briandhughes
I know in Studio One you have to install the VST3 version for the ARA Melodyne to work.

I'd imagine this is a big part of it, since it would appear ARA was part of the X3 plan for some time (Noel's comments indicate it was a big task).  And let's not forget the move from Roland to Gibson and the removal of VVocal from X3.   Add that to the limitations when using Waves VST3 plugins and more manufacturers offering VST3 versions, and it's like a software alignment of the stars.
 

lfm
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.

In S1 only the VST version of Melodyne will work with ARA.  I'm not sure that it's a technical requirement, but I suppose it is the precedent at this point.  
 
Besides, there are the other benefits of VST3, like parameter categorization (whatever that will look like), some of which I hope to see in the future.   I think the only VST3 plugins I have are Melodyne Editor and Melda, but I'll take whatever advantages there are.

IIRC, one benefit about VST3 is that the gui assets and the dsp are separated. I surmise that this is similar to the way Pro Channel works.
 
IIRC, the claimed benefit is that it a system like this is way more efficient when you have 79 tracks and they are all running the same efx using only one set of graphics assets.
 
IMHO, it seems like a good idea. Good ideas are bound to rise to the surface.
 
best regards,
mike
 
 
 
 

Didn't Steinberg just say they were going to stop developing/supporting their VST2 application? Like the developers won't be able to use that program to create plugs? I don't quite understand all that stuff. However the newer program for VST3 is still capable of creating VST2.
 
The Bakers probably realized that not addressing this was gonna tarnish the image of a hyper modern DAW. Also people have been wailing about it for some time now so it keeps a few people happy.
 

When I look at all my 3Rd party plugs most do not have a VST3 version available. Contrary to what some are.saying I don't think Cakewalk are late to this party.

Why did they add any new features to X3?

The big picture of VST3 is not all about plugins..
 
Some hardware synth editors, particularly Yamaha, are VST3 only, and there is no surer way to alienate a keyboard musician looking to move to a DAW environment than by not supporting the provided editor for their very expensive synth/workstation.
 
In my case, if I had not already been a Sonar user for 5 years before I purchased my $2k+ s70xs,  Sonar would not have even been on the table for consideration ..regardless of cost, capability or any other actual or perceived benefit...it simply would not have got to the starting line. Picking Sonar under such circumstances would have been to allow the tail to wag the dog.
 
Now, given that Yamaha Motif series has been the major market share in synth workstations by a sizeable degree for the last 6-7 years.. its pretty obvious to me that Sonar has already lost some decent number of potential customers.
 
had x3 not had VST3 then I would have been next out the door.
 

mudgel
When I look at all my 3Rd party plugs most do not have a VST3 version available. Contrary to what some are.saying I don't think Cakewalk are late to this party.

scook
Why did they add any new features to X3?

It really does seem like a no brainer for the programmers to include it if they had the time. I know very little about VST3 but if that's where things are heading I see no reason to leave it out and every reason to put it in. That's the one thing about Sonar, it really is hyper modern for what it is (you could say FL and Ableton are way more modern but they aren't really for actually RECORDING audio). For the most part Cake doesn't seem to be like a company that "keeps up with the Jones'". They ARE the Jones'.

briandhughes
you have to install the VST3 version for the ARA Melodyne to work.

Bingo was his name!

stevec

briandhughes
I know in Studio One you have to install the VST3 version for the ARA Melodyne to work.

I'd imagine this is a big part of it, since it would appear ARA was part of the X3 plan for some time (Noel's comments indicate it was a big task).  And let's not forget the move from Roland to Gibson and the removal of VVocal from X3.   Add that to the limitations when using Waves VST3 plugins and more manufacturers offering VST3 versions, and it's like a software alignment of the stars.

That sounds exactly right to me.  I don't believe there is such a thing as ARA on VST2.  You don't code ARA support just for the fun of it when there are so many other things that people are asking for.  But Melodyne is truly a breakthrough product IMHO -- to important to be ignored.  It is so useful that people are willing to put up with a really kludgy connection as a VST2.  It looks like ARA will be a huge leap in integration (and hopefully stability) for the SONAR / Melodyne combination.
 
Moreover, some other VSTs can benefit by evolving to ARA and probably will in the next 18 months, so this was the right time to make that a priority.