# 'This will Change Everything' from Steinberg Nov. 14th !



## muziksculp (Nov 11, 2013)

Hi,

*It Looks like something BIG is heading our way from Steinberg on Nov. 14th*. 

'_This'll Change Everything_' is posted on their website's announcement header.

That's quite a big statement. 

http://www.steinberg.net/en/home.html

But.. that's it. No more info. about this. 

So.. We will know on Nov. 14th.

Any guesses ? 

Cheers,
Muziksculp


----------



## ysnyvz (Nov 11, 2013)

probably the new notation software, they were working on with sibelius team


----------



## jamwerks (Nov 11, 2013)

Isn't that an Iphone in the corner? Maybe just an Iphone app...


----------



## Stephen Rees (Nov 11, 2013)

Unless its a cure for cancer and/or AIDS then I think this is a little hyped. That really would change everything. But audio software? No.


----------



## mark812 (Nov 11, 2013)

Maybe a group buy. :lol:


----------



## Guy Rowland (Nov 11, 2013)

It's an app, clearly. I'm rooting for Cubasis, the Angry Birds edition.


----------



## jleckie (Nov 11, 2013)

Yeah.

KORE was supposed to change everything too...


----------



## RasmusFors (Nov 11, 2013)

Pretty shure it's some kind of app, or ios related hardware.


----------



## Stephen Rees (Nov 11, 2013)

Once upon a time things 'raised the bar'.

Then we evolved to things being 'must have'.

Then they became 'game changers'.

And now......they 'change everything'.

I love Steinberg. I've been using Cubase since dinosaurs ruled the Earth (and incidentally they were asking for the feature to be added to be able to move channel strips around in the mixer freely even then - maybe one day we'll get it) but I find this hyping makes me a bit grumpy for which I apologise.


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 11, 2013)

I know what it is. It's a Segway that comes with Cubase preloaded.


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 11, 2013)

Well.. If it's just an iPad/iPhone app. How can that change everything ? Quite a bold, and big statement to make if it's just a mobile app. :roll:

Oh.. Maybe it's Loopmash 3 :lol:


----------



## muk (Nov 11, 2013)

Seems to be just a random mobile app. It's way too early for the notation software Daniel is working on.


----------



## chimuelo (Nov 11, 2013)

Maybe the OS they promised years ago so realtime performance could be used instead of wasting billions of cycles running background Windows/Apple crap.


----------



## TGV (Nov 11, 2013)

Hyped? How can you say that. You clearly haven't been paying attention of Steinberg. They worked closely with John Williams and have come up with a working Death Star, that will obliterate you and your direct environment the moment you play the tones of the Imperial March without a permission from LucasArts. Be careful when you stand next to someone who's humming ta ta ta...


----------



## germancomponist (Nov 11, 2013)

chimuelo @ Mon Nov 11 said:


> Maybe the OS they promised years ago so realtime performance could be used instead of wasting billions of cycles running background Windows/Apple crap.



Ah yes, I remember it was 10 years ago or so, but if it would come, then it would for sure change everything... .


----------



## snattack (Nov 11, 2013)

A usable version of the iPad Cubase controller? My worst buy ever =)


----------



## FriFlo (Nov 11, 2013)

My guess: multi touchscreen support for Cubase 7.5 ...


----------



## paulmatthew (Nov 11, 2013)

Nope , It's Cubase : The Xbox One Edition


----------



## jamwerks (Nov 11, 2013)

It's not like Steinberg to do "would changing" statements, to then just put out a little app.

I'd say (and be thrilled about) C7.5, with an Ipad controller app.


----------



## MikeH (Nov 11, 2013)

..


----------



## dcoscina (Nov 11, 2013)

I know they are coming out with Cubasis 1.7 that has interapp audio. Whether it can load other libraries and control via midi track is to be seen but would be cool


----------



## Daryl (Nov 12, 2013)

I doubt it will change everything. I'm not even sure it will change anything for me. I've learned not to get sucked into the hype of "game changer, next generation" products, because they are usually just more of the same. :wink: 

D


----------



## Stephen Rees (Nov 12, 2013)

Daryl @ Tue Nov 12 said:


> I doubt it will change everything. I'm not even sure it will change anything for me. I've learned not to get sucked into the hype of "game changer, next generation" products, because they are usually just more of the same. :wink:
> 
> D



If its not going to change the fact that I'm balding and have a big nose then I'm not interested.


