But, VST3 does bring a lot of new things to the table.

The code has been re-written, it runs a lot more efficiently than the VST2 format ... and pretty much everything on their web site.

If VST2 can be as good as all of that, then why hasn't anyone done it?

I don't own any VST3's, so I don't have a vested interest in Sonar supporting it. But, VST3 brings so much more to the table and I want it.

Sonar does not handle VST's well to begin with. It may very well be time for a serious look at a re-write.

There's a lot of VST's and VSTi's that come with Sonar that work better and more stable in other DAW's.

I can't believe we'll sit here and start threads over how much we want color customization back, but downplay all the things that VST3 brings to the table.

I wonder if any of it's detractors have even read what it does in comparison to VST2? I'm excited and can't wait personally.

Bub there is nothing VST 3 brings to the table that VST 2,4 can't do. I have no problem with adding VST 3 support to Sonar but its simply not true its better. Different yes better no. Its also sort of funny that all these years we have been fine with the "kludge" known as VST 2.4.  Also I don't see a problem with the way Sonar supports VST anyway. Its much the same in any other DAW.

John. I think I may have worded that poorly. One of the pluses that Cakewalk has touted in recent years is the raw amount of included plugins. If many were no longer included, for those that already have older versions that would be great but they could no longer use that in marketing to new customers. It's no big deal to me personally because many of them are redundant. I can't imagine a new client running straight to launch Square upon installing X2. In addition my concern was that with a rewrite some of the plugins will no longer function. Some barely function now. I love Pentagon but the patch of death issue is no secret and not likely to get better with future updates.

All I can say is, read Steinbergs web site regarding the new technology of VST3.

Seems to me there are a lot of improvements in both stability, resource management, and midi editing.

If all that can be done in VST2, then by all means, lets get going developers.

Of course, all marketing literature is truthful

John


Bub there is nothing VST 3 brings to the table that VST 2,4 can't do. I have no problem with adding VST 3 support to Sonar but its simply not true its better. Different yes better no. Its also sort of funny that all these years we have been fine with the "kludge" known as VST 2.4.  Also I don't see a problem with the way Sonar supports VST anyway. Its much the same in any other DAW.

Cannot side chain waves plugins without VST3
 

dubdisciple


I think the next re-write of Sonar is going to spell the end of several popular legacy included products, thus reducing the perceived value when they list all the instruments and effects. Right now a good chunk of the effects and instruments are Dxi's and 32-bit. I suspect keeping these legacy things around ads a layer of complexity when it comes to moving forward. They already gave up on Beatscape and The Pentagon bug is ignored. I only say this because my guess is there will be some weeping when that update that brings VST3 also signals the death of the old. I have no problem with that since change is inevitable.

Bub

dubdisciple

I think the next re-write of Sonar is going to spell the end of several popular legacy included products, thus reducing the perceived value when they list all the instruments and effects.

Yeah, a lot of people have complained that they don't include Lexicon Reverb any more.

I noticed that Studio one has VST 2 and VST 3 listed in their specs. Why would they need both? Apparently they can coexist. I installed beatscape from my X1 CDs just to get the content. I think the Matrix view is the thing that replaces Beatscape. I think it works better than Beatscape. It may very well be that lexicon is not included anymore due to a license issue not a software issue. We don't know why it is not included. That may be the reason they switched to Breverb. For that matter why did they switched from GR4 to TH2. Personally I don't miss the lexicon reverb and if I need it I can install it at any time. 

The Beatscape content is included in the X2 Producer Loops and One-Shots. There is no need to install Beatscape from X1 or before to get the Beatscape content if you have X2 Producer.

scook


The Beatscape content is included in the X2 Producer Loops and One-Shots. There is no need to install Beatscape from X1 or before to get the Beatscape content if you have X2 Producer.

Thanks Scook. I was not sure if it had the content. I need some time to play with this stuff.

bz2838

John


Bub there is nothing VST 3 brings to the table that VST 2,4 can't do. I have no problem with adding VST 3 support to Sonar but its simply not true its better. Different yes better no. Its also sort of funny that all these years we have been fine with the "kludge" known as VST 2.4.  Also I don't see a problem with the way Sonar supports VST anyway. Its much the same in any other DAW.

Cannot side chain waves plugins without VST3
 

I don't know how that is a VST 3 ability when we already have VST 2.4 plugins with sidechaining. 

If Waves chooses to use VST 3 to have this ability that is on them.