Your opinion: Syncrosoft performance drain in Cubase/Nuendo?

Discussion in 'Mixing & Song Critique' started by Calgary, Dec 3, 2005.

  1. Calgary

    Calgary Active Member

    Nov 25, 2005
    Just curious what everyone thinks about this:

    In Cubase/Nuendo the new syncrosoft drivers which run the dongle system have been shown to have a severely negative impact on the performance of the software, in particular the MIDI system. They say that if you grab a MIDI note and swirl it around you can visibly see the sluggishness brought on by the CPU cycles being chewed up by the hundreds of lines of code (with many loops) in the MCFACT module.

    In other words, Steinberg's quest to secure the program from hackers, which of course they didn't even succeed in doing anyhow, has lead them to install a system which makes the software perform badly. They are fully aware of this of course. Interesting strategy because in the end only the paying customers suffer, the hackers had no problem at all ripping Cubase/Nuendo 3.0/3.1 and posting it to any of a thousand different download sources. This riles me a bit because in my case Cubase costs $869.

    Apparently Syncrosoft rewrote much of the driver for the 3.1 update which decreased the code, and therefore the performance impact. But nonetheless both Cubase and Nuendo remain somewhat crippled due solely to the security driver which saps rescources excessively.

    What's your opinion on this whole thing? Think about the model, you buy a premium-price product which promptly assumes you are a crook and subsequently chews up your system resources "all the time" foreverafter, solely in an effort to foil your theft.

    I was just about to buy Cubase 3.0 but I think I'm going to just stick with my ancient copy of Nuendo 2.0. This is ridiculous stuff, I'm not paying them cash for a separate security key which ruins the performance of the software. That's outrageous. Up until now I've been quite pro-Steinberg but I have to admit this is one of the least classy moves I've ever seen by a software manufacturer. It really stinks IMO. Punish all the paying customers and meanwhile the crackers/downloaders are not impeded one single tiny bit.

    I read that it took the hacker(s) who defeated the new system 1,500 man hours to completely write the driver from scratch. So now they have the full driver and it only takes them a few minutes to update it with each new release. Translation, it's peanuts for them, this system didn't affect their plans to crack/release these titles one iota. It only affected people who bought it legitimately.
  2. hueseph

    hueseph Well-Known Member

    Oct 31, 2005
    Vancouver, BC, Canada
    The only company that has been able to "beat" the hackers in any way is ProTools with their hardware dependant software. Even then there are hacked versions of that software. You can't blame Steinberg for trying. They want their customers to have a choice over what hardware they use.

    The problem is that there are hackers. There will always be hackers.

    No doubt the dongle has been a problem from day 1. Even the parallel port dongles are problematic. What do you suggest? Eliminate the dongle and allow the hackers to do their thing? Maybe it would be better to just increase fines for using hacked software.
  3. Calgary

    Calgary Active Member

    Nov 25, 2005
    There you go. I'm not sure I'd call it a victory but it's definitely an indicator of what the playing field looks like. :D

    I can definitely blame them for the driver implementation. That's like saying "you can't blame Sony for trying". :)

    I don't agree. To me this is like saying the problem with a poor quality lock is "thieves" rather than the lockmaker. The hackers don't force the downloads on anyone. People who pay for software don't crack things, the people who download are almost exclusivley people who would not have otherwise purchased the software.

    You live in Vancouver? You've seen fines increased for a variety of ill behavior, more and more police each year, etc. and has that resulted in any reduction in the problems? Of course not. Fines do not deter people, period. Nor do they "compensate". That's a well established situation. Besides, in general criminals use the proceeds of crime to pay their fines anyhow, compounding the overall cost, or better yet they drag their ass through the "fine options" program and cost us another $35 day in administration fees for a month or two. :D

    I work for a software company. Our stuff is very popular amongst both legitimate users and crackers/downloaders so I'm not at liberty to discuss how we manage this issue but I can say that what I'd suggest to Steinberg is to redirect a very tiny sliver of their massive profits into an innovative driver development team which can deliver professional quality code which doesn't impede performance for legitimate users in any tangible way. Not only is that possible, but it's *very* possible. There are tons of brilliant programmers out there available to anyone who is genuinely dedicated to the quality of their product. Admittedly driver development is a kettle of fish but it would be by no means difficult for Steinberg to have done a much, much better job on this particular system. It doesn't require hundreds of lines of code looping perpetually to achieve what they are seeking to do, not even close. The issue here isn't the presence of the driver, it's the quality of the driver. :cool:

    That's my take on it anyhow. I respect your position though, and I can certainly see why you would feel that way. :cool:
  4. MilesAway

    MilesAway Guest

    Does anybody know if any software/plugin manufactures are using digital "watermarks" in audio yet?
    It would be an interesting way to combat piracy if upon playback/mixdown, the software added a randomly placed (and undetectable to the human ear) digital fingerprint onto the recording that could be scanned for during printing/mastering/etc... and compared to a "registered software -vs- studio" database.

    While obviously a complicated solution (requires willing participation from printing & mastering firms), this could be an effective way to track down studios attempting to release commercial material created with unlicenced software. The "little-guys" could still slide under the radar by mastering/printing the CDs themselves but even the most hardcore DIYers would think twice before trying to burn 10,000+ CDs themselves...

    ... just thinkin' out-loud :)

Share This Page