Needless to say, Cubase is geared towards music production while Nuendo includes features for post-production.
In that review, I also touched on the evolutionary change of Cubase versus Nuendo, and the version numbers as they leap-frogged each other, so I won't readdress that subject here. During the course of reviewing Cubase Pro 10, I dug into a few of the more Cubase-specific workflows and features that I didn't know much about or use often. The product has grown and evolved over the years, along with mixing requirements, which makes it is hard to track changes or note new features through the passing of time. The decision to use Nuendo as my main recording and mixing software has served me very well, and Steinberg has improved their resampling quality with this release for even better sounding audio. I am very particular about everything in the audio path and cannot tolerate average (or merely acceptable) quality for my clients. Contrary to the beliefs of some, all DAWs do not sound alike. At the time, Nuendo's biggest draws were that I was not required to use any dedicated/proprietary hardware for I/O or processing, there were no track count limitations, and it had superior sonic integrity. I began using Nuendo v1.5 in 2000 when it was first released for Mac OS. Where to start a review of a product or software is especially tricky when you have been working with it for almost 20 years.
0 kommentar(er)
