Page 4 of 24

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2015 5:02 pm
by da10us
Pro software should always have a focus on quality. Cubase has so many nice features, but when you touch them sligthly changes are great that you run into odd behaviour (PLE, visability filters, macro, remote editor stuff, etc.). Instead of fixing, more features (hence bugs) are added.

Sad enough it's a soft/hardware industry standard. If I remember correctly Mackie threw a soundcard on the market without any driver stating you had to use asio4all....(?).

I'm pretty sure that (proven!) focus on quality would be much more attractive then any new feature. Specificly in the long run...

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2015 7:32 pm
by nsharpstudios
We are all stunned over here that the long standing bugs are still here with 8.5 not to mention the mixer window showstopper on multiple screens in 8.5. Even the guy who's writing our sampler app is stunned: "It's not rocket science, and who the hell is beta testing this thing.... the end user???" It's just sad.

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2015 9:17 pm
by MattiasNYC
noiseboyuk wrote: To Steinberg - let's think about doing things differently, eh? How about opening a genuine and ongoing dialogue with your customers here?
Thanks, I needed a laugh....
.... (just not a broken rib from doing it so hard)

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2015 9:21 pm
by MattiasNYC
themarqueeyears wrote:An open plea to Steinberg for what?

It's a business to make money, it's not a high school science project!

They fix as much as they can afford to fix, but when you are asking people for money you have to add value - that's how business works.
Business normally works the way where you advertise certain functionality of your good or service, and then negotiate a price and sell the product. If you as a customer buy something that isn't what it was marketed as being, either by being defective or falsely advertised, then normally you not only have the right to return the good (or service) for a refund, but people actually do this frequently.

Not only that, but when companies refuse to honor that basic legal right lawsuits happen, and companies have to pay up. This happens all the time.

Saying that it's a business doesn't even qualify as an argument. Did you hear Volkswagen use that defense when their product didn't perform as advertised? No? Well then, there you go....

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2015 9:25 pm
by MattiasNYC
And by the way: This is like the millionth time this happens. It's always the same;

1. users complain about stuff that isn't working and say they need that to be a priority
2. users dream about cool new features and start "wishing-threads"
3. Steinberg (or other) offer a paid upgrade with new features
4. USERS PAY FOR IT
5. users notice persisting bugs as well as new ones
6. Go back to step 1.....

Guess which step is the one which makes it absolutely certain that there will continue to be releases with bugs in them?

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2015 9:52 pm
by greggybud
Lydiot wrote:And by the way: This is like the millionth time this happens. It's always the same;

1. users complain about stuff that isn't working and say they need that to be a priority
2. users dream about cool new features and start "wishing-threads"
3. Steinberg (or other) offer a paid upgrade with new features
4. USERS PAY FOR IT
5. users notice persisting bugs as well as new ones
6. Go back to step 1.....

Guess which step is the one which makes it absolutely certain that there will continue to be releases with bugs in them?
Love your Avatar!

To break out of this horrible cycle I think would require a big price increase. Personally I'm willing to pay for it simply to break away from being held hostage by this prosumer market that drives all DAWs including Cubase. I'm confident there is a small market that wants core functions and workflow prioritized without the "features" prosumers and new users get excited about. Often it's just a marketing ploy. Think about it. We have gone WAY past the evolutionary end of the basic DAW. Upgrades cost the same, but the refinements of core functions and workflow seem less and less. I am super happy this 8.5 included midi/velocity improvements. But with it came the cloud, vst transit, an upgraded VSTI, and just like Native Instruments until recently, a upgraded, but I think closed Media Bay system...unless it's open to VST3? Does anyone know for sure?

Today it's about selling features for the sake of features...not so much functionality or workflow.

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2015 10:05 pm
by MattiasNYC
greggybud wrote:Love your Avatar!
Thank you sir.
greggybud wrote:To break out of this horrible cycle I think would require a big price increase.
If you mean that a much higher price would finally make consumers not pay for it which would force SB to deal with issues, then maybe yes.

