Cubase SX# student edition

  • Thread starter Thread starter nashunbooking
  • Start date Start date
N

nashunbooking

New member
what are the differences between the full cubase sx3 version
and the full version of cubase sx3 for students? I notice there is a big difference in price. I also know that with microsoft word, it really wasn't a different version...well at least not that I could tell. Is the situation the same with cubase sx3?
 
nashunbooking said:
what are the differences between the full cubase sx3 version
and the full version of cubase sx3 for students? I notice there is a big difference in price. I also know that with microsoft word, it really wasn't a different version...well at least not that I could tell. Is the situation the same with cubase sx3?
Click to expand...

It's just the same as the retail version. I bought the crossover version and it is the same deal - the same as the full retail version.
 
how ever I think the EULA is not the same. Like where I work we have Some video toasters video studio in a box eduacional version and the EULA says it cant be used for profit.
 
You receive a discount on many software titles for being a student. It's the same software.
 
Yep. That's what I use right now. No difference that I can tell. I'll have to look through the EULA now that it has been mentioned. You do need to verify that you are actually a student, though, but that's usually not that hard.
 
altiris said:
how ever I think the EULA is not the same. Like where I work we have Some video toasters video studio in a box eduacional version and the EULA says it cant be used for profit.
Click to expand...
Then it should be fine for most studios :D
 
altiris said:
how ever I think the EULA is not the same. Like where I work we have Some video toasters video studio in a box eduacional version and the EULA says it cant be used for profit.
Click to expand...

I'm totally charging a band 10 dollars per song right now for a 4 song EP that I'll probably end up working 50-60 or so total hours on(and it'll still sound like shit). Do you guys think I'm gunna get in trouble????????? :eek: :eek: :eek:
 
tell the band

that it is for pre-production. thats the only thing i can say. It has to sound better than a boom box.

no offense meant here, but if a band is willing to have someone record them that is not a good engineer, then they are either A: doing it becasue they just want some pre-production stuff to critique what they need to work on B: they are doing you a favor (i doubt this one if you are putting 60 hours in) or C: and this is only for bands that do not have a clue...they would be doing it with you to release it (highly unlikely).

I would figure they can't be expecting much, so don't worry about it. Unless you can do it yourself, you tend to get what you pay for in music...unless you are on a label with a serious budget. Then you get ripped off as my old band did and pay for some guy's name to be placed on it (our label spent roughly $60,000 on a crappy recording).


i am no engineer, but I have been working in the music industry from the buisness aspect since I was 17 (11 years ago). My knowledge is only from a buisness perspective so it is only useful from that viewpoint.
 
nashunbooking said:
that it is for pre-production. thats the only thing i can say. It has to sound better than a boom box.

no offense meant here, but if a band is willing to have someone record them that is not a good engineer, then they are either A: doing it becasue they just want some pre-production stuff to critique what they need to work on B: they are doing you a favor (i doubt this one if you are putting 60 hours in) or C: and this is only for bands that do not have a clue...they would be doing it with you to release it (highly unlikely).

I would figure they can't be expecting much, so don't worry about it. Unless you can do it yourself, you tend to get what you pay for in music...unless you are on a label with a serious budget. Then you get ripped off as my old band did and pay for some guy's name to be placed on it (our label spent roughly $60,000 on a crappy recording).


i am no engineer, but I have been working in the music industry from the buisness aspect since I was 17 (11 years ago). My knowledge is only from a buisness perspective so it is only useful from that viewpoint.
Click to expand...

If that was in response to me, then I honestly have no clue what you are talking about. I was (sarcastically)talking about getting in trouble from Steinberg for getting a profit(if you want to call $40 a profit) by using the educational version of their software.
 
Last edited:
my response was actually to something else

damn, I am not sure how it ended up on this board. I thought I hit reply to another person's questions about managers and what they do, but it wasn't in the cubase forum. Sorry.
 
BRIEFCASEMANX said:
If that was in response to me, then I honestly have no clue what you are talking about. I was (sarcastically)talking about getting in trouble from Steinberg for getting a profit(if you want to call $40 a profit) by using the educational version of their software.
Click to expand...

They had a discussion on this back in the SX 1.x days on the steiny forum, and someone brought up the profit thing, but no one could back it up with any wording in the users license that forbids you to use your academic version of SX for profit. Unless someone here can post to the contrary, you can sleep with a clear concience.
 
I don’t know about Cubase. But the box of the Video Toaster had a sticker that read “ Not for commercial use.” I’m sure you will be fine even if the EULA states you cant make some money off of it. But I wouldn’t open up a studio with it.
 
altiris said:
I don’t know about Cubase. But the box of the Video Toaster had a sticker that read “ Not for commercial use.” I’m sure you will be fine even if the EULA states you cant make some money off of it. But I wouldn’t open up a studio with it.
Click to expand...

I would. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top