How important is VST3 support for you as a customer

[AdmiralQuality]

And why would they be? VST2 isn't going away anytime soon, so unlike Logic dropping AU there's no urgent pressure.

That's just a hypothetical example, right? Woah, you scared me there! My heart skipped a beat when I read that!

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.

I'm worked up, but I never said you or any other developer that they shouldn't adopt VST3. Indeed, it's BECAUSE the other developers don't adopt it that I'm reluctant to as well. Market share. Voting with wallets. Exactly.

My ONLY issue is one of the poll items. And that's those who clicked "deal breaker". All I want to know is, WHY does anyone feel that way. So far, aside from just believing the hype, and yes... if you really need Note Expression, I don't see why a plug-in has to be VST3 or someone won't consider using it.

I think I'll do one of my upcoming products as a VST3, just to prove that my stance isn't because "it's hard". Then I'll be able to join this debate from an expert level!

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[hibidy]

PG......MIS!

[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.

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

If they wanted to. I know you don't think they need to, but what you think is likely irrelevant to most of the dev world(and vice versa).

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.

Still, nobody said Steinberg was the world. I changed my clothes today. Microsoft changed to Windows 7. Neither of us are the world. You either change with it or you don't. Chances are, if you don't make certain changes, you get left behind. At some point, this could very well happen with VST3.

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.

Why, because you say so? Are you the one who decides what is important for a user? You're trying to make assumptions that your view is relevant and those who aren't agreeing are misinformed. You're wrong. You have no idea why people make their decisions, and your bias and preconceived notions of what they SHOULD think is irrelevant, again, to most of the world.

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.

Oh, you're so great compared to those who have made a conscious and informed decision to support it. And of course, you know what was in the minds of legitimate, SUCCESSFUL developers who have chosen to support VST3. It MUST have been "for show". Suuuuuuure......

You know NOTHING about what WILL happen. You THINK you know what will happen, but it's nothing more an an opinion. Same as anyone else.

And there is no such thing as "needing" VST3, or VST2.4, etc. It's extremely rare that ANY new technology or version of something gets adopted quickly. Windows 7 is superior to Windows XP in most ways, yet people still hold on to XP. My company still uses Adobe Audition 1.5 even though version 3 is excellent. Welcome to technology. Just because it hasn't been adopted on a widespread basis right away, doesn't mean it never will. And any claim you make to the contrary is a guess, pure and simple, based purely on opinion.

Brent

[koolkeys]

By the way, one of the reasons it would be a deal breaker is because with a VST3 plug-in, you get additional benefits in Cubase, one of the most popular hosts, and easier sidechaining and other things in hosts like Studio One. You can debate all day whether the host is done properly or not(after all, some of you seem to really like pretending to know how all devs should go about their business), but that IS a reason for a dealbreaker.

By the way, VST Expression HAS been adopted by major players such as VSL. It's only a matter of time that they take advantage of things like embedded expression maps and Note Expression maps. Whether you like the feature or not, or think it's useless, doesn't matter one bit to those who have already SATISFIED their users who REQUESTED support for it.

Brent

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[AdmiralQuality]

I know you don't think they need to, but what you think is likely irrelevant to most of the dev world(and vice versa).

Look Brent, if we're going to debate things, I'd appreciate if you could make better points than just declaring that my opinion doesn't matter. Or... let's debate that. WHY doesn't my opinion matter? WHY does yours matter more?

And again, again, again, again, again... I'm not really speaking to the developer world here (we have a Dev board for that). I'm speaking to users (of which I is one too ). WHY, people who clicked "deal breaker" in the poll, would a piano or compressor plug-in NEED to be a VST3, or you'd NEVER use it? That's all I want to know, and if I can dispel some myths while I'm at it, all the better.

Still, nobody said Steinberg was the world.

