KVR Audio

Ben [Camel Audio] · Post by **Ben [Camel Audio]** » Sun Aug 08, 2004 12:00 pm

Hi,

What are the differences between Cubase and Nuendo? Which is better for writing music with? I wish to write music with mostly VSTis and do some audio recording (vocals etc). (Please ignore the issue of how much they cost - I'm lucky enough to have Nuendo for testing purposes). I've found Nuendo a bit like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Any opinions on whether using Cubase SX is likely to be a more streamlined experience? (Or is it just a question of me knuckling down to it and getting familar with a new sequencer?)

Thanks
Ben

püRe · Post by **püRe** » Sun Aug 08, 2004 12:09 pm

The differences are minor...at least for someone recording music and who's not much into postproductio and film music...

Nuendo's improvements/features over SX are mostly video/postproduction related...like 10.2 support (SX goes "only" up to 5.1), 9-pin device support (maybe this could prove useful with ADATs), OMF/AES31 support (if you want to export/import something to/from ProTools, Logic, etc...), Network capabilities (sharing projects over network) and 192khz compatibility...

Main difference is that Nuendo is prettier

iDavid · Post by **iDavid** » Sun Aug 08, 2004 12:20 pm

Cubase is a bit of a beast, but it has ALL the features I need.

Screen layouts help a lot. I can click between a view of the entire song, to the mixer, to combo of the two in a second.

Two monitors would be even better if ya got the cash.

I would also recommend the book Cubase SX/SL tips and tricks by Keith Gemmell. Pretty small and quick read. It helps a great deal.

Ben [Camel Audio] · Post by **Ben [Camel Audio]** » Sun Aug 08, 2004 1:01 pm

Thanks very much for your replies. So, if I understand you correctly, Cubase SX isn't any easier/simpler to use than Nuendo - correct?

Thanks
Ben

püRe · Post by **püRe** » Sun Aug 08, 2004 1:50 pm

Ben [Camel Audio] wrote:Thanks very much for your replies. So, if I understand you correctly, Cubase SX isn't any easier/simpler to use than Nuendo - correct?

Thanks
Ben

Exactly, once you know Nuendo, you'll know SX and vice versa...

bluedad · Post by **bluedad** » Sun Aug 08, 2004 1:52 pm

Ben [Camel Audio] wrote:Thanks very much for your replies. So, if I understand you correctly, Cubase SX isn't any easier/simpler to use than Nuendo - correct?

Thanks
Ben

(forgive me, I've just moved from vst to sx - simple it isn't!)

ericj23 · Post by **ericj23** » Sun Aug 08, 2004 2:15 pm

i think its quicker to use than vst ever was - but then ive been using sx since it came out !

its like any complex peice of kit - it takes a little time to get used to - its just a shame the documentation with it is shocking ! ie it tells you about things without explaining how to best use them

vtx · Post by **vtx** » Sun Aug 08, 2004 3:47 pm

Recording and producing in surround may also effect your decision...

flametop · Post by **flametop** » Sun Aug 08, 2004 4:24 pm

Also buying Nuendo you may get people bleating you are making too much money from CA5000

tetraplan · Post by **tetraplan** » Sun Aug 08, 2004 10:53 pm

püRe wrote:The differences are minor...at least for someone recording music and who's not much into postproductio and film music...

Nuendo's improvements/features over SX are mostly video/postproduction related... [...] OMF/AES31 support (if you want to export/import something to/from ProTools, Logic, etc...)

You mean CubaseSX doesn't support OMF?
That's really bad.

Groet, Erik

püRe · Post by **püRe** » Sun Aug 08, 2004 11:25 pm

tetraplan wrote:You mean CubaseSX doesn't support OMF?
That's really bad.

Groet, Erik

I believe so because Steinberg mentioned that on a list of differences between SX and Nuendo...

tetraplan · Post by **tetraplan** » Mon Aug 09, 2004 12:24 am

püRe wrote:
tetraplan wrote:You mean CubaseSX doesn't support OMF?
That's really bad.

Groet, Erik
I believe so because Steinberg mentioned that on a list of differences between SX and Nuendo...

It would make it one hell of a contender.
It's clear Steinberg wants to push Nuendo to the Heavy Users.
Makes sense in a way. On the other hand, both flavours of Sonar support it, and it's really useful (1).
Anyway, back to our scheduled program,

Groet, Erik

(1) really, really useful.

Ben [Camel Audio] · Post by **Ben [Camel Audio]** » Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:09 am

Hi,

Thanks very much for all the replies. It looks like I should just get on with learning a new sequencer

Thanks
Ben

Phaedo · Post by **Phaedo** » Mon Aug 09, 2004 1:49 pm

I'm pretty sure SX does support OMF now.

Kim Lajoie · Post by **Kim Lajoie** » Mon Aug 09, 2004 2:03 pm

SX2 supports OMF. In what capacity I don't know, as I've never used the feature.

Ben, if you're finding Nuendo to be too complex for you, then it's likely that Cubase SX will also be a similar experience. Depending on your needs, you might want to check out Sonar, or maybe hosts like Traktion, Muzyz (sp?), etc.

Personally, I use Cubase SX2 because It's right for me. I use about 80% of the features, which is tons.

Forever,

Kim.

Cubase SX vs Nuendo