----------



## dcoscina (Nov 12, 2013)

There is a new UR44 audio interface that can work with the iPad....they uploaded it onto YouTube yesterday. Wouldn't be the first time that they jumped the gun on the PR with a YouTube ad before their official announcement.


----------



## Bach (Nov 12, 2013)

Hope it's not an iPad/iPhone gimmick. 

I would crave for a good 8channel controller by Steinberg


----------



## germancomponist (Nov 12, 2013)

It will be a master keyboard with 88 semi weighted keys with lots of motor-faders, controllers e.t.c. ... . That's my dream!


----------



## Ryan (Nov 12, 2013)

Bach @ 12/11/2013 said:


> Hope it's not an iPad/iPhone gimmick.
> 
> I would crave for a good 8channel controller by Steinberg



Here: http://www.yamahaproaudio.com/global/en ... age_fader/


----------



## ProtectedRights (Nov 12, 2013)

Only a damn hype for a most buggy product I am sure


----------



## Daryl (Nov 12, 2013)

Stephen Rees @ Tue Nov 12 said:


> Daryl @ Tue Nov 12 said:
> 
> 
> > I doubt it will change everything. I'm not even sure it will change anything for me. I've learned not to get sucked into the hype of "game changer, next generation" products, because they are usually just more of the same. :wink:
> ...


HAHA Twins...! :lol: 

D :lol:


----------



## Daryl (Nov 14, 2013)

So what has changed then?

D


----------



## Stephen Rees (Nov 14, 2013)

Daryl @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> So what has changed then?
> 
> D



The world is still turning, so that's not it....


----------



## Tatu (Nov 14, 2013)

germancomponist @ Tue Nov 12 said:


> It will be a master keyboard with 88 semi weighted keys with lots of motor-faders, controllers e.t.c. ... . That's my dream!



I think I've read these Gunther's words before... :D 

Keep dreaming!


----------



## Martin K (Nov 14, 2013)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EwDmNe7SlI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVSmoAtVd_A


----------



## Daryl (Nov 14, 2013)

Martin K @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EwDmNe7SlI
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVSmoAtVd_A


Nah, that can't be it. We already have Source Live for that sort of thing, so that wouldn't change anything, except giving us more of what we already have. Steinberg has promised to change everything......


----------



## germancomponist (Nov 14, 2013)

Martin K @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EwDmNe7SlI
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVSmoAtVd_A



As cool this is, it also means that even more large studios will soon close its doors forever?! A wide field, of course! 

It could mean, too, that now, because this technique, more studios are booked again. This would be great!


----------



## jamwerks (Nov 14, 2013)

Cool!


----------



## Christof (Nov 14, 2013)

So this will change everything?
In a positive or negative way?


----------



## germancomponist (Nov 14, 2013)

Christof @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> So this will change everything?
> In a positive or negative way?



Read my post on the previous page.


----------



## Daryl (Nov 14, 2013)

Gunther, I think that my point is that nothing has changed because it's nothing that didn't already exist. Studios like Abbey Road regularly use Source Connect, as do various Eastern European studios, so all that's changed is that there is a proprietary VST version from Steinberg. Nothing new really.

D


----------



## rpaillot (Nov 14, 2013)

Daryl @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> Gunther, I think that my point is that nothing has changed because it's nothing that didn't already exist. Studios like Abbey Road regularly use Source Connect, as do various Eastern European studios, so all that's changed is that there is a proprietary VST version from Steinberg. Nothing new really.
> 
> D



I've been beta testing this, and I think it's more powerful than Source Connect. 
It features up to 16 multitrack audio recording, and it also features midi recording
and remote VST recording.

That means if you've a partner who has the last piano or the last strings sample library you dont have, you can record its performance as an audio track as well as midi ( at the same time) directly in your Cubase session.

Also, it's way cheaper than source connect and the great thing is the musician just need the performer app which's free. Only the host needs to pay, I don't think it's possible with SC....

Try this guys , recording a musician over the internet has never been so cool ! ( I prefer recording a musician in real time than having to send him the playback wav files and wait for him to deliver the recordings ... and sometimes being disappointed :D)


----------



## synapse21 (Nov 14, 2013)

The free VST Connect SE is compatible with Nuendo 6. It keeps mentioning "Cubase 7 required" all over for this new Pro product. Seems weird that it wouldn't also work with Nuendo 6 (?).