Yes, ttoz did. The subject is VST3, by Steinberg. He's referring to a world change. I'm pointing out that Steinberg isn't the world. They're just one company amongst many, going the way they think they should go. People follow, or don't. Look, I like Steinberg. I like a lot of their products. I like the workflow of Cubendo. And I like that they're dominant enough to have created a de facto cross platform audio plug-in standard. And that standard is VST2.4.

Chances are, if you don't make certain changes, you get left behind. At some point, this could very well happen with VST3.

The results of this poll would seem to defeat that assumption. And yet again, I've already said I'd adopt it if I was getting "left behind". But I'm not. There's just a small percentage of misinformed people who need some myths debunked, and that's all I'm trying to address.

Why, because you say so? Are you the one who decides what is important for a user?

In my company, yes. I'm a decider. I decide.

You're trying to make assumptions that your view is relevant and those who aren't agreeing are misinformed. You're wrong. You have no idea why people make their decisions,

That's why I'm asking them. I DO have no idea why anyone would make that decision.

and your bias and preconceived notions of what they SHOULD think is irrelevant, again, to most of the world.

My bias is my opinion. Same thing. If the facts were different, I'd have a different bias.

Oh, you're so great compared to those who have made a conscious and informed decision to support it. And of course, you know what was in the minds of legitimate, SUCCESSFUL developers who have chosen to support VST3. It MUST have been "for show". Suuuuuuure......

Urs himself suggested above that a reason to make a VST3 would be to get on Steinberg's page of VST3 supporting developers. We'll see if that happens because I'm going to make one.

You know NOTHING about what WILL happen. You THINK you know what will happen, but it's nothing more an an opinion. Same as anyone else.

Sure, but in this case, I'm right.

And there is no such thing as "needing" VST3,

I agree! Unfortunately, that's the subject of this poll/thread.

or VST2.4, etc. It's extremely rare that ANY new technology or version of something gets adopted quickly.

It's been years Brent. And it's NOT new technology. It's just a version of something, for which there is already another thing that everybody uses.

Windows 7 is superior to Windows XP in most ways, yet people still hold on to XP. My company still uses Adobe Audition 1.5 even though version 3 is excellent. Welcome to technology. Just because it hasn't been adopted on a widespread basis right away, doesn't mean it never will. And any claim you make to the contrary is a guess, pure and simple, based purely on opinion.

Brent

I still use XP as my main machine. Everything else is just for testing. Gawd I hate when Win7 renames files to "Copy" instead of asking me if I want to overwrite. Is there a way to turn that off? And I'm logged in as the administrator dammit, stop asking me for permission!

And sorry, but the poll seems to back up my opinion-based guess. I guess we need to have it again in a few years, but it seems for the last SEVERAL years there's been no mass migration to VST3. That's for a reason.

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[AdmiralQuality]

By the way, one of the reasons it would be a deal breaker is because with a VST3 plug-in, you get additional benefits in Cubase, one of the most popular hosts, and easier sidechaining and other things in hosts like Studio One. You can debate all day whether the host is done properly or not(after all, some of you seem to really like pretending to know how all devs should go about their business), but that IS a reason for a dealbreaker.

But my (hypothetical) piano plug-in doesn't NEED a side-chain or Note Expression. Why would someone reject it then?

By the way, VST Expression HAS been adopted by major players such as VSL. It's only a matter of time that they take advantage of things like embedded expression maps and Note Expression maps. Whether you like the feature or not, or think it's useless, doesn't matter one bit to those who have already SATISFIED their users who REQUESTED support for it.

Brent

It's an esoteric feature only really useful in samplers. Again, sure, great. But why would you reject the hypothetical VST 2.4 piano plug-in over it? It would still work as well as a VST3 piano plug-in, in EVERY VST host there is. WHY then is it's VST2.4 status a "deal breaker"?

OBVIOUSLY if I want to support those features, I'll need to make the plug-in a VST3. But the vast majority of plug-ins do things to which those new features don't apply.

I'm not saying to anyone don't make or use VST3s. I'm saying, unless those features are needed or even apply, that nobody needs VST3 over VST2.4. S'all.

