How important is VST3 support for you as a customer

[AdmiralQuality]

That Urs , are they really only three VST hosts ok...thought they would be more...
I know for instance, to sample from your host using NI's Maschine, you have to use the Maschine FX version, as an insert in the track you want to sample, save the sound and pull it up in the vst instrument version... I know Angus created a clever software to do all that in one go for Geist, but for the end user that is at the very least inconvenient, for other users like me a PITA....I guess we shall see where all of this settles, but knowing SB I know they aren't going back to VST 2.4 and as more plugins come to vst 3 I have a feeling at some point some will be left behind.
rsp

VST3 hosts, yes. (There's hundreds of VST 2.4 hosts.)

No, of course Steinberg won't go back to VST 2.4, but on the other hand, their hosts still support it (last I checked anyway). So if you're a developer, are you going to target hundreds of hosts? Or three? Granted there's a wrapper included in the VST3 SDK to make your VST3 plug-in 2.4, but then you need to distribute and maintain both versions, and you're are at Steinberg's mercy as far as getting bugs fixed. Of which there have been LOTS. Meanwhile, native VST 2.4 plug-ins are still working as great as they always did, and always will. (Simply because of the size of the population using them and the length of time it's been around.)

[lagavulin16]

I don't care about VST3 and voted accordingly, but I care quite a bit about 64 bit.

[zvenx]

That Urs , are they really only three VST hosts ok...thought they would be more...
I know for instance, to sample from your host using NI's Maschine, you have to use the Maschine FX version, as an insert in the track you want to sample, save the sound and pull it up in the vst instrument version... I know Angus created a clever software to do all that in one go for Geist, but for the end user that is at the very least inconvenient, for other users like me a PITA....I guess we shall see where all of this settles, but knowing SB I know they aren't going back to VST 2.4 and as more plugins come to vst 3 I have a feeling at some point some will be left behind.
rsp

VST3 hosts, yes. (There's hundreds of VST 2.4 hosts.)

No, of course Steinberg won't go back to VST 2.4, but on the other hand, their hosts still support it (last I checked anyway). So if you're a developer, are you going to target hundreds of hosts? Or three? Granted there's a wrapper included in the VST3 SDK to make your VST3 plug-in 2.4, but then you need to distribute and maintain both versions, and you're are at Steinberg's mercy as far as getting bugs fixed. Of which there have been LOTS. Meanwhile, native VST 2.4 plug-ins are still working as great as they always did, and always will. (Simply because of the size of the population using them and the length of time it's been around.)

I got you.. but do you see yourself or other developer's positions changing? what will it be like in a year or two? yes I know no one can predict that far ahead in terms of technology. will five years from now will we still be having this argument (although I am sure vst 4 or 5 would be out then.)
rsp

[AdmiralQuality]

There is a reason why some of us moved from hardware to software. for me it is the convenience.... the harder it is to use, the more likely I never use it. case in point rewire... I stopped using reason because it is just so much easier to use a vst.......
I am not going to do all of that to use sidechain, so much easier for me to find a compressor that works with sidechain in the vst3 spec....
took ppl awhile to move from tape to digital....some still haven't , but all the tape companies eventually went out of business....nuff said..
rsp

But this isn't a paradigmatic change like hardware to software. It's software to software. ("Buy it again, for the first time!") With only the tiniest increment of improvement, and a whole bunch of new problems, limitations and bugs. Newer isn't always better. Again, I think Cubase/Nuendo 3.1 was the pinnacle of Steinberg hosts, and I see no compelling reason to "up"grade. No, it's not x64, but you want to know a secret? x64 code runs no faster than 32 bit code did. The singular advantage is the elimination of the 4GB RAM limit, and, at least for me, that's never been a problem either. (I'm not a big sample user, but even if I was, Direct-from-disk technology has been around for years -- you don't need massive amounts of RAM dedicated to storing samples.)

I can set up sidechaining in older hosts in about 15 seconds. Improving that to 5 seconds isn't a big impact to my workflow (particularly for something I use so rarely).

[AdmiralQuality]

I got you.. but do you see yourself or other developer's positions changing? what will it be like in a year or two? yes I know no one can predict that far ahead in terms of technology. will five years from now will we still be having this argument (although I am sure vst 4 or 5 would be out then.)
rsp

I expect 10 years from now there will still be a huge number of VST 2.4 hosts and plug-ins and you'll still be able to count the number of VST 3.x hosts on your fingers.

It's not "technology". There's no new technology here. It's just change for change's sake. Which I'm pretty sure is not what my customers want me spending their money on.

If I start to see VST 3.x getting some traction, I'll re-evaluate. But again, it's almost universally un-adopted. (And it's 3 years old already!)

[xoxos]

it's marketing, pure and simple

as one of kvraudio's "official indignant persons," i feel obliged to indicate that were talking about a company that abandoned the .fxp format in favour of a proprietary .vstpreset format.

it's difficult for me to understand why there are young/any people in this day and age who aren't naturally skeptical about business interests. why are we still rushing out and snapping up the juiciest looking worm dangled in front of us? newest = best??

[Muzik 4 Machines]

zero, nada, not at all
the minor improvements over vst2 are not worth the troubles

[RunBeerRun]

Not important, old stuff is bound to always be less expensive.

I still use VHS tape players, mostly listen to cassettes, have my 2nd guitar I got when I was 12.

[LXNDR1]

i'm scared of it to be honest
i'm scared of everything new and unknown
i'm still using Logic 5.3 that's how far backwards i am

suppose everybody drops VST2 support, what are we gonna do with our terrabytes of plugins?

i only hope nobody drops 16/44.1 support

[Urs]

Sorry for making my joke not obvious

I do think though that as many host developers did as many things wrong in VST2 as did plugin developers. Because it caters for, hmmm, maybe... uhm... thoughtlessness? There's a little chance though that VST3 requires as much thinking as, say, AU and thus might become similarly "broadband compatible". I mean, one hardly hears "AU XY does not work in host blabla". But in VSTland you hear that all the time. Maybe things like VST3 and AU are defined in a narrower fashion so that them smartpunks have less playground to break things.

[zvenx]

naw, no need. it was funny, I just wasn't thinking it out.
rsp

[davidka]

The latest VST version seemed kind of an unexpected 'milestone' for me, with the note expression feature. I'm just curious, what kind of new improvements are ahead for the VST technology.

Guys, what do you think? What does the future hold for virtual instruments? Did we already reach the limit of major breakthroughs in this territory?

[Music Engineer]

So, to rehash -

VST3.X is great for devs

VST3.X really doesn't make a difference to consumers

well, at least that was my personal impression from an (admittedly very superficial) look at the VST3 SDK when it first came out. kinda bitter irony for steinberg that the group which may have benefited most is exactly the same group that - by and large - rejected it. and this is, IMHO, very much to blame to the false marketing claims about the "new features". they created a feeling of being treated as dumb sheep (for me, at least) and consequently bad feelings towards the thing as such - even though it might not have been that bad.

...and then the rants here began and i did not yet bother to look at it again. but eventually, i probably will. we'll see

[standalone]

To answer the op, vst3 support is not very important for me when buying a plugin or a host, but vst3.5 could be crucial if it delivers what Steinberg promises.

[jdieks]

To answer the op, vst3 support is not very important for me when buying a plugin or a host, but vst3.5 could be crucial if it delivers what Steinberg promises.

+1 Allthough you need vst3 plugins in cubase for propper sidechaining, so for dynamics plugins it's a big + too