The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Cubase vs Nuendo
Old 29th April 2006
  #1
Gear Head
 
🎧 15 years
Cubase vs Nuendo

Hi guys!
I recently attended a nuendo presentation and became interested.
I have been using another product earlier, but this DAW software is no longer made for pc (guess which one.. ), so I am considering my options.
Steinberg products seem attractive since they are available on both platforms etc. (Mac AND pc). They don't "lock" me to a single platform, should I decide to change, and they also don't force me to use a specific brand of hardware. Which I think is really good.

But, here's my "quick" question... What is the real difference between cubase and nuendo for someone doing only music. (That would be me )
I am not interested in the film features of nuendo.

The new control room features in nuendo seemed nice, though....

So basically:

1. Is there any difference in audio quality (audio engine etc) between the two?
2. Are there any differences in built-in audio features (fx etx), quality-wise? (I would probably use bought plugins more than built-in ones, but it's always nice to have some built-in utility plugins if they are usable)
3. Does the most recent version of cubase have the same new features as the new nuendo version has? (control room section etc)

Any steinberg-gurus out there?
Thanks!
Old 29th April 2006
  #2
Gear Addict
 
🎧 15 years
Only about 30 hours of Cubase SX3 and 25 hours of Nuendo under my belt.
On the surface, they both seem very similar to the last couple versions of Logic.

There's going to be a learning curve, and they are definetely layed out differently than protools.

As for the difference between Cubase and Nuendo...

ummmmmmmm.

ummmmmmmmmmmmm.

Well, I don't remember doing any video editing on Cubase.

And...ummmmmm.

Ok, I give up. Somebody else answer.
Old 29th April 2006
  #3
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Hi

Here is a list of Nuendo exclusive features....

ftp://ftp.steinberg.net/Download/Nue...ature_list.pdf

This is for Nuendo 3.2, SX is on 3.1 at the mo so the Control Room stuff will find its way into the next SX release.
Old 29th April 2006 | Show parent
  #4
Moderator
 
George Necola's Avatar
audio engine is the same.. same "soundquality"..

cheers
Old 29th April 2006 | Show parent
  #5
Lives for gear
 
allencollins's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I think they sound identical in my tests.
I'm lookin at the SL now. Stripped down
but good for audio withou the bells and whistles
Old 30th April 2006 | Show parent
  #6
Gear Maniac
 
iziphonics's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I used to work on Nuendo for years in the other studio, but when I bought DAW for my own project studio (I compose music for pictures too) I picked Cubase. It has everything I need for composing work.
Anyway answers to your questions are.



Quote:
1. Is there any difference in audio quality (audio engine etc) between the two?
No

Quote:
2. Are there any differences in built-in audio features (fx etx), quality-wise? (I would probably use bought plugins more than built-in ones, but it's always nice to have some built-in utility plugins if they are usable)
The effects are the same. Most of them not really good, but some useable. Anyway I'd advice adding some thid party plugins.

3. Does the most recent version of cubase have the same new features as the new nuendo version has? (control room section etc)

Not really. Nuendo has version 3.2 while Cubase is still 3.1x. CR section was an addon for 3.2 update, and seems to be a cherry on the cake for Nuendo users. I don't think Steinberg will ever publish 3.2 of Cubase.
Old 1st May 2006 | Show parent
  #7
Lives for gear
 
dpianomn's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I'm very happy with SX, but the control room function would be AWESOME! i hate having to reroute my outputs constantly during tracking.

other than that, i really don't have any gripes with it.
Old 1st May 2006 | Show parent
  #8
theother
Guest
I worked with both for many years and switched back and forth.

For music people there is no difference. They have a slight different look / skin / colour whatever you want to call it. nuendo is darker and Cubase more modern , brighter, futuristic looking.

Nuendo has a couple of extra features for video/post-pro. Most of it import/export features.
You can also run 9-pin and TimeBase synchronizer with Nuendo which you might need for linking video & film.

