Sonar 6 information is available now.

[popsych]

I HOPE like heck they have a pure VST implementation

No such thing. VST has to be wrapped in any host in Windows, period. Either you have accsess to the wrapper or not, and they all scan initially, and with a new plug. Subdirectory listing are just a function of a particular wrapper. There is no such thing as NATIVE VST on Windows period, because VST itself isn't native to Windows. But I see the Myth keeps getting perpetuated. I suppose you could always put a blindfold on everytime you install a new plugin.

Vst is no more wrapped than using the windows API is.Without elaborate knowledge on the subject but based on all plugin architectures i'm familiar with I'm guessing vst and vsti are just typical .dll's with callback functions. As such considering the configuration for e.g.

Cubase (logic user myself) the schematic was:
Cubase layer for calling plugins -> Vst Plugin .dll
For sonar up until now it was
Sonar layer for plugins -> Translator Layer -> Vst plugin .dll

Pretty much the same deal as is with Waves waveshell.dll

So yes one can say that cubase had native vst support when sonar didn't.

[whyterabbyt]

I dont need to explain anything, apparently the devs at cakewalk seemed it nessecary enough to mention it in the latest feature list for the updgrade.

Yeah, same as it was in the feature list for Sonar5. But you were claiming that it wasnt 'proper' then. And now you're claiming it is now. Want to tell me what has changed with the technical implementation?

I mean, it seems like even Ron Kuper understood what i was talking about, and many other users who agreed with me, hence the new vst implementation in the upgrade (which hopefully will not let down).

What makes you think its a new VST implementation? Do you actually think people have been testing a beta of 4.5.x on one hand while there's a different version being used in S6?

whyterabbit, perhaps YOU can explain why The devs at cakewalk found it nessecary to include this *new* feature if it was already good enough?

Sonar6 : "Work seamlessly with VST plug-ins — VST support is now integrated into SONAR 6 and no longer requires an external VST to DX adapter"

Sonar5 : "Integrated VST and VSTi support" (which no longer required an external VST to DX adapter)

So what have the devs at cakewalk found it 'necessary to include'?

The definition of *native* is irrelevant, as we know that perhaps only a few hosts REALLY have *native* vst....

Thats something you wouldnt accept for a very long time.

I didnt realize you made a utility for sonar... what does it do?

It lets you customise the plugin menus, something Ive not actually seen for any other host.

[Majken]

Whyterabbyt: Soundforge actually has a plugin menu customizer. Both lets you sort a list of favourite plugins and place them in a menu tree for stuff like dynamics, reverb and so on. Very handy!

/Majken

[whyterabbyt]

Whyterabbyt: Soundforge actually has a plugin menu customizer. Both lets you sort a list of favourite plugins and place them in a menu tree for stuff like dynamics, reverb and so on. Very handy!

/Majken

Interesting, ta. Its a useful feature, so Ive always been surprised that I'd never seen anything which used it. Always found it odd that so many people complained about not being able to organise them in Sonar when nothing else seem to either, and it could actually be done (externally) for Sonar way back in V1.

[Jason Brian Merrill]

WR, I dont presume to *know* why cakewalk seems to have made this claim twice in a row -- i just hope they got it *right* (i.e. without the annoyances I have observed) this time

"Thats something you wouldnt accept for a very long time. "

ever since i opened a vst in FLstudio 3.5 (and subsequently saw the Fruity Wrapper open up) I accepted it. and that was a very long time ago. As was also mentioned in that thread, SAmplitude also uses a wrapper -- however, i have no problem using that programs wrapper, I find it completely unobtrusive...

I dont wish to argue.

IF it works for you, fine!!! I have no problem with that.

So, this utility only work with sonar then eh? Pretty cool tho. Very nice of you to provide this for the sonar community.

[whyterabbyt]

So, this utility only work with sonar then eh? Pretty cool tho. Very nice of you to provide this for the sonar community.

It depends on how the host gets the name of the DX/DXi plugin. At rpesent its only changing the information that Sonar uses. If I knew what other hosts were using, I could maybe do the same for them, but Im in the middle of a rewrite that the menu reorganisation features of S6 probably make redundant...

[aMUSEd]

I HOPE like heck they have a pure VST implementation

No such thing. VST has to be wrapped in any host in Windows, period. Either you have accsess to the wrapper or not, and they all scan initially, and with a new plug. Subdirectory listing are just a function of a particular wrapper. There is no such thing as NATIVE VST on Windows period, because VST itself isn't native to Windows. But I see the Myth keeps getting perpetuated. I suppose you could always put a blindfold on everytime you install a new plugin.

