not to increase for the life cycle of that version, I might consider it. I really need to know ALL THE DETAILS before I could make a decision. I will say, however, that, as a hobby user, the subscription price would have to be low to a point that Steinberg probably couldn’t justify letting it go for that price.

So, bottom line, I don’t think SB could offer a subscription price low enough to get me interested.

J.L.

I am more than prepared to “freeze” and no longer move forward if a subscription-based license happens.

Arguments can be made to how the license is now a virtual subscription, but it is not. My Steinberg licenses, if I bailed right now, will still be able to used right now till the day I die without having to fork over another cent.
My biggest gripe about a subscription:

#1: I refuse to be on the cutting edge due to reliability.
#2: I want to retain the licenses I pay for.

I am skipping Cubase 7 all together. Why should I pay for it or any other version when I will never use it?

I give the community a lot of kudos for adopting new releases and reporting all the problems. That is awesome, their choice, their money and to do what they want to do with it. It is not for me though I used to be that way.

I am a very easy-going guy and apologies if I seem negative. I am just putting my foot down on this. I will not follow Steinberg into a subscription-based licensing model. Cubase 6.5 and I can make a damn good record, do VO, ADR and sound design like the 24-track tape machine and rack gear I used for a decade. 6.5, it may be you and me for the long-haul.

I would simply move on to something else if this happens.

If the next cubase came with a subscription model only, i would change to a diffrent DAW first thing the day i would have to upgrade. I want to, at least feel that i own the software i bought, whatever the license agreement says. And i want it to work whenever i choose to use it.

Ive recorded 1000s of songs in various versons of cubase since the days of atari and i could anyday load up one of the old macs and use my old cubase software that i bought and own.

I generally dont like the subscription models in any software, as life is more and more dependent on PCs, i think its a dangerous way we are going when we dont own the software we need to use everyday for regular tasks.

I hope steinberg is only asking our opinion, but not considering a subscription model for cubase.

Yes, from reading the forums & various blogs, it looks like Adobe have lost a lot of users (both hobbyist & professionals, including larger companies & institutional users) since they went cloud-only. A lot of people are just sticking with CS6. There’s a huge complaint thread on their forum that has been active since they made the change last spring (I can’t find it right now - it’s hard to find anything more than a few days old on there since they introduced infinite scrolling. I dislike infinite scroll almost as much as forced subscriptions :laughing: ).

Of course some people do like the Cloud. The complaints are more about the lack of perpetual licenses, rather than subscriptions per se. Most users just want to be able to choose the model that works best for them. Although there are also a lot of complaints from cloud users about Adobe’s poor service when things go wrong.

This sums up some of the issues Adobe Inc. - Wikipedia

I really hope Steinberg are aware of the downsides of subscription software from a user’s POV. I can see how it’s more beneficial for developers & software companies, but not if customers end up deserting them…