The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Cubase SX3 and Nuendo are the same ?
Old 10th May 2006
  #1
Lives for gear
 
dreamsongs's Avatar
 

Cubase SX3 and Nuendo are the same ?

A couple of days ago my friend brought his new Nuendo rig to my house on his laptop. He'd been bragging about it for weeks... I have Cubase SX3 which I'm very happy with...

We ran some tests to compare differences between one and the other. As you all know, the Nuendo interface, windows and overall look is the same as SX3. Some slight differences in the colors, that's all.

We tried one track at a time, then 12 and then 24 tracks of a given procect. We really couldn't hear any differences in audio quality with single tracks. My friend said that Nuendo had a better summing engine than SX3 wich I laughed at...I thought it was the Video capabilities that made it more expensive.

So, we ran about 24 tracks through my converters and to my monitors. We came to the conclusion that there wasn't any sonic difference between the two. We tried to listen critically and find differences but we couldn't. They sounded pretty much the same to both of us.

This is not an official test or anything but, I really wanted to know why some people who only work with the audio side of both these DAW's would choose Nuendo over SX3 and pay $1,400 more for it. I don't understand...

Maybe it was a little late at night and maybe I missed the finer details, but honestly, I couldn't hear any difference...

If there is truly any difference between the two please enlighten me, I would really like to know...
Old 10th May 2006
  #2
Gear Addict
 
Psyko/Acoustics's Avatar
 

From what I understand they have the same digital audio engine. I believe this has been confirmed numerous times by Steinberg, who you could ask directly for the definitive answer.


There are apparently some large differences in things pertaining to video, and there are some extra functionalities in Nuendo like "Control Room". That's all I know.


If it means anything, I've called Cubase projects up in Nuendo and they sound exactly the same to me.
Old 10th May 2006
  #3
Lives for gear
 
dreamsongs's Avatar
 

Hence what I posted...

I thought maybe the summing engine was superior in Nuendo, but no, I didn't hear it.

The question still remains, why do people who only work on the audio side pick Nuendo over Cubase and pay more than half what SX3 costs ?

Still stranger to me is how some people put SX3 down while praising Nuendo when they're exactly alike ?

I don't get it...
Old 10th May 2006
  #4
Lives for gear
I think a lot of studios use Nuendo because they can expand their work to Ads and soundtracks.
Old 10th May 2006
  #5
Lives for gear
 

I think Nuendo has a few more plugins and possibly some extra surround and video features. I personally find that third party plugins are superior to Steinberg plugins, so Nuendo offers nothing of interest to me over SX3.

It's fairly well known that Steinberg use SX3 as their beta testing program for Nuendo. SX users get the new features first, and by about the third release the bugs are fixed and the new features are then added to Nuendo. For this reason, Nuendo is slightly more professional if you can't afford to do free beta testing for Steinberg.
Old 10th May 2006
  #6
Lives for gear
 
GP_Hawk's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreamsongs
Hence what I posted...

I thought maybe the summing engine was superior in Nuendo, but no, I didn't hear it.

The question still remains, why do people who only work on the audio side pick Nuendo over Cubase and pay more than half what SX3 costs ?

Still stranger to me is how some people put SX3 down while praising Nuendo when they're exactly alike ?

I don't get it...
It's just people being silly and confused. You probably won't run into many professional's making any such claims. And the thing to remember is that if you do get into more post, you can always upgrade to nuendo from sx3.
Old 10th May 2006
  #7
Lives for gear
 
Tibbon's Avatar
Hint: Logic Pro costs more than Logic Express, but yet sounds the 'same'. Why does one cost more? Professional features!
Old 10th May 2006
  #8
Lives for gear
 
dreamsongs's Avatar
 

Nuendo doesn't have any extra features that I'm aware of ...

It's not something that's gonna keep me up at night but the original question was "why pay $1,400 more for Nuendo"?