Then you can go higher than 5.1 channels with Nuendo, almost unlimited. Something I never needed.

I'm in music and the sole reason I had to go Nuendo was so I can look the SSL computer to Nuendo but even that can be done by now with Cubase alone if you use something like 2Tools from Al Smart.

The biggest difference I would say if you do music is that Nuendo just got a complete control room function. Too much to explain here. Look it up.
It can be great or not depending how you prefer to work.

To be honest for me Nuendo isn't a must, although I like the 'L' button on the channels which is a listening bus seperate from the 'in place Solo' 'S' button.
Great for listening to FX-returns.
But bear in mind you pay twice the money for this little extra feature.
Old 13th February 2008 | Show parent
  #9
Here for the gear
 
🎧 10 years
Post Cubase VS Nuendo

Internally, the Cubase and Nuendo engines are identical, and the only differences are in the appearance and the feature-set. As a quick recap that applies to both products, you get as many audio tracks as your PC hardware can handle, aided and abetted by a dizzying selection of software plug-ins. Each audio clip can be edited individually with features that include high-quality time stretching and tempo/beat matching. The overall architecture is similar to that of a hardware mixing desk. Plug-ins can be set to work on individual audio tracks, and tracks can also be sub-mixed as groups with their own independent plug-in chains. Full MIDI editing is also included, as is the printing and preparation of musical scores, though the latter lags behind the sophistication of dedicated packages, such as Sibelius and Finale.

The look of Nuendo has been modified to appear more business-like, with a dark grey rather than a light grey colour scheme, and meters that look like the plasma displays on an upmarket mixing desk. These changes are literally cosmetic – they’re just a different skin – but the result oozes professionalism. The look can be heavily customised, and it’s also possible to customise the menu trees. In fact, significant parts of the interface (and some of the features) are coded in XML, so XML experts will be able to get their hands dirty with some serious hacking here.

The other features aren’t easy to sum up. The biggest difference is that Nuendo caters for a much broader range of audio options. This applies to file formats, which include all the usual suspects (WAV, AIFF, MP3, OGG, etc) plus obscurities such as AES31 and OMF that never see the light out of day outside of the sound-for-movie business. Nuendo also offers more surround options. It can handle projects in unlikely formats, such as 10.2, and higher sampling rates, with a maximum of 192kHz for ultra-fi projects. A major difference is that Nuendo is generally more network aware, so projects can be shared among a workgroup more easily and efficiently. The details here are impressive, with automatic edit updates across instances of a project on a network, cross-network edit permissions for different levels of access, and even a live chat feature.


Oddly, perhaps, the differences between the plug-ins supplied with Nuendo and Cubase are the least significant. There’s a fascinating ‘Acoustic Stamp’ tool for applying convolution effects, so that you can make a recording of your favourite concert hall and apply it to your audio as an effect. There’s also a Nuendo-specific EQ tool that sounds marginally smoother than the default in Cubase, at the cost of some additional processor power. Steinberg’s now-ancient Denoiser and Declicker plug-ins are also thrown in to help clean up pops, clicks and other noises from dirty audio.

Unless you’re a home studio buff, Nuendo will almost certainly be too much for you, if only because of the inflated price. But if you’re serious about music, or you work with it professionally, it’s a more plausible option, especially in a sound-to-video context. What it does do, it does very well indeed. The notation editing could be updated but, otherwise, there’s very little to find fault with.

Most home studio users will be able to get by with Cubase, but for those who want the ultimate, Nuendo offers a realistic alternative to the competition at the very high end (and I mean high). And it comes with a much lower price than the five figures that are normal in that particular market.
Old 13th February 2008 | Show parent
  #10
Lives for gear
 
orange's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
hi Busyrocker (And welcome to GS)

looks a bit like a cut-and-paste from a press release but I think some of your info might be a bit out of date - after all this thread is nearly 2 years old.