It's a bit ironic I think, because as much as PT users have complained about the incredibly messy transition from one licensing model to another there appears to be some merit to the underlying concept. With a steady revenue stream they can put out minor updates more frequently and not look that bad, as long as they every now and then inject something bigger. With SB it seems they've painted themselves into a corner of "stubborn" (or "greed") where they just simply can't even consider dealing with some bigger issues an truly making them priorities while delaying something else. It'd mess up their rigid schedule, and we can't have that.

The one thing I'd say is that Nuendo is more expensive and the same thing happens there. In fact, it's not without irony that this conversation is held in the Cubase section seeing that one of the broken new features of Nuendo v7 that so many looked forward to is supposedly a "priority".... after tweaking Cubase.... and adding "transit" and whatever.... and programming a new version of a VSTi.... and so on....

"priority". A difficult word.
greggybud wrote:Today it's about selling features for the sake of features...not so much functionality or workflow.
I'm not 100% sure I agree 100% with the above..... and that's a mostly true statement.....

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2015 12:40 am
by bjderganc
+1 -- The features are already great. The bugs are driving me crazy and wasting my time.

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2015 12:47 am
by CrunkNationEnt
+1 FRFR...LMAO!

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2015 5:49 pm
by mbr
I'm really disappointed... :cry:

I used Cubase since 2000.

Maybe I should jump ship to Nuendo > it seems after all these years they first dump all this *flower* on us and fix it in Nuendo :roll:

There has to be a reason why Nuendo always is a few steps behind Cubase... :idea:

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2015 8:16 pm
by Mike001
It would be REALLY NICE to hear from STEINBERG on this post.
Pretty please. :D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?:
Mike001

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2015 9:18 pm
by MattiasNYC
mbr wrote:I'm really disappointed... :cry:

I used Cubase since 2000.

Maybe I should jump ship to Nuendo > it seems after all these years they first dump all this *flower* on us and fix it in Nuendo :roll:

There has to be a reason why Nuendo always is a few steps behind Cubase... :idea:
You're joking, right?

Nuendo has received exactly one maintenance update for version 7, since its release. One. How many did Cubase get? 5? Pro Tools 6 I think. And in this one update the most severe bugs, yes, plural, were NOT fixed. On top of that a representative said that it was now a priority to fix said bug, and five-six weeks later here we are with a new VSTi, and a new Cubase 8.5.

There might be fewer bugs in Nuendo, but it doesn't receive the priority the price discrepancy implies, and it's not without serious bugs either.

The only way any of this can be solved for either Nuendo or Cubase users is if people stop paying for updates while bugs persist. Does anyone really think that's going to happen?

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2015 10:31 pm
by mroekalea
as always after the .5 release there will be an 8.0.40 or 8.0.50 release, let's see what that means!

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 5:36 am
by greggybud
Lydiot wrote: If you mean that a much higher price would finally make consumers not pay for it which would force SB to deal with issues, then maybe yes.
I mean a higher price to separate the prosumers from every-day experienced professional users. Prosumers love new features, are less experienced, and use Cubase casually. Unfortunately I think they are the huge majority therefore any DAW has to be married to them for survival. Lets say they are 90% of the DAW market.

So 10%, meaning the every day experienced and professional users, pay a much higher price. But in return the resources are spent on bug fixes, improved workflow, improved integration and support for 3rd parties, and improved technical support. This horrible and endless DAW cycle of new "features" that are eye-candy for newbies, which often bring more bugs, some of which are never fixed... is broken.

Better integration means ENCOURAGING 3rd parties to join what Steinberg has just done with their drums and loops in their media bay instead of saying "its a closed Steinberg thing." It means the DAW maker focusing on their own core functions while allowing 3rd parties to directly integrate with the mix console. Instead of a Steinberg created mix console that exists now, why not pay an optional additional price for UAD or Waves to integrate an SSL or API console? These things can be done, but not when you keep having to seduce new users with LoopMash or a new VST.

I hope someone recognizes a small but growing demand for this.

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:33 am
by indiescore
greggybud wrote:
Lydiot wrote: If you mean that a much higher price would finally make consumers not pay for it which would force SB to deal with issues, then maybe yes.
I mean a higher price to separate the prosumers from every-day experienced professional users. Prosumers love new features, are less experienced, and use Cubase casually. Unfortunately I think they are the huge majority therefore any DAW has to be married to them for survival. Lets say they are 90% of the DAW market.

