I would like to point out that I bought Waves Vocal Rider several weeks ago.  It works just fine in X1d 64. I use it on every mix.  Here is a link to the Waves page which clearly shows that it is supported by Sonar. http://www.wavesupport.net/Objects/Images/Product%20Info/Supported_Hosts_Charts/V9_pc.html  I honestly think that there is some disinformation being disseminated here.  I have thousands of dollars invested in UAD plugs using my UAD Quad card. They are still 32 bit but seem to work just fine.  I can find no documentation anywhere on the UAD site or the UAD forum that there 64 bit implementation will be VST 3 only..

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..

Understandable - but it's still not going to be fun to either 'salivate' at VsT3 only plugs or get them and sit on the sidelines while CW figures stuff out.

Sonar vs Imageline, "with respect to vst 3," is far off the mark.  I just think this is interesting.  I have no skin in the game either way.  I am not against vst 3, and I am not for it.  I definitely see the benefit in affordable tools like Sonar, and the variety of Cakewalk Product.   And keeping these tools affordable.


I do not want to quote anybody and get into a, "trolling," contest, but when you consider how differently FLStudio and Sonar operate; grab some insights into the engineering decisions that get made, "behind the scenes, in the offices."

Imagline may have looked at the VST 3 Api and said, "wow, we can add this and save money."  While Cakewalk looks and sees, "what a massive undertaking and mega-expense."

That's just the way it is.  FLStudio and Sonar are extremely different.  What may make sense for 1 architecture, may be lunacy for the other.

stevee9c6


I would like to point out that I bought Waves Vocal Rider several weeks ago.  It works just fine in X1d 64. I use it on every mix.  Here is a link to the Waves page which clearly shows that it is supported by Sonar. http://www.wavesupport.net/Objects/Images/Product%20Info/Supported_Hosts_Charts/V9_pc.html 

I understand that "supported" in this case means it will load and can be automated -manually- (ie. using envelopes etc., not sidechaining). Are you suggesting you are succesfully using the Sidechain feature in Vocal Rider and using one audio track to control the Vocal Rider in an alternate track?
 
For example, the C6 compressor will function fine in Sonar HOWEVER the Sidechain function does not work. Can you absolutely confirm that the Sidechain function works in Sonar?

SToons

stevee9c6


I would like to point out that I bought Waves Vocal Rider several weeks ago.  It works just fine in X1d 64. I use it on every mix.  Here is a link to the Waves page which clearly shows that it is supported by Sonar. http://www.wavesupport.net/Objects/Images/Product%20Info/Supported_Hosts_Charts/V9_pc.html 

I understand that "supported" in this case means it will load and can be automated -manually- (ie. using envelopes etc., not sidechaining). Are you suggesting you are succesfully using the Sidechain feature in Vocal Rider and using one audio track to control the Vocal Rider in an alternate track?
 
For example, the C6 compressor will function fine in Sonar HOWEVER the Sidechain function does not work. Can you absolutely confirm that the Sidechain function works in Sonar?

Actually, the top of the page clearly states: 
 
Waves Version 9
Supported Hosts and Formats - PC

Version 9 supports all audio hosts below in 32-bit, and 64-bit where available.
Sidechain is supported on Pro Tools, Nuendo, Cubase, Audition CS6, and Studio One only

So no offense, Steve, but this is the "issue" that I and others are complaining about. Also note which DAWs DO fully support Waves plugins. I continue to see this as a major fail on Cakewalk's part. While it is quite possible that this does not hinge on VST3 implementation, nonetheless Sonar does not fully support one of the largest and highest regarded plugin suites available and this has been continuing for some years now. Perhaps Noel will suggest that this is a failure of Waves to conform their plugins to adapt to Sonar's architecture but as a user/consumer frankly I don't care. The end result is that if I have to ultimately choose between Waves and Sonar it's goodbye Cakewalk. Everything else I have invested in will work fine in other DAWs. I really do think Cakewalk is stepping backwards for many pros to chase the hobbyist market. I can't blame them but it's not the direction I'm prepared to follow.
 
I, like many others, have significantly more invested in plugins than the actual host. This is true in Photoshop as well and is a growing trend. This to me has become a sign, along with the advent of the "proprietary" ProChannel plugins, that it appears Cakewalk is moving in a different direction than other companies. Most Steinberg plugins are universal and can be used in most host applications. Not Cakewalk, at least not as of -recently- . Numerous other example abound. I could be wrong about the long-term but right now, for me, upgrading is "gambling" whereas switching DAWs is a "sure thing".
 

SToons

stevee9c6


I would like to point out that I bought Waves Vocal Rider several weeks ago.  It works just fine in X1d 64. I use it on every mix.  Here is a link to the Waves page which clearly shows that it is supported by Sonar. http://www.wavesupport.net/Objects/Images/Product%20Info/Supported_Hosts_Charts/V9_pc.html 

I understand that "supported" in this case means it will load and can be automated -manually- (ie. using envelopes etc., not sidechaining). Are you suggesting you are succesfully using the Sidechain feature in Vocal Rider and using one audio track to control the Vocal Rider in an alternate track?
 
For example, the C6 compressor will function fine in Sonar HOWEVER the Sidechain function does not work. Can you absolutely confirm that the Sidechain function works in Sonar?

Sidechaining is not supported in Sonar. You do not need to use sidechaining to use this plug.  It works very nicely on vocal tracks by simply inserting it and setting the parameters of gain change. The information posted in this thread indicated that it did not work in Sonar. It works just fine without sidechaining.

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. 

I'm going to my studio to work on some mixes now. I'm not interested in arguing on the internet when I can be recording.  Certainly, this may be an important issue to some and I do hope that is addressed in future updates. I've already purchased the X2 pre-sale and am looking forward to it. Later :) 
 
BTW... I also own Cubase, and Studio One so I reckon if I wanted to use the sidechain function I could load it in one of those.

This reminds me of the discussions back in the days before Sonar was made VST compatible. 

There were some quite valid reasons as to why Cakewalk wouldn't support VST when it was such a de facto standard - including the fact the DX was supposedly superior in many aspects and offered better possibilities. Ron Kuper had some pretty good arguments and promising ideas.

Eventually, we finally saw a few major manufacturers supporting DXi, but eventually, Cakewalk gave up on fighting that uphill battle and implemented VST. 

10 years later, we're back to square one, more or less. No matter how many arguments against VST 3 can be made, no matter if 2,4 could have allowed much of what's in 3. VST3 is here. 

I somehow doubt that Steinberg gave a discount to its former employees to implement VST3 in Studio One - yet, it was implemented. As such, I have no idea what makes it so hard and expensive to implement in Sonar.

Technically, Sonar can probably do pretty much everything w/ VST 2.4. And it's good to know that VST3 is in the pipes. But I don't think adopting VST3 in X2 would have hurt.

stevee9c6
Sidechaining is not supported in Sonar. You do not need to use sidechaining to use this plug.  It works very nicely on vocal tracks by simply inserting it and setting the parameters of gain change. The information posted in this thread indicated that it did not work in Sonar. It works just fine without sidechaining.

What do you mean there's something wrong with my car? It works just fine, it's moving forwards as I speak. Why worry about the brakes as I don't seem to need them right now...

Works? Maybe. Fine? Not. ;-p