Why people are moving away from Cubase

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:

  1. For example there is a key command to open the history or export window but no key command to close it.
  2. If you use multiple video monitors there is no way to directly focus any of them.
  3. 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 glad at least there is no LoopMash 3 in C9. :laughing:

+1 for edit mode.

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.

Good point, moreover I think they should give Cubase AI for free.

They already do, in fact the only way to get AI is “free”, bundled with hardware.

:laughing: Buy Dongle with the License and get Cubase Pro 8.5 for free.

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.

I’m not interested in corporate secrets, I referenced communication and information, along the lines of the details you listed.

Steinberg have clearly said they are much too busy to post for things like that however. I’m just pointing out that the next thing to happen is pretty predictable, people will post all kinds of things to fill the information void, some of them wrong, and some just stirring things up in general when they didn’t have to be.

It seems to me that a little time spent by Steinberg up front would save more time spent on damage control later, but I’m sure they have their reasons to disagree.

If it concerns you, I wonder why you never followed up with the needed information despite I offered you direct help on various occasions.

Alexis, I was making a point about the relatively low bar needed to create the impression of veracity on the Internet. Sorry, you missed my point.

I leave Cubase behind at the mixing stage because of the horrible “clickfest galore” the mixer is.
It has so much to ask for, that I don’t know where to begin.

I actually prefer to do my tracking in C8.5, due to the great combination of Lanes and Track Versions (and obviously some great editing capabilities), and I really like the Arrange/Project page… And the Control Room feature is the one feature I “can’t live without”.

… But the mixer looks and feels like it is from a completely different program. Absolutely horrendous IMO.

PS. I set up a mix including 83 audio tracks in about half the time in Studio One Pro 3 than in C8.5 (even though I an supposed to know Cubase much better, used them 90/10 in favour of Cubase).
This includes organizing, color coding the tracks, and routing etc.
Drag and drop of plugins is another great advantage in favour of S1 (without insert restrictions - great for testing different plugins… NO, I don’t need 16 insert within a mix, but it is great to compare stuff).

If people leave Cubase, I really do believe that the mixer is a big part of it…

Thank you, Steve. I’m afraid I made my point poorly … it was that posts like that are not surprising, indeed are expected where information is sparse and the developer doesn’t communicate with the user base.

I understood and agree with your post, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogfPKm-oYIA&list=PLEm7pigh1tLdCZv4glB9oJtukAPx0g5A_&index=7 .

This thread is getting philosophical … It’s true that I didn’t give tons of details on the people I was talking about and gave names and all for obvious privacy reasons … I just stated what was happening at work and it might not be the case elsewhere. Meanwhile, Fabio was quite nice and replied quickly (even on a Sunday) and he offered to assist me regarding performance issues and said he would bring up the Edit Mode request. That’s what I call good communication.

Thank you Fabio! I’ll send a support request for the Edit Mode. About the performance, I’m a beta tester so I’m currently testing other things but I’ll try to do dig deeper and make a report about it if I have time. Thanks for your help!

Yes, this thread is a great example of that!

Hello dbh,

actually we do offer a Cubase → Nuendo crossgrade that basically saves you the Cubase price and turns your license into a Nuendo (+NEK) license.

You can find all infos about it here: Compare Nuendo and Cubase | Steinberg

To the OP: Not to say that Cubase isn’t the greatest software for music creation and composition there is, but it is Nuendo the actual platform we are focusing on for Game Audio workflows. Our research, as well as the reaction from the game audio community since the release of Nuendo 7, is showing us that many game music composers, sound designers and game developers in general are moving TO Nuendo from other platforms. We are in a very close relationship with many big players in the game audio industry to keep making Nuendo better and better for them, and even though I can’t talk for every single game audio person out there, as I’m sure many people like to see other options - there are many other great tools available - so far the feedback about Nuendo 7 has been very positive. You may want to take a look at it :wink:

My 2 cents. I wish you guys a good day.

All the best,


[19th Feb 2019 - Mod Edit: deleted post and locked thread to avoid further necro-posting]