I put a foot towards the dark side... [Archive]

mrtomcat

01-12-2010, 02:29 AM

As the ones that know me here know I've been a steinberg supporter from day 1 and still LOVE my Nuendo but since I am getting more and more work via other studios and they all use PT I decided to get an MBOX 2 Mini that way I can at least have a PT LE at home, learn it more and hopefully figure out a way to work in Nuendo and transfer back to PT...thinking of getting ProConvert.

So unfortunately my PT DVD was damaged and after speaking to Digi today they let me download the program (it's been going for over 8 hours now...slow ass server...), so I have not been able to fully install only partially.

Question: I read (I think somewhere here) that PT8 has encrypted files now and that ProConvert no longer works on it. I also read that the only way would be to save the session as a PT 7 or earlier project...now I have not been able to see such option.
Save As only allows to change the name and Export is disabled.

Any thoughts? Is that a PT LE issue or/and are there workarounds?

thanks

mrtomcat

01-12-2010, 05:25 AM

all right, I got everything installed and figured out the save in an older version: Save Copy In does the trick. Still need to know the best way to get a Nuendo project in there without proConvert (since I don't have it yet)

First impression...holy crap Nuendo is a million times more powerful, the amount of clicks and trips do the menu bar I have to make, no decent highlights, barely any right mouse clicks...the UI is way too complicated and the workflow...wow... I am sure once I get used to it a bit more I'll like it a bit better but so far I am not impressed...I also had to reboot about 6 times before that thing was ready.
And of course mbox's are made in China which messes with my china boycott...but I'll be good, I conform...I need a drink

MattiasNYC

01-12-2010, 02:02 PM

all right, I got everything installed and figured out the save in an older version: Save Copy In does the trick. Still need to know the best way to get a Nuendo project in there without proConvert (since I don't have it yet)

I think you'll find plenty of people who have done it in different ways. As far as I know no matter what you do it's always going to be a bit of a pain in the ass to go between DAWs.

What kind of session data are you looking to transfer?

First impression...holy crap Nuendo is a million times more powerful, the amount of clicks and trips do the menu bar I have to make, no decent highlights, barely any right mouse clicks...

Well, to be fair you're comparing the LE version to the fullblown Cubendo software. It's not entirely fair to be honest.

the UI is way too complicated and the workflow...wow... I am sure once I get used to it a bit more I'll like it a bit better but so far I am not impressed...

I think PT v7 was a lot cleaner than v8. I preferred it by far. But in general I wouldn't be prepared to say that the UI of Pro Tools is way more complicated than that of Nuendo. I actually think it's the opposite, depending on how you set things up of course.

There's a lot to like in PT, and there's a lot to like in Nuendo. Preferred work flow and type of work being done is really what determines which one is the "better" app.....

Good luck !

LEX

01-12-2010, 02:42 PM

I think you'll find plenty of people who have done it in different ways. As far as I know no matter what you do it's always going to be a bit of a pain in the ass to go between DAWs.

What kind of session data are you looking to transfer?

Well, to be fair you're comparing the LE version to the fullblown Cubendo software. It's not entirely fair to be honest.

I think PT v7 was a lot cleaner than v8. I preferred it by far. But in general I wouldn't be prepared to say that the UI of Pro Tools is way more complicated than that of Nuendo. I actually think it's the opposite, depending on how you set things up of course.

There's a lot to like in PT, and there's a lot to like in Nuendo. Preferred work flow and type of work being done is really what determines which one is the "better" app.....

Good luck !

First, like any software you need to get to know it. Once you know it you might find some things about it you like.

I agree. I felt PT7 was much cleaner than 8, though 8 has some nice new features.

Also, though a bit pricey, DV Toolkit adds several features you don't get with LE.

I'd also suggest you get to know your Key Commands, then you won't spend so much time in the menu's.

I don't know if Windows can do it, but natively on a MAC you can assign key commands to any software you want.

Maybe on the music side of things, Nuendo has the edge.