I would love to hear from anybody who doesn't work with video that chose Nuendo over SX3...c'mon I know you're out there...!
Old 10th May 2006
  #9
Gear Addict
 
Psyko/Acoustics's Avatar
 

Sorry I didn't say much in my 1st post...

I just read that there are some extra built in functions for working on team projects, with access rights, and LAN integration.

The "Control Room" feature is pretty cool, it allows a special separate method of creating and monitoring multiple cue mixes and checking each in the control room to hear what your performer is hearing.

I know there's more... an ability to send video to a separate monitor is another...

Cubase seems like more of a small-scale production product while Nuendo is designed for a full blown audio installation. You can get similar audio results from both but Nuendo has features like the above which will appeal to people who need this kind of flexibility, along with extra post-production functions.

If your friend has no use for these things he shoulda got Cubase.

Logic Express seems pretty crippled in audio functionality next to Logic Pro to me - not as much as Cubase to Nuendo. The price tag justifies it too. Kinda like the lesser versions of Cubase (SE, SL) to SX.

Cubase features:

http://www.steinberg.net/552_1.html

Here's some Nuendo stuff that Cubase mostly doesn't have:

http://www.steinberg.net/95_1.html


Funny how there's no Cubase to Nuendo comparison. I don't like that.
Old 10th May 2006
  #10
Gear Maniac
 
FalconerHK's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psyko/Acoustics
Funny how there's no Cubase to Nuendo comparison. I don't like that.
ftp://ftp.steinberg.net/Download/Nue...ature_list.pdf

Seek and ye shall find... here on this very forum.
Old 10th May 2006
  #11
Lives for gear
 
Roger Starr's Avatar
 

Almost the same. Nuendo has some extra stuff for post, that's it. Because of the buggy past, Cubase still has sort of a bad rep, Nuendo not, so there you have mostly only a marketing reason...

Roger
Old 10th May 2006
  #12
Gear Addict
 
Psyko/Acoustics's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FalconerHK
ftp://ftp.steinberg.net/Download/Nue...ature_list.pdf

Seek and ye shall find... here on this very forum.

Couldn't find that! Thought I tried everything. Oops.
Old 10th May 2006
  #13
Lives for gear
 
dreamsongs's Avatar
 

I guess there are some added features in Nuendo. I for one do not need those extras, maybe the control room sounds nice, but not vital. It doesn't mean that other people feel the same way as I do, but for the extra $$$ it just isn't enough...

Now, if you said that there is an improved mix/summing engine and it sounds better, that's another story. But with good outboard pre's, compression, fx and good mixing chops, SX3 sounds as good as any other DAW. But that also is another thread...

Bottom line for me is that comapring side by side, the extra $ really isn't worth it. At the time I got SX3 money was no object, I looked at pretty much everything out there, they were all pretty close, but I thought SX3 gave me more bang for the $, more features, ALC, midi, unlimited tracks etc...

I'd say that's as good as it's going to get for $599.00. If I ever need those extra goodies, I'll look at Nuendo. In the meantime, I'll stick with SX3, I'm still learning all the things it can do...But, I would spend the extra dough in the future for something that sounds much better, no doubt...
Old 10th May 2006
  #14
jdg
Lives for gear
 
jdg's Avatar
they are exactly the same audio engine.

now, does the PC version sound different then the mac version?

i've heard that rumor many times.
Old 10th May 2006
  #15
Gear Addict
 
Psyko/Acoustics's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdg
they are exactly the same audio engine.

now, does the PC version sound different then the mac version?

i've heard that rumor many times.
Oh crap...I don't want to figure this one out
Old 10th May 2006
  #16
Lives for gear
 
crypticglobe's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreamsongs
A couple of days ago my friend brought his new Nuendo rig to my house on his laptop. He'd been bragging about it for weeks... I have Cubase SX3 which I'm very happy with...

We ran some tests to compare differences between one and the other. As you all know, the Nuendo interface, windows and overall look is the same as SX3. Some slight differences in the colors, that's all.

