Nuendo 3 vs. Cubase 5/6 vs alternatives?

[ihavezippers]

to answer my own question, i wanted to check my facts---I googled Digital Performer and PC, and apparently the newest version (not yet released) is going to be PC compatible. So...I think I will wait for DP8. Looks like it will be in my price range.

[philper]

DP is good for music composition and recording, but lacking for video audio post I think. Nuendo 5 is a better bet, esp after you jobs start to get a bit more complex.

phil p

[tom_lowe]

Originally Posted by ihavezippers

I like ProTools, but I thought only Digidesign hardware works with ProTools and I'm not going to change out audio interface at this point.

Where have you been the last 2 or so years?!

[ihavezippers]

Originally Posted by tom_lowe

Where have you been the last 2 or so years?!

ha, i guess more research is in order? I've also heard that ProTools is not that great unless you have the money for their premium version, but then of course nothing touches it. I've only seen ProTools in use in a professional studio, so I imagine they have the money for the premium version...but the experience was magical.

Thanks for the information about Digital Performer. clearly I need to do more research, I thought DP was a heavy hitter in the film scoring world...I read it was used on LOTR.

[kdm]

DP8 may still be several weeks away - hard to predict. Waiting is fine, depending on how long you are willing to wait, and risk whether DP8 will even be stable.

If you need something now, Cubase 6.5 would be a much better buy for scoring than Nuendo 5.5. Nuendo has more post features than Cubase but not more scoring features. ProTools+CPT is the best choice for post, hands down.

Nuendo and Cubase aren't very far apart and Nuendo is certainly not "worlds better".

There are a few Nuendo users that might disagree, but having been there with Nuendo, that's my .02. Cubase/DP/Logic for scoring. ProTools for post.

[Jjrbricks]

IMHO go with the version of Nuendo you can afford. It's a foot in the door and you will get some $$ off when you upgrade. I would think your only other challenge may be your computing power considering your only working w/ $500 in that department.

[cee1cee4]

Hi everyone!!
I am in the market for Nuendo and I don't have the money for the current version. I want to know if anybody here knows where I can find Nuendo 3.
I have search everywhere including Ebay, music stores, Online stores. Please help thanks

[soundcat]

i've used cubase and nuendo and as far as my experience, they're very much alike. i've even shared project files between the two apps without any issues whatsoever. the interface, effects, quality, is almost identical, from my understanding, if you're not doing more than 5.1, don't have a need for networking or the cash for nuendo, maybe check out cubase for now until you can afford nuendo?

i know most say cubase is better suited for music and i wouldn't consider myself an expert at all, but personally, i have a hard time seeing why it can't be used for post-production. not to mention, with cubase you have the ability to do music as well. you need to buy an expansion for nuendo to get those same music specs.

download the trial for nuendo and cubase, check them both out and experiment. im curious to hear what others think about this too. the only difference that's annoyed me a little while working in cubase is not being able to combine two mono tracks into stereo, this can be done in nuendo with ease, there may be a few other small features like this that make it worth while for some...

as far as finding a copy of nuendo 3, i tried not too long ago with no luck. sorry, hope this helps!

[drakem]

As far as I know Cubase won't work with Eucon Pro and Nuendo with Eucon Artist. :(.
As of features, Nuendo has got more powerful Automation system, couple of more key commands, extended edit. I think Control Room has more features, as well as Direct Routing for stems and so on. I don't have Cubase so please bear with me

[Henchman]

First off, what and where is your market.
Every stage I work at requires score to be delivered in a Pt session.
If you make things difficult, you will find your client list shrinking.

[ErikG]

Hench, I often agree with your statements, not this time.
A composer needs to choose his composing tool for feel, and how intuitive it is to use while composing.
Choosing a daw because it will be used to replay the delivered stems would be crazy. Buy or borrow a PT license to put your exported stems into PT whenever necessary (or buy aa translator).
Cubase really lacks in automation, stems and export functionality and don't have video follows picture when moving event, aka Edit Mode (there's more to the difference but it won't really change what you can do).
If you can live with that Cubase will very likely be fine.

[Henchman]

I'm not saying don't use whatever you want to use.
But when it's 8 o'clock pm, and the director wants a change, and you can't get hold of the friends Pro-Tools system to do the conversion, what are you gong to do.
Send an OMf/AAF, that when when it arrives doesn't open, or open properly. Synch is off, etc?

Do you really want to risk that?

Like I said. If the market you are in is using mostly Nuendo. Use Nuendo. if its Pro-Tools, make sure you can deliver a PT's session. Otherwise, next time,they'll be using someone who can.