Nuendo 4 has changed the rules a bit...if you want things like drum editor, notation etc you need to buy the nuendo expansion kit
Details :: Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH


Cubase4 has a customisable skin - so you can make it look more buisness-like/dark grey whatever etc etc

Essentially, if you don't know the difference between nuendo and cubase then you probably don't need the extra features in nuendo.
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #11
Gear Guru
 
Animus's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Well one of the biggest differences and advantage for Nuendo is the new automation system. Awesome. Of course I guess this new automation isn't suited for music so they put it only in the "post" software. I imagine though Steinberg are waiting to charge Cubase users for it in version 5.
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #12
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 15 years
Cool SX3 or Nuendo 3.2?....

I am also considering to choose between SX3 and Nuendo 3.2 ..

which one would run faster ?.. or is more stable .. or better coded?..

would Nuendo be the clear winner... given that its the flagship product?...

or the difference is merely feature wise..


thanks
John
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #13
Moderator
 
George Necola's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by activexjava ➑️
I am also considering to choose between SX3 and Nuendo 3.2 ..

which one would run faster ?.. or is more stable .. or better coded?..

would Nuendo be the clear winner... given that its the flagship product?...

or the difference is merely feature wise..


thanks
John
features and stability. seems like betatesters are cubase users, then implement the fixes in nuendo. that is why neunedo 4 was released a year after cubase.

if you dont need all the sync/cideo/post features described above, go with cubase.

cheers
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #14
Gear Guru
 
Animus's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Necola ➑️
features and stability. seems like betatesters are cubase users, then implement the fixes in nuendo. that is why neunedo 4 was released a year after cubase.

if you dont need all the sync/cideo/post features described above, go with cubase.

cheers
You forgot to mention about all the new bugs Nuendo 4 introduced and the old ones that they didn't fix, namely the infamous xscale bug. Basically you can't use Nuendo or Cubase with more than 4 cores. 8 core or dual quad core will scale terribly and get exponentially worse the less latency you run at. If you use Cubendo makes sure you have 4 cores or less, for now. Might be quite awhile before they fix this as it sounds like it will take a major rewrite. Just thought I would mention this to the original poster.
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #15
Lives for gear
 
orange's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Animus ➑️
You forgot to mention about all the new bugs Nuendo 4 introduced and the old ones that they didn't fix, namely the infamous xscale bug. Basically you can't use Nuendo or Cubase with more than 4 cores. 8 core or dual quad core will scale terribly and get exponentially worse the less latency you run at. If you use Cubendo makes sure you have 4 cores or less, for now. Might be quite awhile before they fix this as it sounds like it will take a major rewrite. Just thought I would mention this to the original poster.
yes...this one has been a problem for well over a year now. And this is a bug that SB describe as a "priority".

this is how bug reporting works at SB:

user: I've discovered a bug
SB: no you haven't - prove it
user: here's an exact repro
SB: it's your hardware
user2: I've got same issue
SB: it's your plugins
user3: I've got same issue
SB:(sticking fingers in ears)...la la la la la la can't hear you
user4: anybody there?
SB: (several months later) there might be a small issue there but don't worry, that will be fixed in the next release
SB: (several more months later) here's the latest update
user: where's the bug fix ?
SB: it will be in the next update

repeat ad nauseum.......
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #16
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
this is how bug reporting works at SB:

user: I've discovered a bug
SB: no you haven't - prove it
user: here's an exact repro
SB: it's your hardware
user2: I've got same issue
SB: it's your plugins
user3: I've got same issue
SB:(sticking fingers in ears)...la la la la la la can't hear you
user4: anybody there?
SB: (several months later) there might be a small issue there but don't worry, that will be fixed in the next release
SB: (several more months later) here's the latest update
user: where's the bug fix ?
SB: it will be in the next update
Hahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!! The truth is funny.
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #17
theother
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by activexjava ➑️

would Nuendo be the clear winner... given that its the flagship product?...


thanks
John
The simple answer is: No.

