Steinberg survey about latency

[Sam Inglis]

Might be benefits to everyone in filling this in, even non-Steinberg users?

https://latencyperformance2018.questionpro.com

[The Elf]

Link doesn't work.

[Matt Houghton]

Link doesn't work.

Try this one

[The Elf]

Link doesn't work.

Try this one

Ta!

[Forum Admin]

Duly submitted - though the limit to one option, in places, will skew their results (eg. number of cue mixes I need varies depending on if it's just me recording or more than one person).

[Drew Stephenson]

Done, with the same caveats mentioned above.

[Logarhythm]

Likewise - only able to choose one sample rate. Is it that unusual to change this for different projects?!
Wonder if they've hired one of the students who were posting surveys here a few months ago to give some design tips

[Martin Walker]

Also done, although I agree that a few of the questions have questionable reasoning

Martin

[The Elf]

Duly submitted - though the limit to one option, in places, will skew their results (eg. number of cue mixes I need varies depending on if it's just me recording or more than one person).

I had exactly the same dilemma. The problem is that the given responses dictate a skewed answer.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kwackman]

the limit to one option, in places, will skew their results (eg. number of cue mixes I need varies depending on if it's just me recording or more than one person).

I didn't complete this- but I did wonder if this is a genuine Steinberg survey? I've done some in the past, they usually email users directly. The styling of questions, as noted in this thread, isn't up to their usual standard.

[Forum Admin]

Sam, do we know for sure that this is a genuine Steinberg survey?

[Sam Inglis]

Actually, no, I just followed a link from another site -- perhaps it's not (although quite why anyone would go to the trouble of faking such a thing I have no idea!).

[Matt Houghton]

Yes, it's genuine. Steinberg put it out on their social media yesterday.

[Kwackman]

Yes, it's genuine. Steinberg put it out on their social media yesterday.

Ah, OK, sorry for the distraction!

[twotoedsloth]

Seems like a strange survey. I don't think anyone would switch DAW platforms solely because of latency. If there were several advantages, sure. But for no other reason?

[Folderol]

Oh what fun! I wonder what they'll make of my replies

[Dave B]

Seems like a strange survey. I don't think anyone would switch DAW platforms solely because of latency. If there were several advantages, sure. But for no other reason?

I thought that that was odd as well. And it seemed to be the general thrust of the questions - so either a) Steinberg have some cunning plan for low latency monitoring or b) they have had feedback that people are changing DAWs 'because XXXX has better latency'. The latter is obviously drivel, so maybe they are just trying to gauge public opinion.

Meh ... I switched DAWs because, at the time, I didn't like the way that the software company was treating it's users - over charging and under delivering. Nothing to do with latency...

[Folderol]

They also seemed to be fixated on hardware, but my experience is that it's the software that contributes the most latency.

[James Perrett]

Steinberg's biggest problem is unreliability - whether real or perceived, there are plenty of us who remember Cubase crashing regularly and who stopped using it. It doesn't matter how good their latency is, they badly need to show that they care about reliability if they want to attract customers. Karl Steinberg's old attitudes won't cut it these days when programs like Reaper work so reliably.

[Kwackman]

Steinberg's biggest problem is unreliability - whether real or perceived, there are plenty of us who remember Cubase crashing regularly and who stopped using it. .

I might be very lucky, but I find it pretty stable to be honest.
I've been using it since the days of Pro-24 & Cubase on Atari ST and now Cubase on a Mac.
I'm probably not a power user, but I very seldom have a problem of crashing.
YMMV.

[The Elf]

Cubase has its faults, but lack of stability is not one of them. It's a very mature, slick and solid piece of software.

[James Perrett]

My experience is from a good few years ago but, at that time, Cubase was the least stable piece of music software that I'd ever used and it crashed every few hours. I'd had no problem with other music software on the same machine.

Yes, it was very slick, easy to use and probably fine for a home user but not something I could rely on in the studio. I was on the Cubase email list in the days when Karl Steinberg still participated but he didn't really want to take an interest in the instability - he just blamed the PC architecture for causing the problems. In comparison, I found Greg Hendershott (Cakewalk's founder) to have a much more helpful attitude on the Cakewalk email list.

[Matt Houghton]

I use various DAWs, mainly Cubase, Pro Tools and Reaper, and have used many more over the years (including Logic, Studio One, Live, Reason...). They've all had their moments, but I can't say I've found Cubase to be particularly unstable relative to the others.