But if you are working in Post, with existing FX libraries, and picture even LE has Nuendo beat.

LEX

MattiasNYC

01-12-2010, 03:14 PM

All good points Lex...
I'd also suggest you get to know your Key Commands, then you won't spend so much time in the menu's.

I'm guessing that was a general point and not necessarily directed towards me. I've made real good use of Key Commands, but I have to say that the ability to remap and customize them - not to mention creating macros - gives Nuendo the edge in this department. (I know you can work around it). Just the fact that you can remap right hand commands to your left side is a big deal when doing editing if you need to keep the right one on the trackball, for example.

I don't know if Windows can do it, but natively on a MAC you can assign key commands to any software you want.

Ops: Just saw the above... Anyways, I prefer being able to do it directly in the DAW.

Maybe on the music side of things, Nuendo has the edge.

But if you are working in Post, with existing FX libraries, and picture even LE has Nuendo beat.

LEX

I'm curious why you'd say that. What is it with FX libraries that makes PT and even LE beat? Not sure I get it....

Also, I think there are plenty of scenarios where the work-flow determines which one wins, regardless of whether you're in Post or Music. I'm about to get into some heavy (meaning monotunous in this case) editing and even though I'm by far faster in Pro Tools (because of longer time spent on it) I'm guessing that some things will go significantly faster in Nuendo (where I'll do it). Things related to consolidating regions into audio files (PT speak) for example. Just through using macros N should be a winner. But we'll see.

But anyways, I'm interested to hear about the benefits as far as FX goes....

mrtomcat

01-12-2010, 05:06 PM

LEX

01-12-2010, 07:29 PM

I'm curious why you'd say that. What is it with FX libraries that makes PT and even LE beat? Not sure I get it....

Also, I think there are plenty of scenarios where the work-flow determines which one wins, regardless of whether you're in Post or Music. I'm about to get into some heavy (meaning monotunous in this case) editing and even though I'm by far faster in Pro Tools (because of longer time spent on it) I'm guessing that some things will go significantly faster in Nuendo (where I'll do it). Things related to consolidating regions into audio files (PT speak) for example. Just through using macros N should be a winner. But we'll see.

But anyways, I'm interested to hear about the benefits as far as FX goes....

There are many details I just don't have the time to go into for PT/Nuendo example.

As Far as FX goes, Most editors use Soundminer or Netmix as their database. The standard is .L/.R for split mono files. But Nuendo renders them (left) and (right) in which soundminer shows both and doesn't link them together.
As a .L/.R, SM only shows the .L file giving you more room to view your search.

As far as dealing with sound files, the industry standard is split mono. ALL the FX libraries in town are setup that way and often if you are one of the editors on a project, you get pulled FX that are split mono.

Now PT can deal with stereo interleave as it just splits the file on import. Nuendo on the other hand can't deal with split mono on stereo tracks or 5.1 tracks ect.

The other major factor is everything is Los Angeles is PT, so if you are working with people working in PT, you might as well just be in PT.

Get a PT labeled Keyboard and Xkeys for your macos.

LEX

MattiasNYC

01-12-2010, 10:41 PM

thanks for the feedback.
I am sure that once I use it more I'll find a few things I like better.
My overall attitude towards any software or tool is that I prefer things to be less convoluded and straightforward.
Nuendo out of the box, you open it up you have your tracks, mixer and you're ready to roll...PT I have to set up all kinds of stuff, again not being able to create tracks via right mouse click..the fact that I have to do a special combo in order to see two plug ins side by side...and just way too much stuff on the screen. No button to click on for automation, there I have to righ click on the track, on the mixer I didn't even see an option...anyway, we'll see

I think it's interesting that some of those comments are almost exactly the same as the ones PT users give on Nuendo! I really think a lot of it has to do with getting used to where things are, and what the logic is behind why things end up there. You'll get used to it.... maybe...

I was under the impression that LE is the same UI as HD, I thought the only difference is the hardware? If that is not the case what are the differences?

