New Cubase SX Announced!

7 views
Skip to first unread message

Asleep For Centuries

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 6:25:44 AM3/13/02
to
Cubase SX Announced at Musikmesse

Digital audio, MIDI sequencing, intelligent MIDI input and processing tools,
virtual instruments and effects, editing, notation, mixing and mastering in
5.1 surround sound - with a new look and a new software engine.
http://messe.harmony-central.com/Musikmesse02/Content/Steinberg/PR/Cubase-SX
.html

March 13, 2002

Steinberg Media Technologies AG is proud to present the new Cubase SX at the
Musikmesse in Frankfurt, Germany.

Being the most powerful and intuitive Cubase ever, the new Cubase SX marks
the beginning of a new era. Cubase SX is a completely new program and is
equipped with latest technologies developed at Steinberg's digital audio
laboratories. Cubase SX features fantastic handling and breathtaking
performance for maximum sound quality and a unique music creation
experience. Cubase SX has been developed to support the creative process
without letting technology get in the way of the art of making music.

Cubase SX offers the following new functions and technologies:

Windows XP and Mac OS X support
New user interface
Graphic automation of all parameters
5.1 surround mixing
Musical real-time MIDI processing
Complete set of virtual instruments
New "Nuendo based" Audio Engine
New Audio Editing features by the Nuendo development team
Waldorf synthesizer technology
SPL De-Esser
Quadra Fuzz by Craig Anderton
Wide palette of virtual effect processors
Unlimited Undo/Redo
Edit History
24 Bit / 96 kHz
and many more...
Cubase SX will be available at the end of Q2 2002 for ?799 (MSRP). The
update from Cubase VST/32 will cost ?149, the update from Cubase VST Score
?199 and the update from Cubase VST ?299.

For more information, visit their web site at www.steinberg.net.


N

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 7:12:15 AM3/13/02
to
It'll be interesting to see where this will sit. Nuendo is now obselete
then!

Neil


dp

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 12:15:52 PM3/13/02
to
My check's cut, where do I sign??? ;^)

dp

"Asleep For Centuries" <k...@jak.com> wrote in message
news:a6ncp9$dak$0...@dosa.alt.net...

Asleep For Centuries

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 4:23:42 PM3/13/02
to

"dp" <d...@yoohoo.net> wrote in message
news:cPLj8.365227$Aw2.30...@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...

> My check's cut, where do I sign??? ;^)

send it to me, i'll pass it on...:)

lancelightning

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 4:22:57 PM3/13/02
to

Bloody hell - I went through this dilemma from v3.7 to v5.......do I
really need it when my current version is working fine? I'll probably
be overcome by temptation and upgrade again which is of course exactly
what Steinberg wants. Bastardo!!!..........LL

Steve Richer

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 4:52:45 PM3/13/02
to
yeah but it might be more worth your while this time cos the code is
all-new, hence there should be fewer bugs :-)

Steve

"lancelightning" <z...@z.com> wrote in message
news:e6gv8ukvahf1cdi3n...@4ax.com...

Allen

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 5:22:10 PM3/13/02
to
On one of the other new stuff pages, it mentioned a system link to run VST
on multiple PC's. Does this require a dongled VST on each PC ?
Al

Markus Hastreiter

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 5:29:59 PM3/13/02
to
yes

"Allen" <al...@honeypass.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:GSLS58...@gslsupport.com...

nirsul

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 7:07:24 PM3/13/02
to
There is going to be a patch for 5.1 that has the system link included

--


Best Regards

Nir Sullam

Laurence Payne

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 7:38:23 PM3/13/02
to
I think I'll get the crack :-)

Laurence Payne

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 7:40:33 PM3/13/02
to
Note that Steinberg has announced that an upgrade to SX will include
the facility to retain your VST version, running on another machine if
required.

lancelightning

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 8:08:26 PM3/13/02
to
Didn't know you were into crack Laurence,,,,,,anyway about that
pint..........LL

mrd

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 8:18:39 PM3/13/02
to

Yes But its Win2000/XP only

No more WIN98SE

js33

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 8:55:53 PM3/13/02
to
Hi All,

Silly question. The upgrade prices are in EUR(I assume this
means eurodollars). What is this converted to good 'ole
US dollars?

