Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
Reading the rumors about UA ceasing support for Sonar naturally had me concerned, so I called UA to find out what they had to say on the subject. Here's the deal. UA makes a distinction between qualifying and supporting systems. Sonar, Ableton Live, Studio One Pro, etc. are still supported and UA does test those and other programs for compatibility. Qualifying is apparently a process that takes months of man-hours where UA tests every parameter of every plug-in. They chose three "test beds" for plug-in qualification: Cubase for VST, Logic Pro for AU, and Pro Tools for RTAS. So, what they are basically doing is qualifying operation of the plug-in formats. I can't argue that those are extremely representative programs, as Steinberg invented VST, Apple invented AU, and RTAS is the"Pro Tools format." As a benefit of using these programs, it allows UA to guarantee that every parameter of every plug-in will work with those particular programs because they were the test beds. However, in theory VST is VST, and if a plug-in works perfectly under one VST host, it should in theory work under other VST hosts. So, UA does less rigorous testing with other VST hosts to check whether the theory holds true. So far, my understanding is that UA has not found issues with VST support on other 64-bit hosts, but they are actively seeking any reports of problems from users of non-qualified 64-bit systems so that any problems can be addressed. I will be testing out the UAD-2 Quad card, Apollo, and Satellite with 64-bit Sonar as part of the Pro Reviews related to these products that I'm doing on Harmony Central. UA is looking forward to the results, although they expect I won't run into any issues and have encouraged me to push things as hard as possible. I do need to get an FW800 card for my PC Audio Labs computer, though. I have FW400 ports that should work, but they won't be able to exercise the full available bandwidth.
|
deswind
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 952
- Joined: 2003/11/23 14:07:13
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 16:46:44
(permalink)
That's certainly in the right direction Craig. But it is not enough IMHO. What they tell you is not as legally binding as what they write prior to people making purchases. So if I buy a UAD OCTO, there is no legal obligation of UAD that even the very next software release will work with it and Sonar. Certainly UAD 6.3.2 did not work with 64 bit Sonar.
I believe other hardware manufacturers do test their drivers with various DAWS. And I believe Sonar tests their software with various hardware drivers. It seems reasonable for UAD to test their software with more than one VST host. The idea that "VST is VST" did not work with UAD 6.3.2. To not test with Sonar, and to state that they will not do so, is a business decision, designed to benefit UAD, not the Sonar user. However, I think in the long run, it is the wrong business decision.
I like UAD. I think the OCTO is a great product and I would let to get it. But I also believe it is reasonable for consumers to put more pressure on UAD to make a greater commitment for the thousands of dollars people spend on their hardware and software.
While it is increasingly burdensome for hardware (drivers) and software manufacturers to deal with the diverse applications, an argument can be made that the R&D costs of the UAD software should be paid off at some point, and selling more licenses should bring more and more profit which can be invested in testing their hardware drivers and software products.
|
Middleman
Max Output Level: -31.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4397
- Joined: 2003/12/04 00:58:50
- Location: Orange County, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 16:58:48
(permalink)
I think the decision to not support Sonar with 6.3.2 was very inconsiderate. It appears someone knew that x64 was near and they made a call to leave Sonar users hanging for a few months.
I also blame Cakewalk to some extent as it indicates a less than adequate relationship they have with Universal Audio. If the two companies were closer then there would be some communication and possibly partnering, at the very least communication to the user base, to resolve the issue.
|
DeeringAmps
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2614
- Joined: 2005/10/03 10:29:25
- Location: Seattle area
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 17:03:42
(permalink)
Did you READ Craig's post???
T
Tom Deering Tascam FW-1884 User Resources Page Firewire "Legacy" Tutorial, Service Manual, Schematic, and Service Bulletins Win10x64 StudioCat Pro Studio Coffee Lake 8086k 32gb RAM  RME UFX (Audio) Tascam FW-1884 (Control) in Win 10x64 Pro
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 17:04:39
(permalink)
deswind
That's certainly in the right direction Craig. But it is not enough IMHO. What they tell you is not as legally binding as what they write prior to people making purchases. So if I buy a UAD OCTO, there is no legal obligation of UAD that even the very next software release will work with it and Sonar. Certainly UAD 6.3.2 did not work with 64 bit Sonar.