If you're sort of replying to my previous comment then my point was in response to you saying that "Nuendo is a million times more powerful". So I took that as a comment on the whole DAW, and LE is obviously limited, so a comparison isn't entirely fair. But yeah, the GUI is about the same as far as I know.

Also Lex, or anyone else what is the best way to get a Nuendo project opened in PT?

thanks!

Sorry for repeating myself, but, it would probably help if you could tell us what types of projects you want to transfer.

mrtomcat

01-12-2010, 10:51 PM

sorry, I am looking to transfer music projects, no video stuff. The projects I usually deal with have about 28 to 32 tracks and I would like to be able to take those from PT and move them into Nuendo so that I can mix in there, partially because I like to go through analog outboard gear which is not possible with the mbox I got. Once I'm done I would want to get those tracks back into PT so that I can send it back to the client... Mostlikely I'm not going to need to go back to PT because the mix is done, but in the case where I'd do editing on a track or re-record it through some gear this would be likely...
the goal is as much flexibility as possible
Does that make sense?

MattiasNYC

01-13-2010, 12:28 AM

MattiasNYC

01-13-2010, 12:31 AM

Tomkat,

Yeah, it makes sense. How about you simply consolidate the audio files and drag/drop them into the Nuendo project? All files with the exact same start point and length and you should be good to go. No real need to complicate things, right?

LEX

01-13-2010, 02:10 AM

Thanks for your response Lex.

I've done 99% of all FX lay with Pro Tools and Soundminer, so I haven't encountered an issue with Soundminer/Nuendo. And the FX I lay in with Nuendo I did in Nuendo. I honestly didn't find that to be a particularly big problem, but I should point out that the project although it was a full length movie wasn't particularly FX intensive in any way.

As for compatibility with other operators, well, that's a no-brainer. And workarounds for KC's exist too. I don't use an Xkeys but I have a Preh which is essentially the same thing - a programmable keyboard with macros and plenty of layers.

Anyways, thanks for the input...

that's the thing. If your FX started in Nuendo interleave, then you won't see an issue.

It is when you are dealing with split mono. SB doesn't understand the concept of split mono, their importance and why it is important in the Post world.

If they did, then Nuendo would do it.

LEX

nikki-k

01-13-2010, 05:12 AM

PT LE vs HD..
Hardware. ADC.
As for the rest, there are little things that one person in one hundred will find that they absolutely have to have. The rest can be had by grabbing the Music Production Toolkit, or a step further with the DV Toolkit 2, or go for broke (pun intended :D ) and grab the Complete Extortion (erm.. Production) Toolkit. DVT2 adds almost all I needed versus HD, except for the damn delay comp. With HD, IMO, one must go HD2 Accel min, and HD3 if you want to do 24/96k. For 5.1 and 24/96k, HD4 Accel, HD5 to be really safe. LE is easily enough to make great records IMO. It truly comes down to what playground one prefers.

As far as moving sessions/songs... since I use C5.1.1 and PT LE 8.x (and have used PT LE, HD, and TDM for over 10 years.. easiest for me (music/audio only) has been to *simply* consolidate each track to 1|1|000 (export if necessary, or whatever is needed to have actual per track wav files), and export MIDI for markers and time sig/tempo. With PT, you must have at least one MIDI track (or Instrument Track) to export MIDI (even if you only want markers, or time sig, or tempo). Import MIDI, drop audio in, good to go! I gave up on having OMF or any other format remaining coherent across versions and other crap. Wav audio + .mid, works EVERY time. Well, unless you export MIDI from Logic 8 with certain marker types..lol...

As far as key commands, macros, etc. Headspace. Different approach, different background, different lineage, etc. I used to try and re-key apps to more approximate what I was used to. While this can be expedient in the short run, I have found that while learning the dev's key comand assignments, I can better come to understand where they were working from.. the headspace. Alter after, and I wish I could do so with PT, as I have no use for any of the Post specific commands. For macros- Xkeys.