So 10%, meaning the every day experienced and professional users, pay a much higher price. But in return the resources are spent on bug fixes, improved workflow, improved integration and support for 3rd parties, and improved technical support. This horrible and endless DAW cycle of new "features" that are eye-candy for newbies, which often bring more bugs, some of which are never fixed... is broken.

Better integration means ENCOURAGING 3rd parties to join what Steinberg has just done with their drums and loops in their media bay instead of saying "its a closed Steinberg thing." It means the DAW maker focusing on their own core functions while allowing 3rd parties to directly integrate with the mix console. Instead of a Steinberg created mix console that exists now, why not pay an optional additional price for UAD or Waves to integrate an SSL or API console? These things can be done, but not when you keep having to seduce new users with LoopMash or a new VST.

I hope someone recognizes a small but growing demand for this.
I think you hit the point, the hobbiest is the majority user for cubase and it makes sense to give them 2nd rate SB original Vst instruments bundled with cloud and the latest trends, because this is a for profit business and I get that, however that didn't Impact Cubase until we got to 7 in my opinion when the mixer was overhauled, changed , and since then so many bugs and issues like I have never seen in ten years of using Cubase. Exasurbated with 8, it's an all time low right now for reliability. Just look at the threads.

There is a reason pro tools HD is the professional standard, however it's to expensive for me to get the 24 stereo input I need, I don't do post, I compose for indie films, and hand off stems to post house, and I like the midi functionality, and the fonts are very easy to read ( compared to digital performer ) so here I stay on 8.10 because 8.30 won't work on my new i7 PC. I decided not to get 8.5 based on the bugs reported.

I would like to see Cubase and nuendo become one platform , call it Cubendo 10, like pro tools , first build ONE daw framework that is solid , stable, and works , and charge for add ons that people can choose how to spend their money with post production being the pro version. ( add ons could be vsts, cloud, video, add on post tools, add on composer tools ) for example. Yes I am dreaming away, dream dream dream, repeat after me ...

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:37 am
by DrWashington
+1

Absolutely, fixing bugs to provide a stable, solid toolset should be Steinberg's number one priority above all else. I could give two shits about cloud-whatever if the core program still has stability issues that haven't been addressed.

Also, better tools for MIDI CC automation would be highly welcome. They've been improving it over the years, but only very slightly. It still seems rudimentary in a lot of ways.

Innovation in the tech industry is highly overrated--I know, I'm in it up to my neck. A holistic focus on dependable, solid tools that real musicians can use to get as much work done as quickly as possible with minimal frustration should be THE focus here. New features should be added only when stability can be essentially guaranteed.

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:40 am
by orchetect
I'm beginning to feel that we've been harping this sentiment for years on the forums, and maybe -- just maybe -- we have to take it higher to effect any real change. Start forming petitions and mailing letters / phone calls to the decision makers at Steinberg.

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 8:36 am
by MattiasNYC
greggybud wrote:I mean a higher price to separate the prosumers from every-day experienced professional users. Prosumers love new features, are less experienced, and use Cubase casually. Unfortunately I think they are the huge majority therefore any DAW has to be married to them for survival. Lets say they are 90% of the DAW market.