We tried one track at a time, then 12 and then 24 tracks of a given procect. We really couldn't hear any differences in audio quality with single tracks. My friend said that Nuendo had a better summing engine than SX3 wich I laughed at...I thought it was the Video capabilities that made it more expensive.

So, we ran about 24 tracks through my converters and to my monitors. We came to the conclusion that there wasn't any sonic difference between the two. We tried to listen critically and find differences but we couldn't. They sounded pretty much the same to both of us.

This is not an official test or anything but, I really wanted to know why some people who only work with the audio side of both these DAW's would choose Nuendo over SX3 and pay $1,400 more for it. I don't understand...

Maybe it was a little late at night and maybe I missed the finer details, but honestly, I couldn't hear any difference...

If there is truly any difference between the two please enlighten me, I would really like to know...

I could have saved you all that trouble. :D

Cubase SX 3.x and Nuendo 3.x are 99.9% identical. Same audio engine, same features. They absolutely 100% sonically identical! The only differences are a few little things like:

1. SX has 7.1 surround, Nuendo has up to 12.1 surround.
2. Nuendo has a few post/video related features that SX doesn't have (though you can totally do post and video with SX)
3. Nuendo has a few more file import/export options (like AES, open TL, etc) than Cubase.
4. Nuendo 3.2 has a built in Control Room section. Cubase SX 3.x will not see that feature.
5. 192K sample rates. Nuendo does 192K max, SX does 96K max.

That's it. I mean... the gui is a different color... a few features are in VERY slightly different places, but nothing under the hood is different. They even develop these 2 programs mostly simultaneously.

Why do people use Nuendo over SX 3.0??

Well... I can think of a few reasons:

1. Name. Because Nuendo when developed was aimed at high end users, it does not carry with it the "Cubase" name which is still (unfortunately) associated with a cute little midi sequencer. The Nuendo "name" get's some serious respect in the biz these days and if you are good, your client won't even balk when you say you use Nunedo instead of Pt. If they do balk, you can almost always assure them that you will provide the session files in a PT compatible format, and they are fine with it. This is NOT so with the "Cubase" name. If you say you are using Cubase post Pro's think you are on the level of a home studio guy, and not someone they want to use. Now... all of this is a generalization... but trust me.... it's pretty much the norm.

2. Because you got into Nuendo when it WAS better than Cubase. A little history on this one. Cubase, WAS at one time only a midi squencer (it ran on the Atari!). Then they added audio to it. Then, they started adding a bunch of features. In the meantime... technology was bolting ahead!! The code for Cubase became VERY "kludgy". So... Steinberg decided to write a totally new program taking all the accumulated knowledge they had and putting it to use. Nuendo was born! Nuendo was HUGELY successful and touted for it's ease of use, fantastic sounding audio engine and rock solid stability. Thus further on down the development path Cubase VST development ended, and Nuendo technology was ported over to the new face of Cubase.... called Cubase SX. For a while, there was some feature "leap-frogging" which caused a bit of turmoil with Steinberg users, but now both programs are on a more or less equal development path...since they share the exact same codebase. If you were one of the ones that got into Nuendo way back in the day when it was the hottest native software going... you are probably still using it.

3. Mis-information. For kicks, I will occasionally play "dumb" when I am in music stores and ask the salesmen questions. I have yet to find a music store with a salesman that would admit that Cubase and Nuendo were the same program, and that if you didn't care about the name... SX was a GREAT deal. Plus... I mean... Steinberg is not known for putting a lot of money into marketing. It's gotten a little better since they are owned by Yamaha now... but not much. I mean... this thread proves it. Just the fact that so many people don't know that the audio engine and audio quality of SX and Nuendo are identical just proves that Steinberg hasn't done the best job getting the word out.

4. Post house. If you are a post house.... Nuendo does have some features and product compatibilities that make it totally worthwhile over SX.

5. WK-Audio ID controller. Nuendo has support for this, Cubase SX does not. If you can afford the ID... you can definitely afford Nuendo... and actually the ID still comes with a free copy of Nuendo I believe.... lol.

