Who is using Nuendo 4 and has run into the solo/mute bug?

I have! It;s a pain in the arse and needs to be fixed asap. I can't see how any professional can run Nuendo 4 in professional studio, especially in front of clients, when solo/mute is broken.

Posts are getting locked and deleted over on the Nuendo forum and it is as if Steinberg has turned a blind eye hoping that all the complaints will disappear. I find it unbelievable that a such a large company with an expensive high profile product such as Nuendo 4 doesn't address this. They did say it will take almost a complete overhaul to fix this and they don't know if it will be addressed in Nuendo 4 or Nuendo 5 or both. At least they could come out and say that Nuendo 4 users can expect to be taken care of one way or the other. As it stands now, all users whether new or upgraded , don't know if they will be oblidged to go out and buy Nuendo 5 when it comes out to rectify this annoying bug.

And I'd imagine Nuendo 5 is a year a way still. And Cubase 5 will come out before that it is looking like.

Anyway, lets be proactive and list all these bugs concisely here and work towards a solution.

Hey J,

Welcome to the new Steinberg initiative to bury any complainant in so much red tape that it will be useless in raising any qualm publicly , in doing so giving the impression that the "noisemakers" have been appeased..

We need to ask why is so many conditions are being placed on the end users to simply report a bug, i.e: a fully detailed repo that has to be confirmed by another forum member before Fredon't takes it serious enough to place it on "his" buglist , no negativity, humour or sarcasm will be tolerated, which is incredibly being judged by the above mentioned moderator who has a tendency to read and understand things in a diagonal fashion , so its a total crapshoot what will get lodged in his filter. Add to that the majority who have the time or energy to even bother going thru the B.S required steps, and it all adds up to everything screaming to a halt.

This is not our job, its the job of the BETA list, who time and time again prove they are as useless as tits on a bull , so they are trying to increase the breadth and width with the same conditions placed on the regular end user base, but without the privilege of keeping track of the inside info.. !

The bottom line is that anyone who in the past had the energy or the will to try and make a difference there has either been silenced with an NDA , or has been suffocated to the point of non participation by the moderation and the thinly veiled BETA members who form a guard of honor around the official and non official representatives. Any qualm is usually shadowed by one of the closet crew in apologetic tones to try and discourage further comment and stem the flow. The only thing that has been achieved is that the regular members are leaving in droves , to the point that the moderation and the BETA list may as well be chatting amongst themselves on the public forum as well..

The simple fact that the solo/mute bug managed to escape a resolution during Pre release BETA and QA is idiotic enough, but for it to remain broken for the entire seq4 lifespan, is beyond comprehension.

Add to that some other gems like the launch at 44.1 bug , ongoing issues with x-scaling, ( Nuendo 3 is actually scaling on Octocores better than N4 on XP/Vista - go figure) spiking with VST2.x plugins, issues with OMF and AAF which always seems to be blamed on Digi, importing of 29.97 Quicktimes which was somehow fixed in C4.5.1, but somehow broken again in N4.2.2/C4.5.2, also add to that they broke the capability of the video engine that previously allowed playback of any format video no matter what engine was selected and output, needing the band-aide of using QT alternative to be employed again, etc, etc..

Something needs to change or break..

This post will no doubt have me banned over at Nuendo, and so be it, I have already stopped sharing any technical information a long while ago when it was clear that the information flow was on a one way street, as have many others. With the new hair trigger censorship that has been put into place over there, the only way to have any qualms heard now is to voice them outside of the moderations jurisdiction, which I have no doubt will become the norm over the exception..

Just wait for the closet BETA crew to rear their heads here, as they no doubt will to try and defend Steini's virtue, I can't wait to see what they come up with.. ;-)

Anyhow,

Good luck with it all Mate , I don't envy you, but I have to say like many, I have passed a point of caring about what Steinberg do or don't..

Time for a change and some fresh air..