So 10%, meaning the every day experienced and professional users, pay a much higher price. But in return the resources are spent on bug fixes, improved workflow, improved integration and support for 3rd parties, and improved technical support.
Problem with that is that we already have a more expensive version in Nuendo, and above that Pro Tools. While I think Nuendo overall is a hair better than Pro Tools, if it approaches PT in cost then it's harder to justify. Nuendo is reasonably priced as it is, the problem is with Steinberg. Either their beta testing is just awful, and/or their internal QC, and/or their priorities. But unless they're actually operating at a loss there's absolutely no just reason for not providing the product they're advertising. In fact, the argument can be made to provide it even if they suffer a loss, temporarily. In no other business do users put up with this sort of behavior to the degree that software customers do. There's clearly a couple of body parts missing in the user base.
greggybud wrote:Better integration means ENCOURAGING 3rd parties to join what Steinberg has just done with their drums and loops in their media bay instead of saying "its a closed Steinberg thing." It means the DAW maker focusing on their own core functions while allowing 3rd parties to directly integrate with the mix console. Instead of a Steinberg created mix console that exists now, why not pay an optional additional price for UAD or Waves to integrate an SSL or API console? These things can be done, but not when you keep having to seduce new users with LoopMash or a new VST.
I think the problem with that is that there's already a cost efficient and proven way of integrating an SSL or Neve channelstrip emulation into the mixer, and that's using a regular VST plugin as an insert. The second you'd integrate that more deeply, say by replacing the rack processors by code from UA or SSL to model a console strip, you'll be adding both financial and technical strain to something that can already be achieved. So first of all a deal would have to be struck between two companies, SSL and Steinbert, or three in the case of a UA Neve model (UA, Neve and SB). That deal could break, who knows. We've already lost some licenses because they expired. On top of that you'll have increased complexity. Not everyone will want a Neve or SSL sound but would prefer a more neutral sound, so now there has to be an easy way to swap the emulation in the rack. Might be easy enough, but there are enough issues as it is that I personally have a hard time seeing the value in more complexity given the risks. How long have we had broken VCAs now? The faster-than-realtime analysis of loudness which I rely on used to work fine, but that got broken.

When it comes to core functions like signal flow and automation I have little trust in Steinberg's ability to actually execute according to plan, and, actually, plan well in the first place. There's something very "off" about recent developments in Germany. And given that I would want SB to tread very very carefully.

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 8:37 am
by MattiasNYC
orchetect wrote:I'm beginning to feel that we've been harping this sentiment for years on the forums, and maybe -- just maybe -- we have to take it higher to effect any real change. Start forming petitions and mailing letters / phone calls to the decision makers at Steinberg.
The decision makers at Steinberg probably know already. If anything Yamaha is the one to direct one's dissent to. Yamaha owns Steinberg. They probably care. Steinberg? Not so sure.

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 10:52 am
by ckon
I think you hit the point, the hobbiest is the majority user for cubase and it makes sense to give them 2nd rate SB original Vst instruments bundled with cloud and the latest trends, because this is a for profit business and I get that, however that didn't Impact Cubase until we got to 7 in my opinion when the mixer was overhauled, changed , and since then so many bugs and issues like I have never seen in ten years of using Cubase. Exasurbated with 8, it's an all time low right now for reliability. Just look at the threads.

There is a reason pro tools HD is the professional standard, however it's to expensive for me to get the 24 stereo input I need, I don't do post, I compose for indie films, and hand off stems to post house, and I like the midi functionality, and the fonts are very easy to read ( compared to digital performer ) so here I stay on 8.10 because 8.30 won't work on my new i7 PC. I decided not to get 8.5 based on the bugs reported.

I would like to see Cubase and nuendo become one platform , call it Cubendo 10, like pro tools , first build ONE daw framework that is solid , stable, and works , and charge for add ons that people can choose how to spend their money with post production being the pro version. ( add ons could be vsts, cloud, video, add on post tools, add on composer tools ) for example. Yes I am dreaming away, dream dream dream, repeat after me ...
http://www.steinberg.net/en/products/cu ... ne_up.html

Steinberg already has a line up that is aimed at different users . Cubase Pro with full features being targeted at 'the more serious' or professional user. The Cubase name is famous, all professionals, students budding musicians, hobbyists have heard of it, Nuendo, well now that is a different kettle of fish and a very niche product.

The argument is not 'what is professional' it is 'what is fit for puropose'. For the Creative professional The ball game has changed and there is pretty much a level playing field for the creative world, which is largley governed by your contacts, your experience, the work you produce and if you can get your work into the right hands at the right time. As a company or freelancer If your invoices/royalties/sync fees/etc, etc are paid then great.

The tools one chooses hopefully enable you to produce the 'professional' product you intend to sell to the public or client. If the tools are getting in the way of that (try making a piece of furniture with blades that keep breaking, power tools that keep cutting out, etc , etc) you might eventually get the job done but not nearly as effectively as if the tools had been working correctly in the first place, and with more frustration than was needed.

