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.

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. 

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 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

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.

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.   

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.

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.  
 

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.

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.