6. The above mentioned sample rate max. SX maxes out at 96K, Nuendo at 192K.


Hope this helps. I own multiple copies of both programs and it's really completely transparent to go between the two. The project files are fully compatible, and they total recall in either program.


Last edited by crypticglobe; 10th May 2006 at 08:17 PM..
Old 10th May 2006
  #17
Lives for gear
 

Another feature Nuendo has over SX3 is the advanced crossfade editor
Old 11th May 2006
  #18
Lives for gear
 
dreamsongs's Avatar
 

Thanks Cryptic...

Well... that just about settles it...

I don't sell studio time to strangers and the people I work with don't really care what I use because they trust my judgement as to audio gear and don't have anything to say after they hear the final product.

It is a shame that Cubase is associated with a "little midi sequencer" or not taken seriously but I still think it is a powerful tool if you are just tracking, mixing and editing audio. It has all the features I'll ever need.

I read the extras for Nuendo and although they would be nice to have, I really wouldn't be using them as much as the usual things I would use with just about any DAW.

If you're tracking and mixing ITB, I'm not sure there would be a great deal of difference between the leading DAW's. They all do pretty much the same thing give or take a few features...

I'll sign up for any DAW the day they sound like it was recorded and mixed thru a SSL...in the meantime, it's the same dog with different fleas...
Old 9th January 2007
  #19
Gear Addict
 
skygod's Avatar
Pro Audio Sales Creatures

Quote:
Originally Posted by crypticglobe View Post
3. Mis-information. For kicks, I will occasionally play "dumb" when I am in music stores and ask the salesmen questions ... I have yet to find a music store with a salesman that ...
Dear Tales from the Crypt:

For kicks lol? I do it all the time!!! My modus operandi is walking in and acting like a total moron, and just asking a simple question to test their headspace and level of professionalism (esp at GCs where they now have reps from GC Pro embedded in there now to increase high end sales), and say something like: "Have you heard of the Royer 122 or The Mojave 200?" and it comes out ... "Oh yeah, Dave Royer ... I spoke to him last week at the NAMM etc., known him for 20 years" ...

Unless they print you out a spec sheet and start explaining the cardioid, super , omni, fig 8 curves and bumps to you as compared it to related industry standards like a U87, 47, 67, 251, C12 or ribbon, or small condenser or dynamic, you immediately know that this ********* knows as much about mics or whatever else you are talking about as the local mailman lol ...

Its always nice to talk to professionals that are actually proficient technically (the science), and proficient tactically (the art in practice in the trenches based on experience as end users themselves) than being more concerned to impress me with their idea of industry social bullsheat!

Be wise. Pro audio inquiries and purchases is like swimming in a sea of alligators out there. Once you buy, make sure you made the right decision, because your return at remorse resale is as around 25 cents on the US dollar unless you have a good resale client base.

Then you get the class of megalith superstore retail sales like Sweetwater with a decent reputation for service and support, who constantly list stuff that is vaporware: Tascam X48, Mackie VLZ3, Mackie 1200F ad nauseum ... yet they are more than willing to pre-order and charge your credit card and tie up your money for 6-months as if ... When? Soon. Huh? Yeah. What? Ok. Right? Roger. Wilco? Out. yeah and lets do lunch, and how about a reacharound while I'm being faaked ... fuggouttahere .... fuggedaboudit! Just tell the truth and don't post this crap unless a blinking box sits at the top of the webpage with angels flying around it singing: "Glory Halleleujah ... we will see this marketed item as the day of the Lord approacheth ... and the church said Amen brethren!" It demeans from the fact that you actually have salespersons that are in fact technically and tactically proficient. Too bad. Shame on you you greedy greedy greedy bad boys ...

Research, research, research ... never buy impulsively, and watch the market. It is in flux in quantum leaps every year and the technologies are getting smaller and better each day ... gotta go, I'm being abducted by another salesperson

My 2 cents

~skygod~
Old 10th January 2007
  #20
Lives for gear
 
GearGuy's Avatar
 

WTF?