Vst is no more wrapped than using the windows API is.Without elaborate knowledge on the subject but based on all plugin architectures i'm familiar with I'm guessing vst and vsti are just typical .dll's with callback functions. As such considering the configuration for e.g.

Cubase (logic user myself) the schematic was:
Cubase layer for calling plugins -> Vst Plugin .dll
For sonar up until now it was
Sonar layer for plugins -> Translator Layer -> Vst plugin .dll

Pretty much the same deal as is with Waves waveshell.dll

So yes one can say that cubase had native vst support when sonar didn't.

The point is to load a VST into most hosts you don't need to convert it to a DX/DXi. It's irrelevent whether the converter is built into Sonar or external to it - it still creates a load of wrapped DX/DXi's in the registry that then appear in other hosts as DX effects and you have to go through this whole rigmarole of telling them to ignore such and such a DX effect because it's really a wrapped instrument. If Sonar 6 can just load a VST's properly without resorting to affecting the whole system I'll be more interested. That's what people mean by "native" in this context.

[whyterabbyt]

The point is to load a VST into most hosts you don't need to convert it to a DX/DXi. It's irrelevent whether the converter is built into Sonar or external to it - it still creates a load of wrapped DX/DXi's in the registry that then appear in other hosts as DX effects and you have to go through this whole rigmarole of telling them to ignore such and such a DX effect because it's really a wrapped instrument. If Sonar 6 can just load a VST's properly without resorting to affecting the whole system I'll be more interested. That's what people mean by "native" in this context.

Ron Kuper once said (regarding S5) that these registry entries were created to maintain backwards compatibility for those relying on the functionality for other DX/DXi only software; Sonar itself no longer required them. I'm not sure how that would be best approached this time around.

[aMUSEd]

The point is to load a VST into most hosts you don't need to convert it to a DX/DXi. It's irrelevent whether the converter is built into Sonar or external to it - it still creates a load of wrapped DX/DXi's in the registry that then appear in other hosts as DX effects and you have to go through this whole rigmarole of telling them to ignore such and such a DX effect because it's really a wrapped instrument. If Sonar 6 can just load a VST's properly without resorting to affecting the whole system I'll be more interested. That's what people mean by "native" in this context.

Ron Kuper once said (regarding S5) that these registry entries were created to maintain backwards compatibility for those relying on the functionality for other DX/DXi only software; Sonar itself no longer required them. I'm not sure how that would be best approached this time around.

Lets hope they wean themselves off it then - personally I try to avoid DX stuff on my system - I just don't like how it's not possible to have per app plugin sets like you can with VST or really control it in the way you can with VST plugins.

[Alex Westner]

• Work seamlessly with VST plug-ins—VST support is now integrated into SONAR 6 and no longer requires an external VST to DX adapter

Well, it's about goddamn time.
I realize why they didn't before but that was really hurting them.

.

but how i remember the yells and screams of the sonar fanbois -- "NO BUT IT IS INTEGRATED"!!!!

hehe when sonar 5 came out thats what they said -- fully integrated vst support... didnt happen. something tells me they got it right with the new version and that is nice might just be a worthy host now!!!

so and to all of you who argued with me on that one

Yup, we got it right this time, thanks.

[aMUSEd]

[Alex Westner]

I wish they make their gui more flexible. I'm not keen on it because it seems so cluttered. I'd like a few options for changing the way Sonar looks and perhaps that's included in v6.

Lots of UI flexibility and customization in S6:

http://www.cakewalk.com/Products/SONAR/Custom.asp

Customizable toolbars, track view controls, menu layouts, plug-in menus, track inspector, colors, audio port naming, and more...

[Alex Westner]

Want to explain to all the nice people what makes this one 'native' now? An explanation of what 'native' VST support is first would be nice.

It's also pretty unimportant, as long as it works. My pet peeve about Sonar's VST-support is that it makes a lousy job of organizing the plug-ins. It should at least obey the directory structure.

SONAR 6 does that properly now. We'll obey the directory structure and/or you can make your own custom layouts.

[Alex Westner]

It's also pretty unimportant, as long as it works. My pet peeve about Sonar's VST-support is that it makes a lousy job of organizing the plug-ins. It should at least obey the directory structure.

i solved that a while ago. but i think my solution (subsonar) may be redundant now...

sorry, whyterabbyt...

[Alex Westner]

Oooh, does the Studio Edition now have the per-channel integrated EQ as well?

I know it says that as part of the new console in Sonar 6, but I wondered if it's a cut & pasting mistake on the Cakewalk site.

Yup, it's true!

Also new to Studio that were previously Producer Edition exclusives: assignable fx controls on the console, and a video thumbnail track.