Cubase 12 leaked on Steinberg's site

[pbognar]

They are careful and consistent to avoid saying Cubase 12 is coming in early 2022 like they did for Dorico 4.

I suppose the headline should be: there is no 11.5, but 12 will be early.

They should just call it Cubase 22.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Please be aware that VST 2 is not supported on native Apple silicon, except when run in Rosetta 2 mode. So please make sure that you let the plug-in manufacturers still hesitating to release VST 3 versions know that it’s about time!

Uhm...pretty sure I have VST2 plugins that run natively on Apple silicon. This sounds like Steinberg is dropping VST2 support on Mac to push VST3 adoption, but trying to make it sound like it's Apple's fault and their hands are tied.

[chk071]

Well, it is Apple's fault that everyone has to develop for a new architecture now.

[LoveEnigma18]

Can I sell licenses? If so, how?

Yes, you will still be able to sell your retail licenses using the Steinberg Licensing system. We will provide details of this process in the future.

Note, however, after you have updated an existing license for a Steinberg product to a version that uses the new Steinberg Licensing system, although the license for the previous version will remain in your eLicenser, you cannot resell, transfer or update/upgrade that license.

Not sure I understood the second para well here.

The way I read it, as soon as you update your licenses to the new Steinberg Licensing system, they will become NFR

I feared that to be the case but was hoping it is not. I was expecting that any existing licenses will be easily transferable in future based on the new system, as currently it needs transferring them to USB dongle and shipping it to the buyer.

The worst part is they are saying we cannot update/upgrade it. That's absolutely ridiculous! I am planning to buy Groove Agent 5 soon. If they release GA6 in future, which will be surely after the new system is introduced, what it means in that I can't update my GA5 to GA6. Am I correct?

I think the question is that someone who has eLicenser based licenses could, theoretically, sell the updated license (dongle free) to someone else, and still keep the dongle, which would allow them to still run the software. Which, IMO, makes sense. Nothing prevents you to keep using the dongle in the future, so you could keep updating Groove Agent without updating the license to a dongle free one.

Yes, I understand, but the thing is I don't have the dongle and will never buy one even for transferring any license, especially now that they will be made obsolete soon. What I meant is about transitioning from soft e-licenser to new system and then still being able to update and resell.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Well, it is Apple's fault that everyone has to develop for a new architecture now.

Yeah, but Steinberg is making it sound like VST2 plugins CAN'T work on Apple Silicon without Rosetta, and that's just not true.

[LoveEnigma18]

Can I sell licenses? If so, how?

Yes, you will still be able to sell your retail licenses using the Steinberg Licensing system. We will provide details of this process in the future.

Note, however, after you have updated an existing license for a Steinberg product to a version that uses the new Steinberg Licensing system, although the license for the previous version will remain in your eLicenser, you cannot resell, transfer or update/upgrade that license.

Not sure I understood the second para well here.

When you update to the new system any previous licenses that were eLicenser based become NFR. But you can sell the current license thats based on the Steinberg Licensing system.

If I buy Groove Agent 5 and activate it right now and let's say in future, after the new licensing is introduced and I have to obviously move to it, they release Groove Agent 6.

Can I update from GA5 to GA6? Can GA6 be resold then?

Of course it may be too early to ask this, but since I am planning to buy GA5 soon, I don't want to end up in a situation where I can't update to GA6. Reselling point is not a big deal right now.

Good point!

I think it depends if we can register (say) GA5 with the new system or not. If we can't update or upgrade our licenses then what? The new system only applied on buying new software?! It doesn't make sense!

But if they are sane people, then what they mean is "once you update/upgrade GA5 license to GA6 license in the new system, then you can only sell or update GA6 license and your GA5 license is worthless as you can't separate it from the updated/upgraded version.

Anyway, as companies seem lost the logic in thinking! I suggest you wait and don't buy anything till you see the things are settled and things seem logical!