[MixMasterM]

Most composers I know use DP or Logic. But it's really all about preference for work flow and access to the tools you like to use (ie plugins, soft synths, samplers & libraries). As far as delivering to the mix stage, PT is definitely the most used platform out there in the post world, but not really the best workflow for actually creating music (although I'm sure it is done by some)...so, if you can export into a PT timeline for delivery, that is the best way to get the tracks to the mix stage. Some composers alternatively export cues as aif or wav files that spot to the timeline on import. So, if you're working on something other than PT, and exporting files, them make sure you have the "region tc in" as part of the file name (M1 01:00:08:00) A Cue Sheet is also a helpful (I know many mixers will ask "why?" ....but it's a useful way to check off cues, and ensure what is in the mix is what was delivered) This will ensure cues are in their proper place, and nothing gets missed. Mixers & Mix support crew are not mind readers, so if the composer is not delivering a PT session, then everything must be very clear and organized from the composer or music editor, as to ensure that all the cues are in their proper place. Rambling a bit here...but the important thing is work with what works best for you...and make sure that delivery to the stage is something that is simple to load up, and that takes minimal time to set up in the mix.

[Henchman]

Miguel, yes absolutely use what suits the composing. But Im sure, as a mixer, you won't be too happy having to spend valuable mix time importing and spotting multiple stems when doing a fix, on shows that already have tight budgets and time constrains. I know I won't be. And although I won't say anything on the stage, I will most certainly let the sound supervisor know that delvering stems as time stamped files is not acceptable, and not a good use of stage time.

[mattiasnyc]

Originally Posted by Henchman

Miguel, yes absolutely use what suits the composing. But Im sure, as a mixer, you won't be too happy having to spend valuable mix time importing and spotting multiple stems when doing a fix, on shows that already have tight budgets and time constrains. I know I won't be. And although I won't say anything on the stage, I will most certainly let the sound supervisor know that delvering stems as time stamped files is not acceptable, and not a good use of stage time.

Honestly, I have a hard time seeing how you'd lose much if any time by importing a time stamped file as opposed to doing a track import or open a new session on a slave PT setup.

Import file. Spot it. Done. Takes less than one minute.

[Steven1145]

To the OP: dont bother with an outdated version of an app. Go for a more recent version that still has active users and support. Plus Nuendo 5's video engine is much, much better than what was in N3.

[Henchman]

Originally Posted by mattiasnyc

Honestly, I have a hard time seeing how you'd lose much if any time by importing a time stamped file as opposed to doing a track import or open a new session on a slave PT setup.

Import file. Spot it. Done. Takes less than one minute.

Because a single cues isnt a single file. And of you are constantly importing and spotting cues that consist of 4-8 stems, the time wasted adds up quickly.

[mattiasnyc]

Originally Posted by Henchman

Because a single cues isnt a single file. And of you are constantly importing and spotting cues that consist of 4-8 stems, the time wasted adds up quickly.

So how would you prefer it'd be done then? Step by step that is.

[Henchman]

Originally Posted by mattiasnyc

So how would you prefer it'd be done then? Step by step that is.

Well, it happens very often that when music fixes come in there are more than one. I simply import the 4-8 tracks as new tracks. Go to each fix drag the whole 4-8 tracks at one time into the existing tracks, and mix them in. Move on to the next. I don't have to first creat however many tracks needed for the new files, then import or drag and drop the files into those tracks. Then spot them, then move them to the correct tracks, then mix them.

Then after having done this for every fix, delete the import scratch tracks.

Also, a lot of times, a fix is a session only, linking to already existing files of the old cue.
So yes, way way way more efficient use of time if it's a PT session.

[mattiasnyc]

I'm not seeing much of a difference.

Originally Posted by Henchman

Well, it happens very often that when music fixes come in there are more than one. I simply [1] import the 4-8 tracks as new tracks. Go to each fix [2] drag the whole 4-8 tracks at one time into the existing tracks, [3] and mix them in. [4] Move on to the next.

You'd still be left with the tracks you imported that you dragged from, so step [5] is "delete the import scratch tracks".

The alternative you describe seems to have extra steps that are unnecessary, unless I'm missing something...

Originally Posted by Henchman

I don't have to [1] first creat however many tracks needed for the new files, [2] then import or drag and drop the files into those tracks. [3] Then spot them, then [4] move them to the correct tracks, [5] then mix them.

[6] Then after having done this for every fix, delete the import scratch tracks.

You don't have to manually create tracks to drop imported files on. Instead you can either just import and select for imported files to land on their own tracks, saving one step, or import straight into the bin and then drag straight onto the mix tracks they'd end up on anyways, this time saving two steps since there'd be no source tracks to delete either.