But they didn't make that mistake with 6.4, and 6.3.2 was only current for less than a month; the systems prior to that worked with 64-bit Sonar, so the bottom line was a period of less than 30 days where you couldn't run the newest plug-in offerings with 64-bit Sonar. This is not uncommon - MachFive 3 didn't work with Sonar until MOTU came up with a fix a few weeks later. I know firsthand of situations where software compatibility was broken post-testing but pre-release because of "just one more little change that surely won't break anything, so yeah, go ahead and release it." I'm not trying to be an apologist here, just pointing out the reality of a comparatively small industry with comparatively small businesses serving a comparatively small number of customers. Also, they stated they DO test with Sonar, Ableton Live, Studio One Pro, and other DAWs. The inclusion of a Sonar Compatibility Mode in older releases indicates a certain level of commitment. Although I assume Sonar, Ableton Live, Studio One Pro, and other DAWs represent a smaller portion of their users, they don't want to write anyone off. If Sonar users, or users of any other DAWs, encounter problems with UAD plugs, they should report those problems to UA so fixes can be made. UA has made fixes on behalf of better Sonar operation in the past, so that implies to me that the number of Sonar users are significant enough to warrant attention. If you read the EULA for any software, nothing is guaranteed to work with anything, ever  Even qualifying a system can go out the window when a new version of the host program appears. OTOH, my 1966 Telecaster still works, and I can still buy strings for it if one breaks. I doubt hardware/software combos will ever achieve that level of longevity or certainty.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 17:17:05
(permalink)
Middleman
I think the decision to not support Sonar with 6.3.2 was very inconsiderate. It appears someone knew that x64 was near and they made a call to leave Sonar users hanging for a few months.
I also blame Cakewalk to some extent as it indicates a less than adequate relationship they have with Universal Audio. If the two companies were closer then there would be some communication and possibly partnering, at the very least communication to the user base, to resolve the issue.
They didn't decide not to support Sonar with 6.3.2. They screwed up, but they fixed it less than 30 days later with 6.4. However, not as bad a screwup as the ADAT EPROM update that didn't stop the tape after it hit the end of the reel after rewinding Humans are involved. Mistakes are made whenever humans are involved. Also, I know for a fact that UA and Cakewalk do communicate. Having a less than 30 day time frame is really pretty good for finding a problem, isolating it, fixing it, QCing it, and releasing a revision. Would it have been better if 6.3.2 had been released without problems? Of course. Same for Vista, OS X, Core Audio aggregation on the Mac...
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 17:18:22
(permalink)
And maybe someday the line spacing issues in the forum software will be fixed
|
deswind
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 952
- Joined: 2003/11/23 14:07:13
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 17:19:04
(permalink)
I was actually going to edit my post to acknowledge, to be fair to UAD, that they did fix the issue with 6.4 in an expeditious fashion. In fact, earlier than their announced deadline. That is always a smart customer astonishment move for which they deserve credit.
This whole matter may not be an issue in reality. But either their legal team or someone did refine their language on their website and it is apparently a move to narrow down their representations from the past.
I respectfully request that they take a look at that language, take into account what they told you, and see if a better revision of the language would work.
I agree, they cannot make guarantees on future updates. But they can endeavor and make good faith efforts to be compatible with Sonar. That is where I believe some refinement of their language on their website would be wise.
I am optimistic here.
Below is what UAD has posted. I believe it can be "wordsmithed" a little better. Certainly they deserve an opportunity to take another attempt at writing it.
"UAD Powered Plug-Ins are compatible with VST, RTAS, and Audio Units host applications, and are widely used with a variety of major DAW software — including Pro Tools, Logic Pro, Cubase, Nuendo, Live, Sonar, and more.