Yes, I am hoping what you said is true and it indeed logical. But as fmr said it is a bit tricky for USB dongle cases. I believe migrating from soft e-licenser to new system is effectively the same thing (there is no hardware involved), so we should be able to update and resell (the latest version, not previous).

That's a good suggestion and I am indeed not buying it right away. I will only buy it if it goes on 50% discount.

In the meantime, I have dropped an email to support. Got a response already, but trying to reconfirm my understanding. Will post here once done.

[chk071]

Well, it is Apple's fault that everyone has to develop for a new architecture now.

Yeah, but Steinberg is making it sound like VST2 plugins CAN'T work on Apple Silicon without Rosetta, and that's just not true.

You're right, seems a bit weird. Maybe what they actually mean is that the VST2 SDK doesn't support Apple Sillicon development out of the box (i.e. developers found ways to support M1 natively anyway, like they with MIDI learn in VST3). Just a long shot, I have no idea really.

[ShawnG]

Well, it is Apple's fault that everyone has to develop for a new architecture now.

Yeah, but Steinberg is making it sound like VST2 plugins CAN'T work on Apple Silicon without Rosetta, and that's just not true.

You're right, seems a bit weird. Maybe what they actually mean is that the VST2 SDK doesn't support Apple Sillicon development out of the box (i.e. developers found ways to support M1 natively anyway, like they with MIDI learn in VST3). Just a long shot, I have no idea really.

“Not supported” =/= “won’t work”

[jtrake]

https://www.steinberg.net/cubase/12/
https://www.steinberg.net/licensing/

Maybe old news but found these
Edit: And yes, these were already mentioned earlier in the thread

[chk071]

Well, it is Apple's fault that everyone has to develop for a new architecture now.

Yeah, but Steinberg is making it sound like VST2 plugins CAN'T work on Apple Silicon without Rosetta, and that's just not true.

You're right, seems a bit weird. Maybe what they actually mean is that the VST2 SDK doesn't support Apple Sillicon development out of the box (i.e. developers found ways to support M1 natively anyway, like they with MIDI learn in VST3). Just a long shot, I have no idea really.

“Not supported” =/= “won’t work”

True as well. Guess it's all about the correct interpretation of such statements.

[Timfonie]

One-time online activation of software is understandable, but WHY EVERY 30 DAYS? (once a month is arbitrary: it's equal to NOT OFF-LINE permanently anymore)

There's only one main reason for that: it's all about having control *.

We're moving away from possession and freedom towards a life enchained, where organisations decide when, where and how you may make use of services they offer. Any changes in terms and conditions have to be accepted, because they can pull the plug as they like when you don't agree with them.

So, Steinberg is going to drop the dongle (also for existing users) and will venture a subscription service. That's not what they exactly say on their website but it is very likely. If resistance of their userbase has waned and people got used to the idea Steinberg will implement it. Subscription too expensive? Too bad for you! We are a company which maximizes profit so we try and find the best monthly price for us, not the best price for you. We don't care about loosing customers as long as our total income flourishes.

Someone at Gearspace got a mail from ReFX stating:
"Steinberg has informed us that they are discontinuing the USB-eLicenser and soft-eLicenser technology as of January 1st, 2022. Steinberg will maintain the server handling those services for a grace period of six months until June 30th, 2022. After that period, Steinberg reserves the right to shut down the server at its sole discretion."

And on the FAQ:
Q: "Does the introduction of Steinberg Licensing mean that Steinberg is introducing subscription pricing?"
A: ".. the new system does open up many new possibilities for the way we offer our products, and we plan to explore these in future."

Of course a deterioration like this can only be presented as "an exciting huge milestone!" and "Great changes ahead". Yeah, right. For Steinberg themselves and maybe for some users.

"you computer only needs to be connected to the internet once every 30 days to renew the offline allowance for your Steinberg software products."