RSE

01-13-2010, 12:25 PM

MattiasNYC

01-13-2010, 01:24 PM

For a (music) recording studio PT is way better then Nuendo:

Routing, automation, track import from saved sessions (not from 'dedicated exports'), tab-to-transient. playlists and multi-channel operations, to name a few.

Maybe you just need to get used to a different concept, that’s all.

I agree with some of that, but:

I think automation is clearly better in Nuendo 4.3.
I think import of track settings etc is clearly better in general in Nuendo.

TAFKAT

01-13-2010, 03:44 PM

PT LE vs HD.. Hardware. ADC.

Thats PDC for us Steini folk, i.e Plugin Delay Compensation. Many don't realise that LE does in fact have ADC/PDC , but only within the limitation of the buffer settings, so if the collective delay introduced by the plugins being used is above the buffer, then you have the hoop jumping. Thing is many if not most 3rd party plugs do have some inherent delay that needs to be compensated resulting in the buffer being quickly exhausted, so the point is mute once you move off the internal bundled plugs ( many which do not have any inherent delay) .

If Digi ever get their shite together and introduced a comparable level of ADC/PDC to the other Native DAW's, it would be all over bar the shouting in the market place , and thats not saying I believe PT is the better DAW, just that they could use the huge leverage they already have for the PT branding, and move it to the next level for the non HD market as well.

mrtomcat

01-13-2010, 09:45 PM

thanks for the feedback.

I spent some more time on a session last night, the mixer is driving me crazy, the fact that I can not type in values, that it's incredibly difficult to see what channel I am on, no way of moving from channel to channel, my alphatrack reacts incredibly sluggish.
I am really not impressed by this software, it doesn't look like they spent much research on ui design.
anyway, bottomline is, I'm in LA I want to work, I need to make myself like it

RSE

01-13-2010, 10:37 PM

I agree with some of that, but:

I think automation is clearly better in Nuendo 4.3.
I think import of track settings etc is clearly better in general in Nuendo.

I think you need to check out the PTHD 8 features, you'll find that PTHD can automate much more then what Nuendo can automate - not so much the other way around.

Just to mention group (called linked channels in N4) automation will do - In N4 faders need to be automated one-by-one, which is very time-consuming in a studio environment.

The same goes for the import options - in N4 one needs to constantly export a track archive with every save, just to be ready for when the client asks to import some tracks into a new session (without loading the old session for export) - this simply does not make any sense in a (commercial. live) studio environment

Once clients get familiar with some PT options, they become indispensable - try assigning a copy of an automated send to 40 channels at once in N4, for example.

mrtomcat

01-13-2010, 10:58 PM

N4 faders do not need to be automated one by one, you can do as many as you like at once...just a matter of your controller. Even with one controller you can easily link them, record the automation and unlink if needed.
you might have a point on the copying, never tried that...never needed to either.
Not following you on the import comment...why would I need to export a track archive with every save? Maybe I'm not understanding your point.

I have yet to see anything in PT that Nuendo doesn't do faster in a simpler way...in regards to the work I am doing... ok, I give you one: the Create Click Track track is cool, I wish I could do that in Nuendo...but other than that nothing comes to mind

nikki-k

01-13-2010, 11:02 PM

Thats PDC for us Steini folk, i.e Plugin Delay Compensation. Many don't realise that LE does in fact have ADC/PDC , but only within the limitation of the buffer settings, so if the collective delay introduced by the plugins being used is above the buffer, then you have the hoop jumping. Thing is many if not most 3rd party plugs do have some inherent delay that needs to be compensated resulting in the buffer being quickly exhausted, so the point is mute once you move off the internal bundled plugs ( many which do not have any inherent delay) .

If Digi ever get their shite together and introduced a comparable level of ADC/PDC to the other Native DAW's, it would be all over bar the shouting in the market place , and thats not saying I believe PT is the better DAW, just that they could use the huge leverage they already have for the PT branding, and move it to the next level for the non HD market as well.