[AdmiralQuality]

Excuse me asswipe but you quoted words that I never said. If your going to quote me quote me as I wrote it. That's fraudulent behavior.

I copy/pasted anything I put in a quote tag. Did you not mean by "world change" the topic of this thread, Steinberg's VST3? If not then I apologize for my misinterpretation and invite you to clarify.

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[AdmiralQuality]

i did not say that! Read my post again! what you said "ttoz wrote", ttoz didn't write! You were quoting someone else and put my name to it! In that case if it was unintentional i retract my asswipe comment.

Ah! Very sorry. I must have got mixed up because he quoted you directly above it.

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

I am asswipe, yes. I will try to improve.

[Urs]

I'm worked up, but I never said you or any other developer that they shouldn't adopt VST3. Indeed, it's BECAUSE the other developers don't adopt it that I'm reluctant to as well. Market share. Voting with wallets. Exactly.

Yeah, I can't remember you telling me how I get screwed by Steinberg. That was indeed mostly someone else.

So are you saying that, if I port my stuff over to VST3, say, up the number of available VST3 plugins by, say, 22 plugs (or 20%) this year, that this would change the balance so much that you'd feel tempted to support VST3 as well? Is that something you're afraid of?

As I said before, maybe Steinberg could have improved on VST2.x, and maybe that would have been "the right thing to do", but also maybe that would have been desastrous (just remember the outcry in the VST mailing list when VST2.4 came out and the usual suspects preached the end of the world was near because some of their precious opcodes were deprecated). We don't know and thus I don't really care what's wrong or right. No seriously, IMHO a clean cut was fair enough, and hence I support it.

[AdmiralQuality]

How many times do I have to say this Urs? I'm not against VST3. It just doesn't void the usefulness of all the still working fine and will continue to be for quite some time VST2.4 products out there.

And now I'm working on a VST3 plug-in, literally as we speak. So now AQ supports VST3 as much as U-he. I still haven't gotten any beers from Steinberg though.

But (if and) when I'm done and have a VST3 plug-in in my roster, my opinion will remain that nobody should consider a plug-in not being available in VST3 a "deal breaker" unless they require the implementation of one of those rather esoteric new features. That's ALL I've been saying. The topic of the thread/poll, yo?

[koolkeys]

Look Brent, if we're going to debate things, I'd appreciate if you could make better points than just declaring that my opinion doesn't matter. Or... let's debate that. WHY doesn't my opinion matter? WHY does yours matter more?

Where did I say your opinion doesn't matter? It's just an opinion, same as anyone else's. I only said that your opinion isn't likely going to drive the decisions of the rest of the dev world. You are misquoting me.

And again, again, again, again, again... I'm not really speaking to the developer world here (we have a Dev board for that). I'm speaking to users (of which I is one too ). WHY, people who clicked "deal breaker" in the poll, would a piano or compressor plug-in NEED to be a VST3, or you'd NEVER use it? That's all I want to know, and if I can dispel some myths while I'm at it, all the better.

And I told you. If they use Cubase, you get more using VST3 because Steinberg has designed it that way. Since there is enough good about Cubase to warrant using it for those users, it IS a dealbreaker for some.

Yes, ttoz did. The subject is VST3, by Steinberg. He's referring to a world change. I'm pointing out that Steinberg isn't the world. They're just one company amongst many, going the way they think they should go. People follow, or don't. Look, I like Steinberg. I like a lot of their products. I like the workflow of Cubendo. And I like that they're dominant enough to have created a de facto cross platform audio plug-in standard. And that standard is VST2.4.

Actually, if you read what he said, he didn't say that Steinberg was the world. The world just happens to use their standard, and if it changes, you either go with it or you don't.

The results of this poll would seem to defeat that assumption. And yet again, I've already said I'd adopt it if I was getting "left behind". But I'm not. There's just a small percentage of misinformed people who need some myths debunked, and that's all I'm trying to address.