So, instead of admitting this absolutely bad move, they reframe it as 'not as bad as requiring a permanent internet connection'.
Allright, someone slaps you in the face. Be glad! Because this is much better than being kicked between your legs.
You don't want to be hit at all? Well, that's sooo 20th century style. Welcome to this new age where being hit is the new normal. People soon won't know anything else. Just get used to it...


You might find this post an overreaction, an exageration. However it's not just about this step by Steinberg (which is a huge one though), it's about the whole transition towards being controlled instead of being IN control. This does not only concern music software but anything in our lives.

It's usually a step-by-step process where every single step just isn't enough to actually have people turn their backs. However alltogether these step lead us to a situation where one might ask 'have I ever agreed to get into this'? People's adaptability leads to shifting baselines. Someone grown up with smartphones won't properly understand a world where people aren't looking at their screens all the time. People being born nowadays will not understand a world where one could just buy something and not being bothered with changing terms and conditions, behavior data-mining, interference, online-deactivation (business rendering a product useless, unless you agree with what they want), and so on.

Yes, I have read the part in the FAQ on the possibility of once-a-year-activation. The point is: this is what they say NOW. These are conditions which can be changed as they like in the future. And probably they will as profit rules. I don't totally trust their words. I trust their desire for a stable or increasing income whatever that may take.

It's not an exciting day. It's a sad one. Steinberg is not an evil company though and its employee's are probably mostly just like us. They just pursue their best interests. As long as enough paying customers accept what's being offered Steinberg will continue their online (ad)venture. Hardware is becomming more valuable as (mostly) it can't be deactivated over the internet - if you can't or don't want to pay monthly fees.

* Of their income. Another reason maybe fear of misuse of the copy-right system, when one pretends a failed harddrive and asks for a new licence ID which is actually being used for another machine.

[dblock]

It's like Cubase is on probation and has to check in with the probation officer every 30 days. I may be switching to a new daw eventually.
Once I "own" something, I don't like feeling like somebody else owns half of it.

[PAK]

Ah yes, classic good ol'KVR selective quoting to rabble rouse the masses.

Ahh, and the good old selective and overly assumptive reply. I pointed out it appears they're planning to introduce a subscription model. They are. I did not state they're removing the perpetual option. Though I concede, on reflection, I should've added the "no plans for change now" part about perpetual licenses. That's because I think anybody (who follows this stuff) would automatically assume they'll offer both - at least initially.

That said, they could have just as easily stated "we will not withdraw the option to buy a perpetual license". Instead they use the good old phrase "we have no plans". Does it mean they will? No. But, by phrasing it such, they're also reserving the right to remove perpetual licenses.

BTW I'll also point out if someone is against this, but bought into the yearly updates, you're essentially on their subscription model, in all but name only, already. However, if anyone doesn't like how Yamaha have been maintaining things (or lack thereof), and isn't completely married to Cubase, then this indicator perhaps serves as another reason to start looking at your other options..

[PAK]

Haha, selective quoting at its best then, as usual.

Not selective quoting at all, unless you assume an agenda. What? You assume incorrect things? Never

My post was to point out they are considering a subscription model. Which part of that is untrue? Which part of it implies anything about the perpetual license? As I said, I think it's obvious that they will offer both, as Protools does, at least initially, though maybe I should've mentioned for the sake of clarity and assumptive trolls, always eager to read intent that isn't there.

But, if I'd went on to quote that bit, I would also have pointed out, by the language used, that they are reserving the right to discontinue a perpetual license in future, because they fail to explicitly state otherwise, and merely mention "no plans". People are free to make of that as they will..

[chk071]

One-time online activation of software is understandable, but WHY EVERY 30 DAYS? (once a month is arbitrary: it's equal to NOT OFF-LINE permanently anymore)

There's only one main reason for that: it's all about having control *.

You could sell your software, and still have it activated, if it didn't do some kind of activation check every now and then. You can discuss about the 30 days, but, you can't discuss about it generally, because it has to do something like that.