Cubase Pro running on and with quality hardware (and a whole host of other factors) can be used 'in the right hands' to make a product that subsequently generates financial gain (sometimes small, sometimes huge) but although not without some current frustrations. (as with all current audio sequencers)

just read this to look on someone else lawn:

http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=366385

The solution....well this is the biggie. As a company, Steinberg simply must continue to listen to and have a dialogue with it's customers, be humble! and remember that without the customers there is no Steinberg, Not an Ivory Tower. This is true for all successful companies.
They have to generate a regular income! that goes without saying and a rather obvious point, you cannot sell new products (C8.5) with just bug fixes but eventually not fixing issues and making bad decisions will harm sales in the form of bad reputation or reviews and online comments from disgruntled and unhappy users, currently I am very frustrated with the very slow progress providing certain fixes. Having never worked for Steinberg I cannot comment on the employee satisfaction rating but if this is down as well as poor communication, possible arrogance of employees then ultimately the quality of products will suffer. I have not a clue as to how things are going there, but I can only imagine it is not a terribly happy place right now)

it's an all time low right now for reliability
nope: we have been here before.

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 12:23 pm
by Quaylebeast
+1

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 12:27 pm
by matjones
Clearly their beta testing system just isn't' cutting it at the moment for what ever reason/s.... so why not enlarge the beta testing group or even..... dare i say it.... release public betas? :o :o :o
QA and testing just seems to be getting worse and worse....

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 12:52 pm
by mbr
Lydiot wrote:
mbr wrote:I'm really disappointed... :cry:

I used Cubase since 2000.

Maybe I should jump ship to Nuendo > it seems after all these years they first dump all this *flower* on us and fix it in Nuendo :roll:

There has to be a reason why Nuendo always is a few steps behind Cubase... :idea:
You're joking, right?

Nuendo has received exactly one maintenance update for version 7, since its release. One. How many did Cubase get? 5? Pro Tools 6 I think. And in this one update the most severe bugs, yes, plural, were NOT fixed. On top of that a representative said that it was now a priority to fix said bug, and five-six weeks later here we are with a new VSTi, and a new Cubase 8.5.

There might be fewer bugs in Nuendo, but it doesn't receive the priority the price discrepancy implies, and it's not without serious bugs either.

The only way any of this can be solved for either Nuendo or Cubase users is if people stop paying for updates while bugs persist. Does anyone really think that's going to happen?
I hear what you saying...but all the new features is first released in Cubase and then later much later in Nuendo so it seems to me that Cubase is the testing ground for Nuendo and always was. Yes they had one maintenance update maybe because all the beta testing is done with Cubase and they only needed one.

There also seem to be much less “noise” in the Nuendo forum...

To try and spite a powerful company like Yamaha with not paying for upgrades is silly and won't work, they are a multi billion dollar conglomerate.

I think by just bit ching here relentlessly will do it and hopefully they will release another maintenance update soon so we all can go back to make and produce music in "silence"

Personally I will see what happens in the next 6 months and If version 8 cant be as stable and reliable as 7.5 I'm jumping ship to Nuendo and take it from there.

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 5:37 pm
by greggybud
Lydiot wrote:
Problem with that is that we already have a more expensive version in Nuendo, and above that Pro Tools.
I could be mistaken, but I think the reason Nuendo is expensive is the post production features and the expensive licenses related to those features. Remove the licenses and post production features, and you have pretty much the same as Cubase? More resources are needed for core functions, workflow, and bug fixes. IMO Pro Tools is caught in the cycle too, but still has the advantage of "industry standard."
Lydiot wrote: The second you'd integrate that more deeply, say by replacing the rack processors by code from UA or SSL to model a console strip, you'll be adding both financial and technical strain to something that can already be achieved. So first of all a deal would have to be struck between two companies, SSL and Steinbert, or three in the case of a UA Neve model (UA, Neve and SB). That deal could break, who knows. We've already lost some licenses because they expired. On top of that you'll have increased complexity. Not everyone will want a Neve or SSL sound but would prefer a more neutral sound, so now there has to be an easy way to swap the emulation in the rack. Might be easy enough, but there are enough issues as it is that I personally have a hard time seeing the value in more complexity given the risks. How long have we had broken VCAs now? The faster-than-realtime analysis of loudness which I rely on used to work fine, but that got broken.
Not wanting more complexity.