However, due to plug-in host differences between DAWs — and our own rigorous testing standards — Universal Audio officially tests and qualifies UAD v6.4.0 software only with Avid Pro Tools 10 (32-bit) and Steinberg Cubase 6 (64-bit).
FAQ: Does this mean that my DAW is not supported? A: We can only fully qualify so many DAW applications, and generally any VST, RTAS or Audio Units-compliant host application should work with UAD plug-ins. Also, any ASIO or Core Audio-compliant application should work with Apollo. That said, if you are experiencing issues with your UAD or Apollo on a DAW that we don't list as qualified, you can still contact tech support and log the issue with us. We absolutely want to know if something is not working for you, we have great relationships with all DAW manufacturers and will continue to work with them to understand why an issue is occurring."
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 17:33:43
(permalink)
deswind
I was actually going to edit my post to acknowledge, to be fair to UAD, that they did fix the issue with 6.4 in an expeditious fashion. In fact, earlier than their announced deadline. That is always a smart customer astonishment move for which they deserve credit.
This whole matter may not be an issue in reality. But either their legal team or someone did refine their language on their website and it is apparently a move to narrow down their representations from the past.
I respectfully request that they take a look at that language, take into account what they told you, and see if a better revision of the language would work.
I agree, they cannot make guarantees on future updates. But they can endeavor and make good faith efforts to be compatible with Sonar. That is where I believe some refinement of their language on their website would be wise.
I am optimistic here.
Below is what UAD has posted. I believe it can be "wordsmithed" a little better. Certainly they deserve an opportunity to take another attempt at writing it.
"UAD Powered Plug-Ins are compatible with VST, RTAS, and Audio Units host applications, and are widely used with a variety of major DAW software — including Pro Tools, Logic Pro, Cubase, Nuendo, Live, Sonar, and more.
However, due to plug-in host differences between DAWs — and our own rigorous testing standards — Universal Audio officially tests and qualifies UAD v6.4.0 software only with Avid Pro Tools 10 (32-bit) and Steinberg Cubase 6 (64-bit).
FAQ: Does this mean that my DAW is not supported? A: We can only fully qualify so many DAW applications, and generally any VST, RTAS or Audio Units-compliant host application should work with UAD plug-ins. Also, any ASIO or Core Audio-compliant application should work with Apollo. That said, if you are experiencing issues with your UAD or Apollo on a DAW that we don't list as qualified, you can still contact tech support and log the issue with us. We absolutely want to know if something is not working for you, we have great relationships with all DAW manufacturers and will continue to work with them to understand why an issue is occurring."
Again, please note that the language you quote refers to what they qualify, UA differentiates between supporting and qualifying a host, and I explained what "qualifying" entails. They state, in writing, that they support Sonar on the Apollo support page. They also state in writing that they support Sonar on the UAD-2 support page. And on their UAD-2 support page, there's a recent technical bulletin regarding Sonar compatibility with 6.3.1 and 6.3.2, which indicates support for Sonar.
|
deswind
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 952
- Joined: 2003/11/23 14:07:13
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 17:40:53
(permalink)
I understand, Craig. They can simply add a sentence or two saying what you said in this response (perhaps an updated response, additional edit or whatever) - just to calm down everyone. The question I quoted above asks about support. They could have responded to the question" Does this mean that my DAW is not supported" by saying - "Yes, the following are supported . . . Then talk about the difference between support and qualification.
The problem was an "inartful" answer to a question, which is simply a "human" thing.
This is important not just because of the posts on this Cakewalk forum, but on other forums as well.
And THANKS for what you have done here. The other references are encouraging as well. I do think this will all work out.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 17:43:07
(permalink)
deswind
I understand, Craig. They can simply add a sentence or two saying what you said in this response (perhaps an updated response, additional edit or whatever) - just to calm down everyone. The question I quoted above asks about support. They could have responded to the question" Does this mean that my DAW is not supported" by saying - "Yes, the following are supported . . . Then talk about the difference between support and qualification.