Cheers,
JS

Asleep For Centuries wrote:

> Cubase SX Announced at Musikmesse
>

> Cubase SX will be available at the end of Q2 2002 for EUR 799 (MSRP). The
> update from Cubase
> VST/32 will cost EUR 149, the update from Cubase VST Score EUR 199 and the
> update from
> Cubase VST EUR 299.

js33

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 8:59:16 PM3/13/02
to
Or more bugs since it is new.
Usually new software has more bugs then existing
updated software does. But a new architecture
of the software may be a good thing as it no doubt
leaves behind legacy code. I noticed this version
is only supported on W2000/XP or OSX.
What about all those people still swearing by W98?
I guess they will be forced to move up if they want to
keep up.

Cheers,
JS

js33

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 9:11:37 PM3/13/02
to
Hi All,

I answered my own question.
Live Rates as of 2002.03.14 02:08:02 GMT.
299.00 EUR Euro = 261.960 USD United States Dollars

So it's about the same.

Cheers,
JS

js33

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 9:56:24 PM3/13/02
to
Hi N,

It's hard to tell at this point. But the new Cubase SX
will be like Nuendo with Midi features. However they
state that Version 1.0 of SX will not have every feature
of 5.1 but they will be incorporated in subsequent releases.

Cheers,
JS

Chris Tondreau

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 11:33:49 PM3/13/02
to
I'm both excited and pissed off at the same time.

I just shelled out over $500 Canadian about two years ago for VST3.7,
another $200 only about six or eight months ago for the update to VST 5.0,
only to find out now that it is slated for obsolescence in the near future.
I'm only using the 24bit version, so it is going to cost me a projected $420
CDN to update to SX!! This is on top of the $200 or so that I just paid
about three months ago for the LM4 MKII.... does the VSTi for drums (listed
as a drum sampler) included in SX negate this purchase too??!! Why can't
Steinberg make the updates available at the retailer level so that
competition can keep prices down? Will we really get a great deal on the
upgrade from Steinberg??

OTOH..... it looks like it has the potential to be an awesome system.
(though I'll have to upgrade my Win98 system PII466 to WinXP, probably a new
motherboard and processor....grrr....) I have enjoyed VST for the past two
years and have not had the complaints that I hear from many on this group.
It is encouraging to see that a lot of the features that users have been
pining for (ie. multiple undo) have been addressed for the new "version."
The integration of audio and midi channels in the same mixer is a feature
that I like. For $400 CDN, I get an update from 24 to 32bit, the Apogee
dither, True Tape, Cubase score features, and all the new features of SX. I
can't really complain about the price. For me, it is just the timing.

Chris
Hamilton, Canada

"js33" <js...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:3C9012A9...@attbi.com...

js33

unread,
Mar 13, 2002, 11:42:14 PM3/13/02
to
Hi Chris,

I hear ya but...software upgrades are a fact of life.
You don't have to upgrade. That is up to you.
But just remember that within 6 months (or sooner) they will
probably have another upgrade. This is how software
companies or any other company stays in business
by having new products. I have never really looked into
Nuendo but heard it was really good for audio but lacked
midi support. Now it looks like CuBase will have Nuendos
audio features and CuBase's midi combined so where
does this leave the Nuendo product?

Cheers,
JS

charged

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 1:00:15 AM3/14/02
to
cool. very cool. the pdf shows that for vst/32 owners
the upgrade is 99 euro. is that accurate? that's cheeaaaappp.


Markus Hastreiter

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 1:48:15 AM3/14/02
to
JS,

SX isn't nuendo with midi, its using the same audio engine nuendo does.
Sonar uses the same audio engine as SF Vegas does, still doesn't make them
comparable programs.

-Markus


js33

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 4:53:31 AM3/14/02
to
Hi Markus,

I believe you are incorrect. Go read the interviews
with the developers. They say how they took most
of the codebase of Nuendo and brought in the midi
features from Cubase.

Cheers,
JS

Ceewun

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 6:20:46 AM3/14/02
to

"Chris Tondreau" <christ...@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:_LVj8.923$r_1....@read2.cgocable.net...

> I'm both excited and pissed off at the same time.
>
> I just shelled out over $500 Canadian about two years ago for VST3.7,
> another $200 only about six or eight months ago for the update to VST 5.0,
> only to find out now that it is slated for obsolescence in the near
future.


