Do you need IN chnls different to OUT chnls in a reverb?

[funkster1]

I have renamed quite a number of VSTi & FX dll's for better organisation, and I have found only very few plugins to cause problem with this.

When you look at the name your host assigns to the plugin you have renamed it is always the original name.

This may well be possible. I will look at it later in Cubase's "Plugin Information Window".
But the renamed plugs appear with the 'new' name in the VST instrument rack/FX insert slots.

Cheers
Raphael

[Sahul]

I think the names are fine. If anyone has problems with them he could always rename the dll...

I agree. I think it's rather annoying from an user point of view to discover that the new version of a certain plugin causes incompatibility with old songs due to a change in its name or ID. And having duplicated .dll's is more a workaround than a real solution.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

Jorge, do you maybe know of a solution to this? I know how to handle multi-IO plug-ins, but so far I do not know how to make them work in older hosts, without manual configuration switching. Multiplie DLLs are not the best solution, but it is a solution nevertheless.

[Sahul]

Sorry Aleksey, when I was talking about "duplicated .dll's" I should have added "from the same plugin". A multi-IO version is not exactly the same plugin, so for me at least it's fine. It's much like a 2.0 version with different name and ID, I don't have problems with that.
You know, I've had some experiences lately with plugins from other companies which changed its ID from a minor bugfix release 1.x.x to 1.x.1, and that caused me a lot of trouble as I couldn't update without losing compatibility with my old songs.

[Spe3D]

I voted no – as the work around looks too messy from the first post in this thread – plus I actually don’t need it.

Best regards,

Spe3d

:O)

[Aleksey Vaneev]

Thanks But I've actually found a way around this - I'm testing this with Crunchessor: it reports 2in/2out config if it detects 'old' host. Otherwise it reports max number of channels it supports.

[euthymios]

Yes

[Klemperer]

I don't own Pristine space so my voting isn't of much use. The old NAMES suit perfectly to me, I like them much better cause of their clarity, the purchases and the demos. But surely we all aren't stupid and if renaming was necessary to some it wouldn't be a problem. I don't use surround yet as well.

[greendoor]

Maybe 2 in 4 out would allow 1 stereo impulse to be used for early reflections, and and a 2nd stereo impulse to be used for the tail. Having a seperate stereo channel for the tail only would allow a chorus to be applied, since convolution can't do chorusing ...

[lostchildren]

My recording does not need the addition but you never know. I would say yes if it will not put a load on the systems. Having been in recording for over 40 years I must say Voxengo effects are not only the best for the money but true works of art. Aleksey Vaneev
is the best bar none.