They're much better at designing plug-ins than I am, but I'm a better writer
|
deswind
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 952
- Joined: 2003/11/23 14:07:13
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 17:46:58
(permalink)
Now that is funny! They are great plugin developers and you are a great writer. And you have a great sense of humor, which makes your style even better! Now if I can just figure out why my posts with quotes come out in italics even though it is not in italics when I am writing it!
Anderton
deswind
I understand, Craig. They can simply add a sentence or two saying what you said in this response (perhaps an updated response, additional edit or whatever) - just to calm down everyone. The question I quoted above asks about support. They could have responded to the question" Does this mean that my DAW is not supported" by saying - "Yes, the following are supported . . . Then talk about the difference between support and qualification.
They're much better at designing plug-ins than I am, but I'm a better writer
|
ampfixer
Max Output Level: -20 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5508
- Joined: 2010/12/12 20:11:50
- Location: Ontario
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 18:10:33
(permalink)
Interesting and informative update. I guess the 800 lb gorilla in the room is what IS a VST?
If they test on cubase that means the plug will be fully VST 3 compatible. It may function with VST 2, but maybe not. There were recent posts in the software forum about waves plugs that don't work 100% in Sonar because they need a VST 3 host for full functionality. So it seems that the onus is on Cakewalk to go to VST 3 in order to ensure maximum compatibility with Waves and UAD. If they don't, we end up with a poo flinging fest to decide who's fault it is.
Can UAD move an entire market? Probably not, but if enough plugs require VST 3 it puts more pressure on the DAW makers to buy their license from Steinberg.
Regards, John I want to make it clear that I am an Eedjit. I have no direct, or indirect, knowledge of business, the music industry, forum threads or the meaning of life. I know about amps. WIN 10 Pro X64, I7-3770k 16 gigs, ASUS Z77 pro, AMD 7950 3 gig, Steinberg UR44, A-Pro 500, Sonar Platinum, KRK Rokit 6
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 20:47:51
(permalink)
ampfixer
Interesting and informative update. I guess the 800 lb gorilla in the room is what IS a VST?
If they test on cubase that means the plug will be fully VST 3 compatible. It may function with VST 2, but maybe not. There were recent posts in the software forum about waves plugs that don't work 100% in Sonar because they need a VST 3 host for full functionality. So it seems that the onus is on Cakewalk to go to VST 3 in order to ensure maximum compatibility with Waves and UAD. If they don't, we end up with a poo flinging fest to decide who's fault it is.
Can UAD move an entire market? Probably not, but if enough plugs require VST 3 it puts more pressure on the DAW makers to buy their license from Steinberg.
Good observation. But I searched the Universal Audio site for any mention of VST3, and the only references I found were in the forums where people were complaining about UA plug-ins not supporting VST3 or AAX formats...so I presume UA is not supporting VST3 yet.
|
Jonbouy
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 22562
- Joined: 2008/04/14 13:47:39
- Location: England's Sunshine South Coast
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 21:08:03
(permalink)
Thanks for your input Craig.
This is a strange one to me I never bothered with 6.3.2 because I never had time to install it before 6.4 came out.
I've just been using my UAD stuff in blissful ignorance to anything like this and it's been working as faultlessy before and still is after this latest update.
Is anyone actually having issues with their UAD stuff since the upgrade because it seems to be working swell here as per normal?
I think most companies 'support' VST products and UAD has been no different in that regard than anyone else. I've certainly never been frowned upon by anyone at UAD for being a Sonar user and have always had support from them as expected as needed.
So if somethings changed I swear I'd have known nothing about it unless I saw this. So has anything actually changed for the worse or is this just the paranoia mill just engaging after a dodgy release?
As far as I can tell it's business as usual.
"We can't do anything to change the world until capitalism crumbles. In the meantime we should all go shopping to console ourselves" - Banksy
|
Jonbouy
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 22562
- Joined: 2008/04/14 13:47:39
- Location: England's Sunshine South Coast
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/01 21:27:43
(permalink)
Anderton
UA makes a distinction between qualifying and supporting systems. Sonar, Ableton Live, Studio One Pro, etc. are still supported and UA does test those and other programs for compatibility.