There are very very few things that Nuendo has that Cubase doesn't.

Most of them are exclusively for postpro users. (different formats, import/export options)

Nuendo can use an external synchronizer for video/tape machines.

Has more channels than 5.1 (who needs that in music?)

It's more likely that you regret having bought Nuendo later. It costs twice and you won't use the extras.

If you are a pro-recording studio with a decent budget it might not matter and you might just go for Nuendo to be safe.

Don't forget the updates will always cost you more in the future with Nuendo on top of your intial outlay.
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #18
theother
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by orange ➑️
yes...this one has been a problem for well over a year now. And this is a bug that SB describe as a "priority".

this is how bug reporting works at SB:

user: I've discovered a bug
SB: no you haven't - prove it
user: here's an exact repro
SB: it's your hardware
user2: I've got same issue
SB: it's your plugins
user3: I've got same issue
SB:(sticking fingers in ears)...la la la la la la can't hear you
user4: anybody there?
SB: (several months later) there might be a small issue there but don't worry, that will be fixed in the next release
SB: (several more months later) here's the latest update
user: where's the bug fix ?
SB: it will be in the next update

repeat ad nauseum.......
heh

But to be true you can replace 'SB' with 'DAW of choice' according to my experience. ie. 'Digi'. Wasn't much better with any of them...
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #19
theother
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Necola ➑️
features and stability. seems like betatesters are cubase users, then implement the fixes in nuendo. that is why neunedo 4 was released a year after cubase.

if you dont need all the sync/cideo/post features described above, go with cubase.

cheers
It's true. But then you could wait and only update Cubase when the Nuendo users get their upgrades. Usually at the same time there is always a Cubase x.1 version out.

Then you have you equal stability.
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #20
Lives for gear
 
laser's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by orange ➑️
yes...this one has been a problem for well over a year now. And this is a bug that SB describe as a "priority".

this is how bug reporting works at SB:

user: I've discovered a bug
SB: no you haven't - prove it
user: here's an exact repro
SB: it's your hardware
user2: I've got same issue
SB: it's your plugins
user3: I've got same issue
SB:(sticking fingers in ears)...la la la la la la can't hear you
user4: anybody there?
SB: (several months later) there might be a small issue there but don't worry, that will be fixed in the next release
SB: (several more months later) here's the latest update
user: where's the bug fix ?
SB: it will be in the next update

repeat ad nauseum.......
And here it is with Samplitude:

user: I've discovered a bug
Magix: no you haven't - prove it
user: here's an exact repro
Magix: it's your hardware
user2: I've got same issue
Magix: it's your plugins
user3: I've got same issue
Magix:(sticking fingers in ears)...la la la la la la can't hear you
user4: anybody there?
Magix: (several months later) there might be a small issue there but don't worry, that will be fixed in the next release
Magix: (several more months later) here's the latest update with bug fix
users 1, 2, 3 & 4: Yeh! Yeah! Magix, your the GREATEST!!! HEY, IT STILL DOESN'T WORK!
Magix: sure it does--prove it

repeat ad nauseum..

Laser
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #21
Lives for gear
 
laser's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
......and here's how it works with Logic:

user1: I've discovered a bug
user4: anybody there?
user2: I've got same issue
user4: anybody there?
user3: I've got same issue
user4: anybody there?
user5: have you heard the rumors about Logic (n+1)?????
user6: yeah, it'll be great!! Can't wait!!!!
user4: anybody there?
user7: it's coming out any time!!! Really!!! Can't Wait!!!
user8: better than Pro Tools!!!!!!
user4: anybody there?
user9: maybe next month!!!!!!!
user10: much better than Pro Tools!!!!!! It'll be the death of Pro Tools!!!!!
user4: anybody there?
user11: it's for certain!!!! Next year!!!! Can't wait!!!!
user 12: Pro Tools Killer!!!! For sure!!!!
user4: anybody there?

repeat ad nauseum.......