Peace

V:

Quick Edit : For clear evidence of the attempted red tape , read in on the idiocy being displayed on this thread Here

TAFKAT, your statements are the MAIN reasons I took a pass on Nuendo 4. The attitude is def NOT PROFESSIONAL there. I'll stay with Cubase and ride it till I move to Protools HD. Nuendo aint worth the headache nor Fredos pissy attitude towards prospective customers/users.

there is no communication with Steiny and thats the problem. Solo/Mute broken, you gotta be kidding me, nope thats right, its in CUBASE as well

That's it? Only 2 Nuendo 4 users here??

I'll bet there's a ton of Nuendo 3 users here

Yeah there's some bugs but anyone who says they can't use it in a pro studio cracks me up. I use it everyday in a pro studio. Once you ID a bug you work around it. It's not a deal breaker. I just finished a song with 80 tracks w/ 45 trks of back vocs. All set to folder tracks and indiv subgroups. Got around the mix quite easily. When I came across the problem I dealt with it. Maybe different if it keeps happening and you don't know about it but it's been discussed. I'm not happy about it but I weigh the advantages of working with Nuendo 4 against dealing with some issues and it's still worth it.

I'm not saying I can't work with it. Obviously I can but I am getting tired of explaining why all the tracks that are using mute automation suddenly come blaring on everytime I use the solo button. How do you explain to a paying customer? How do you explain that the extra time it takes to reset them all is necessary? You hit the nail on the head... pro studio and a pro studio shouldn't have to make excuses.

How do you work around soloing tracks then trying to mute a reverb return to A/b with and without reverb and having all your source tracks mute with the reverb return? Or how about soloing a track that has a reverb send and have all the other tracks sent to that reverb solo as well?

Didn't say it wasn't a pain. I usually explain to the client it's a bug. I get over it. Nuendo has always been a little dicey when using mutes/ solo and automation. As long as when I mix the shit works (which it does) I swear and move on.
Long ago I started using the mute tool in the proj window for about 1/2 my mutes and I make a habit of using disable on the tracks that I know are out of the picture. The majority of my mute automation is for delay returns. Also muting edit groups with the mute tool is much faster when muting multiple tracks. I'd still do it that way if I was mixing on a SSL. Faster and cleaner.
Don't get me wrong, I want a flawless DAW but I'm willing to work with what I have as long as it makes the process better not worse.
Every user has some gripes with their DAW. I hear PT users ragging all the time about this and that but they still use PT.
Nuendo may not be perfect though it's still killer.

That's what I did 1.5 yrs ago. I didn't want to. I had a lot of time invested in learning to work efficiently in Cubendo and I really liked the overall concept of the application. But the problems listed already and many others drove me kicking and screaming into Digidesign's pockets. It sucked going from Apogee to 192 converters for a while and learning a new system and converting sessions in the middle of ongoing projects but I'm sure glad now that I went through it. Every time my curiosity occasionally draws me to the Cubase and Nuendo forums to see how things are going I'm grateful that I no longer have to depend on Steinberg software. Something has gone really wrong over there.

haha

I say again there is absolutely no excuse for solo/mute being broken and especially not being fixed after a year and maybe not getting it fixed til Nuendo 5. I really can't see any client looking at you like your not crazy when you tell them you can't let them hear certain things isolated in a mix because your software is limited. You must have real understanding clients. heh I don't even have clients and it drives me crazy working on my own tracks.

I've dealt with a lot of bugs with Steinberg before but something not as intrinsic as this. I never really had a problem with solo/mute in Nuendo 3 and earlier.

i'm nuendo3 user and i have same problems. in case, anybody know where can i download nuendo 4 demo?

I know. I can't fathom *how* Steinberg thinks they could let that one slide. They should have had teams working on it around the clock a long time ago.

Pity, because even if they decide to fix it, it will take a long time. It has a number of permutations.

But, FWIW, it's not the Nuendo forum moderator's fault. I see no need to drag him into this. Steinberg as a company should be more proactive about finding and fixing bugs--and not essentially saying to the customer "prove it to me, and then I may consider fixing it."

Regards,
Bill

Hi!

But it is the moderator on Nuendo.com, I think he's called Frodo or something, that has set up the rules for bug reports on Nuendo.com. It is his personal rule and not Steinbergs rule that bugs has to be confirmed by another user before it is bugbased! That moderator is killing the development of Nuendo and causing many users to leave Nuendo and Steinberg and look elswhere for a new DAW.

