How important is VST3 support for you as a customer

[dreamkeeper]

It seems they cannot leave their dream...

[woodster]

I think there is good and also bad sides to VST3.

I think Steinberg effed up with dropping FXB/FXB functionality when they introduced VST3/Media Bay.
On the other hand, on many soft synths with less than ideal onboard browsing, Media Bay can be really helpful if you like to trawl through loads of presets.
I think their Media Bay "Concept" is the main reason they called it VST3, to maybe help differentiate the old system from the new.
If so, that is (as mentioned by some people here) driven by marketing mostly I think.

However, I did vote for VST3, as I do think there are benefits as mentioned by others previously.

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[Saukar30]

Summary:

"The developer that enabled our jobs that allows us to make an income from plug in coding has revised their specifications and we don't like it because we were happy with the way the specification was now. And we may one day have to do all this extra work to stay current and we feel it's unnecessary. We hate steinberg, why did they have to change things. why, mummy, why oh why."


SHUT UP YOU WHINY..... ^&$##$^#& !!!!!

or better yet if you think you can do better, create a plug in standard yourself that you feel is superior and try to get it widespread like vst. LFMAO. Oh yes who was it again that enabled you to make a living from audio plugins?

ROFL This is so true its hilarious. Ladies & gentlemen... move forward!

BTW I really don't care either way. I only buy software every few years so most likely I'll have to uppdate LOTS after this year. The world changes. You either change with it or get lost in it.

[koolkeys]

WOW i can't believe i punished myself to such a degree by reading all of this, then again i have spare time, which many don't. I am going to put my two bobs worth in before this thread is doomed to the lock.

VST3 pro's for me, if i were a cubase user (and it likely will get added to my list of hosts one day).

1) I LOVE the effects processing suspending. now yes, i DO KNOW that it was possible to do this in vst 2, for example ambience reverb has released it's resources when processing silence or playback is stopped since day one, and blue cat plugins do, but 95% do NOT. OK, some people like to know the maximum their cpu is going to be hammered not to have any surprises. But i hate the way when playback is stopped even, that on a heavy cpu project, Cubase is hammering the cpu at whatever the usage was when playing. I mean, it can;t be great to have a 3 ghz quad cpu being hammered at 80% of it's capacity when in fact it is using maybe 10% at the time. So cubase has made it easy in this regard. As long as the developer sticks to the vst3 spec and from what i read it's a much more overall bug free system when implemented, then the user has HOST choice in cubase to use the suspend processing on silence option or not. Although i don't understand exactly why studio one has supported vst3 as it includes one click native vst 2 sidechain, doesn't support note expression and does not suspend processing on silence, so it seems in that case they haven't even bothered to implement it properly, so why bother at all.


2) i think the sidechaining is great, it simplifies things

3) I saw the official note expression video with halion sonic se and i was gobsmacked. And the audio to midi feature whilst interpreting the expression, WOW. How anyone can say this is NOT cool for midi is beyond me.

Quickly to URS. Thank the lord for level headed devs like you. You are a gentleman and a scholar. I don't say that because you plan to support vst3 but simply your great attitude through this thread.

@ AQ, not surprised to see you causing a ruckus

@ aciddose, maybe you should work on properly finishing a vst *2* plugin before wasting your time here

@ complaining whiny devs in general on the matter.

Maybe you should learn not to bite the hand that feeds you. Yes, SB. Does anyone realise it was due to them the whole plugin phenomenon even exists? So the CREATOR of vst decides to revise it. WOW guess what, they are allowed to!
NO ONE is putting a gun to your head and saying you must support it! Cubase still officially supports 2.4 as does every vst host on the planet.

Why even bother hating so much on it. Couldn't the detailed, time consuming bashing you have done here be put to better use, like coding for example?

This debacle has been going on since the introduction of vst 3 and i have thought if the devs that have spent so much time intricately ripping it apart, to actually coding, they would probably have vst3 versions by now. LOL how ironic.