Way to resurrect a thread from May 2006 and then to post your rant which had nothing to do with the topic.

I don't even follow what they heack you are saying after the Sweetwater part, but speaking from experience, you are wong about pre-orders at Sweetwater. If you pre-order something from them, they never charge your card until the item arrives in-stock. So your rant about them was baseless...
Old 10th January 2007
  #21
Lives for gear
 
GearGuy's Avatar
 

Now posting about the actual thread....

Yes, everything that Steve (crypticglobe) said! Like many, when I chose Nuendo Cubase SX did not exist yet. I sold my PT system because I liked Nuendo so much more... but if I had to choose today and I was new to DAW I would go with Cubase 4 since it is more or less Nuendo minus some post production extras... That choice was not really available until Cubase SX2 came out. Most people that use Nuendo for music production are doing so because they made that choice years ago...
Old 10th January 2007
  #22
Lives for gear
 

The example of the way Cubase and Nuendo leapfrog each other may be more clear shortly (maybe at Namm?).

For example, Nuendo 4 may have significantly different and additional features compared to Cubase 4. If so, then you have more distinctions between the two despite the similarities.

Get out there a ways in time and Cubase5 will come out, perhaps looking a lot like Nuendo 4... plus new features. Folks will spend time discussing why to buy Nuendo 4 when Cubase5 is less expensive and looks similar. But then, Nuendo 6 will hit with it's features setting it apart from Cubase 5...and so on.
Old 10th January 2007
  #23
Lives for gear
 
popmann's Avatar
Quote:
Because you got into Nuendo when it WAS better than Cubase.
that's the deal. I've used it in two eras...in the day of VST5 versus neundo 1.5...Nuendo was much less buggy AND sounded FAR better.

Then, when they did Nuendo 2 and SX1...the gap narrowed in terms of sonics. A difference, but not one I'd deem worth paying for. They claimed it used the same audio engine then, too.

Now? I don't follow them anymore. But, "same audio engine" from a software company means DICK to me.
Old 10th January 2007
  #24
Gear Maniac
 
Mikem's Avatar
 

I think the audio engines became the same on Nuendo 2 and SX2--there was a complete rewrite, with added features in Nuendo.

This thread is no longer current information (as has been pointed out) since C4 now has Control Room, and other formerly Neundo exclusive features. This is probably a very bad time to buy Nuendo, since you don't know when N4 will come out and you also don't know when the post-dated free upgrades will start for people who bought just before N4 came out. Will it be at NAMM? No way to know.

But C4 (once some of the remaining bugs are ironed out) should be more than enough for anyone doing only audio with little video going on. Having not worked with video much, I really can't speak to its video capabilities.

My main rant with C4 is its responsiveness when changing stuff like buffer settings. It may have something to do with my 3xUAD-1 cards, but the program basically hangs for me when changing audio settings, and SX3 and Nuendo 3 never used to do this for me on the same system. If I want to change buffers, I pretty much have to save and shut down the prog, set my buffers, and relaunch. Other people have reported similar issues.

Anyway, Cubase 4 is really nice. But I'll probably still upgrade my Nuendo when it comes out, just to keep my license current, even if I don't use the Nuendo exclusive features. I know, it's dumb. But ..... must ..... have ..... current ...... version!!!
Old 10th January 2007
  #25
Lives for gear
 
GearGuy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikem View Post
I think the audio engines became the same on Nuendo 2 and SX2--there was a complete rewrite, with added features in Nuendo.
That is 100% correct. Technically speaking, C4 is now a new audio engine than N3 is currently at... nothing about it though should make it sound any different to anyone's ears.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikem View Post
This thread is no longer current information (as has been pointed out) since C4 now has Control Room, and other formerly Neundo exclusive features. This is probably a very bad time to buy Nuendo, since you don't know when N4 will come out and you also don't know when the post-dated free upgrades will start for people who bought just before N4 came out. Will it be at NAMM? No way to know.