Again with the misinformed crap. You're wrong. They just have different wants, needs, wishes, workflows, etc. than you. You have no idea what is in the mind of others, so you can't intelligently say they are misinformed.

In my company, yes. I'm a decider. I decide.

So YOU decide what's important for your users? Or do they? If it's you, then you sure do sound like another company you seem to despise so much.......Steinberg. No. THEY decide, and you decide how important the features are to implement from your end.

That's why I'm asking them. I DO have no idea why anyone would make that decision.

Just because you don't understand why somebody would do it, doesn't mean their reasons are wrong, or that they are misinformed. You just disagree.

My bias is my opinion. Same thing. If the facts were different, I'd have a different bias.

Your bias isn't based on fact. As you said, it IS your opinion. And that is ALL it is.

Urs himself suggested above that a reason to make a VST3 would be to get on Steinberg's page of VST3 supporting developers. We'll see if that happens because I'm going to make one.

No, Urs didn't say that a reason to make VST3 was just to get on that list. He suggested it as a way of having your name known by those who look at the list. A form of advertising, if you will. That wasn't a reason to switch to VST3.

Sure, but in this case, I'm right.

Nope, you have an opinion. Nothing more.

And there is no such thing as "needing" VST3,

I agree! Unfortunately, that's the subject of this poll/thread.

Ahhh, nice misquote of what I said. Way to take it out of context. There also isn't a NEED for VST at all, or digital editing, or 24 inputs on an interface. Doesn't mean it doesn't benefit somebody.

It's been years Brent. And it's NOT new technology. It's just a version of something, for which there is already another thing that everybody uses.

It's not really been that long. Some developers didn't even go from 2.3 to 2.4 in that time. And you also have to realize that when something works, it's always hard to get people to switch. How many people switched right away to Windows 7 from XP(those that skipped Vista, of course)? Just because people don't switch en masse doesn't mean that the ones who did are somehow wrong or misinformed. It's up to the devs to switch or not. Users can hope for it, or wish for it. But in the end, it's the dev community who actually makes the move. Each dev will have their own reasons, as you know. But nobody is "wrong". Just differing opinions, all relevant.

Windows 7 is superior to Windows XP in most ways, yet people still hold on to XP. My company still uses Adobe Audition 1.5 even though version 3 is excellent. Welcome to technology. Just because it hasn't been adopted on a widespread basis right away, doesn't mean it never will. And any claim you make to the contrary is a guess, pure and simple, based purely on opinion.

Brent

I still use XP as my main machine. Everything else is just for testing. Gawd I hate when Win7 renames files to "Copy" instead of asking me if I want to overwrite. Is there a way to turn that off? And I'm logged in as the administrator dammit, stop asking me for permission!

You can turn off the permission asking stuff. As for the other question, I don't know. Maybe? I haven't checked for that setting.

And sorry, but the poll seems to back up my opinion-based guess. I guess we need to have it again in a few years, but it seems for the last SEVERAL years there's been no mass migration to VST3. That's for a reason.

A quote with 367 people(I haven't actually voted yet, fwiw) on a corner of the interwebs? Go ask the tens of thousands of Cubase users if they would prefer to have a VST3 plug-in if available, and I bet your numbers go WAY to the other side. And of course, take into account how many people despise Steinberg, or use a host that doesn't support VST3.

Polls on KVR or any other forum are skewed and inconclusive at BEST, so if you're using that to prove anything, you're really standing on shaky ground. Like the polls asking "what host do you use", and Reaper comes out on top. But Reaper very likely doesn't have anywhere near the userbase of Cubase or Sonar or Logic or Pro Tools. Is the poll a way to prove Reaper has more users? Of course not. And the large and vast MAJORITY of DAW users never step foot inside of KVR.

So yeah, I wouldn't go around claiming a KVR poll proved your point.

By the way, 31% of people in the poll DO prefer VST3 if available. THAT is a big percentage of users, no matter how you slice it. Just sayin'

Brent