With kind regards

Eske Nielsen

I don't know about being directly responsible for killing the development, but he is sure as Hell not helping..

Well then again, he is actually helping in some degree, the competition that is.. :-)

V:

Believe me, I have no intention of starting an debate, and Fredo is more than capable of speaking on his own behalf.

Yes, Fredo is keeper of the forum bugbase (and, no, I do not know of other databases :-)), but if you look at the Nuendo 4 credits in the "About" or "Info menu" you will see that Steinberg has a staff of 10 Quality Assurance people.

But I understand your point, Eske. Perhaps writing hard copy letters to Steinberg Development and to your Steinberg distributor are other valid channels for reporting bugs.

But I think they need some type of online bug reporting and followup system that goes straight into Q/A or Development, similar to opening a typical customer support ticket.

This, of course, goes for plenty of other software companies. But there will always be some (like me) who bemoan the falling quality control standards of software, and others who say: "Software is complex and imperfect. Live with it..."

I hope I can now graciously bow out of this thread . If I'm lucky. heh

Best regards,
Bill

Eske and Bill - both of you are spot on - different aspects of the same issue, and quite accurate imho.

This is exactly what Steinberg needs to dispense with the frustrations many of us have faced in trying to get bug reports and functional problems though, not to mention feature requests, which are even more difficult, if not impossible at times.

I have been pushing for this recently though various channels, and on the forum, but I am not overly optimistic that we will see any results. An online bug reporting/trouble ticket system would help tremendously.

An online bug reporting system would do no good if Steinberg doesn't actually actively fix bugs. And from the looks of the latest update they haven't been doing to much in the past 8 months, except maybe Sequel 2. Now they must be working on Halion 4 and Cubase 5 to further fill the coffers. I am just guessing. ;-)

I'm on Nuendo 4 and that bug pisses me off........I have had to write fast fades instead.

The other bug is the import channel settings and my UAD plugins do not work until I relead them and reinstate the setting......

I can understand how a DAW that costs over $1500 can't handle these simple tasks....I bought the upgrade for the Drag and Drop inserts, but I never wanted these issues.

What really pisses me off is that Steinberg has unofficially said that they can't say if it will be fixed in Nuendo 4 or Nuendo 5 or both...... the fact that they can't give users a definite response is scarey. I'm usually a patient person who usually doesn't complain but I find the lack of an official ,defining response unacceptable. And yes, drag and drop inserts are wonderful and help speed up the workflow but this bug has slowed it down on another end 3 times as much.

Hey J,

And don't expect anything to change soon..,

The modus of operandi that has been set up on the Steinberg public forums is to place a strawman as a filter between themselves and those of us who dare to raise any qualms. In doing so they can continue to hide behind the curtain with corporate jibberish , not delivering anything past - its on the "To Do List" , while allowing the so called moderation to suffocate any attempts to try and get a more definitive response.

That modus has just gone into overdrive over at the N.com forum , with the "unofficial" commentary on the BUG thread now reaching a level of idiocy that I believe Yamaha / Steinberg have allowed to reach a point that is doing irreparable damage to themselves. For those who haven't read in lately, check out the last opus from Fredo , it has now reached the stage that we are being accused of conspiring against him for some hidden agenda.

Incredible , and I dare say absolutely hilarious for any of the competition reading in , but for the end users and Steinberg its a collective disaster..

Any and all responses to that opus will now be deleted apparently, so he has the final word there, and we have no right of reply. Its time to shift the arena to where he has no jurisdiction and we are on a level playing field.

Here is as good as any..

V:

Is this bug system specific? Preference specific? After reading countless rants and posts about this issue, I don't experience the problems to the same extent. With all the mixing I'm doing I would have noticed. My problems are sometimes the fx ch doesn't solo with the track (minimal). Other minor irratations that I've gotten used to but no major ball busters. Nothing I can reproduced on a regular basis.
Last nite I talked to another N user who doesn't have the solo/mute issue either.

