New upgrade prices for Cubase

[Compyfox]

There are just things that don't swing with me, SJ.

a) They might probably blame it on inflation. The inflation is however only happening in terms of food over here. So that is nonsense

b) They might blame it on lack of income, then a price raise won't work

c) A price raise does not guarantee better support, especially not after the webboard crap they recently pulled (unlocked from my Steinberg, so "outdsiders" are bound to come back again, causing a stir)

d) A price raise does not garantee us a better software. The constant "we listen to our customers" quote is a plain lie. Else issues that were adressed with v x.00 would have been fixed by now, and ton of filed FR's being implemented.

e) A price raise does not guarantee a longer upgrade cycle, or non-paid updates. Steinberg introduced the paid .5 update. And that wasn't an update, that was forking you over to VSTi with some features that were .5 exclusive which could have been part of C6.0 as well. UNPAID. Also, the upgrade cycles are getting shorter. We're down to 1,5 year. So I expect a paid .5 by January, and C8 by Summer NAMM 2014, or AES convention 2014 latest.



I'm all for better support, more seriousness and the likes. But as Cubase user, especially since SX days, I'm treated like a rookie, lied to my face. And Steinberg can easily get away with stealing out money - not fixing things and rather postpone it for the next version, just to mess it up even further. And on top of it, they simply spit on us for being legit customers.

The same happened in the final Pinnacle days. Now with Yamaha days, it's happening again. I'm not the least surprised that Presonus picked up former Steinberg emplyee's that then created Studio One, which is a Steinberg/Logic hybrid. And apparently, these programmers can handle the VST3 and ASIO technology way better, than those that initially created it.



I'm seriously lost for words currently.

I'm pissed, I could go all apesh*t on Steinberg. But I blew my powder already in the 7.06 update thread.

[donato]

S1 is better anyway! (Disclaimer: IMO).

[LawrenceF]

Come on guys. Things sell for what the market will bear. If people didn't pay what they're asking it wouldn't cost what it does.

That's really the nature of business. It's not their intent to make their top of the line products affordable to the masses. Never has been. They make reduced versions for that. OTOH, anyone doing commercial work who can't afford a few hundred bucks a year to keep their software updated needs to rethink their business plan.

For a hobby... well.. it's always been an expensive hobby.

We can't compare the entire daw industry to the pricing anomaly that is Reaper. It would be nice if every daw was $60 but it's never gonna happen so we may as well get over it.

[Compyfox]

Sorry, I definitely do not consider this as a hobby. I'm a freelancer, and I have my sheer problems to keep up to date with software upgrades.

A good friend of mine recently coursed about constant upgrades, and all being happening around the same time, at constant rising funds. He doesn't get much money either. And a 300quid upgrade for just one tool alone, does hurt. And I'm not talking about smaller tools, hardware maintenance, OS updates, etc. Which are also due every once in a while.


Steinberg's prices rose from initially 99EUR from major upgrade to major upgrade (I think last time I saw that, was C4). Then it was 130EUR, 150EUR. With C6 we saw another increase, and a paid dot update. Now we're at 250EUR from major version to major version.

Within two to three Cubase versions, that's a drastic increase, with even shorter upgrade cycles, and even more bugs introduced right from the start. And if you're past 2 major versions, you might as well buy Cubase completely new.



As hobbyist, I wouldn't care. But I try to earn a living from using Steinberg tools. And that is simply not fun, neither is it fair considering what mess we have to work with.

