Jim Roseberry

I have checked  effect "per-clip" in X2. 1.Not working for me too ..... 2.Prochannel modules are not available in the   "per-clip"  selection  

Not working... or not releasing the CPU when the clip is not playing?
Per-clip EFX works fine here... but doesn't release the CPU when the clip isn't playing.

not releasing the CPU

@synho  - What are your system specs, please?

synho

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk
]

There is no built in ability for any VST2 plugins to ignore sections of silent audio. The best you can do is bypass the plugin. 
VST3 has a way for plugins to know when a buffer is silent. DX plugins have had that feature since the dark ages of computing in the 90's :)

Does prochannel modules works on VST2 protocol?

 
Yes, as far as I know Pro channel modules are based entirely on VST2 unfortunately.  
If I run the company I had never allow tech-department based Pro Channel on any outdated VST2 technology. VST3 has been out for years and
Cakewalk should implemented it years ago. Lets face it DX is dead like x32, get over it! 
 
 
I hope Cakewalk address this lack of VST3 support as soon as possible and also update the Pro Channel modules to take part of the modern VST3 technology available 100% FREE. I hope the CEO read this post. This is no brainer!
 
 
Best Regards
Freddie

Freddie I'm sorry but there is no technical basis for your assertion whatsoever. Prochannel uses VST2 for the basic plumbing thats it - all the extra prrochannel specific stuff is handled via our extensions to VST. Whether it was based on VST3 or 2 makes zero difference to the behavior of the prochannel since we have full control over what we want to do. We chose VST2 because it was convenient for the vendors developing PC modules. 

Features like this are not implemented uniformly by all plugins since it is an optional feature. Some plugins due to the nature of their processing may or may not be able to do this. I think there is a fair amount of confusion on what a plugin specification is. A specification is a communications protocol - it defines a bi-directional set of operations that can be performed by the host or plugin. It doesn't mandate that every single operation is implemented. Similar to the the MIDI specification - MIDI controllers typically implement a small subset of the MIDI spec depending on their capabilities and workflow.  

swamptooth

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk
]

There is no built in ability for any VST2 plugins to ignore sections of silent audio. The best you can do is bypass the plugin. 
VST3 has a way for plugins to know when a buffer is silent. DX plugins have had that feature since the dark ages of computing in the 90's :)

Hi Noel,
 
I'm guessing though that the feature wasn't implemented uniformly on dx plugs.  I was wondering if the OP was having a problem with breverb in  particular, so i decided to try out a comparison to the sonitus reverb (a dx plugin) and still got the cpu loaded at a more or less constant rate, after starting audio, that didn't adjust downward on an empty audio track.  the levels on my machine were comparable, so i don't worry too much.  i do worry about 5 instances of breverb causing 15% cpu utilization... i wish we knew the ops system specs because several folks could offer feedback, i'm sure.

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk
]

Freddie I'm sorry but there is no technical basis for your assertion whatsoever. Prochannel uses VST2 for the basic plumbing thats it - all the extra prrochannel specific stuff is handled via our extensions to VST. Whether it was based on VST3 or 2 makes zero difference to the behavior of the prochannel since we have full control over what we want to do. We chose VST2 because it was convenient for the vendors developing PC modules. 

Thank you Noel for getting back so quickly.
I understand that it’s easier and faster to build on technology that already implemented in SONAR like VST2. As you said already what you first wanted to accomplish with Pro Channel only need VST2. I understand your point completely.
 
 
But isn’t that little narrow thinking and not look out for the future?
 
Isn’t any CPU in use when nothing streaming thru SONAR or the Pro Channel a goal and a very nice feature to implement and to have in SONAR?  VST3 technology has this ability to save CPU if nothing is stream thru so why shouldn’t  Cakewalk be interested to take full advantage of this CPU friendly technology on all your instruments like Rapture, Dimension Pro, Z3TA+ 2, and plugins, PC-modules not just Pro Channel? It doesn’t make any sense.
 
By adding VST3 and update your PC-VST extension to it, it will also allow as a bonus effect your end-users using VST3 plugins with Cakewalk SONAR platform. Technically I don’t know if it’s hard to implemented or not but I’m confident that you at Cakewalk tech-department are competent to do so.
And by the way, VST3 are a very nice feature to have and you make sure that you have built and thinking about the future. As I see it, a win win situation!
 
 
Best Regards
Freddie

a lot my plug ins are not even vst 3, so sure id like to see this in the future.
but for right now in sonar x2a, its not hurting me any.

Steinberg Media Technologies released the Software Development Kit (SDK) for VST3 on January 17 2008, on the issue of it being embraced, so far it has not done to well. 

so far it has not done to well.

 
I wonder what would have happened if Waves, and only Waves, had chosen to stick with VST2.4...
 

Freddie H

Thank you Noel for getting back so quickly.
I understand that it’s easier and faster to build on technology that already implemented in SONAR like VST2. As you said already what you first wanted to accomplish with Pro Channel only need VST2. I understand your point completely.
 
 
But isn’t that little narrow thinking and not look out for the future?
 
Isn’t any CPU in use when nothing streaming thru SONAR or the Pro Channel a goal and a very nice feature to implement and to have in SONAR?  VST3 technology has this ability to save CPU if nothing is stream thru so why shouldn’t  Cakewalk be interested to take full advantage of this CPU friendly technology on all your instruments like Rapture, Dimension Pro, Z3TA+ 2, and plugins, PC-modules not just Pro Channel? It doesn’t make any sense.
 
By adding VST3 and update your PC-VST extension to it, it will also allow as a bonus effect your end-users using VST3 plugins with Cakewalk SONAR platform. Technically I don’t know if it’s hard to implemented or not but I’m confident that you at Cakewalk tech-department are competent to do so.
And by the way, VST3 are a very nice feature to have and you make sure that you have built and thinking about the future. As I see it, a win win situation!
 
 
Best Regards
Freddie

We're fully aware of the pro's and cons of VST3 since we have a fair amount of experience with it, having released plugins that are VST3 such as Z3Ta and the CA-2A. As such we already have VST3 plugins out there. 
It was not "narrow thinking" at all to base PC on VST2. We can do all we want to do with the PC without the need for VST3. And it would be trivial to implement VST3 support for PC modules if and when there is a need for it, since the PC is a set of extended API's which could be easily extended to VST3. 


You keep referring to VST3 as a feature - its not a feature - its a specification which is something completely different. VST3 and VST2 both provide the plumbing to write a plugin. The actual features are implemented by the plugin (and the host). As I said in my prior message VST3 itself doesn't guarantee that the plugin implement any item from the VST3 specification - silence processing and sample accurate automation are two examples. Very few VST3 plugins support either. Most vendors have written VST3 wrappers around their own DSP and do the minimum to make it work in a VST3 host thats all.