Actually, the rule that a bug has to be confirmed by another user before it is bugbased is not a bad one at all.
I've seen countless times users screaming 'bug!' when it amounts to operator error, or simply not having read the manual.
The 'track set to musical timebase/linear timebase' is one that crops up every few weeks.
People calling something a bug doesn't automatically make it so, and as a developer you would need multiple confirmations to ensure you're not wasting time on something that only appears to happen with one person, or turns out not to be a bug at all.

That having been said, it does seem to take them a long time to fix stuff; if I compare it to the good old days I was on Logic and it was still owned by Emagic, there would be fixes every few weeks.

But Joris, remember we are going through a 3rd party volunteer user, not an official bug reporting system. Confirmation isn't bad, if you have users frequently active. I have had 2 bug report threads that took literally months to get Fredo to list simply because there aren't enough users using Nuendo in all capacities to repro these. Many of us do actually have the ability to filter out user error quite easily. I only post bugs I know are bugs beyond a shadow of doubt.

One only took 30 seconds to recreate, and was 100% reproducible but took 3 months to get listed. It almost missed this dev cycle even though it would likely only take 5 minutes to fix (haven't upgraded to test - it still may not have been fixed afaik).

Also note that US Steinberg tech support will direct you to the forum to report bugs - again through a user, not a Steinberg employee.

Fredo has said that most bugs reported on the forum are already known and that the forum bug reporting process is just "to help users", yet I have 2 that haven't been fixed since I started using Nuendo. The same applies to solo/mute - it can't possibly have passed beta - no it isn't a huge issue to some, or in some cases, but I have run into it several times, including in front of clients.

I have also had to defend a bug - not the report format, but the actual bug, that Fredo didn't think was a bug, and didn't bother to test first, or didn't follow the repro. The reason I wanted the confirmation process removed is that it is delaying getting actual bugs into development fix cycles - it's probably one reason the corruption error has (afaik) never been addressed - no 100% repro with multiple confirmations, no fix. The same applies to the solo/mute bug - it took months for it to get acknowledged. It could have been fixed if addressed when first reported and put in the 4.2.2 cycle.

Regardless of what Fredo says, getting several customers to confirm a bug is *not* standard practice in the software industry. It is simply a luxury for those that can afford it (offered by the grace of their customers) or an ill-placed requirement for anyone without the resources to research their own bugs. If Steinberg truly has 10 QA engineers, there is no excuse for even having a public repro/confirmation process. I setup a Systems Test/QA lab for a development company I worked for - I know how this works. And we had less than 10 developers there, yet we did our own QA and bug testing/fixing. 10 QA people should be overkill for QA, bug testing, repros, reporting, etc given that Steinberg only has a couple of products developed in house - Cubase and Nuendo. I think everything else is contract/OEM - Wavelab may be an internal dev - not sure.

Hey KDM,

I agree 100% ..

As I stated earlier, this is not our job, its the job of the BETA list and QA, who time and time again prove they are as useless as tits on a bull , so they are trying to increase the breadth and width with the same conditions placed on the regular end user base, but without the privilege of keeping track of the inside info..

All this posturing about most bugs are already caught by the BETA and QA, and that this endeavour is just an extension is a running joke, as any of us who have been witness to the modus of operandi over the years know full well that so much slips thru the cracks of the official testing, it only takes literally minutes for end users to find bugs that the official elite have somehow missed.

We also know from past history that exerting any energy while the filter is in place is useless. I find the continuing accusations of pilot error an insult to the intelligence, and I am sick to death of hearing it . Between you, I and a few others, we have collectively put the whole BETA / QA team to shame on more than one occasion , so if anyone is to be accused of pilot error, perhaps the finger should be pointing the other way , as from where I sit, the above mentioned have been asleep at the wheel for years... !

Something has to change, or break..

Peace

V:

So if it is not a problem for you it shouldn't be a problem for anyone else and thus a rant?

It's not system specific at all. I guess it depends on how you mix. If you have pretty straightforward simple mixes with tracks in no folders you will be fine I guess. But if you start using lots of groups, fx returns, vsti channels, mute automation, folder tracks it can get very scary fast. I can't work around it since I mix live out of vsti's, and use lot's of fx returns and groups.


But this begs to question why even buy this expensive "advanced" software if the workaround is to mix "simple" with no complex routing. Mine as well just use Fruity loops.