Re: Cubase 4: You Have Got to Be Kidding Me!

[Dominus]

Doubt it. Steinberg knows better than the users what they want.

If anyone questions it, they'll just delete the posts off of Cubase.net.

You are not telling the truth.
Perhaps the plugs are not organized in folders but allowed some other kind of organization.
Speculation is a lot of fun but i don't see the point here.
You seem not to be a member of Cubase.net, neither a cubase user.

From Cubase.net:

Christian Dettner
Administrative Moderator


Joined: 01 Dec 2004
Posts: 2890
Location: Hamburg, Germany

PostPosted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 5:56 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, it puts VST3 plugins for sure into the forefront. An own sorting method for the user could be possible, though not for a 4.0 version. Of course, when 3rd party VST3 plugins will become available (which is not yet the case), the need of changing the order won't get smaller. For the moment, the automatic categorization is not that bad as it sounds at first.

I added the bold. My speculation is based on previous Steinberg antics. What am I *not* telling the truth about?

[nagal]

I read this on the Cubase.net forum and almost feel out of my chair. I can not believe Steinberg is being so short sighted in not allowing users to configure there VST3 hierarchy themselves.

[MickGael]

The part that really burns me is:

...An own sorting method for the user could be possible, though not for a 4.0 version...

In other words, pay for some future upgrade to restore a feature that worked 2 versions ago. Where have we heard this one before?

I/m not a Steinberg basher, but as a usability specialist, this absolutely floors and mystifies me...Don't they do any usability testing?

[bleebsen]

Could be in a free 4.0.1 update though, MickGael.

I actually like the idea. I've been completely rearranging my plugins folder for 5 times and it still sucks. So it can't get any worse imho...

[MickGael]

Could be in a free 4.0.1 update though, MickGael.

I actually like the idea. I've been completely rearranging my plugins folder for 5 times and it still sucks. So it can't get any worse imho...

Hi bleebsen,
Perhaps you are right. Hope, they say, springs eternal.

[ericj23]

jesus f'in christ - storm in tea cup or what

the vsts are arranged as normal - the only ones that arent are the nice cpu saving vst 3 ones - there are none of these anywhere apart from in cubase

there will not be any of these until after the sdk is released next year - so there is absolutely no problem at all until lets say march next year

cubase has already promised a point release after vista with full 64 bit - should be sometime about march next year

so the problem is errr...

well put it this way - anyone want to bet that you will be able to organise vst3 plugs by the time any of them actually exist

[bduffy]

We should, of course, wait and see. But being forced to organize things "the Steinberg Way" just seems silly.

[Dominus]

The problem I see is that you *know* that manufacturers are going to put their company name into the slot, and not the type of plugin that it is.

I've spent tons of time supporting someone that bought a DAW from me that uses Pro Tools, because I gave him a CD full of free plugins that I collected over the years through here (gave, not sold) to check out and he wrapped them all. I had to have him unwrap all of them, and pointed him to Hermann Seib's VSTHost to check them out one by one to see which ones he likes. Now, I know Digidesign won't give you plugin management because "there's only about 100 native RTAS plugins anyway, what do you need to manage? ", but in VST capable DAWs and with the glut of free plugins, people are going to want to manage them themselves.

[Dominus]

Ohh, FedEx just pulled up. Time to get my copy of Sonar 6.

[bduffy]

The problem I see is that you *know* that manufacturers are going to put their company name into the slot, and not the type of plugin that it is.

I've spent tons of time supporting someone that bought a DAW from me that uses Pro Tools, because I gave him a CD full of free plugins that I collected over the years through here (gave, not sold) to check out and he wrapped them all. I had to have him unwrap all of them, and pointed him to Hermann Seib's VSTHost to check them out one by one to see which ones he likes. Now, I know Digidesign won't give you plugin management because "there's only about 100 native RTAS plugins anyway, what do you need to manage? ", but in VST capable DAWs and with the glut of free plugins, people are going to want to manage them themselves.

Yes, and not to mention that as consumers in a free market econoy, we're supposed to have the power of choice!

[diverdee]

Usual 'Steinberg Shuffle' - two steps forward, 1 step back.
Put your left leg in, left leg out.............

[kritikon]

Hmmm...it certainly seems stupid on the face of it, but has anyone tried Cubase4 yet. Do we know what the "automatic sorting" is. Maybe it will automatically sort them into Eqs, delays, modFX etc?

(I know it's not actually likely that Steinberg will be that organised, but stranger things have happened.)


...no, you're right...probably they'll automatically sort them in reverse alphabetical order or similar...

[egbert]

The only paid upgrades these days are full version updates - after that point releases and bug fixes are free so there is no way you are going to pay for 4.01 or 4.1.

[fizbin]

This behavior is exactly the way Pro Tools classifies its plugins. (FYI)

Seems to work for some folks, although it would be nice to have a choice.

fizbin

[Lunch Money]

The idea is that the metadata could be used by the host to allow the users a system of sorting plug-ins themselves. 3rd party developers will be able to provide their users with whatever amount of flexibility they want, including recognizing folder structures. Whether Steinberg chooses to use this functionality in Cubase or not doesn't affect 3rd parties, who might do something more powerful and creative.

Greg