[snip]

I know how you feel. I upgraded my second version of VST to 5.1 only a
month or so ago.. now I have to upgrade them both, along with the studio PC
which is still running W98. This is also going to force me to upgrade my
MOTU as there are no W2K/XP drivers for it... <sigh> ;-)

But the feeling is illusory.. no-one 'needs' to upgrade... VST 5 will not
suddenly stop working !

Besides, the alternative (no progress in software development etc) is for us
all to still be running Pro24 on Ataris!

All in all this is great news.. I anticipated Steinberg pursuing the Nuendo
route and 'forcing' us to go along with them.

Also, the fact they've knocked Windos on the head means they're getting very
serious about stability which is a good thing.

,c.

cannone

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 10:26:30 AM3/14/02
to
I hope this is an official Cubase/Steinberg Newsgroup and that someone who
actually represents them reads this message!
I REFUSE to buy another update from Steinberg to upgrade to Cubase SX.

I own a Roland/Edirol U-8 controller / remote. This came with a custom
version of Cubasis. I was also told by the retail store that there is an
upgrade path to the full Cubase 5 VST32 so I went for it and bought the full
version.

I immediately noticed a problem with the control of VST32 from the U-8 and
so I let Steinberg know via e-mail as well as their "Beta test" forum. This
was back in 5r1.

I went through the motion each time and downloaded r2 to r6 but the problem
still hadn't been fixed. I eventually downloaded 5.1 r1 and still no joy. I
have also posted it a few times to this newsgroup but obviously no help.

NOW THEY EXPECT ME TO UPGRADE AGAIN TO SX! DO I HAVE IDIOT WRITTEN ON MY
FOREHEAD?

If they can't fix a simple problem after 6 upgrades, is the full facelift
going to make a difference? They want me to spend more money on another new
package but they haven't even fixed a problem in a previous one after 6
upgrades.

COME ON GUYS GET YOUR AAS IN GEAR!!!

Kevin Cannone
can...@iafrica.com

"Asleep For Centuries" <k...@jak.com> wrote in message

news:a6ofqf$1qb$0...@pita.alt.net...

Danny Taddei

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 12:06:46 PM3/14/02
to
I'm going to wait to upgrade sx until hell freezes over! I have spent an
ungodly amount of money on over 200 plug ins and as of 5.1 many already don't
work. Most of them are there only to overcome the pitfalls of cubase to begin
with. I don't want to see the results of sx.

I have 2 motu cards plugged into my mac and have no idea how they will work
with osx or the new sx. I don't have osx because cubase doesn't work with it
now so I will have to install it and all the software that will be needed to
run with it and hope I can learn how to deal with it. Then, after all that
headache, I will have to learn the new sx version's twists and turns.

Cubase should not be moving so fast. As another post said, Steinberg should
make what they have to be the best. Changing out the engine is something they
could have done behind the scenes as is unlimited undo and the other little
features that we hope to be getting from sx. Further, I was expecting that for
the money I have already spent, I would have a product that works better then
it does and get upgrades on it. Every time a major upgrade comes out it is a
NEW product.

Instead of signing on to the addiction of upgrades, I am going the other way.
As of 5.1, I will no longer buy cubase products. I have it already and it isn't
good enough to chase after. Instead I am going to use it as is and replace it
with dedicated record units like mackie's, alesis or other's units as they come
out and use the computer for what it does best which is computing. I can still
edit a track when I need to and add what needs to be added but this chase of
technology has fooled most and stifled others. How much work do we get done
when we have to upgrade and learn all the time. This is about music, not nerd
fashion. 2 weeks of downtime in a year is 2 weeks of vacation that I have to
work and actually pay out for. that brings the price of my upgrades to the cost
of a new small car, even if the upgrade costs very little!!!

<nospam>@less.net

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 2:10:15 PM3/14/02
to
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 17:06:46 GMT, Danny Taddei <da...@taddei.org>
wrote:


>Instead of signing on to the addiction of upgrades, I am going the other way.
>As of 5.1, I will no longer buy cubase products. I have it already and it isn't
>good enough to chase after. Instead I am going to use it as is and replace it
>with dedicated record units like mackie's, alesis or other's units as they come
>out and use the computer for what it does best which is computing. I can still
>edit a track when I need to and add what needs to be added but this chase of
>technology has fooled most and stifled others. How much work do we get done
>when we have to upgrade and learn all the time. This is about music, not nerd
>fashion. 2 weeks of downtime in a year is 2 weeks of vacation that I have to
>work and actually pay out for. that brings the price of my upgrades to the cost
>of a new small car, even if the upgrade costs very little!!!