Yeah, true. I always forget about that. For me, it is that "sometimes.." factor that gets me. I would rather not have to check; then again, if I do not hear any offending side-effects from plugs that do introduce...

My biggest issue with PT is how the native version will suffer to allow Daddy to survive. IMO, HD stand on it's own merits, and feature set is hardly the case for that.. for me and many others at least. Biggest issues for me are ADC/PDC (though I do love that a simple swap of displayed values on channel strips will show incurred values!), cost of Complete Extortion Toolkit, and.. almighty RTAS.

Cubase has the closest feature set to what my wish list includes (currently) for Composing. For track, edit (sparing use), mix.. PT or tape, and I would rather be on a nicely outfitted HD4 Accel than just about anything else. I know it well enough to do what I want without too much distractive thought. I am sure any app would do what I want.. just a matter of taking time to learn something else. I have a friend who has almost completely *altered* Reaper to be a PT clone, but with the benefits Reaper will allow (and any cons it also brings ;) ). Even with that, I would rather have my old PT HD4 Accel... and keep my MR816X + C5 for composing :D Only thing I would love is to use C5 without a dongle on my laptop.. I know I will snap that stupid thing one day... (sigh)

LEX

01-13-2010, 11:34 PM

I agree with some of that, but:

I think automation is clearly better in Nuendo 4.3.
I think import of track settings etc is clearly better in general in Nuendo.

Possibly, but PT automation is really just Euphonix S5 automation. The problem is, stupid Digi, crippled the automation in just the software, but it is far more powerful with a D command or ICON.
So +1 for Nuendo only.

You can do all the importing of tracks you want without having to archive it first. +1 PT.
Nuendo may have more options, but PT has many import options that exceed Nuendo by far.

LEX

RSE

01-14-2010, 06:06 AM

N4 faders do not need to be automated one by one, you can do as many as you like at once...just a matter of your controller. Even with one controller you can easily link them, record the automation and unlink if needed.

Please read the N4 manual:

"• When automating the settings of a channel that is linked
to another channel in the mixer, the parameters of the
linked channel will NOT be automated."

you might have a point on the copying, never tried that...never needed to either.

Well obviously you never had to, but when a musician (in a group of musicians) asks me to feed his cans with a new automated send with a different balance and/or events (which happens twice a week more or less), I need a quick solution - in PT I can do this quickly and in N4 I cannot.

Not following you on the import comment...why would I need to export a track archive with every save? Maybe I'm not understanding your point.

In PT tracks can be imported directly from the (regular) saved session file - in N4 one needs to load the source session first, mark the channels for export and then save them in a different XML format, before importing tracks into the target session.

I have yet to see anything in PT that Nuendo doesn't do faster in a simpler way...in regards to the work I am doing... ok, I give you one: the Create Click Track track is cool, I wish I could do that in Nuendo...but other than that nothing comes to mind

I do not know what your needs are and this why I refer to a generic '(music) recording studio' needs, what the old geezers call 'industry standard' -

The reason why most commercial music studios use PTHD is not because of the 'superior sound' (as if...) but because it was (and still is) programmed with studio needs in mind, while Cubendo had evolved from a single composer / musician's solution, which at the time was sync'd alongside the recording system, not replacing it.

The sad fact was (and still is) that Steiny are still stuck with their old concepts (dragging plugins was introduced just in version 4 for example, and copying sends is still science fiction) while Digi are very quick to adopt new features from the competition (check out the last versions of the automation for example).

mrtomcat

01-14-2010, 06:45 AM

LEX

01-14-2010, 03:05 PM

Do this. create 3 channels. Group them. Automate channel 1.

Now what happens if you want to automate just channel 2?

What happens if you ungroup them?

LEX

mrtomcat

01-15-2010, 03:46 AM

Do this. create 3 channels. Group them. Automate channel 1.

Now what happens if you want to automate just channel 2?

What happens if you ungroup them?