----------



## playz123 (Nov 14, 2013)

It's out...but I'm still sitting here waiting for my world to change.


----------



## Christof (Nov 14, 2013)

Same here in Vienna, all quiet.


----------



## chimuelo (Nov 14, 2013)

I might be able to finally make beats. That is the hardest style for me to get creative with.
Chick-a chick-a cha cha, tsst tsst tsst tsah, boov boov boov....
I don't know these complex rhythms are created, maybe Cubase will have the Beat transformer plug in, then we can lay down orchestral tracks and call it techno symphonic.


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 14, 2013)

rpaillot @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> That means if you've a partner who has the last piano or the last strings sample library you dont have, you can record its performance as an audio track as well as midi ( at the same time) directly in your Cubase session.



Yeah - see... that's a problem. That is the very definition of copyright infringement, is illegal, and violates practically every EULA out there.


----------



## germancomponist (Nov 14, 2013)

Daryl @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> Gunther, I think that my point is that nothing has changed because it's nothing that didn't already exist. Studios like Abbey Road regularly use Source Connect, as do various Eastern European studios, so all that's changed is that there is a proprietary VST version from Steinberg. Nothing new really.
> 
> D



Yes, I see your point, Daryl. But I think, now when more and more people will have this in their DAWs it will maybe be done more or much more than ever before?


----------



## rpaillot (Nov 14, 2013)

RiffWraith @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> rpaillot @ Thu Nov 14 said:
> 
> 
> > That means if you've a partner who has the last piano or the last strings sample library you dont have, you can record its performance as an audio track as well as midi ( at the same time) directly in your Cubase session.
> ...




Yeah. I had not thought of this ... but in a way when you ask a guitarist to record something for you, do you have to own the guitar used ??


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 14, 2013)

No. And if I own a guitar, can I lend it to you for you to bring back to your house, try out, and record with? Of course.

It's an interesting argument, and one that has made it's way only partially thorugh the courts. If you can share a physical musical instrument, why can't you share sw? Well, some people will argue that sw is not a tangible good, and is subject to protections the physical musical instrument doesn't need to be. Up to you to decide whether ot not that is a legit argument

In any event, as of right now, it is legal to share a guitar, but it is illegal to share a sample library and it's sounds. That renders your scenario above illegal.

Cheers.


----------



## germancomponist (Nov 14, 2013)

RiffWraith @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> No. And if I own a guitar, can I lend it to you for you to bring back to your house, try out, and record with? Of course.
> 
> It's an interesting argument, and one that has made it's way only partially thorugh the courts. If you can share a physical musical instrument, why can't you share sw? Well, some people will argue that sw is not a tangible good, and is subject to protections the physical musical instrument doesn't need to be. Up to you to decide whether ot not that is a legit argument
> 
> ...



A wide field! 

When a producer asks you to arrange and record the string-part of a song for him, you do it. You do it with the libs you have bought. Then the producer goes to another composer who is well known for his good drum programming, and he does it with the libs he had bought. And so on.... . This happens every night and day and is il/legal?


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 14, 2013)

germancomponist @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> RiffWraith @ Thu Nov 14 said:
> 
> 
> > No. And if I own a guitar, can I lend it to you for you to bring back to your house, try out, and record with? Of course.
> ...



Right - but in that case he (theoretically) is hiring you, and paying you to do a job. That does not qualify as sharing.

Definitely many grey areas here, tho.


----------



## Stephen Rees (Nov 14, 2013)

RiffWraith @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> germancomponist @ Thu Nov 14 said:
> 
> 
> > RiffWraith @ Thu Nov 14 said:
> ...



I've always got very uncomfortable in those occasions, and declined to do it.

In theory, one person could buy say a strings sample library, and then hire themselves out to provide string arrangement services with that library to a thousand other composers for thousands of recordings.

Thousands of recordings released by thousands of composers, but only one library purchased between them. Wouldn't that be illegal? I hope it is. It would be very unfair otherwise.


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 14, 2013)

Stephen Rees @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> I've always got very uncomfortable in those occasions, and declined to do it.
> 
> In theory, one person could buy say a strings sample library, and then hire themselves out to provide string arrangement services with that library to a thousand other composers for thousands of recordings.
> 
> Thousands of recordings released by thousands of composers, but only one library purchased between them. Wouldn't that be illegal? I hope it is. It would be very unfair otherwise.