I sympathize with you brother! I originally went the other route for
just this reason and bought a Tascam DA-88 and a DA-30 to master to.
They've gone the way of the Spotted Owl.
You really can't win in the technology game, it's a sharp stick in the
back forcing you reluctantly forward.
On the other hand things are improving at a phenomenal rate and are
way more affordable than they would have been for the hardware 20
years ago.
I would love to not have to pay for each upgrade as well and would be
especially pissed if I were cannone, who's problems were never
addressed, but I think the best philosophy is wait till you need the
change and the bugs are out.
I just upgraded my whole computer and operating system so I could run
more tracks at once at a higher bit rate with more plug ins. Now the
new software will likely expect this level of system and tax it more
than the last. If I moved to a 24 bit 96 khz hardware system, in a few
years it will be 48 bit 192 khz as an industrial standard.
There is no winning in this game except to worry most about the music.
I've heard great stuff recorded in 16 bit recently by musicians who
had little money and less expertise at recording, but the quality of
the playing still shone through. The bad mics and micing were more
evident than the fact it was done on an Adat.

Paul Gitlitz
Glitchless Productions
www.glitchless.net

Eddie

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 2:45:40 PM3/14/02
to
amen.

"cannone" <can...@iafrica.com> wrote in message
news:3c90c...@news1.mweb.co.za...

main event

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 3:56:08 PM3/14/02
to
Well I used Cubase 2.0 right up until 2000...

As long as the program meets your requirements then dont upgrade ;-)

--
' In front of the loudspeaker, everyone is equal'

http://www.mp3.com/mainevent


lancelightning

unread,
Mar 14, 2002, 6:06:24 PM3/14/02
to
About the most intelligent post on the subject so far!!.........LL

Krid

unread,
Mar 15, 2002, 6:57:33 AM3/15/02
to
js33 <js...@attbi.com> wrote:
Eurodollars???

When will those U.S. citizens ever learn that there's also a world *outside* their
country?

Incidentally that mysterious place called 'Europe' is where much of your
audio-software and a lot of your best cars come from. ;)

Like you meanwhile obviously found out yourself, the currency we have in (most of)
Europe since this year is called 'Euro'. To increase your confusion however, the
subunit of the Euro is called 'cent'. (It's not even 'Eurocent' or something just
'cent'. If you ask me they rather should have sticked to the name 'Ecu' = European
currency unit, anyway. )

Bye,
Krid.


>js33 wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Silly question. The upgrade prices are in EUR(I assume this
>> means eurodollars). What is this converted to good 'ole
>> US dollars?

>I answered my own question.


>Live Rates as of 2002.03.14 02:08:02 GMT.
>299.00 EUR Euro = 261.960 USD United States Dollars
>
>So it's about the same.
>


-------------------------
www.mp3.com/krid

Krid

unread,
Mar 15, 2002, 7:01:43 AM3/15/02
to
ray.m...@gmx.net (Krid) wrote:

>js33 <js...@attbi.com> wrote:
>Eurodollars???

...

Oops, sorry forgot to trim that line. Of course I wrote this reply, not js33.
(To avoid further confusion *before* it arises.)

Sorry.
Krid.

-------------------------
www.mp3.com/krid

Paulo Gomes

unread,
Mar 15, 2002, 6:54:50 AM3/15/02
to
ECU is a very mean word here in Portugal, I'm glad they switched for EURO.

Paulo Gomes

Krid <ray.m...@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:3c91df25...@news.freenet.de...

js33

unread,
Mar 15, 2002, 7:31:02 AM3/15/02
to
Hi Krid,

What in my post made you think I was putting down anyone???????
All I asked is what the conversion rate was which I found out
myself anyway. As Eurodollars are fairly new I haven't heard
the conversion factor mentioned here in the US.
Also I was born in Germany.

Cheers,
JS

Krid

unread,
Mar 15, 2002, 7:57:52 AM3/15/02
to
<nospam>@less.net wrote:
<...>

Yes I agree that today you have incredible possibilities at much lower
cost than in the past (with old studio-hardware).

However Steinberg's recent pricing is really annoying!

I bought Cubase at version 3.5 for 600 DM (that's about 300 EUR now)
(and was happy to get free updates with bugfixes and new features
until 3.7r2)
Just less than half a year ago I bought the 5.1 update for 129 EUR.

Though I like the 5.1 features a lot, I still considerd the upgrade price
a bit high and one of my main thoughts was that I now had the recent
version of Cubase again and would again receive free bugfixes and updates
for the next few years, just as it had been the case with 3.5.

Well, along comes Cubase SX...

The pricing for Cubase SL (the version that's to SX about the same that
plain VST is to VST/32) is supposed to be 499 EUR according to
Steinberg.

The upgrade from Cubase x.x (!) to Cubase SL is always 199 EUR.

So my upgrade path from 3.7 over 5.1 to SL would be about 630 EUR, compared
to the list price of 499 EUR for people who directly start with Cubase SL.

So along that path, I would have payed about 130 EUR (which is about 130 $) more
than by buying SL at the end of this year.

Yes of course, I did already have a version of Cubase to work with along the last
years, so that's not the same as just buying it now. All I'm saying is that if at
least the pricing would be such that the complete upgrade path for the existing
customer-base would not be more expensive than the price of the latest version,
then most customers would not feel screwed!

It's really annoying to think that I upgraded to 5.1 just about half a year ago. Had
I known that Steinberg was to realease SX this year, I would have waited. This would
have saved me the complete price of the 5.1 update, because in their stupid upgrade
pricing going from 5.1 to SL / SX costs exactly the same as from 3.7. It should
definitely be cheaper for users who use the currently latest version.

Heck, they should at least extend the reduced upgrade price to the customers who
bought Cubase or an upgrade within the last half year or even the last year, not just
to customers who bought it since March 1st 2002.

And BTW their prices keep increasing drastically. I mean today the upgrade from plain
VST 5.1 to SX costs the same as the *complete* price for the VST 3.5 I started with!
(And that's *on top* of the price I payed for the 5.1 update...)

Bye,
Krid.

-------------------------
www.mp3.com/krid

Krid

unread,
Mar 15, 2002, 8:09:28 AM3/15/02
to
"Paulo Gomes" <cont...@netc.pt> wrote:

>ECU is a very mean word here in Portugal, I'm glad they switched for EURO.
>
>Paulo Gomes

So PLEASE tell me what it means in Portuguese! I'm dying to find out! ;)

Hey, I'm still amazed they haven't banned the word 'IP' -Address yet. ;)

Bye,
Krid.

-------------------------
www.mp3.com/krid

Krid

unread,
Mar 15, 2002, 8:09:27 AM3/15/02
to
js33 <js...@attbi.com> wrote:

>Hi Krid,
>
>What in my post made you think I was putting down anyone???????
>All I asked is what the conversion rate was which I found out
>myself anyway. As Eurodollars are fairly new I haven't heard
>the conversion factor mentioned here in the US.
>Also I was born in Germany.

No, I was not supposing you were putting down anyone.

I just was amazed once again at how few American people seem to be
getting the news that concerns other countries than their own.

The switch to the Euro currency with the beginning of this year was
a major event in Europe and received quite a lot of attention in European media.

As it was also covered on CNN more or less intensively, I was astonished
that someone would assume that 'EUR' stands for 'Eurodollars'. That's all.

Re-reading your lines above, once again: It's EURO! not Eurodollars or
anything else. ;)

Well, as I said I agree that it's a stupid name for a currency. But that's the way it
is.

Bye,
Krid.

-------------------------
www.mp3.com/krid

Victor Eijkhout

unread,
Mar 15, 2002, 8:07:29 AM3/15/02
to
js33 <js...@attbi.com> wrote:

> As Eurodollars are fairly new

You mean the things that supplanted the British dollars and the German
dollars?

You're digging yourself deeper and deeper in that hole that has a sign
posted next to it, saying "Come and see the ugly American".

Hint: it's called a Euro. Dollars are American. Although the word itself
has roots in German ("Thaler") and Dutch ("Daalder"), and maybe other
European languages.


--
Victor Eijkhout
"the time comes for everyone to do deliberately what
he used to do by mistake" [Quentin Crisp]

Jeremiah McAuliffe

unread,
Mar 15, 2002, 11:02:31 AM3/15/02