I was thinking a new DAW built from the ground up with the objectives of working with 3rd parties for that deep integration. I'm not a programmer, but I like the words "open source" to an extent. The DAW manufacturer focuses only on it's own core DAW functions, workflow, and few bugs. No eye candy. No competing built-in features that are usually done better by 3rd parties. The focus is on the core DAW functions and it's ability to integrate at a deeper level with major manufacturers. I'm currently dreaming, but as the market continues to expand and grow in different segments for hobbyists vs. pro use I think there is potential.

Re: An open plea to Steinberg

Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:08 pm
by indiescore
ckon wrote:
I think you hit the point, the hobbiest is the majority user for cubase and it makes sense to give them 2nd rate SB original Vst instruments bundled with cloud and the latest trends, because this is a for profit business and I get that, however that didn't Impact Cubase until we got to 7 in my opinion when the mixer was overhauled, changed , and since then so many bugs and issues like I have never seen in ten years of using Cubase. Exasurbated with 8, it's an all time low right now for reliability. Just look at the threads.

There is a reason pro tools HD is the professional standard, however it's to expensive for me to get the 24 stereo input I need, I don't do post, I compose for indie films, and hand off stems to post house, and I like the midi functionality, and the fonts are very easy to read ( compared to digital performer ) so here I stay on 8.10 because 8.30 won't work on my new i7 PC. I decided not to get 8.5 based on the bugs reported.

I would like to see Cubase and nuendo become one platform , call it Cubendo 10, like pro tools , first build ONE daw framework that is solid , stable, and works , and charge for add ons that people can choose how to spend their money with post production being the pro version. ( add ons could be vsts, cloud, video, add on post tools, add on composer tools ) for example. Yes I am dreaming away, dream dream dream, repeat after me ...
http://www.steinberg.net/en/products/cu ... ne_up.html

Steinberg already has a line up that is aimed at different users . Cubase Pro with full features being targeted at 'the more serious' or professional user. The Cubase name is famous, all professionals, students budding musicians, hobbyists have heard of it, Nuendo, well now that is a different kettle of fish and a very niche product.

The argument is not 'what is professional' it is 'what is fit for puropose'. For the Creative professional The ball game has changed and there is pretty much a level playing field for the creative world, which is largley governed by your contacts, your experience, the work you produce and if you can get your work into the right hands at the right time. As a company or freelancer If your invoices/royalties/sync fees/etc, etc are paid then great.

The tools one chooses hopefully enable you to produce the 'professional' product you intend to sell to the public or client. If the tools are getting in the way of that (try making a piece of furniture with blades that keep breaking, power tools that keep cutting out, etc , etc) you might eventually get the job done but not nearly as effectively as if the tools had been working correctly in the first place, and with more frustration than was needed.

Cubase Pro running on and with quality hardware (and a whole host of other factors) can be used 'in the right hands' to make a product that subsequently generates financial gain (sometimes small, sometimes huge) but although not without some current frustrations. (as with all current audio sequencers)

just read this to look on someone else lawn:

http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=366385

The solution....well this is the biggie. As a company, Steinberg simply must continue to listen to and have a dialogue with it's customers, be humble! and remember that without the customers there is no Steinberg, Not an Ivory Tower. This is true for all successful companies.
They have to generate a regular income! that goes without saying and a rather obvious point, you cannot sell new products (C8.5) with just bug fixes but eventually not fixing issues and making bad decisions will harm sales in the form of bad reputation or reviews and online comments from disgruntled and unhappy users, currently I am very frustrated with the very slow progress providing certain fixes. Having never worked for Steinberg I cannot comment on the employee satisfaction rating but if this is down as well as poor communication, possible arrogance of employees then ultimately the quality of products will suffer. I have not a clue as to how things are going there, but I can only imagine it is not a terribly happy place right now)

it's an all time low right now for reliability
nope: we have been here before.


So many assumptions, I have been around long enough to know avid has issues, and Thanks but I am aware of the product line up, my suggestion is very different and addresses purpose, could care less if the flagship is called professional that's just semantics and not an argument, the argument. curious, tell me a time when Cubase was worse in your opinion in terms of reliability? In my case it just isn't so.