LEX

I wouldn't approach it that way...let me give you a workflow example on how I use this maybe it clears it up better:

Let's say I have 4 harmonie vocal tracks that I want to ride in the choruses.
I first set the faders so that I have the relationship levels set to where I want it
I then link the tracks
I know select write automation on all 4 tracks
I select the first track
Now I play the song and start riding the parts using my alpha track, because they are linked they all move up and down based on track 1
Then I deselect write and enable read
I know de-link the tracks

All 4 tracks now have their own automation and I can finetune each of them individually

Very straight forward

RSE

01-15-2010, 05:42 AM

all good and fine BUT on the automation issue, I do this daily and it always works...maybe they need to update their manual because they forgot to add a feature :)
I think you're misreading this: If a channel is linked and one of the channels is recording automation the automation is not taking place on the linked channel...however if both linked channels have automation write enabled both channels are being written to...hope this makes more sense.

You're missing the point, 'linking' is not 'grouping':

You may link faders in N4 in order to write individual track data, but the LEVELS you write are not grouped - it's just the faders that are 'ganged':

This means that automation data is saved individually (editing or 'drawing' automation data will not affect the other 'linked' faders) - so for example, if you've made a first pass and you wish to correct it, you need to re-write using the faders or edit the tracks one by one (copy and paste).

In PTHD grouping is (also) true VCA style grouping, the same VCA grouping found in large-frame recording consoles:

This means that all the slave faders are assigned to and controlled by a master fader, and its data is ADDED to the individual track data (+ it may be edited separately) - tracks may be added and removed from the group etc.

+ Automation data may be copied from any source to any destination, for (a common) example, fader automation data may be copied to a send's automation on selected tracks.

Even in PTLE group automation is really 'grouped' - you may assign plugins/sends to all members of the group and edit their automation data as a group: the sends' levels/ pans /mutes are ALSO grouped in real-time, and may be edited in the same way, + the groups themselves may be edited (tracks added or removed).

...and btw, when you copy a plug-in to all members of the group its automation data is copied with it.

Once you (or worse, your clients) get used to this style of work, automating in N4 feels VERY primitive.

Anyway, the statement 'automation is clearly better in Nuendo 4.3' is false.

MattiasNYC

01-15-2010, 10:00 AM

Not sure what you're arguing:
Please read the N4 manual:

"• When automating the settings of a channel that is linked
to another channel in the mixer, the parameters of the
linked channel will NOT be automated."

mrtomcat said: "Even with one controller you can easily link them, record the automation and unlink if needed."

As far as I can tell that is correct. Or does that not apply when using a controller....?

RSE

01-15-2010, 01:40 PM

Please read the N4 manual:

"• When automating the settings of a channel that is linked
to another channel in the mixer, the parameters of the
linked channel will NOT be automated.".

Not sure what you're arguing:

mrtomcat said: "Even with one controller you can easily link them, record the automation and unlink if needed."

As far as I can tell that is correct. Or does that not apply when using a controller....?

In order to fully understand the quoted text from the N4 manual you need to read it as follows:

"When automating the settings of a channel that is linked
to another channel in the mixer, the parameters of the
linked channel will NOT be automated by the data recorded by the fader that you are moving."

You may 'link' the faders for inputting data to individual tracks, but the linked faders are not automated by grouped data - still each fader 'writes' to its respective channel, but the DATA are not grouped.

In a typical session we use the faders just for 'rough' input - the mouse is not a very artistic tool, the resolution at lower levels (-10 > -20 dB) is not sufficient, and we also use the editing features a lot - drawing, copying, pasting and duplicating - so most of the automation is 'performed' by editing or drawing data, rather then by fader input -

But since the data in N4 channels are not grouped, when one edits the recorded data it affects only the respective channel, not all the faders in the group:

...Which means that in PT the faders may be automated as a group, but in N4 faders need to be automated one-by-one, just like I said:

I think you need to check out the PTHD 8 features, you'll find that PTHD can automate much more then what Nuendo can automate - not so much the other way around.