Good example of a grey area. Say you writing a track for small film (for ex), and need choirs. You dont have a choir lib, so you call me and say, "hey Jeff - I need some choirs for this track I am writing. Here it is... go put some choirs to it. I'll pay you x-$, and give you 25% of the writer's for that track". I send you a .wav of the choirs, you send me the money, and ensure I am on the cue sheets. Is that illegal? Can't see that it is. Let's say for argument's sake that it is. That's saying that composer a can't hire composer b to do a job on that film with a lib that composer a doesn't have. Ok, what about the director of that film - can HE hire composer b instead of the other composer? What's the difference?

But purchasing the lib with the actual intent of providing that service on a mass scale as you outlined in your ex. - that may be different. I don't know. Grey for sure.


----------



## Stephen Rees (Nov 14, 2013)

RiffWraith @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> Stephen Rees @ Thu Nov 14 said:
> 
> 
> > I've always got very uncomfortable in those occasions, and declined to do it.
> ...



Thanks for that example. It is a dilemma and a grey area for sure.

My wife is a composer too, and we often write tracks jointly and share the writers credits. We always make sure that any libraries we use on those tracks are owned by both of us. We just thought it was the right thing to do.


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 14, 2013)

VST Connect Pro might be a great tool to have for some composers/producers who need to collaborate (remotely)

But.. For myself. It does not change anything !

Hopefully the next Steinberg Cubase 7 update, or some other new product they release, will change something to the better.


----------



## KingIdiot (Nov 14, 2013)

Stephen Rees @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> RiffWraith @ Thu Nov 14 said:
> 
> 
> > germancomponist @ Thu Nov 14 said:
> ...





classic not reading licenses and clicking accept going on here 

jsut about every license states that each composer of the cue must own a copy of the license. So you can't share one through hiring arrangers. It's a big deal if working on pop/rock records. I also don't thin it's followed all too much, otherwise every producer wh oends up a "songwriter" on some hip hop records would need to own a license for those 8th note staccatos in the bridge. 

if you do this kind of work though, you should invest in getting your own private samples. Project Prague helped keep me clear a while ago and also gave me unique samples to boot.


----------



## Stephen Rees (Nov 14, 2013)

KingIdiot @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> classic not reading licenses and clicking accept going on here
> 
> jsut about every license states that each composer of the cue must own a copy of the license. So you can't share one through hiring arrangers. It's a big deal if working on pop/rock records. I also don't thin it's followed all too much, otherwise every producer wh oends up a "songwriter" on some hip hop records would need to own a license for those 8th note staccatos in the bridge.
> 
> if you do this kind of work though, you should invest in getting your own private samples. Project Prague helped keep me clear a while ago and also gave me unique samples to boot.



Thankyou for clearing that up


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 14, 2013)

KingIdiot @ Thu Nov 14 said:


> classic not reading licenses and clicking accept going on here
> 
> jsut about every license states that each composer of the cue must own a copy of the license. So you can't share one through hiring arrangers. It's a big deal if working on pop/rock records. I also don't thin it's followed all too much, otherwise every producer wh oends up a "songwriter" on some hip hop records would need to own a license for those 8th note staccatos in the bridge.
> 
> if you do this kind of work though, you should invest in getting your own private samples. Project Prague helped keep me clear a while ago and also gave me unique samples to boot.



Ah, but I do read the EULAs. Believe it or not. And I just had a look at three: CS, SF, EWQL

Ok, I think we understand that - regardless of whether or not the EULA specifies this - we can't share libs. So, if I come over to your house, and say, "dude - you have Albion? Lemme have some!!!" I then play some stuff in your seq., render it to audio, bring that home with me, and put into a song of my own. We all understand that's a no-no.

However, nonoe of those EULAs says you can't use the lib on a job you get hired on. Now we all know, that if I get a call one day, "hey Jeff? My name is Rob. I am directing a film called "Day 1", and I want to hire you as the composer. There won't be a budget for live musicians, so we will need you to deliver a virtual score, which means you will have to render your sample libs to audio, and deliver those tracks to my supervising sound ed." - we all know that that'd be ok for me to do that. What if a compsoser calls me, and says, "hey Jeff, my name is Dave. I am scoring a film called "Day 1", and my deadline is too tight, and I can't finish everything. I need you to compose a few cues. I will pay you $350/min. There is no be a budget for live musicians, so I will need you to deliver a virtual score, which means you will have to render your sample libs to audio, and deliver those tracks to me. Do you have x, y, and z? Great - I don't have those, but thy will work really well in this film". - we all know that that'd be ok for me to do that as well. But (and I alluded to this earlier) what if Dave calls me and says, "hey Jeff, my name is Dave. I am scoring a film called "Day 1", and I need some choirs, but don't have a choir lib. Can you write some for me? I will pay you $350/min. When you have the choirs done, render your sample libs to audio, and deliver those tracks to me". So, what we are saying is THAT is not ok? Why not? Are we saying that the third scenario is_ sharing a lib through hiring arranger?_ Because it really isn't. And then why is the second scenario ok? Bear in mind - when I compose those cues, I am using sample libs that the other composer doesn't have.


----------



## KingIdiot (Nov 14, 2013)

I'm a little too lazy to go pull out my EULA and search through PDFs, but I remember, especially when doing QLSO libs, that the agreements stated that each "composer" on the track/song needed a specific license. That it's stated in there. This may not be the case for EVERY developers, but I remember it being something of a point that was made years ago, when this topic came up.

whether or not it's adhered to, probably a different story. Whether or not it's chased down by developers, yet another story. Grey areas you might be able to work out with developers on a gig to gig basis, probably yet again another story.

but none of it is outright ok or not ok across the board if you're going against just EULA. Morality issues aside.

granted. EULAs have changed wording over the years, even by the same developer.

what's crazy is that so many folk have spent boatloads buying library after library to get that specific articulation or sound or usage, when they could just all get together and build a custom one away from all the EULAs, except for the ones they set for themselves


----------



## gsilbers (Nov 14, 2013)

interesting to see vst connect pro. 
Yesterday i filled the logic pro x questionaire/survey and some of the questions where about being able to this (vst connect pro style).


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 14, 2013)

KingIdiot @ Fri Nov 15 said:


> I'm a little too lazy to go pull out my EULA and search through PDFs, but I remember, especially when doing QLSO libs, that the agreements stated that each "composer" on the track/song needed a specific license. That it's stated in there. This may not be the case for EVERY developers, but I remember it being something of a point that was made years ago, when this topic came up.
> 
> whether or not it's adhered to, probably a different story. Whether or not it's chased down by developers, yet another story. Grey areas you might be able to work out with developers on a gig to gig basis, probably yet again another story.
> 
> ...



Eh, don't think I am trying to give you a hard time, nor that I am trying to argue with you. Because that is definitely not what I am attempting here. This is actually a good convo.

The EWQLSO EULA does not say that - maybe it did at one point, and if you say you saw it there, it probably did. The closest thing I could find out of the three I checked, was SF's:



> Every person who uses this lib must buy a license.



Now, the EW EULA does kinda come close to what you alluded to:



> ...you may use the EASTWEST and third party audio file content (irrelevant text here) on a royalty-free basis, to create your own original soundtracks for your film, video and audio projects.



You could - if you tried hard enough - make an argument that b/c the EW EULA uses the term "your own original soundtracks", you therefore can not use the sample content to make someone else's original soundtracks. But that would be a real stretch.

And you could - if you tried hard enough - make that same argument based on what the SF EULA says. That too, would be a real stretch.

It is a bit grey for sure, but personally, I don't think that either of those arguments have a snowball's chance in hell in a court of law. Not in the USA, anyway. 

Cheers.


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 14, 2013)

Just thought of something else.

I own Photoshop, and you own After Effects. 

I start putting together some images, and can not do something I want to, because Photoshop does not have a specific feature. AE does. As I do not own AE, I hire you to render something for me. You do, you send me the file, and I send you the money. Is that not ok?


----------



## pkm (Nov 14, 2013)

From the dawn of time, people have been hired because they had the tools that others didn't.

I know tangible goods are a different story, but the idea is the same. I hire a plumber to fix my sink because he knows what to do and has the right wrenches, just like a composer might hire me to do string programming because I know what to do and have the right libraries.

There's some legal language in the EULAs to protect the developers, but the important thing is the intention of the developers and what they are trying to prevent. Here's the distinction in my eyes, and what I feel is the "spirit of the EULA" of most of these libraries: 

Am I hiring somebody for their skills and tools, or am I effectively renting out their samples? Am I hiring them for their programming ability and their superior samples, or are they just running my midi through their samples and sending it right back?


----------



## germancomponist (Nov 15, 2013)

It is absolutely ok when you do a part of a production with the libs you have bought. No company can forbit this, at least not here in the EU.

_BTW: The same with reselling libraries. It is allowed in the EU and no one can forbid it. But please no discussion here about that. European laws are beyond every EULA._


----------



## Guy Rowland (Nov 15, 2013)

germancomponist @ Fri Nov 15 said:


> _BTW: The same with reselling libraries. It is allowed in the EU and no one can forbid it. But please no discussion here about that. European laws are beyond every EULA._



Ha, you can't say something incredibly contentious and then say "please no discussion"! As I understand it, all the EU laws definitely do not apply to sample libraries simply because they are a purely a license to use other people's recordings - you never own the recordings yourself. So unless you can point to a precedent - an EU court ruling against a sample developer - no discussion about that! :D 

(I predict the rest of the thread is now 90% devoted to this issue)

So to VST Connect Pro. Yeah, can't quite see what the big deal is, though it looks nice enough. It's more feature-full than VST Connect basic, and also Source Connect, but the fact it is tied to Cubase-only severely limits the use (inexplicable that Nuendo isn't supported). Still I have some vague hope (wishful thinking?) that the biggest effect of VST Connect Pro is to reduce the price of Source Connect by introducing competition...


----------



## Guillermo Navarrete (Nov 15, 2013)

Hello all, 

Sorry for Hijacking your thread about EULA and license agreements, I just want to answer a small question about the DAW’s that support VST Connect Pro



synapse21 @ 14th November 2013 said:


> The free VST Connect SE is compatible with Nuendo 6. It keeps mentioning "Cubase 7 required" all over for this new Pro product. Seems weird that it wouldn't also work with Nuendo 6 (?).



Nuendo 6 is also supported, it is just missing on the product page, the mistake should be corrected any time soon.

Best regards,
GN


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 15, 2013)

pkm @ Fri Nov 15 said:


> Am I hiring somebody for their skills and tools, or am I effectively renting out their samples? Am I hiring them for their programming ability and their superior samples, or are they just running my midi through their samples and sending it right back?



Good way to put it.

And yes - I am all for the devs protecting themselves against sharing - as in end users renting out their samples, and just running midi through their samples and sending it right back. Absolutely. But they just can't protect themselves against people getting hired on job, and using the samples there. At least not on an individual, one-on-one basis.

Cheers.


----------



## germancomponist (Nov 15, 2013)

RiffWraith @ Fri Nov 15 said:


> pkm @ Fri Nov 15 said:
> 
> 
> > Am I hiring somebody for their skills and tools, or am I effectively renting out their samples? Am I hiring them for their programming ability and their superior samples, or are they just running my midi through their samples and sending it right back?
> ...



This discussion could be endless... . 

What when I play in a band and use there my bought libraries, but we all together compose our songs? All band musicians should buy the libs what I use?


----------



## KingIdiot (Nov 15, 2013)

I remember it being specifically stated at one point. things may be worded differently now. But this discussion came up YEARS ago, and that was in the EULAs and/or stated specifically on line a while back. Things have changed, so maybe wording has changed, or maybe it was something stated by developers online in the original discussion, but I always find the EULA waters extremely murky, anyway.

What I also tend to find is that it's so murky because they are aware how stringent concepts can hinder some of the more common uses like playing in a band, but there's need for something there for say, an online service that can render all your MIDI into another library for $1 a minute of audio. 

which this new cubase feature would make pretty easy


----------



## germancomponist (Nov 15, 2013)

KingIdiot @ Fri Nov 15 said:


> ... an online service that can render all your MIDI into another library for $1 a minute of audio.
> 
> which this new cubase feature would make pretty easy



Yeah, and Steinberg is inviting people to do so, at least in this video.... . Huh...


----------



## KingIdiot (Nov 15, 2013)

germancomponist @ Fri Nov 15 said:


> KingIdiot @ Fri Nov 15 said:
> 
> 
> > ... an online service that can render all your MIDI into another library for $1 a minute of audio.
> ...



"As long as it's got MIDI" 

no seriously though. I've had the idea of online rendering for a while, and I think that's an offline/cloud based service that could keep developers going, and get us closer to realism outside of the realtime playback shenanigans.

in other news. I really like this Cubase feature. Virtual Band-ing has never been easier.


----------



## germancomponist (Nov 15, 2013)

Yes!


----------