[SJ_Digriz]

There are just things that don't swing with me, SJ.

a) They might probably blame it on inflation. The inflation is however only happening in terms of food over here. So that is nonsense

b) They might blame it on lack of income, then a price raise won't work

c) A price raise does not guarantee better support, especially not after the webboard crap they recently pulled (unlocked from my Steinberg, so "outdsiders" are bound to come back again, causing a stir)

d) A price raise does not garantee us a better software. The constant "we listen to our customers" quote is a plain lie. Else issues that were adressed with v x.00 would have been fixed by now, and ton of filed FR's being implemented.

e) A price raise does not guarantee a longer upgrade cycle, or non-paid updates. Steinberg introduced the paid .5 update. And that wasn't an update, that was forking you over to VSTi with some features that were .5 exclusive which could have been part of C6.0 as well. UNPAID. Also, the upgrade cycles are getting shorter. We're down to 1,5 year. So I expect a paid .5 by January, and C8 by Summer NAMM 2014, or AES convention 2014 latest.



I'm all for better support, more seriousness and the likes. But as Cubase user, especially since SX days, I'm treated like a rookie, lied to my face. And Steinberg can easily get away with stealing out money - not fixing things and rather postpone it for the next version, just to mess it up even further. And on top of it, they simply spit on us for being legit customers.

The same happened in the final Pinnacle days. Now with Yamaha days, it's happening again. I'm not the least surprised that Presonus picked up former Steinberg emplyee's that then created Studio One, which is a Steinberg/Logic hybrid. And apparently, these programmers can handle the VST3 and ASIO technology way better, than those that initially created it.



I'm seriously lost for words currently.

I'm pissed, I could go all apesh*t on Steinberg. But I blew my powder already in the 7.06 update thread.

I'm not really arguing for or against Steinberg ... I started a silly internet argument over semantics. My bad, the scotch is to blame. So please, no one take offense ... it's just a different perspective on a topic that really doesn't matter.

In that vein, regardless of "quality", the idea that a few hundred dollars for professional software as being "expensive", just doesn't hold water. We have engineering software that costs several thousand dollars per seat, per product .. and you need a suite of crappy, buggy, poorly thought out, horrendously cobbled together applications to get them to do something even remotely useful. So imagine what having a few hundred developers using a few suites of software is costing you? Not to mention 23% annual maintenance fees. This isn't niche stuff either, we're talking major highly visible and "popular" things like the Rational Suite from IBM which likely has more customers on a per seat basis than all the DAWs combined. If you ever want to feel like you've been bent over and used like a rented porn dummy, go for a stroll through the IBM licensing house of mirrors.

I'm not making excuses for this, I'm just saying $200 is chump change in the pro software world.

[VitaminD]

I never said the large studios were going completely extinct.. just that the trend is towards smaller bedroom setups.. to which it is.. or has been for some time at least.. you'd have to be reality challenged not to see that.

There will likely always be a 'handful' of large studios... not because of the technology, but because of the minds running the technology.. the space.. as well as, perhaps, names..

a quick google search..

http://phys.org/news169471822.html
http://www.npr.org/2009/12/10/121304883 ... ain-future
http://www.fox8live.com/story/23389242/ ... -long-shot (<-- is ironic because the article interviews an owner of a large studio and mentions around 5k studios nationally but admits most are in bedrooms or garages; seems to be largely a plug for his own large studio)


And you're welcome to disagree. If you know me at all, you'll know I don't care too much if you disagree with me. No need to get in a huff (as you seem to have done).

Even if you do agree.. what do either of us get? Just expressing what I see.. and how I feel... and I feel cubase is expensive to keep updated.

I see you see otherwise.

[SJ_Digriz]

No need to get in a huff (as you seem to have done).

No huff intended. See above post. I support everyones right to be wrong ... err.. I mean to have their own opinion.

[LawrenceF]

Sorry, I definitely do not consider this as a hobby. I'm a freelancer, and I have my sheer problems to keep up to date with software upgrades.

I didn't mean - you - were a hobbyiat, I was just being complete.

Bottom line, I can name lots of guys still using old versions of PT or other older tools and making good money. They don't feel the need to have the latest greatest software version, even though most could easily afford it. Honestly, for a working freelancer was there really anything in Cubase 7 that was absolutely necessary? That brought you tons of new income or new customers?

If so, it pays for itself. If not, there's no major need to have it anyway if money is tight.

Seems to me - not you, just in general - lots of people upgrade just to have the latest greatest, not necssarily because the business (or their music) even requires it.

Thanks Compy.

[VitaminD]

Sorry, I definitely do not consider this as a hobby. I'm a freelancer, and I have my sheer problems to keep up to date with software upgrades.

I didn't mean - you - were a hobbyiat, I was just being complete.

Bottom line, I can name lots of guys still using old versions of PT or other older tools and making good money. They don't feel the need to have the latest greatest software version, even though most could easily afford it. Honestly, for a working freelancer was there really anything in Cubase 7 that was absolutely necessary? That brought you tons of new income or new customers?

If so, it pays for itself. If not, there's no major need to have it anyway if money is tight.

Seems to me - not you, just in general - lots of people upgrade just to have the latest greatest, not necessarily because the business even requires it.

Thanks Compy.

Likely true with the wanting to have the latest and greatest. I think much of the complaints, though, are how Steinberg goes about it... They tend to price crossgrades from bundled versions for around the same price as an upgrade for a 'loyal' owner of the full version.

The same thing you say the market will dictate is exactly what I'm (as one buyer) am saying... I don't feel it is worth the price and they hose current owners. Apparently I'm not alone here in thinking this....


Out of curiosity (since we've already killed this thread)... what do you think the reasons were for Apple dropping the price of Logic? It seems, at least on the surface, they could have kept the price to Cubase standards since there was no one else bluffing with their 500 dollar-ish pricing scheme.. perhaps wanting to make it more appealing? perhaps because it is Apple-only (and thus less market) ??

That said, and as an aside to the aside, I think we might see something interesting if BWS is ever released (:lol:), is well regarded, and is priced significantly lower than the 500 dollar range (of which most others currently live -- including Ableton Live, it's closest competitor), to the price of Live at least -- I want to see if Ableton keeps a strong chin or lowers a bit.. if BWS really catches on that is...

[SODDI]

It wouldn't be expensive if the software worked properly.

[Compyfox]

That brought you tons of new income or new customers?

I had to upgrade due to two major reasons

a) being forced to stay up to date (including support)
b) paying less in terms of upgrade fees overall (once switched from VST5 to SX3 and paid a fortune)


I didn't know at this point what a trainwreck this would turn out to be.

[LawrenceF]

Oh, you are definitely not alone Vitamin D. I got off the Steinberg money train at v5.

But I'm not mad at 'em. They exist for one reason only, to make money. If people stop paying $499 / $299 to upgrade or whatever they'll lower the prices. But as long as people are paying those prices they won't be moving very much.

They know what we all know, that most will gripe for awhile and still pay anyway. If not now, next time. Like the casino, if you play long enough they always win.

It's a great app though, not a rip off by any stretch, but it's not cheap.

[chk071]

Now we have a lot of 'bedroom' studios.. coupled with the price of synth and effects software dropping and increased competition in the DAW market, prices have to lower to stay competitive... and relative.

Not sure if your theory about lots of bedroom studios is the reality, but, basically, Steinberg wouldn't raise the upgrade prices, if they weren't competetive anymore, rather the opposite seems to be the case when they can raise the prices, and still sell well... the price of a product is dependent from a couple of things, for example what the market offers, what the people are willing to pay for, whether you made yourself a good name (especially in this case) etc.

[fandango]

299 Euro from C5..I'm glad that C5 suits me fine for now and when the time comes to move on I'm sure someone will have Studio one for sale in the marketplace.
Sad, I've loved Cubase for over a decade but have finally realized, this is a hobby and I cannot justify spending that. Not for what I do..

Ouch indeed!

Yep, as purely a hobbyist I think Steiny have priced me out for several versions now. I don't feel a great need to upgrade to 7 from 6.5. I was tempted (vaguely) at £120, but at £166 (xe.com conversion from new Euro prices) there is an unavoidable recognition of the fact that "value" and "price" are two very different things.

"Sorry... but I'm out."

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]