There may come a time where vst3 starts to become more demanded and this is what you guys are really complaining about.. the fact that you will suddenly have to put more work in, (wow what a revelation, work to get paid ), and maybe a customer will choose a vst3 version over yours and subsequently lose you sales. Ok so you have an option, stay happy with vst2 and your customer base or write vst3. Do it or don't, just don't spend time bitching about it here. There is no point to it. NOTHING productive will come out of it cause no matter what you say or how much you scream, Steinberg, the CREATORS of vst, are going to continue to push vst 3 as much as possible. It's simple, do it, or don't. I can't see anything that could be simpler.

Summary:

"The developer that enabled our jobs that allows us to make an income from plug in coding has revised their specifications and we don't like it because we were happy with the way the specification was now. And we may one day have to do all this extra work to stay current and we feel it's unnecessary. We hate steinberg, why did they have to change things. why, mummy, why oh why."


SHUT UP YOU WHINY..... ^&$##$^#& !!!!!

or better yet if you think you can do better, create a plug in standard yourself that you feel is superior and try to get it widespread like vst. LFMAO. Oh yes who was it again that enabled you to make a living from audio plugins?

And shockingly enough, your current EQ decision is between......wait for it......shocking, I know.......two TOP devs who happen to offer VST3 versions of their plug-ins.

Imagine that!

Brent

[AdmiralQuality]

And shockingly enough, your current EQ decision is between......wait for it......shocking, I know.......two TOP devs who happen to offer VST3 versions of their plug-ins.

Imagine that!

Brent

And do either of them implement Note Expression?

This is the thing, I can still make a VST3 and it won't do Note Expression, or any other of a myriad of "features". The API doesn't define functionality, it just provides the interface for controlling that functionality IF IT'S THERE.

Some of you seem to think that SB are "the world" but they're just another company. Yep, VST 2.4 had a great market share. And still does! But VST 3.x doesn't yet (and how many years old is VST3 now?) And for all the reasons us "whining developers" have noted already, I doubt it ever will.

This isn't some reluctance to trade in the horse and buggy for a steam powered carriage. It's more like reluctance to give up English in favor of Esperanto.

[koolkeys]

And shockingly enough, your current EQ decision is between......wait for it......shocking, I know.......two TOP devs who happen to offer VST3 versions of their plug-ins.

Imagine that!

Brent

And do either of them implement Note Expression?

They are effects, of course they don't. And they are VST3, not VST3.5.

Some of you seem to think that SB are "the world" but they're just another company. Yep, VST 2.4 had a great market share. And still does! But VST 3.x doesn't yet (and how many years old is VST3 now?)

Just over two years old. How long did it take devs to jump from 2.3 to 2.4? It took quite a while for that jump as well, even though it offered some great things like VSTXML, etc.

Nobody said Steinberg was "the world". But they created the VST spec, and people use it BY CHOICE. Don't like it? Don't use it. Go develop in one of the lesser-adopted formats. Nobody is making you do ANYTHING, including making the switch to VST3. But yet, you hate them still.

And for all the reasons us "whining developers" have noted already, I doubt it ever will.

Opinion. Nobody really knows.

Brent

[AdmiralQuality]

And shockingly enough, your current EQ decision is between......wait for it......shocking, I know.......two TOP devs who happen to offer VST3 versions of their plug-ins.

Imagine that!

Brent

And do either of them implement Note Expression?

They are effects, of course they don't. And they are VST3, not VST3.5.

OK, what if they were pianos? Would they need to be VST3.5 then?

Some of you seem to think that SB are "the world" but they're just another company. Yep, VST 2.4 had a great market share. And still does! But VST 3.x doesn't yet (and how many years old is VST3 now?)

Just over two years old. How long did it take devs to jump from 2.3 to 2.4? It took quite a while for that jump as well, even though it offered some great things like VSTXML, etc.

Nobody said Steinberg was "the world".

The world changes. You either change with it or get lost in it.

The world didn't change. Steinberg just changed one API that did one thing, for another that does exactly the same thing.

But they created the VST spec, and people use it BY CHOICE. Don't like it? Don't use it. Go develop in one of the lesser-adopted formats. Nobody is making you do ANYTHING, including making the switch to VST3. But yet, you hate them still.