Qualifying is apparently a process that takes months of man-hours where UA tests every parameter of every plug-in. They chose three "test beds" for plug-in qualification: Cubase for VST, Logic Pro for AU, and Pro Tools for RTAS. So, what they are basically doing is qualifying operation of the plug-in formats. I can't argue that those are extremely representative programs, as Steinberg invented VST, Apple invented AU, and RTAS is the"Pro Tools format." As a benefit of using these programs, it allows UA to guarantee that every parameter of every plug-in will work with those particular programs because they were the test beds.
However, in theory VST is VST, and if a plug-in works perfectly under one VST host, it should in theory work under other VST hosts. So, UA does less rigorous testing with other VST hosts to check whether the theory holds true.
So far, my understanding is that UA has not found issues with VST support on other 64-bit hosts, but they are actively seeking any reports of problems from users of non-qualified 64-bit systems so that any problems can be addressed.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Exactly this, most plug-in/add-on developers have to develop on a limited range of Software it isn't possible to develop on every available DAW out there, sometimes the 3rd party developer will enter into a marketing arrangement which means they would recommend a DAW that is part of that arrangement, so what that's good business. Sometimes it can be simply because the plug-ins have gone through the most severe testing on the platforms they develop on so they can offer a greater guarantee that things will work on that specific platform and are wise to inform potential customers of that fact. Having said that for any plug-in/add on developer that uses the ASIO or VST standard technology for their product would be commiting financial suicide by limiting their market away from the rest of those platforms that also support these technogies. It ain't gonna happen. Whatever platform a plug-in developer favours they will all do their utmost to maximise the market they have by being pretty darned sure it's going to work on the rest and will do whatever is possible to get your stuff working on your DAW of choice. The market is too small for them not to, I see no cause for concern here and I'm certainly not experiencing any issues currently that would make me fear otherwise. Thanks to Craig though for wading into this one and putting some realistic perspective on it. Much appreciated ol' fella. Further to that, also it's fantastic news that they've gone 64 bit at long last because it least means they are intending to stay around long enough to get a return on the investment of doing that and are not planning to disappear off into iOS land any time soon. Given all those things I think it's given us UAD owners far more security than we had 6 months ago, it certainly doesn't seem to me to be the time for the fear mongers to take centre stage at all.
post edited by Jonbouy - 2012/12/01 21:40:01
"We can't do anything to change the world until capitalism crumbles. In the meantime we should all go shopping to console ourselves" - Banksy
|
Mr. torture
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 439
- Joined: 2007/09/10 16:59:50
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 07:28:22
(permalink)
I downloaded 6.4 after receiving an email from UA with a link to it. I have been using the previous version with no ill effects. Pun not intended..
|
jimkleban
Max Output Level: -64 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1319
- Joined: 2008/11/09 09:42:45
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 09:27:00
(permalink)
As a matter of fact, UA thought they fixed the SONAR issue with 6.3.x (the prior release to 6.4 (x64 version... like they planned 6.4 to be the 64 bit version).
I was in contact with them all through the month leading up to 6.4. They even asked me if I could wait a few days because 6.4 was going to be released. Which they told me not only would the Sonar issue be fixed but it was the 64 bit version. So I waited and sure enough, they were correct. So, they were aware of the issues and had it fixed... the only delay for us was their decision to include the fix within the 64 bit version.
I for one am glad that they took this approach. We finally got our x64 plugs. I never ever got a response from them that SONAR wasn't supported and the feeling that I had to take a back seat in this process.
So, when Craig says the difference in context is really just qualitying vs on going support, it fits my recent high contact with UA over the SONAR issue.