Also, when spotting you just select to spot to where the files are timestamped and you should be good. No real "extra" step of significance in my opionion. Or in other words:

[1] import files to bin
[2] drag in spot mode to appropriate mix track
[3] mix

Originally Posted by Henchman

Also, a lot of times, a fix is a session only, linking to already existing files of the old cue.

Not sure I understand the benefit here. If you're saying that rather than importing a bunch of individual files that are in different locations on the timeline you import the session, you could just as well simply import one long file for the duration. So instead of importing 3 sets for 3 different locations of fixes just re-render the complete file again and import one long file. Same difference. Or alternatively look at importing to bin with spot-on-drag-to-track and there won't be a difference between drag from track versus drag from bin, except for the need to then delete tracks.

Originally Posted by Henchman

So yes, way way way more efficient use of time if it's a PT session.

I'm just not seeing it as that much more efficient I guess. Seems to me to be a workflow issue.

[Henchman]

Mattiasync, how many movies and /or TV shows have you mixed?
I need the files to end up on the same named tracks as the originals.
Strings on strings, percussion on percussion etc.
Dragging them into the region list, puts them in alphabetical order, all through the region list, in alphabetical order.
Same with importing them or dragging them directly to tracks.

Again, I have worked on shows where I have had to drag stems in as separate files, and I know from experience what a big time waster it ends up being. And when I am needing to mix an hour and a half Movie in 4 days, every second is precious . And time wasted dealing with a composers material that is delivered poorly, is time taken away that would be better spent fixing dialog.

So, if all one can afford is one program, and you want to deliver properly, you need to deliver in the format your local industry is using.

[mattiasnyc]

Originally Posted by Henchman

Mattiasync, how many movies and /or TV shows have you mixed?
I need the files to end up on the same named tracks as the originals.
Strings on strings, percussion on percussion etc.
Dragging them into the region list, puts them in alphabetical order, all through the region list, in alphabetical order.
Same with importing them or dragging them directly to tracks.

Again, I have worked on shows where I have had to drag stems in as separate files, and I know from experience what a big time waster it ends up being. And when I am needing to mix an hour and a half Movie in 4 days, every second is precious . And time wasted dealing with a composers material that is delivered poorly, is time taken away that would be better spent fixing dialog.

Look, you don't need to tell anyone that time wasted is time wasted, that's obvious. All I'm saying is that for me and for the way I work and speed I can use PT at the scenario you outlined isn't a problem.

Personally I don't really care what the source is for an update as long as it is accurate in and by itself, and as long as I know what it is and how to use it. The difference in time between the two workflows you showed amounts to very little to me.

Originally Posted by Henchman

So, if all one can afford is one program, and you want to deliver properly, you need to deliver in the format your local industry is using.

Well, sure, if you're being asked to deliver PT sessions then PT is what you need one way or another. I don't dispute that. And I don't dispute that it's the post standard in the US.

[mattiasnyc]

Originally Posted by Henchman

I'm not saying don't use whatever you want to use.
But when it's 8 o'clock pm, and the director wants a change, and you can't get hold of the friends Pro-Tools system to do the conversion, what are you gong to do.
Send an OMf/AAF, that when when it arrives doesn't open, or open properly. Synch is off, etc?

Do you really want to risk that?

Like I said. If the market you are in is using mostly Nuendo. Use Nuendo. if its Pro-Tools, make sure you can deliver a PT's session. Otherwise, next time,they'll be using someone who can.

I guess the question is which option is possible on his budget.

[MixMasterM]

Originally Posted by Henchman

Miguel, yes absolutely use what suits the composing. But Im sure, as a mixer, you won't be too happy having to spend valuable mix time importing and spotting multiple stems when doing a fix, on shows that already have tight budgets and time constrains. I know I won't be. And although I won't say anything on the stage, I will most certainly let the sound supervisor know that delvering stems as time stamped files is not acceptable, and not a good use of stage time.

Hench, I agree, importing time stamped cues can waste a bit more time on the mix stage. I certainly would prefer a Protools session from the composer. I'm just saying that if that is not an option for delivery to the stage, then alternatively time stamped files that are well organized (each Cue within it's own well named folder & region names with Cue ID, Timecode start time, Instrument) and a well documented physical Cue sheet certainly helps speed up the process for me. If I get a bunch of random cues in a folder with minimal info, then yes, that's annoying....so, going back to my original point in answer to the poster...my personal view is for composers to use what they feel helps them deliver great music, making sure it's mixed well and delivered on time, if delivering files, then keep it super organized, keep it simple, keep splits to max 3, place each set of cue files in there own appropriately named folder, and communicate with the mixer or sound facility transfer dept....but....if you are delivering splits wider than 3 or have 50 cues in an hour of programming , then please transfer to PT. or else I (and definitely Hench and many other mixers) will be pretty grumpy.