But C4 (once some of the remaining bugs are ironed out) should be more than enough for anyone doing only audio with little video going on. Having not worked with video much, I really can't speak to its video capabilities.
Agreed...
Old 10th January 2007
  #26
Lives for gear
 
azwun25's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwiburger View Post

It's fairly well known that Steinberg use SX3 as their beta testing program for Nuendo. SX users get the new features first, and by about the third release the bugs are fixed and the new features are then added to Nuendo. For this reason, Nuendo is slightly more professional if you can't afford to do free beta testing for Steinberg.
this is a very ture statement. I use Nuendo 2 at home and SX3 at work. No difference.
Old 10th January 2007
  #27
Gear Maniac
 
SurfingMusicMan's Avatar
 

Sonar

To continue this thread to the next logical step, I don’t understand why people seem to stop with Nuendo and Cubase? What about programs like Sonar? I’ve been using Sonar lately and certainly can’t tell a difference in sound quality or performance. I do think that Sonar has a much better workflow though.

The only reason I can see not to use Sonar for audio over Cubase or Nuendo is the “reputation” issue once again. Steinberg has more of a name than Cakewalk does.
Old 10th January 2007
  #28
Gear Maniac
 
Mikem's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by barthowk View Post
To continue this thread to the next logical step, I don’t understand why people seem to stop with Nuendo and Cubase? What about programs like Sonar? I’ve been using Sonar lately and certainly can’t tell a difference in sound quality or performance. I do think that Sonar has a much better workflow though.

The only reason I can see not to use Sonar for audio over Cubase or Nuendo is the “reputation” issue once again. Steinberg has more of a name than Cakewalk does.
I know you stated it as an opinion, but it drives me bonkers we people talk about this or that prog having a better workflow than something else. Yes, there are objective things that help or hurt workflow, but most of the platforms are so mature at this point that the differences are subjective preferences, not objective feature sets.

E.g., I gave Sonar a chance, and to me, it's workflow was inferior to Cubase/Nuendo--less intuitive, etc. Much of that is familiarity, granted, but the rest was my personal taste. The same was true with Samplitude--which I actually invested in and WANTED to like--just couldn't get past the workflow issues that, again--FOR ME--didn't exist in Cubase/Nuendo.

So I hope people will view workflow as an intangible that you can't predict from user to user--people have preferences, and your preferences mean nothing to me, nor mine to you.

But workflow will be discussed, and when it is, I think it's useful to cite specifics, too, so people can be educated at the differences in how the platforms handle certain tasks. E.g., how Sonar handles program changes won't mean much to me if I have no hardware synths or only deal with audio. Anyway, stating the obvious at this point, but that's always been a pet peeve of mine. I don't mean to jump on you personally. I'm just usually your post as an excuse to rant a bit.
Old 10th January 2007
  #29
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GearGuy View Post
WTF?



Way to resurrect a thread from May 2006 and then to post your rant which had nothing to do with the topic.

I don't even follow what they heack you are saying after the Sweetwater part, but speaking from experience, you are wong about pre-orders at Sweetwater. If you pre-order something from them, they never charge your card until the item arrives in-stock. So your rant about them was baseless...
Sorry, but you're wrong. I'm still waiting for a sweetwater backorder from before christmas, and they charged me the day I placed the order.
Old 10th January 2007
  #30
Lives for gear
 
GearGuy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RadioBox View Post
Sorry, but you're wrong. I'm still waiting for a sweetwater backorder from before christmas, and they charged me the day I placed the order.


No actually I'm not wrong, what I stated in my previous post is their policy. Did you ask them to charge your card? Was there a reason to charge the card early (credit card promotions, etc?)

Why don't you simply call them and fix this situation directly instead of posting your rant on a forum, in a thread called "Cubase SX3 and Nuendo are the same ?" that has nothing to do with Sweetwater?!?! They are reasonable folks over there... and if they cannot satisfy you, then call the owner of the company. He posts his e-mail and phone number on this forum in other threads that you can easily find....
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump