Blogman


We don't need music to live either, but imagine a world without it. Besides, it's not about living, it's about making a living. If my studio is asked to mix a surround sound mix I can't use my Waves surround plugins without VST3, so I'm not able to make as good a living. I'm not about being mediocre. Want to stay competitive.

Ok, I see your point here.
 
Just a question, how did you use the Waves surround plugins before?

backwoods - The point is working how YOU want to work... Sure, there are workarounds and ways to compromise. It's kinda like being back in the 1900's and saying "yeah, I don't need your fancy shmancy automobile, I can get to town on my horsey just fine - this whole automobile thing is just a fad anyways" :)

Oh yeah - I'm drinking cherry coke zero - crap, hate to disappoint ya

Well - while I agree it would be nice if Sonar should have VST3 now, we must accept the fact it will take some more time before it arrives. Do not forget -just like it is been said- just adapting VST3 parameters is not enough. If you want all the new VST3 stuff actually getting to work in Sonar, the core engine of Sonar needs a complete rewrite (and possibly a big part of the interface also). This is not a task none in a few months I am afraid.

I think VST3 will come to Sonar, but not in the short term.

Altough I understand people want to have this addition, for me (and this is strictly personal) it is more important the next incarnation (X2) of Sonar will become stable and as bugfree as possible. Changing core parts of Sonar to add VST3 can only been done after this stability is achieved, otherwise there is a big chance adding VST3 will become a huge bugfest.

Just my 2 cents..

firefly9000


alexoosthoek - I think the reason this unsettles people so much is because the same company that looked to the future and brought 64 bit processing way before the rest of the crowd, now seems to have lost that ability of foreshadowing things. A lot of people found that attractive about Cake (me included). There are plenty of behemoths (like ProT) that trudge along and sort of stumble into the future instead of being one up on it.

I do want to give props to Cake though for always working on optimizing the workflow. I saw the new X2 vid and there is a lot of cool stuff... But the VsT3 position that they take baffles me.

Cake can only do so much in , what,  1 1/2 year time?
 
 

JClosed


 If you want all the new VST3 stuff actually getting to work in Sonar, the core engine of Sonar needs a complete rewrite (and possibly a big part of the interface also). This is not a task none in a few months I am afraid.

I am no programmer so I can't comment on that.... But IF what you say is true it would be kind of ironic because the Noel from Cakewalk posted earlier that there is very little difference between 2.4 and 3.
 
Still, not sure how wise it is to leave this out considering that the next version of Sonar (X3) isn't probably around the corner.

alexoosthoek


Cake can only do so much in , what,  1 1/2 year time? 
  
 
 
 
 

I understand that, but VsT3 doesn't seem like something that should be so low on the list - especially considering that Sonar is a HOST to other applications - this being one of its main characteristics.

*** TEXT DELETED BY POSTER BECAUSE OF FORMATTING ISSUES I COULD NOT SOLVE, RE-ENTERED IN MY NEXT POST ***

I apologize if I have unfairly muddied these turbulent waters with a technical misunderstanding on my part if in fact VST3 and Cubase's articulation switching are not joined at the hip, if the latter is not dependent on the former. I am by no means an expert on the subject. If my comment on this particular issue is miscategorized as a VST3 comment, then I withdraw it as stated and reiterate it as an appeal to make articulation switching, which is certainly doable in Sonar, easier, Cubase serving as a good example of how one might do it.
Let me say that the addition of automation lanes in X2 and copy/paste functionality for automation is a very helpful one.

I will add my feature requests, but alas it does not ameliorate my feeling that I must be in the minority here because what's important to me is not so important to the Sonar community. Thus my requests seem doomed, and I guess that's just something I have to accept as I consider the future. As I said, it is what it is.

One other thing, it definitely is true from my interaction that in the orchestral midi field Sonar, while it is known that it exists, is not commonly encountered and is but the blip of a scout plane on the radar. Cubase, while I'm sure it has its own problems, has a signature return the size of a capital ship. I say this not to put Sonar down, but as a hobbyist who some years ago hitched his wagon to Sonar without having realized this fact.

firefly9000

alexoosthoek


Cake can only do so much in , what,  1 1/2 year time? 
  
 
 
 
 

I understand that, but VsT3 doesn't seem like something that should be so low on the list - especially considering that Sonar is a HOST to other applications - this being one of its main characteristics.

One thing's fore sure, I'm glad I didn't have to make that decision :)

firefly9000

JClosed


 If you want all the new VST3 stuff actually getting to work in Sonar, the core engine of Sonar needs a complete rewrite (and possibly a big part of the interface also). This is not a task none in a few months I am afraid.

I am no programmer so I can't comment on that.... But IF what you say is true it would be kind of ironic because the Noel from Cakewalk posted earlier that there is very little difference between 2.4 and 3.
 
Still, not sure how wise it is to leave this out considering that the next version of Sonar (X3) isn't probably around the corner.

Noel indeed said there was very little difference between 2.4 and 3, but the (programming) venom is in the details. To make the few differences actually work in Sonar is not a job for the faint of hart. For instance - VST3 supports a per-note MIDI articulation (only supported by a few soft synths for now, but well). This means a complete rewrite of the MIDI sound engine part, the piano roll view and probably everything that has something to do with notation. Now - take the "new" side chaining people are talking about. This means a complete overhaul of all signal processing routes working in Sonar internally (and so probably a major rewrite of the ProChannel). This is not something that can be done in a spare Sunday afternoom. This is a LOT of work.

Sure some other platforms have done so already, but let's not forget Cakewalk has less staff than Steinberg etc. They have to make money tough, and have to produce something now en then to get enough money to keep things rolling. This means they have to make priority's, and VST3 is not a top priority at this very moment (but will be maybe at a later time).

That all said - I am convinced VST3 will come to Sonar, but -just as I said- not in the very short term..