Jim
The Lamb Laid Down on MIDI www.lldom.com Studio Cat Custom i7 with Thunderbolt (wonderful system built and configured by our own Jim R) Apollo Duo (via TB) UAD Quad UAD Duo WIN 8.1 x64 with 32 GB Ram 4 SSD for programs and sample libraries Splat (latest version)
|
deswind
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 952
- Joined: 2003/11/23 14:07:13
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 11:49:36
(permalink)
While it all makes sense as you explained it, and they deserve credit for the 6.4. version being expedited to help Sonar - UAD invited the misunderstanding by a complicated response to inquiries. All UAD needed to say is - "Don't worry - we will care about Sonar just like we always did."
By a complicated scenario of support versus qualifying analysis, which UAD themselves confused in their response to a question, they created a series of blog responses. Craig stepped in, got clarifications and now the matter, as far as I am concerned, is put to rest.
So while UAD is to be commended, I also believe the people posting concerns are to be commended, whether their concerns with a manufacturer are real or perceived. It is better for a manufacturer to get input, rather than just have people not buy their product.
AB
=================================================
jkleban
As a matter of fact, UA thought they fixed the SONAR issue with 6.3.x (the prior release to 6.4 (x64 version... like they planned 6.4 to be the 64 bit version).
I was in contact with them all through the month leading up to 6.4. They even asked me if I could wait a few days because 6.4 was going to be released. Which they told me not only would the Sonar issue be fixed but it was the 64 bit version. So I waited and sure enough, they were correct. So, they were aware of the issues and had it fixed... the only delay for us was their decision to include the fix within the 64 bit version.
I for one am glad that they took this approach. We finally got our x64 plugs. I never ever got a response from them that SONAR wasn't supported and the feeling that I had to take a back seat in this process.
So, when Craig says the difference in context is really just qualitying vs on going support, it fits my recent high contact with UA over the SONAR issue.
Jim
|
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2446
- Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 12:08:07
(permalink)
Thanks Craig. Great info.
|
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3617
- Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 12:24:25
(permalink)
Anderton
Reading the rumors about UA ceasing support for Sonar naturally had me concerned, so I called UA to find out what they had to say on the subject. Here's the deal.
UA makes a distinction between qualifying and supporting systems. Sonar, Ableton Live, Studio One Pro, etc. are still supported and UA does test those and other programs for compatibility.
Qualifying is apparently a process that takes months of man-hours where UA tests every parameter of every plug-in. They chose three "test beds" for plug-in qualification: Cubase for VST, Logic Pro for AU, and Pro Tools for RTAS. So, what they are basically doing is qualifying operation of the plug-in formats. I can't argue that those are extremely representative programs, as Steinberg invented VST, Apple invented AU, and RTAS is the"Pro Tools format." As a benefit of using these programs, it allows UA to guarantee that every parameter of every plug-in will work with those particular programs because they were the test beds.
However, in theory VST is VST, and if a plug-in works perfectly under one VST host, it should in theory work under other VST hosts. So, UA does less rigorous testing with other VST hosts to check whether the theory holds true.
So far, my understanding is that UA has not found issues with VST support on other 64-bit hosts, but they are actively seeking any reports of problems from users of non-qualified 64-bit systems so that any problems can be addressed.
You have it almost in plain english there. This mean, let me rephrase that = We will continue to only support VST3, AU and AAX format in the future. So VST2 will soon be legacy at UAD. Noone at Cubase platform use VST2 if they don't need to. I get it that UAD need to narrow the priority support field. Still VST3 is not the same as VST2. It's another ball game. If it work on VST3 doens't mean it will work on VST2. Waves priority their support field too. The have already announced that this version of WAVEs-plugins will be the last that support VST2.
post edited by Freddie H - 2012/12/02 12:31:13
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
|
deswind
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 952
- Joined: 2003/11/23 14:07:13
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 13:54:47
(permalink)
It seems that the ball is in Sonar's court to go to VST 3. If Sonar becomes VST 3, will VST 2 still work?
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 14:23:26
(permalink)
Freddie H
You have it almost in plain english there.
This mean, let me rephrase that = We will continue to only support VST3, AU and AAX format in the future. So VST2 will soon be legacy at UAD. Noone at Cubase platform use VST2 if they don't need to.
