jamescollins
I seem to remember them saying they didn't have any plans to implement it...

This is what Noel said originally:

"We haven't seen any compelling reason to support VST3 since VST 2 is capable of doing pretty much all that VST3 can do. VST3 is largely a somewhat improved API to talk to VST's with very little gain to the end user or host developer. It would be way too much work for us to support with no known gains."

http://forum.cakewalk.com/Sonar-8-not-VST3-compatible-m1504455.aspx#1504464

But that was nearly 6 years ago. I couldn't find a more recent quote.

I seem to remember Noel saying it wasn't a pressing issue at the time but it would be something they'd consider in the future.
 
Well, the future is here, so embrace it!

Noel on VST3:
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/fb.ashx?m=2653661
http://forum.cakewalk.com/fb.ashx?m=2654926
 
 

Thanks for digging that up Kev - wow, 6 years ago?! OK that makes more sense - I was under the impression those comments were made last year, but it must have been people digging up old dialogue.

Anyway I hope this thread isn't misunderstood - no negative undertones here - I think it's great X3 will have VST3 and look forward to its release. I was simply interested in the apparent shift in thinking, but as Kev pointed out, those comments were made 6 years ago, so this thread is irrelevant.

Thanks - let the circus continue!

I know in Studio One you have to install the VST3 version for the ARA Melodyne to work. Also a lot of folks on this forum were requesting VST3 support because plugins like Waves Vocal Rider could not side chain.

some other dev folk disliked they had to make vst3 versions.. that their things didn't utilise in the new standard
 but like it or not , it's the standard...
 
if they didn't , more than probable less VST makers would do vst2 versions of their stuff..
 
same thing happened with the mac and some plugins only working on older systems for a while..
 

Bristol Jonesy wrote:
I seem to remember Noel saying it wasn't a pressing issue at the time but it would be something they'd consider in the future.

Well, the future is here, so embrace it!


That's exactly what I remember. I think there are just more Vst's that can utilize its benefits, so that now the timing is right to add the feature. I also believe that Cakewalk is listening to its users wishes and trying to accommodate as much as they can, with available resources.

I think recollection is unclear.
 
I have followed the entire VST3 discussion, and my recollection is..
 
Noel did state that the majority/all of VST3 functionality exists in VST2.4, just not implemented in most VST, and hence there was not a pressing need for VST3 from a technical perspective . Noel also acknowledged that
a) Providers with VST2.4 and VST3 would not be likely to improve their VST2.4
b) Some providers (of VST instruments and effects) only offer VST3
c) Some providers of hardware (I am looking at you Yamaha) only offer VST3 editors
 
Noel stated that it was omitted from X2 as a) they had enough to do, and b) did not deem it essential and critical to support VST3 at that time. Noel acknowledged the need that a number of users had and indicated that there would likely be a time that Sonar supported VST3. He did not make any statement as to when or how, nor would I expect that, as this is clearly market sensitive material.
 
FYI, there is no "sudden decision" on any significant software development (as this is) and I suspect that CW has been working on this since the spring or therreabouts. Clearly CW would never make any statement as to what features would be offered in subsequent releases until such time is ripe. The time is now ripe.
 
I have no issues with how CW has handled the VST3 situation.. there was rampant debate in the winter in the forums, and the next major release has VST3... what could be a better example of listening to your users?
 
my apologies to Noel if I have incorrectly stated his position, I am, after all, getting older so the memory is the umm fade thing.. what was that?
 
regards, Ian
 

jamescollins
Not a smart-arse question, genuinely interested to know. It seems like just months ago that Cake staff were on here quite emphatically saying VST3 is unnecessary, hyped up and quite useless (of course those weren't their words, but can't be bothered looking for the original threads) and that they had no plans to implement it in the future - what caused the U-turn?

jamescollins
Not a smart-arse question, genuinely interested to know. It seems like just months ago that Cake staff were on here quite emphatically saying VST3 is unnecessary, hyped up and quite useless (of course those weren't their words, but can't be bothered looking for the original threads) and that they had no plans to implement it in the future - what caused the U-turn?

Imo:
1. The feature request
2. marketing strategy
3. The sun

Isn't it just that Studio One has has VST3 and Melodyne ARA and they are a strong competitor.
 
What I read from Noel was a complete rework of routing that also improves some stuff for VST2.x.
 
And VST3 ability to organize automation parameters in groups will help significantly when having a number of plugins and you are about to select what to automate. Now I've had examples that take up more than one monitor with listed parameters.
 
If they also remove Midi FX and replace with VST midi would be nice. Not many bothered to make x64 midi fx. So the ability to handle multiple midi ports on plugins could mean this has improved. Maybe midi support on fx as well - would be swell. Having some plugins like Leslie that want that.
 
And most of all - X3 seems to take Sonar to frontline again and having the initiative.
 
Hope this mean full support for Waves Tune - which never was supported officially anyway. I'm staying with Sonar Studio - and I assume ARA is not part of that, like Studio One did make it a trial only on their non-top version.