For the umpteenth time, all I'm trying to do is explain to users that they don't NEED VST3. I KNOW I don't need to implement if I don't want to, that's why I don't. But NOBODY should be rejecting a product for not being VST3. The small percentage of people in the poll who checked "deal breaker" are misinformed, and I'm just trying to debunk that bunk.

And for all the reasons us "whining developers" have noted already, I doubt it ever will.

Opinion. Nobody really knows.

Brent

Well, I know. Again, how old is VST3 now? Where are all the products? Trust me, if we NEEDED VST3 to do something, we'd all have adopted it immediately. But we don't like doing work for nothing. Also some developers have a conscience so we're also not interested in adopting it just for the sake of show.

[aciddose]

ttoz, you'd think your first point is valid, but in fact a lot of vst2 hosts support process suspend already. renoise does it for example.

all you need to do is:

1) ask the plugin what it's estimated hysteresis is
2) check for inputs
3) check for outputs

after 2 and 3 are false for the period learned by 1, suspend processing.

this is a host feature, but for some reason again instead of putting the functionality into their host, they put it into the plugin. why the hell would they do that? are they incompetent? perhaps.

plugin authors shouldnt need to spend time fiddling with implementing host features - that's the host's job.

another way for stainberg to pass off their past incompetence or cubase lackluster feature set on to imaginary limitations of the spec they themselves designed (which, in fact doesn't have this limitation, it has a hysteresis request function) and then claim they've fixed it by in fact forcing developers to implement it, while their host still doesn't implement the proper functionality.

[AdmiralQuality]

ttoz, you'd think your first point is valid, but in fact a lot of vst2 hosts support process suspend already. renoise does it for example.

all you need to do is:

1) ask the plugin what it's estimated hysteresis is
2) check for inputs
3) check for outputs

after 2 and 3 are false for the period learned by 1, suspend processing.

this is a host feature, but for some reason again instead of putting the functionality into their host, they put it into the plugin. why the hell would they do that? are they incompetent? perhaps.

Yep. Lots of VST2.4 hosts suspend processing (which I think is a bad idea, but let's debate that somewhere else).

[Big Tick]

Just to chime in - I don't like what I have seen of VST3, but if I have to, I will jump into it, and it won't be the first time I jump into something I didn't like.

Having said that - I hope everybody here agrees that the acceptance of VST3 has been really bad. Heck, even major players like Arturia or NI still don't support it ! This, I would say, indicates that Steinberg somehow has failed to promote its standard.

[aciddose]

i always want to mention that, but that's alas an appeal to authority... plus, we hate NI too don't we? so they couldn't be right..

also, since we don't know for a fact, odds are they'll release it tomorrow just to prove you wrong. so appeal to authority is never a good argument to make.

[Urs]

Heck, even major players like Arturia or NI still don't support it !

Well, the AU thing has shown that independent software devs are often more flexible to adopt new ideas early on. That doesn't mean that NI won't do VST3 at some point.

I think most people are quite relaxed about this stuff. No-one seems to be in a hurry or anything. And why would they be? VST2 isn't going away anytime soon, so unlike Logic dropping AU there's no urgent pressure. One can do it on the side, no need to put everything else on hold for it. Let an intern do it whatsoever, no rush.

The only ones who seem worked up a bit are the ones who don't want to support VST3. Why is that? If they were really convinced that VST3 is a failure, then there shouldn't be any fear...?

Hence I don't quite get it. Why do people try to suggest to me and others that supporting VST3 is a bad idea? Some other companies have done it before and they havn't mysteriously disappeared from the flat earth. To my best knowledge, that is.

[Urs]

plus, we hate NI too don't we?

I never got that way of thinking.

[LeVzi]

Hence I don't quite get it. Why do people try to suggest to me and others that supporting VST3 is a bad idea? Some other companies have done it before and they havn't mysteriously disappeared from the flat earth. To my best knowledge, that is.

I don't make plug-in's nor do I understand much about their working's, BUT This seems the most valid question of all, why are so many people against it, in some cases in a big way. Everything progresses, gets improved upon and eventually ppl move to it or you get left behind.


Saying that, I might actually try and learn just what vst3 can do, seeing as i've owned Cbase long enough, you'd think I would have tried it.