Just to mention group (called linked channels in N4) automation will do - In N4 faders need to be automated one-by-one, which is very time-consuming in a studio environment.

This friendly argument was all about the (false) statement 'automation is clearly better in Nuendo 4.3':

No, it's not 'clearly better in Nuendo 4.3', it's clearly worse.

LEX

01-15-2010, 02:23 PM

In order to fully understand the quoted text from the N4 manual you need to read it as follows:

"When automating the settings of a channel that is linked
to another channel in the mixer, the parameters of the
linked channel will NOT be automated by the data recorded by the fader that you are moving."

That's exactly what I was saying.

LEX

mrtomcat

01-15-2010, 09:44 PM

ai caramba

well, quite frankly I couldn't care less about this aprticular part, automation works fantastic for me in N4, is it the best I have no clue. I am easily able to automate multiple tracks at the same time, even could do it using a group bus the same way as I described before...without violating the rules of software inheritance which based on your description PT does...not my thing.

What I find much more interesting is when I was at the NAMM show yesterday, every DAW manufacturer had booths set up with product demonstrations, and very creative attitudes, digi/avid had a booth with no product or demos or anything artistic or creative, just benches and lots of business guys in suits and ties...that sums it up for me right there... which could have the excat oppositie effect for you of course which bring me to my final statement on this:

A good friend of mine made the perfect point yesterday and I truly believe that's what it all comes down to:

The best DAW is the DAW that YOU can be the most creative and constructive with... For me that is Nuendo for you it's PT it's really as easy as that.

RSE

01-16-2010, 03:03 AM

ai caramba

The best DAW is the DAW that YOU can be the most creative and constructive with... For me that is Nuendo for you it's PT it's really as easy as that.

True, but my point is that as consumers it's in our best interest not to overlook the product's faults and the competition's advantages, and hence the (constant) comparison -

The 'my choice is always best' attitude is what makes it possible for Steiny to save on R&D, and make us pay for bug fixes instead of improvements.

Most opinions I see in forums are 'my system is the best at everything', although most users who state that don't know even the first thing about the alternatives -

I bring up PT's advantages not in order to promote Digi (I use Steiny at home, and I own both systems), but in order to improve Cubendo by making its faults known to the users, in the hope that customer feedback would force Steiny to pull their heads out of their fat asses, and COMPETE.

This forum is great because it promotes constructive criticism, and I saw that at least one dude from SB NA is reading it - at Steiny's forums I get more then enough 'Cubendo is best' attitude besides the usual Bolshevik propaganda tactics - that's why I never bother to write there, and that's why I do write here.

mrtomcat

01-16-2010, 03:52 AM

I agree that comparison is good, but only because someone likes something better on a different system does not mean others agree. There are quite a few items I would like to see improved in Nuendo...folding in tracks based on the folder they are in in the mixer for example is something I've been asking about for years...
I worked in the software industry for 15 years inbetween music and I know very well what a proper user interface is supposed to look like, PT is far from it, it violates I don't know how many rules that software engineers are supposed to follow. And truly my biggest issue with PT is simply that it is a convoluded interface and that I have to hit 3 buttons for something I can do in 1 click in nuendo.

I can pretty much guarantee you if you take a novice and put him in front of both systems he'll be faster up and running on nuendo than on pt. I have also been using steinberg products for over 20 years which is another reason I prefer them.

LEX

01-16-2010, 05:06 AM

I can pretty much guarantee you if you take a novice and put him in front of both systems he'll be faster up and running on nuendo than on pt. I have also been using steinberg products for over 20 years which is another reason I prefer them.

Funny. I was speaking to someone a few weeks ago who was a Nuendo user. When he finally learned PT, he said it was far easier to get around and simpler to edit with than Nuendo. And he knew Nuendo very well.

There are some great things about Nuendo. I think they just need to step back from complicated and simplify a little more.

What's the point of a feature is 2 people use it.

LEX