I get it that UAD need to narrow the priority support field. Still VST3 is not the same as VST2. It's another ball game. If it work on VST3 doens't mean it will work on VST2. Waves priority their support field too. The have already announced that this version of WAVEs-plugins will be the last that support VST2.
There is no evidence, anywhere, that the UA 64-bit plugs are VST3. Besides, if they were, they wouldn't work with Sonar.
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 14:24:57
(permalink)
deswind
It seems that the ball is in Sonar's court to go to VST 3. If Sonar becomes VST 3, will VST 2 still work?
I have yet to find a VST2 plug-in that won't run with the latest, VST3-compatible version of Cubase (6.5).
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 14:26:14
(permalink)
Then again...if Sonar goes VST3, I'll be able to use Padshop Pro...I love that synth.
|
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3617
- Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 15:06:54
(permalink)
Anderton
Freddie H
You have it almost in plain english there.
This mean, let me rephrase that = We will continue to only support VST3, AU and AAX format in the future. So VST2 will soon be legacy at UAD. Noone at Cubase platform use VST2 if they don't need to.
I get it that UAD need to narrow the priority support field. Still VST3 is not the same as VST2. It's another ball game. If it work on VST3 doens't mean it will work on VST2. Waves priority their support field too. The have already announced that this version of WAVEs-plugins will be the last that support VST2.
There is no evidence, anywhere, that the UA 64-bit plugs are VST3. Besides, if they were, they wouldn't work with Sonar.
They state they will only support Cubase? Isn't that the same don't you think? Do you honestly think they will put time and make two version VST2 and VST3 to support Cubase users when everyone will only use the VST3 version on Cubase and the rest of the DAW platforms? Its almost only SONAR that doesn't support VST3 yet. Studio ONE-users, LOGIC, PRO TOOLS, CUBASE, NUENDO are all set! Think about it. Time will tell. Besides, if they were, they wouldn't work with Sonar. Exactly, You got it! 
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
|
wst3
Max Output Level: -55.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1979
- Joined: 2003/11/04 10:28:11
- Location: Pottstown, PA 19464
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 15:07:08
(permalink)
I'm not sure why Cakewalk is hesitating on the VST3 bit - VST3 is supposed to be backwards compatible with VST2.4, and possibly even older versions. There is probably a pretty good reason, at least from their perspective.
I think this only underscores the need for open standards... while Steinberg has been pretty decent with both ASIO and VST, it has not always been smooth sailing, and it would be naive to expect it to be. Both of these pseudo-standards offer them some competitive advantage.
Given that the MI community embraced MIDI it does seem odd that they did not learn from that, and make VST and ASIO more open...
-- Bill Audio Enterprise KB3KJF
|
Freddie H
Max Output Level: -39 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3617
- Joined: 2007/09/21 06:07:40
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 15:11:33
(permalink)
wst3
I'm not sure why Cakewalk is hesitating on the VST3 bit - VST3 is supposed to be backwards compatible with VST2.4, and possibly even older versions.
Tell me about it!
-Highly developed spirits often encounter resistance from mediocre minds. -It really matters!
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 18:19:02
(permalink)
Freddie H
They state they will only support Cubase? Isn't that the same don't you think?
Did you even READ the first post? Are you aware that Cubase supports VST2 plug-ins? Are you aware that if VST3 hosts can support VST2 plug-ins, and if the market for VST2 plug-ins is WAY LARGER than for VST2 plug-ins, companies that aren't terminally stupid will continue producing VST2 plug-ins? Please read the first post to understand the difference between how UA defines qualifying a platform and supporting a platform.
|
yorolpal
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13829
- Joined: 2003/11/20 11:50:37
- Status: offline
Re:Here's the Scoop on UA 64-Bit Support for Sonar
2012/12/02 18:24:51
(permalink)
Craig meets Freddie head to head in a Texas-No-Holds-Barred-Lights-Out-Chainlink-Cage-Death-Match. Watch out Craig, ol pal. Don't let him git ya in his famous 64bit "sleeper hold"...as the fans say, "IT REALLY MATTERS!!!!!!" :-)
|