Laser
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #22
Gear Guru
 
Animus's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
lol!
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #23
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 15 years
Apple's attitude,as of late, is worse than Steinberg/Yamaha.It's truly the best/worst of times for us computer based musicians, so many features to get the sale and no support or QC to back them up.I want my old tascam 4 track back
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #24
Moderator
 
George Necola's Avatar
I must admit, that there are hardtimes for softwaremanufacturers.. espcially in audio, where every user has a diffrent combination of interface, motherboard, CPU, RAM, Sequencer, plugins, even OS-software, patchversion... and so on.

so I think if there are 1 million user, there are 100 million bugs.. :D

let's buy a tapemachine
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #25
Gear Nut
 
🎧 10 years
I've always preferred Nuendo to Cubase. Nuendo was more stable and worked better for me. But last year I got tired of waiting for Nuendo 4 and went with Cubase 4. I'm happy with Cubase 4 only a few things in Nuendo 4 that Cubase 4 doesn't have that I'd like, so I'm pretty sure I would choose Cubase over Nuendo even now.
Old 14th February 2008 | Show parent
  #26
Gear Maniac
 
idrinkalot's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by busyrocker ➑️
Internally, the Cubase and Nuendo engines are identical, and the only differences are in the appearance and the feature-set. As a quick recap that applies to both products, you get as many audio tracks as your PC hardware can handle, aided and abetted by a dizzying selection of software plug-ins. Each audio clip can be edited individually with features that include high-quality time stretching and tempo/beat matching. The overall architecture is similar to that of a hardware mixing desk. Plug-ins can be set to work on individual audio tracks, and tracks can also be sub-mixed as groups with their own independent plug-in chains. Full MIDI editing is also included, as is the printing and preparation of musical scores, though the latter lags behind the sophistication of dedicated packages, such as Sibelius and Finale.

blablabalbla
good first post... but you do realize this thread was made nearly 2 years ago?
Old 14th February 2008
  #27
Here for the gear
 
🎧 10 years
Cubase vs Nuendo

Hey eveyone! No-one mentioned the REALLY big difference between Cubase and Nuendo........Nuendo costs three times as much!!heh
Old 11th November 2008 | Show parent
  #28
Lives for gear
 
mbradzick's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Just wanted to revive this...

I heard that Nuendo actually sounds a little better than Cubase due to distortion in Cub. T or F?

Also, when a company needs 5.1 and stereo audio, you have to give them two different mixes right? You can't just give them 5.1 and expect it to come out stereo right? This is a stupid question but I wanna be sure since we'll be doing some commercials soon.
Old 11th November 2008 | Show parent
  #29
Deleted 6aa6ee2
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Zick ➑️
Just wanted to revive this...

I heard that Nuendo actually sounds a little better than Cubase due to distortion in Cub. T or F?
False

Quote:
Also, when a company needs 5.1 and stereo audio, you have to give them two different mixes right? You can't just give them 5.1 and expect it to come out stereo right? This is a stupid question but I wanna be sure since we'll be doing some commercials soon.
Does the company want two different files? Deliver what the contract specifies.
Old 11th November 2008 | Show parent
  #30
Lives for gear
 
mbradzick's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcwave ➑️
Does the company want two different files? Deliver what the contract specifies.
Well obviously we'd do what the contract specifies, but my boss asked me if it is necessary to do two different mixes...one for stereo, one for 5.1. In other words, we can't just hand them the 5.1 mix and expect it to automatically translate into stereo right? I told him we'll have to give them two separate mixes but I wanna be sure.

Again, stupid question but I want an answer other than my own.
πŸ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 4610 views: 606899
Avatar for cabooter
cabooter 4 weeks ago
replies: 577 views: 32395
Avatar for kdm
kdm 1st July 2009
replies: 97 views: 35322
Avatar for mowmow
mowmow 15th September 2010
replies: 51 views: 9857
Avatar for red_gibby
red_gibby 28th February 2017
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump