What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

General discussions on songwriting, mixing, music business and other music related topics.
Paphnuty
Junior Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:42 pm
Contact:

What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Paphnuty » Sun Jan 16, 2011 10:15 pm

Hello,
May be I should post this topic in an other part of the forum... anyway if moderators find the better place they will move it in.
I think it is not bad idea to help the Nuendo developers to understand difference needs of Nuendo customers. Sometime it is not easy to make something better but in the same time the obvious things are missed. Here I am starting with couple useful IMHO features.
1. I found not convenient that I cannot select deferent tracks which are not close with RANGE TOOL.]
Nuendo range native.jpg
This how I can do it in Nuendo now
(85.18 KiB) Downloaded 126 times
Nuendo range separate.jpg
and this how I want to use it for editing automation without disturbing clips
(90.24 KiB) Downloaded 126 times
May be there is some way to do it but I din't find it after quiet long trying

2. It concerns RANGE TOOL too. It would be great if I could move all with in range not only by mouse but using arrows for more precise nudging. For now I can move by arrows just range itself.



3. This is a bit strange proposition. It can be helpful for re-recording studios which does not have enough big screen for DAW displaying or WAVES FEATURE in mixer. Very often re-recordist should see where session is playing for the moment. NUENDO can make cursor quiet wide which is good but it could be more noticeable if timeline before and after cursor has difference color. For example like this
Nuendo rerecording.jpg
(99.96 KiB) Downloaded 126 times
I hope it can help somehow the NUENDO developers to make it better or at least to understand our needs.
Pahnuty (Andrey Dergachev)
Last edited by Paphnuty on Mon Jun 13, 2011 8:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Rustami
Junior Member
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:08 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Rustami » Mon Jan 17, 2011 9:07 am

Hi!

1. You can do that. Make range selection and click with alt on not needed tracks to exclude them from selection.
Intel Dual CPU E2160 1.8 GHz, 4 GB of a RAM, video - ASUS EAH3650, Sound card - RME HDSP 9632, Windows 7 64 bit

Guest

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Guest » Mon Jan 17, 2011 9:42 am

Wouldn't this be possible to do also by grouping the tracks you want to use... I'm not sure I understood the question. When I do drum editing I group the tracks so I can edit all at once. I've been doing editing on multi-tracks without grouping for years and it sucked. I just found out that grouping is kewl... I'm a slow learner.

/Gay Jedi Knight!

neilwilkes
Senior Member
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 11:55 am
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by neilwilkes » Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:55 am

Things I would like to see include the following, in no particular order.

1 - independant control over every channel in a multichannel VST3 plugin as opposed to the hopeless global operation we currently have.
2 - +10dB on the faders - makes translating from Alsihad very hard with the current +6dB travel.
3 - Better metering, with the latest loudness metering as well as PPM/VU behaviour.
4 - Tab to transient.
5 - Virtual VCA groups
6 - Multiple EFX track addition please, instead of the current one at a time mode.
7 - Improved AutoSave, so that no backups ever get overwritten.
8 - Visual indication of disabled tracks in the mixer.
9 - Better restoration tools
10 - switchable pre-post insert operation on the track EQ - if I add an HPF on this, it does not get added currently until after insert #6 - hopeless. Forces use of a valuable insert slot for an EQ plugin that should be unnecessary.
11 - Whilst we are there, unlimited inserts please.
12 - still with EQ, 5 bands plus HPF/LPF. Think UAD Cambridge.

More as I remember the things that I feel are missing.....
www.opusproductions.com
Intel E5-2687W 8-core Xeon, 32Gb RAM, Windows 7 Pro x64, RME RayDAT, UAD-2 Octo x2 & Quad x2 (fully loaded), Adam A7 x5, WK ID Console
Nuendo 1-6, Cubase 6-7, WaveLab 5-7, DTS/DD encoders, Surround Edition etc, Waves Mercury
Blu-Ray authoring, DVD authoring & high resolution audio specialists.

Detailed Specs on request

Paphnuty
Junior Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:42 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Paphnuty » Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:14 pm

Rustami, thanks a lot. It works and very useful.
Did anyone use Aphex Aural Exciter? I know that it does't concern Nuendo developing but it would be great to see this plug-in not only in PT TDM.
I agree with
2 - +10dB on the faders - makes translating from Alsihad very hard with the current +6dB travel.
3 - Better metering, with the latest loudness metering as well as PPM/VU behaviour.

I would prefer even +12db to avoid problem with PT to Nuendo converting. And good metering eliminate the need for
using third part plug-ins like IXL metering which is very good but it useful on master track and not convenient as ordinary track metering.

Rustami
Junior Member
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:08 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Rustami » Mon Jan 17, 2011 3:11 pm

Paphnuty wrote:Rustami, thanks a lot. It works and very useful.
Did anyone use Aphex Aural Exciter? I know that it does't concern Nuendo developing but it would be great to see this plug-in not only in PT TDM.
.
I found Izotope Ozone exciter very good... Did you try it?
Intel Dual CPU E2160 1.8 GHz, 4 GB of a RAM, video - ASUS EAH3650, Sound card - RME HDSP 9632, Windows 7 64 bit

Paphnuty
Junior Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:42 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Paphnuty » Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:24 pm

Yes, I have tried but in small studios. I like how Ahex Exciter sounds in big a re-recording studio and it's way to increase and control harmonics, some time it really saves dialogs or makes ambience transparent and wide. Probably be iZotope can to compete with Aphex... I should test it.
Thanks again for the advice.
By the way yesterday I was discussing with my friend (he is a PT user) about future of DAWs and he said that it would great if a DAW can have several interface for difference tasks: usual for editing, big symbols for re-recoding, simplified for demonstrating and etc. Somehow I think it reasonable (hope I used right word :) ).

User avatar
Dietz
Member
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 5:40 pm
Location: Vienna / Europe
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Dietz » Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:55 pm

Paphnuty wrote:Rustami, thanks a lot. It works and very useful.
Did anyone use Aphex Aural Exciter? I know that it does't concern Nuendo developing but it would be great to see this plug-in not only in PT TDM.
I agree with
2 - +10dB on the faders - makes translating from Alsihad very hard with the current +6dB travel.
3 - Better metering, with the latest loudness metering as well as PPM/VU behaviour.

I would prefer even +12db to avoid problem with PT to Nuendo converting. And good metering eliminate the need for
using third part plug-ins like IXL metering which is very good but it useful on master track and not convenient as ordinary track metering.
+1 for +12 dB on the fader!

***********

Like I suggested several times already, my biggest wish for a completely new Nuendo-feature would be the possibility to switch the conventional waveform-display in one or several tracks to an FFT-based sonogram (a.k.a spectrogram). Computers are fast enough nowadays. There's so much more information available with this kind of displaying audio, especially during heavy edits: You can easily spot clicks, noise, hum, melodic and/or harmonic progressions, any kind of spectral changes, etc. etc.

... ideally, we would even get some kind of spectral editing, like in Algorithmix' "ReNOVAtor" or "iZotope's "RX".

***********


BTW - my VST-Exciter of choice:

Image

Part of the Vienna Suite bundle.

... yes, I _am_ biased. ;-)
/Dietz

| audio | engineering | music | production |
| soundware | development |

| Nuendo versions from 5.5.6 to 10.2.0 | on various systems and platforms |
| Steinberg user since the 80ies | Nuendo user and forum member since 2000 |

ltf3
Member
Posts: 423
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 5:15 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by ltf3 » Thu Mar 10, 2011 4:13 am

Dietz wrote:
Paphnuty wrote: Like I suggested several times already, my biggest wish for a completely new Nuendo-feature would be the possibility to switch the conventional waveform-display in one or several tracks to an FFT-based sonogram (a.k.a spectrogram). Computers are fast enough nowadays. There's so much more information available with this kind of displaying audio, especially during heavy edits: You can easily spot clicks, noise, hum, melodic and/or harmonic progressions, any kind of spectral changes, etc. etc.
Absolutely ... there's no question that many audio problems are much easier to spot and correct in a frequency domain editor. Just had one today ... a noise was being complained about but not everyone in the room could hear it! (old ears.....). Had to drop out to Sound Track Pro (Apple ... nice interface for Post but hideously unstable) and there in it's Spectral display was the culprit up high but gone in a flash with no affect on the rest of the spectrum. It was very easy and very impressive.

After all Wavelab has had it for ages ... so even a way to round trip to the WaveLab editor like we used to be able to do...

But built in functionality would be better.

Lee
Lee

Cubase 8.5, Nuendo 10, Cubasis ( gotta luv it ), Arturia Audio Fuse, OS 10.13.6, IMac Quad Core 3.2 GHz i7, 32GB RAM, Radeon Graphics 4GB

ltf3
Member
Posts: 423
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 5:15 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by ltf3 » Thu Mar 10, 2011 4:53 am

Hi

Maybe I'm a special case (it's been said before.....LOL) but I'd really appreciate some tools to help arrange and 'collect' tracks prior to tweaking and mixing. Almost like giving the Project window some "database" flavor!

Why?

Most of our stuff comes from editors working in Final Cut Pro via OMF. With FCP's audio capacity (99 tracks) we often get a lot of tracks. This week we had 17 tracks of a door closing! ... admittedly it was a big door, but there were so many options ... spread far and wide amongst all the other FX, Room Tone, Footsteps ... with hardly any logic to it at all. So it's a big job to sort though all the material and get it arranged for a sensible mix pass.

So it occurred to me that it would be great to be able to go through all these tracks and regions and have Nuendo help sort them out. Things like this:

Perhaps preparing some empty "Receiving" tracks Named Dialog, EFX, Foley, Footsteps, Music, etc at the start of the mix ... then Audition a clip and right clicking on it to see a "Move to Track..." and select a "Receiving " track name. The region would then pop up to an empty space on an appropriate track. This would get similar clips grouped much quicker than Cut/Paste or Dragging with less chance of sync slip.

Perhaps being able to sort tracks by Name would at least bring similar elements together quickly.

If the editor has prepared say 15 tracks of room tone on 15 different tracks, it would be nice to select them all and have Nuendo "condense" then into the smallest number of tracks without overlaps.

Plus I'd really like a visual indicator (red flag?) if a clip gets moved away from it's absolute time position at import!

Best

Lee
Lee

Cubase 8.5, Nuendo 10, Cubasis ( gotta luv it ), Arturia Audio Fuse, OS 10.13.6, IMac Quad Core 3.2 GHz i7, 32GB RAM, Radeon Graphics 4GB

neilwilkes
Senior Member
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 11:55 am
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by neilwilkes » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:34 pm

Paphnuty wrote: I agree with
2 - +10dB on the faders - makes translating from Alsihad very hard with the current +6dB travel.
3 - Better metering, with the latest loudness metering as well as PPM/VU behaviour.

I would prefer even +12db to avoid problem with PT to Nuendo converting. And good metering eliminate the need for
using third part plug-ins like IXL metering which is very good but it useful on master track and not convenient as ordinary track metering.
Agreed completely on the +12 instead of +10 - this is what happens not owning Alsihad! Sorry.....
www.opusproductions.com
Intel E5-2687W 8-core Xeon, 32Gb RAM, Windows 7 Pro x64, RME RayDAT, UAD-2 Octo x2 & Quad x2 (fully loaded), Adam A7 x5, WK ID Console
Nuendo 1-6, Cubase 6-7, WaveLab 5-7, DTS/DD encoders, Surround Edition etc, Waves Mercury
Blu-Ray authoring, DVD authoring & high resolution audio specialists.

Detailed Specs on request

User avatar
SafeandSound
Member
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:05 am
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by SafeandSound » Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:05 am

I would like better resolution on handles (please forgive me if this is better in V5)
I am still on 4.3.
Home music making machine : Windows 10 (64bit), Cubase 9.0.2, RME HDSP 9632 PCI, 16GB HyperX 1333MHz, Intel i7-2600 3.4GHz, ASUS P8H61-M LE/USB3, Seasonic X-650 PSU, Radeon HD5450 PCI-E, Samsung 850Pro 256GB SSD (LatencyMON checked, memory tested, latest BIOS/drivers, no cracks, DAW only clean install to SSD) Mastering Engineer Barry Gardner

Guest

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Guest » Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:42 am

Guest wrote:Wouldn't this be possible to do also by grouping the tracks you want to use... I'm not sure I understood the question. When I do drum editing I group the tracks so I can edit all at once. I've been doing editing on multi-tracks without grouping for years and it sucked. I just found out that grouping is kewl... I'm a slow learner.

Sorry for showing so late ;)

Anyways: you can achive a great editing flexibility by using a Folder channel, just right click - choose add folder - grab tracks inside - rock on :arrow: :!: :mrgreen:

Daniel.B

Paphnuty
Junior Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:42 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Paphnuty » Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:40 pm

It would be great to reorganize automation list on track on a different way. For the moment I can see only several parameters which is not necessary useful in current moment and I have to open additional window and search in exposed tree desired parameter to display its automation. It would be more convenient if automation list on track displays plugins and sends I use on the track and if to click mouse on it displays me parameters of the plugin without any extra windows. As far as I remember in Pro Tools and Logic it works like this.
Last edited by Paphnuty on Mon Jun 13, 2011 8:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MattiasNYC
Grand Senior Member
Posts: 3834
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by MattiasNYC » Thu Jun 02, 2011 1:52 pm

Paphnuty wrote:It would be great to reorganize automation list on track on a different way. For the moment I can see only several parameters which is not necessary useful in current moment and I have to open additional window and search in exposed tree desired parameter to display its automation. It would be more convenient if automation list on track displays plugins and sends I use on the track and if to click mouse on it displays me parameters of the plugin without any extra windows. As far as I remember in Pro Tools and Logic it works like this.
I think it's just always going to be a "problem".

Either you end up showing too much information with a single click, or you end up showing less information with several clicks.

Maybe the things I'd like to see are first of all a "bigger" area to hit with the mouse to choose lanes. I can't be bothered with a small area when I'm working fast. I need to get things to open up quickly. Doesn't matter that much to me in this case if it's one click or three - as long as it's easy to do (and fast). The second thing I think would be nice is what's done in Pro Tools: With a key combination (I believe it's control+command) when you click on a parameter in an open plug-in window that parameter is shown on its track. That's actually quite useful.
Nuendo 7.1.4 / Lynx TWO-B / Windows 10 Pro 64-bit / Ryzen 1700 3.7GHz (oc) / 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4@3200MHz / Nvidia GTX 660 / ASUS x370-A mobo/ 500GB WD Blue system drive / Crucial BX100 250GB SSD media / spinners for library/backup ::::: iZotope RX / Phoenixverb Surround / DaVinci Resolve / Faderport / Applied Acoustics UltraAnalog / my pet pony Frank

User avatar
Dietz
Member
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 5:40 pm
Location: Vienna / Europe
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Dietz » Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:04 pm

Lydiot wrote:[...]The second thing I think would be nice is what's done in Pro Tools: With a key combination (I believe it's control+command) when you click on a parameter in an open plug-in window that parameter is shown on its track. That's actually quite useful.
+1!

That's most certainly the fastest way I've found up to now to deal with automation within a DAW.
/Dietz

| audio | engineering | music | production |
| soundware | development |

| Nuendo versions from 5.5.6 to 10.2.0 | on various systems and platforms |
| Steinberg user since the 80ies | Nuendo user and forum member since 2000 |

Paphnuty
Junior Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:42 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Paphnuty » Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:41 pm

Time to time I have to minimize files in session or during saving project to a new folder. In that moment I remember about missing possibilities of choosing of handle length. It could be very useful.
Last edited by Paphnuty on Mon Jun 13, 2011 8:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Big K
Member
Posts: 579
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:55 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Big K » Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:25 am

+1
Nuendo 10, WaveLab 9.5, RME, UAD, PoCo, Win10/64 bit, PC i7 3930K, 16GB RAM, Intensity Pro, Melodyne, Spectrasonics, VSL, All Brainworx & PA, Genelec 1031 for 5.1, Quested HQ 210, NS10s, sevaW lla, LAWO, Neumanns, Brauners, Sennheisers, Schoeps, Sony DASH3324S, 42 RUs of classic hardware, professionally build and designed studio acoustics. SB-User since Cubase 2.0, Nuendo 1.5 ...

Woodcrest Studio

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Woodcrest Studio » Sat Jun 04, 2011 12:36 am

What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO
I would like to see more users. I feel like a dinosaur and that we all are a dying breed. :mrgreen:

olamo
Junior Member
Posts: 98
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 2:40 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by olamo » Sun Jun 05, 2011 7:51 pm

Paphnuty wrote:Hello,
Nuendo range separate.jpg
May be there is some way to do it but I din't find it after quiet long trying
About this one.. I think the idea that in order to control automation data of x amounts of track (say volume curve) you have to ctrl click every second lane is completely BS. Think about it; say you have 120 tracks most of them panned in 5.1 and some of them with a static assignment. First, you can't even see them all on your screen because you also always have the original track view in between. Then selecting is of course even worse - you can't use the range tool effectively without a modifier and a lot of "sub selecting".

Bottomline - no matter how "profoolish" some may think this is, to alt-click a certain parameter in PT displays this lane type on all tracks. Which in turn makes selecting and editing 1000 times faster.

My 2c
Ola

Paphnuty
Junior Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:42 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Paphnuty » Mon Jun 13, 2011 8:47 pm

Because they locked NUENDO INSIDE... I'd like to continue this topic and to say that it would be great to:

See some function like "link tracks" or modify "link channel" to make possible to edit curves by hand (not only by mix sliders in mixer) on several tracks. It is very useful during fine working with splited multi channel files.

Make some speed reducing for mouse wheel scrolling (for example with +Shift) kind of "fine scrolling". The reason is the mac magic mouse is too fast and all my attempts to reduce scrolling speed by external utilities like MagicPref was unsuccessful.

Concerning autofades it would be convenient to extend this function to possibility to drag one clip to another with appearing crossfade without pressing X button. It solved in similar way in Samplitude and Vegas and safe a lot of time.

Paphnuty
Junior Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:42 pm
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by Paphnuty » Sun Jun 19, 2011 12:56 pm

I've remember one more thing:
When I set loop markers I can see it's bounders on time rule and on empty space of work area. But if I have regions fill all my work area window I can see loop marker bounders only on time rule which is not convenient because there is no possibility to observe precisely where loop marker bounders cross regions.

User avatar
toader
Member
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 1:37 am
Location: Denver, Colorado, USA
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by toader » Fri Jul 27, 2012 9:31 pm

Paphnuty wrote: I agree with +10dB on the faders - makes translating from Alsihad very hard with the current +6dB travel.

I would prefer even +12db to avoid problem with PT to Nuendo converting. And good metering eliminate the need for
using third part plug-ins like IXL metering which is very good but it useful on master track and not convenient as ordinary track metering.[/quote]

+1
Computer 1: Cubase 10.0.15, RME HDSPe AES (x2), RME HDSPe AIO (x1), Nvidia NVS 510 video card, Dell T7500 workstation with Intel Xeon X5690 (6 cores with hyperthreading) 3.47gHz, 24GB RAM, UAD-2 Quad, Windows 10 64-bit
Computer 2: Wavelab 9.5.40, RME HDSPe AIO, AMD Radeon RX 480 video, Dell XPS 8720 with Intel I7-7700 CPU (4 cores with hyperthreading) 3.6gHz, 24GB RAM, Windows 10 64-bit

Todd Loomis @ https://noiseradiationstudios.com

TimoWildenhain
Moderator
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:51 am
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by TimoWildenhain » Mon Jul 30, 2012 8:27 am

Hello,

+12 dB is on the list for Nuendo 6.

Thanks,
Timo
Timo Wildenhain - Head of Business Unit
Professional Audio Unit
Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH
Hamburg, Germany
Checkout Steinberg on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and MySpace!

User avatar
MattiasNYC
Grand Senior Member
Posts: 3834
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: What we want to see in future versions of NUENDO

Post by MattiasNYC » Mon Jul 30, 2012 4:43 pm

TimoWildenhain wrote:Hello,

+12 dB is on the list for Nuendo 6.

Thanks,
Timo
How about this?
Nuendo 7.1.4 / Lynx TWO-B / Windows 10 Pro 64-bit / Ryzen 1700 3.7GHz (oc) / 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4@3200MHz / Nvidia GTX 660 / ASUS x370-A mobo/ 500GB WD Blue system drive / Crucial BX100 250GB SSD media / spinners for library/backup ::::: iZotope RX / Phoenixverb Surround / DaVinci Resolve / Faderport / Applied Acoustics UltraAnalog / my pet pony Frank

Post Reply

Return to “Steinberg Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest