trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6348
- Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
- Location: London ON
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/06 21:42:49
(permalink)
stevec
Sidechain is supported on Pro Tools, Nuendo, Cubase, Audition CS6, and Studio One only
Hmmm... Pro Tools is via RTAS, so that leaves Cubendo, Audition and Studio One. On the flip side we have Reaper and Live that apparently do not support VST3, as well as Logic and Digital Performer which don't include VST at all.
So in regards to previous posts stating that SONAR is "one of the only DAWs that doesn't support VST3", what am I missing? I really don't have a vested interest at this point I just find this to be an interesting discussion.
Reason ended up with RE's as well. No VST support still. It seems that a fair number of people do want VST3 support but as was said earlier, sometimes you have to wait for the things to take hold. Me? I'd rather see stability and reliability before adding new supports and such.
The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate. Bushpianos
|
backwoods
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2571
- Joined: 2011/03/23 17:24:50
- Location: South Pacific
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/06 21:49:21
(permalink)
VST3 was introduced for Cubase 4 which was about 2006-2007.
It's 2012 and Cubendo and S1 and Adobe are the only supporting DAWs? Hardly the industry standard at all. Lots of top VST makers say it is a waste of time (Kush Audio, Fxpansion for example).
Being unable to regulate the volume of one track by using Vocal rider being triggered by the volume on another audio track is not tantamount to driving a car without brakes in my opinion.
|
A1MixMan
Max Output Level: -58 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1706
- Joined: 2003/11/19 16:15:11
- Location: SunriseStudios
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/06 21:49:33
(permalink)
This makes me want it by itself:
Resizable edit windows VST3 introduces a new approach to plug-in GUIs though window resizing, allowing for extremely flexible use of valuable screen space.
I HATE that I can't resize VST2 windows.
|
backwoods
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2571
- Joined: 2011/03/23 17:24:50
- Location: South Pacific
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/06 21:53:48
(permalink)
I can't resize any of my VST3 plugins (fabfilter, softube, izotope, plugin alliance, waves, dmg audio, ssl) in Nuendo 5.5 Can't even resize the Nuendo VST3s
post edited by backwoods - 2012/09/06 22:21:57
|
SToons
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 478
- Joined: 2012/05/14 15:21:14
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/06 22:47:13
(permalink)
backwoods
VST3 was introduced for Cubase 4 which was about 2006-2007.
It's 2012 and Cubendo and S1 and Adobe are the only supporting DAWs? Hardly the industry standard at all. Lots of top VST makers say it is a waste of time (Kush Audio, Fxpansion for example).
And over 50% of Americans believe angels exist. So? Sony bet the bank backing Beta (say that quick ten times). How'd that work out? Did you consider the fact that the "type" of VST/VSTi being coded may not benefit from VST3? Do you think I and others are concerned that a reverb plugin may not be VST3 capable? Likely not. Have you also considered that companies will code according to what brings them income? Why hasn't Waves gone further to code their plugins to be fully compatible with Sonar? Likely because they understand their target market doesn't appear to be using Sonar. Clearly they have not dragged their heels in providing support for TDM, AU, RTAS and VST3 which covers most of the serious DAW bases...except one. Sonar. As for "industry standard" - every single institution I have EVER lectured or given clinics in, be it Academy, College or University, teaches using Cubase. Without exception. Every audio recording studio I have been in as a session player or band member uses Pro Tools and, if they have composition in-house, Cubase. Every single gaming company I have worked or contracted for uses Cubendo. When I have done on-air interviews and performances for CBC Radio and CTV among other broadcasters I have never seen Sonar in use or otherwise. If you go to Steve's Music or Long & McQuade, the two largest music retailers in Canada, mention Sonar. It is almost a guarantee the salesperson will advise you against and suggest Cubase, ProTools, Logic or MOTU. I have argued with salespeaople about this but my opinion falls on Industry-standard deaf ears and given Cakewalks current projected path this will not change anytime soon. I'm seriously starting to question my own arguements. In over 10 years I have yet to see a copy of Sonar in an academic institution or in any studio. Ever. Nor have I seen a copy in the hands of any composer I have personally worked with. This is not a criticism of Sonar but this is a reality in the industry. Clearly I would prefer to use Sonar, myself, but slowly as I transition from being a session player/performer/composer to doing more production I am seeing the holes in Sonar's game. Being unable to regulate the volume of one track by using Vocal rider being triggered by the volume on another audio track is not tantamount to driving a car without brakes in my opinion.
It's an analogy - suggesting something is "fine and dandy" when it only partially functions as intended is not tantamount to suggesting something functions properly. Want another analogy? It's like saying the car works fine but won't drive in reverse. It's easier to back up ten feet than to drive in a big circle to end up ten feet back. Essentially this is what happens with Sonar. Want to use Waves Morphoder? Buy a second DAW at great expense to perform only one or two functions. Export audio and MIDI from Sonar into other program. Edit. Re-import. Listen. Needs adjustment? Repeat procedure, indefinitely, as you cannot hear the track against the others while working so it will be much more difficult to tweak and edit. Be prepared to repeat till final mixdown. Hurray, it's like going back 12 years in time to use Gigasampler.
|
keith
Max Output Level: -36.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3882
- Joined: 2003/12/10 09:49:35
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/06 22:58:14
(permalink)
stevec
So in regards to previous posts stating that SONAR is "one of the only DAWs that doesn't support VST3", what am I missing? I really don't have a vested interest at this point I just find this to be an interesting discussion.
VST3 is at the tippy top of a steep hill, of sorts. There's a lot of pushback from the dev community due to unnecesary and seemingly arbitrary complications when comparing 2.4 and 3.x APIs. Steinberg made a power move and threw the technology baby out with the consumer bath water. What steinberg whould have done is take the key improvements in VST3 -- namely, the formalized multi-in/-out routing and maybe the dynamic CPU thing (though I still think that absolutely has to be a function of the host, not 82 individual freaking plugins I have running in a project), and make VST2.5. VST2.5 would have been backward compatible with VST2.4, and contain just the enhancements that were really needed. All the devs would have jumped on VST2.5, which would have amounted to VST2.4 + enhancements. But they didn't do that... they unzipped their marketing pants and peed into the first couple of rows like Jim Morrison at the New Haven Colliseum. And the likes of Waves was offstage left saying "you're our type of folk! we want in on this power play bamboozlement!"... So now you have one market segment pushing forward, the other pulling back, and it's a bit of a stalemate at the moment. Sounds familiar don't it? 64-bit ring any bells? Still a minor disaster, IMO. And whether VST3 starts rolling backward or forward down the hill, expect it to be a bumpy ride either way... much like the The Great 64-bit Fiasco.
|
backwoods
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2571
- Joined: 2011/03/23 17:24:50
- Location: South Pacific
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/06 23:08:40
(permalink)
I think I get it. VST3 is like a perfectly functioning car that can only drive on about 10 percent of roads. VST2 is like a car that can drive anywhere but the glove box light doesn't go.
|
stevec
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 11546
- Joined: 2003/11/04 15:05:54
- Location: Parkesburg, PA
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/06 23:26:33
(permalink)
So now you have one market segment pushing forward, the other pulling back, and it's a bit of a stalemate at the moment. Yeah... It does sort of seem like that's the case, at least to some extent. I do believe that VST3 will roll forward, not backward, but that traction doesn't seem to be quite there yet across the board. From all accounts there are more DAWs and plugins overall that do not support VST3 than do. It doesn't mean the landscape won't be different a year from now, but a year from now who knows - SONAR could be supporting VST3. 
SteveC https://soundcloud.com/steve-cocchi http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=39163 SONAR Platinum x64, Intel Q9300 (2.5Ghz), Asus P5N-D, Win7 x64 SP1, 8GB RAM, 1TB internal + ESATA + USB Backup HDDs, ATI Radeon HD5450 1GB RAM + dual ViewSonic VA2431wm Monitors; Focusrite 18i6 (ASIO); Komplete 9, Melodyne Studio 4, Ozone 7 Advanced, Rapture Pro, GPO5, Valhalla Plate, MJUC comp, MDynamic EQ, lots of other freebie VST plugins, synths and Kontakt libraries
|
SToons
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 478
- Joined: 2012/05/14 15:21:14
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 00:23:48
(permalink)
backwoods
I think I get it.
Pretty clear you don't, at least not as far as my professional needs go.
VST3 is like a perfectly functioning car that can only drive on about 10 percent of roads. VST2 is like a car that can drive anywhere but the glove box light doesn't go.
Unh, yeah, sure. Considering 80% of the better roads are already covered by TDM, AU or RTAS, VST3 doesn't need to travel many roads, just the less developed ones. To suggest sidechaining and Surround tools are about as important to a professional as a glove box light in relation to the functionality of a car indicates enough about your personal musical needs for me to end this discussion with you as obviously the professional demands you experience are quite different than mine which is not a big surprise, nor a disappointment - it just is what it is.
|
backwoods
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2571
- Joined: 2011/03/23 17:24:50
- Location: South Pacific
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 00:28:56
(permalink)
Um, well I've never gone around teaching people how to use DAWs (couldn't imagine anything worse to be honest), but I've made money as a piano player for about a decade- but it's a side gig for me. I've also recorded bands for money using Nuendo and Sonar. And I've done numerous FOH gigs also. Again, it's not my job, more a hobby. I'm accustomed with VST3 plugins also which I don't think you are. You didn't even know that most Compressors that sidechain as VST3s also sidechain using sonar as VST2s! And the ones that I own that don't sidechain as VST2s either don't sidechain as VST3s (eg Vertigo VSC2, elysia alpha, ssl) or don't even exist as VST3 (PSP (First P stands for Professional  )). What exactly SToons are some examples of your "Pro" compressors? Maybe your were meaning, Sonnox or Sonalksis or Flux or Voxengo but none of those "pro" companies offer VST3. But they all make compressors that sidechain in Sonar.
post edited by backwoods - 2012/09/07 02:43:44
|
SToons
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 478
- Joined: 2012/05/14 15:21:14
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 02:41:16
(permalink)
backwoods
Um, well I've never gone around teaching people how to use DAWs (couldn't imagine anything worse to be honest),
I never suggested I taught people how to use DAWs. I get hired to give guitar/music/bass clinics/instruction.
but I've made money as a piano player for about a decade- but it's a side gig for me. I've also recorded bands for money using Nuendo and Sonar. And I've done numerous FOH gigs also. Again, it's not my job, more a hobby.
I am a full time professional and have been since I left school. Actually, starting before I left school. This is not to suggest anything, I'm not drawing a comparison here, but it is what I have always done professionally. I'm fully proficient with VST3 also which I don't think you are.
I'm not proficient whatsoever with "specific" uses of VST3 such as modulating a single note of a chord using a DAW. That's currently not specifically relevant to my needs. However I am of the understanding that it affects me and will continue to in terms of not only using future plugins (compatability; whether you use all features or not is not the only issue) but also in using the ones I have already spent reasonable money on.
You didn't even know that most Compressors that sidechain as VST3s also sidechain using sonar as VST2s!
Please qualify "most". Waves alone makes at least five times as many compressors as you have named, all to be found in far more studios than the ones you have mentioned. Why should I need to know? I teach, perform, do session work, compose for games, commercials and documentaries (among other things), play in two bands as well as working as a hired player, own a music academy, take care of three properties (cottage, house and academy location which I own) , sixteen cats, and a mother who has congestive heart failure issues (she gets a pacemaker in 6 hours). I have more important things to do than to download and play with demos to see what sidechains and what doesn't. I purchased the entire Waves Collection so to have adequate tools that I did not need to faff with that kind of thing. My time is mostly invested in working, not testing and playing around therefore I am more interested in time-saving solutions, not sorting out plugin compatability issues. My money has already been invested as far as plugins (not VSTi's) goes. If you have the time, cheers to you. If I did I might be more inclined to actually care what other companies are doing although it's not likely I would fork out more money on compressors when I have dozens. None of which sidechain in Sonar without mono workarounds and other time-consuming options.
And the ones that I own that don't sidechain as VST2s either don't sidechain as VST3s (eg Vertigo VSC2, elysia alpha, ssl) or don't even exist as VST3 (PSP (First P stands for Professional ), Voxengo)
What exactly SToons are some examples of "Pro" compressors?
Whatever compressors a pro chooses to use. That's a loaded question, now, isn't it? The defacto industry go-to at the moment is Waves. I'm not suggesting everything they make is the absolute best but they certainly offer the most comprehensive, useable out-of-the-box set of complete tools available. So if you're asking what I use, choose any compressor that Waves makes. V-Series, SSL-series, Puig, C-series, CLA-series, H-Comp, Linear Multi, Ren series...take your pick. I have occassionally used the ones included with Sonar 8.5.3.
|
backwoods
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2571
- Joined: 2011/03/23 17:24:50
- Location: South Pacific
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 02:59:25
(permalink)
OK- you got a waves bundle, it makes sense now.
I hope Sonar gets around to VST3 eventually but it really is not that important as some here make it out to be.
p.s. I hope your Mother's pacemaker procedure goes well today.
|
Bristol_Jonesey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 16775
- Joined: 2007/10/08 15:41:17
- Location: Bristol, UK
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 04:37:02
(permalink)
SToons
backwoods
VST3 was introduced for Cubase 4 which was about 2006-2007.
It's 2012 and Cubendo and S1 and Adobe are the only supporting DAWs? Hardly the industry standard at all. Lots of top VST makers say it is a waste of time (Kush Audio, Fxpansion for example).
And over 50% of Americans believe angels exist. So?
Sony bet the bank backing Beta (say that quick ten times). How'd that work out?
Did you consider the fact that the "type" of VST/VSTi being coded may not benefit from VST3? Do you think I and others are concerned that a reverb plugin may not be VST3 capable? Likely not. Have you also considered that companies will code according to what brings them income? Why hasn't Waves gone further to code their plugins to be fully compatible with Sonar? Likely because they understand their target market doesn't appear to be using Sonar. Clearly they have not dragged their heels in providing support for TDM, AU, RTAS and VST3 which covers most of the serious DAW bases...except one. Sonar.
As for "industry standard" - every single institution I have EVER lectured or given clinics in, be it Academy, College or University, teaches using Cubase. Without exception. Every audio recording studio I have been in as a session player or band member uses Pro Tools and, if they have composition in-house, Cubase. Every single gaming company I have worked or contracted for uses Cubendo. When I have done on-air interviews and performances for CBC Radio and CTV among other broadcasters I have never seen Sonar in use or otherwise. If you go to Steve's Music or Long & McQuade, the two largest music retailers in Canada, mention Sonar. It is almost a guarantee the salesperson will advise you against and suggest Cubase, ProTools, Logic or MOTU. I have argued with salespeaople about this but my opinion falls on Industry-standard deaf ears and given Cakewalks current projected path this will not change anytime soon. I'm seriously starting to question my own arguements.
In over 10 years I have yet to see a copy of Sonar in an academic institution or in any studio. Ever. Nor have I seen a copy in the hands of any composer I have personally worked with. This is not a criticism of Sonar but this is a reality in the industry. Clearly I would prefer to use Sonar, myself, but slowly as I transition from being a session player/performer/composer to doing more production I am seeing the holes in Sonar's game.
Being unable to regulate the volume of one track by using Vocal rider being triggered by the volume on another audio track is not tantamount to driving a car without brakes in my opinion.
It's an analogy - suggesting something is "fine and dandy" when it only partially functions as intended is not tantamount to suggesting something functions properly.
Want another analogy? It's like saying the car works fine but won't drive in reverse. It's easier to back up ten feet than to drive in a big circle to end up ten feet back. Essentially this is what happens with Sonar. Want to use Waves Morphoder? Buy a second DAW at great expense to perform only one or two functions. Export audio and MIDI from Sonar into other program. Edit. Re-import. Listen. Needs adjustment? Repeat procedure, indefinitely, as you cannot hear the track against the others while working so it will be much more difficult to tweak and edit. Be prepared to repeat till final mixdown.
Hurray, it's like going back 12 years in time to use Gigasampler.
All of which really begs the question - why are you persisting with Sonar?
CbB, Platinum, 64 bit throughoutCustom built i7 3930, 32Gb RAM, 2 x 1Tb Internal HDD, 1 x 1TB system SSD (Win 7), 1 x 500Gb system SSD (Win 10), 2 x 1Tb External HDD's, Dual boot Win 7 & Win 10 64 Bit, Saffire Pro 26, ISA One, Adam P11A,
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 06:23:38
(permalink)
A1MixMan
This makes me want it by itself:
Resizable edit windows VST3 introduces a new approach to plug-in GUIs though window resizing, allowing for extremely flexible use of valuable screen space.
I HATE that I can't resize VST2 windows.
I have a number of VST 2.4 plugins that are re-sizable. All the Melda plugins are. Kontakt 5 is re-sizable. This is not new and not exclusive to VST 3.
|
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9871
- Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
- Location: Ohio
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 08:30:37
(permalink)
I referenced this earlier...the die hards who don't care, including the CTO, are going to argue the "unimportance" of this into the ground. How many different ways can said CTO explain that *ALL* those features can be implemented using VST2.4 (including VST3 itself)??? The spec brings no real/new capabilities to the table. A complete lateral move. Noel has given a very reasonable explanation as to why Cakewalk chose not to implement VST3 in X2. Too much development time (read cost) for the potential gain. Using Computer Music (UK magazine that targets novices) as a source of "industry standards"???  Call ten significant studios in New York, Nashville, and LA. Ask them about their main DAW application. Guarantee the consensus won't be Cubase... or FL Studio
|
TomG
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 339
- Joined: 2007/02/19 05:28:39
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 09:33:43
(permalink)
Well said Jim.
The *only* VST 3 feature I *would* like to see is VST EFX using 0 CPU cycles when not in use - ie: if you have reverb on a drum track and there are no drums in say the middle 8, then the VST Reverb ceases using CPU cycles during those 8 bars.
I'm wondering - would you know Jim if this VST 3 feature could actually be inplemented in VST 2.X ?
All the best,
Tom
|
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9871
- Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
- Location: Ohio
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 10:05:57
(permalink)
I'm wondering - would you know Jim if this VST 3 feature could actually be inplemented in VST 2.X ? Hi Tom, Based on what Noel has said, I would surely think this is possible... BTW, I'm not bashing Cubase... I own a copy of version 6, ProTools, Samplitude, Vegas Pro, etc. They all have some great features (though Sonar X1 is my personal favorite/main DAW app).
|
WDI
Max Output Level: -54.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2069
- Joined: 2007/08/28 02:31:11
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 10:21:04
(permalink)
Based on what Noel said this has already been implemented in cakewalk products since the 90s which leaves me totally confused. For me, plugins in Sonar always consume CPU whether audio is present or not. So there has to be some kind of misunderstanding as to what we are talking about exactly. To me it's straight forward. No audio, no hit on CPU.
Sonar 7 PE Windows XP Pofessional (SP3) MSI K8N Neo4-F AMD Athlon 64 3500+ 2 GB PC 3200 Ram RME Fireface 800 Edirol FA-66 CM Labs MotorMix Old stuff: ARJO
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 10:32:34
(permalink)
I would think that a plugin needs some CPU to stay active. It can't be totally shut off if for no other reason than to monitor when audio is present. That would allow it to not process stuff that isn't there.
Sonar has been curtailing plugins for some time now. Anyone can check this out by loading a project with sections that are processed at different places in the project. Look at the X1 CPU meter as the project plays. It will vary due to load.
There will be a hit on the CPU even if there is nothing to process but it will go up when that plugin is processing.
|
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9871
- Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
- Location: Ohio
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 10:33:05
(permalink)
Based on what Noel said this has already been implemented in cakewalk products since the 90s which leaves me totally confused. For me, plugins in Sonar always consume CPU whether audio is present or not. So there has to be some kind of misunderstanding as to what we are talking about exactly. To me it's straight forward. No audio, no hit on CPU. If he has the time, perhaps Noel will elaborate...
|
scook
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 24146
- Joined: 2005/07/27 13:43:57
- Location: TX
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 10:35:40
(permalink)
|
WDI
Max Output Level: -54.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2069
- Joined: 2007/08/28 02:31:11
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 10:38:11
(permalink)
John
I would think that a plugin needs some CPU to stay active. It can't be totally shut off if for no other reason than to monitor when audio is present. That would allow it to not process stuff that isn't there.
Sonar has been curtailing plugins for some time now. Anyone can check this out by loading a project with sections that are processed at different places in the project. Look at the X1 CPU meter as the project plays. It will vary due to load.
There will be a hit on the CPU even if there is nothing to process but it will go up when that plugin is processing.
Not from my experience.
Sonar 7 PE Windows XP Pofessional (SP3) MSI K8N Neo4-F AMD Athlon 64 3500+ 2 GB PC 3200 Ram RME Fireface 800 Edirol FA-66 CM Labs MotorMix Old stuff: ARJO
|
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9871
- Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
- Location: Ohio
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 10:42:27
(permalink)
Yes, I saw Noel's post above... If he has time, I'm sure Noel could elaborate further... to WDI's point.
|
cclarry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 20964
- Joined: 2012/02/07 09:42:07
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 11:18:00
(permalink)
This whole discussion is really quite laughable...
Bottom line is this...
Cake is going to take a beating...mark my words..from the Industry for
not including it. On all sides. The Publication reviews are going to rip
X2 and Cake on it. It's a fact.
Cake has NO ALTERNATIVE, if they plan to remain viable, but to implement it.
So WHY keep procrastinating? Costs go up every year. The longer you
take, the more it costs...simple math. And the more features you add to
the program, prior to implementation, the MORE DIFFICULT it will become,
and the LONGER IT WILL TAKE, and the MORE MONEY it will cost,
to keep those features BECAUSE of the REQUIREMENT to implement it.
So you can say what you want Noel, but you are only fooling yourself. It's not going away. You're wasting time, and money, because you don't want to admit that it has to be done and just do it. It shouldn't even matter what "feature requests" you received.
This is an INDUSTRY STANDARD....not a feature, so requests shouldn't even be considered
when talking about this.
And all you fanbois, who really have no clue what's going on out there...wake up.
You haven't listened to a single word said here...other then to Noel, who is
playing Corporate Politics and covering his A** for a HUGE mistake.
Jim,
You can rest assured that, while it may not be their MAIN DAW,
those Studio's in Nashville, New York, and LA....they ALL have Cubase installed.
Not even a question.
As for CM...it's a great publication. And I fully believe they know what they're talking
about.
I'm one of Cakes BIGGEST FANS. I wouldn't have moved from Cubase if I wasn't.
That's what you ALL are missing. VST 3 would put Cake in a much BETTER position.
It HAS TO. It makes it READY for the NEW things coming down the road, that
are JUST NOW being developed, as well as ALL THE PLUGS OUT THERE NOW THAT
REQUIRE IT!!!
It's not even a question of whether you NEED it or not NOW,
but that it WILL be required, NOT ONLY NOW, but even more so later as well,
as the Plug Companies, which are smart enough to ALREADY be on the move,
are NOT going to just drop it.
It's completely ludicrous to think anything else.
Just because YOU don't need it doesn't mean the INDUSTRY doesn't, or that it's going away. Just because you don't want to invest in it doesn't mean you shouldn't.
No one can be that blind.
Do you HONESTLY think that the guys at Steinberg, the largest Sequencer Company out there, just arbitrarily said...hey...let's screw everyone up and write a new standard?
REALLY?
They developed it to address issues with the current standard, because there was a
NEED...not a WANT.
EVERY standard must evolve to deal with issues that arise with it's current implentation, to become better and more efficient.
EVERY software must evolve to deal with issues that arise with it's current VERSION, to become better, and more effecient.
And you ridiculous people who sit around and talk about how I DON'T NEED IT
so screw everyone else, including you Noel, have no sense of being realistic,
or of facing the facts square in the face.
It's HERE...it's a DONE DEAL....and the INDUSTRY - it's going there...like it or not.
WHY do you think Waves, and FabFilter, and VocAlign, and ALL these Plugin
Companies and other DAW's are implementing it NOW, and stating that 2.4 will soon be gone? This is the same way 8 Tracks replaced Records, Cassettes replaced 8 Tracks, CD's replaced Cassettes,...and so on and so on. Are THEY still out there? Yes. Are they still usable? Yes. Does anyone? Ummm...not so much.
Surely you guys REALLY aren't that blind and that dumb.
This ENTIRE thread is laughable...and everyone with ANY Industry knowledge
KNOWS that.
(actually, it's REALLY sad to read those one sided, screw the Industry - I don't need it -so who cares - and you don't know what you're talking about -comments)
Cheers Gents!
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 11:21:18
(permalink)
To me the reason to support VST 3 is for compatibility with new plugins. All the abilities that are seemingly new with VST 3 are already available with VST 2.4.
What is not available is being able to run them if a host wont support them. That is the only thing that concerns me. At some point VST 2.4 will not be used for development.
|
rscain
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 784
- Joined: 2004/03/23 09:52:29
- Location: Kentucky
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 11:27:47
(permalink)
This ENTIRE thread is laughable...and everyone with ANY Industry knowledge
KNOWS that.
I think for anyone to come on here and try to tell anyone else what they need or don't need is laughable. You have your needs and wants, I have mine. You do what you have to to fulfill your needs, I do the same. But don't try to tell me what I need, please. Your tone is extremely insulting. Sorry, but it is.
My Tunes On SoundClick AMD FX9350 @4 gHz, 16 gb ram, 240 gb SSD, 2 1Tb SS/Hybrid HDs, 1 Tb Fantom External HD, Windows 10 64 bit, Sonar Platinum 64 bit, Studio One 4 Pro, Harrison Mixbus, Izotope Neutron 2 Advanced and Ozone 8 Advanced, ARC 2, NI Komplete 11 Ultimate, TC-Helicon VoiceLive 3, Focusrite Saffire Pro 24 DSP, Focusrite Octopre MkII, KRK Rokit 8 monitors, Sennheiser HD 280 pro headphones, MidiMan Oxygen 8, Behringer X-Touch, guitars and stuff
|
pdlstl
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 991
- Joined: 2003/11/06 16:07:23
- Location: Mineral Wells, TX
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 11:32:10
(permalink)
cclarry
Cake is going to take a beating...mark my words..from the Industry for
not including it. On all sides. The Publication reviews are going to rip
X2 and Cake on it. It's a fact.
Cake has NO ALTERNATIVE, if they plan to remain viable, but to implement it.
I'm one of Cakes BIGGEST FANS. I wouldn't have moved from Cubase if I wasn't.
That's what you ALL are missing.
Well, there you have it. Cakewalk is going down. Oh woe is me... Ya know, since Cakewalk is pulling such a bone head move maybe you might want to consider heading back to Cubase. Why did you leave it?
|
piangio
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 203
- Joined: 2004/10/05 04:51:11
- Location: Italy
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 11:53:29
(permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk ]
john6448
VST3 is important to me, particularly because I work with orchestral music and Cubase has used it to make articulation switching so easy.
Sigh. This is exactly the point I have been trying to make all along. VST3 in itself doesn't give you "articulation switching" and even if we implemented the spec you wouldn't get that. That is a whole different feature which just happens to have some support in the VST3 spec. If that feature in itself is specially important to you by all means feature request it but asking for VST3 for sure isn't going to get that to you. Its like going to another vendor and asking why don't you support prochannel modules - its implemented in VST 2.4 after all :)
I'll say it again. VST3 is a plugin spec - no more and no less. It is simply a template for implementing a common protocol to communicate with plugins. It won't get you any new features!
>>cclarry
>>But that does not dimish the importance of VST 3 implemenation.
>>Plug Manufacturers and PC DAW's have been using and implementing it for 4 years now...while Cake sits on their lists.
>>I don't use it...I don't need it...BUT...I understand the NEED and reason for the NEED, and that is why I support
it.
Lets see - you have no need for VST3 yourself and yet you want us to invest our resources in it just in case someone wants it. I'm afraid I don't see a lot of sense in that argument. We use our development time wisely to deliver tools that benefit the most of our customers base and not for some hypothetical gain. I think most people will agree that this is a better model.
|
rabeach
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2703
- Joined: 2004/01/26 14:56:13
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 11:54:57
(permalink)
cclarry
Do you HONESTLY think that the guys at Steinberg, the largest Sequencer Company out there, just arbitrarily said...hey...let's screw everyone up and write a new standard?
REALLY?
Yea it happens all the time. Do you believe that Steinberg and Steinberg alone understands the vst3 specification That any competent software engineer can’t see that it was indeed a political social economic move on the part of Steinberg and there is some passive resistance throughout the industry to this less than stellar development on the part of Steinberg. So called industry standards fall by the wayside all the time. VST is past due. :-)
|
piangio
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 203
- Joined: 2004/10/05 04:51:11
- Location: Italy
- Status: offline
Re:This just in .... X2 DOES NOT SUPPORT VST3 ..per Robin
2012/09/07 12:08:19
(permalink)
I totally agree with Cakewalk policy.
I think that this is only a philosophycal problem.
Sonar is a very good DAW and I think that X2 will improve its capability to produce even better than what I'm doing actually.
For me is not really important which is the best daw in the universe. I only want stability and good performances. The Beatles records were made on very simple machines if we look at what we have now!!!! They made great music indeed....
Thank you Cakewalk team!
|