GSI VB3-II

[kelldammit]

FWIW, there was a niggle with the form for us non-VAT folks. I shot a note to support, and got an answer within a few minutes (after working hours, his time, no less). A few minutes later, the purchase was complete, and i got my new serial # via email.

In general, if a plug proves itself really useful over time, and support is good (as described above), i don't have issue paying an upgrade every few years or whatnot. I get that it's a bit steep for some, but i was okay with it, especially given how VB3 v1 was almost criminally underpriced for as good as it was. As for VB3 II, I like the addition of vst3, and also definitely prefer the new gui to that of v1. C/R...i'm not so wild about in general...but hey, you just can't have it all, i guess.

Anyway, I mostly just wanted to give a shout out for Guido's excellent support. That sealed the deal for me.

kell

[Dewdman42]

I was a software developer for 20 years and I happen to know its not that difficult to port code to 64bit

Excuse me but I find it hard to believe that you've been a sofware developer for 20 years after reading this statement.

Well sorry you can't believe it, but its true. I have ported things to 64bit I know exactly what is involved and its not that hard, except for rare situations, usually when the software was poorly coded to begin with.

Yes, compiling something for a platform or another is as easy as clicking here and there in the IDE's configuration window,

porting to 64bit usually does require more than that and I wasn't suggesting it's a five minute job. But VB3v1 sat there, dwindling on the vine for quite a few years, he could have gotten it to 64bit, as he apparently did on windows, a very long time ago if he cared about supporting this users... It could have been done in a few weeks of work, honestly. This discussion is ridiculous.

VB3-II is not just an "update" to the old VB3, it's a completely new product, it doesn't share a single line of code with the old VB3. Yes, you guys are free to complain about the price if you feel it's too high, but please don't say it's "for an update" because it's not a simple update.

I agree its a new product and VB3 that I bought was abandoned to die on the vine. As stated earlier.

Also, as you can see I haven't gone out of business in the past 11 years and I'm still alive, so I just can't understand this phobia for the C/R protection scheme which is very common, almost 95% of the softwares I own is based on C/R protection (which is actually no protection at all since the cracked version of VB3-II has been released the day after the official release!).

Technically, VB3-II stores the license in a plain text file similarly to the old VB3, so reinstalling it on the same machine can also be done by simply copying the files manually in the proper directories. The only difference with the old one is that moving it to a different machine requires a new authorization code that must be retrieved from the website. And each license enables 3 machines.

I swear: the day I die, all of my source code will become open (unless I got to sell it to someone else while I'm still healthy) so you can keep using it if you live longer than me. But don't try to murder me... I'm well armed

As I said before, he has basically created abandonware out of most of his software products...every one of them actually. Why do you think it will be any different with VB3II? With C/R protection, that matters.

[EvilDragon]

BTW ZioKiller IS Guido from GSi, if you didn't catch that. You're replying to the main in third person


You're conveniently skipping the part about VB3 being based on VSTGUI, which doesn't support Cocoa on Mac at all. Hence it'd need a full rewrite just to be able to port it to 64-bit Mac since Carbon is deprecated.

[Dewdman42]

Good glad to hear guido is paying attention!

A complete rewrite it would NOT have been that is completely false information. I would hope that his GUI code is seperaTe from DSP, for example. If not then see my comment about poor coding above. Worst case he may have had to refactor some GUI code in order to use cocoa or perhaps move to juce. It’s not that hard, and after the years and years it sat there there is no excuse whatsoever for abandoning it. It’s a weak excuse and one that wary buyers should take note because down the road something we can’t predict now will happen related to vb3ii and what we can expect to happen is nothing.

[ZioKiller]

Worst case he may have had to refactor some GUI code in order to use cocoa or perhaps move to juce. It’s not that hard

Oh dear! Where were you when I was looking for you?!

, and after the years and years it sat there there is no excuse whatsoever for abandoning it.

So you're assuming that I've spent years doing nothing, just watching my customers complaining for not updating the plugin... sorry, for not updatig it yet.

It’s a weak excuse and one that wary buyers should take note because down the road something we can’t predict now will happen related to vb3ii and what we can expect to happen is nothing.

Thank you for sharing with us your Crystal Ball's future predictions.

[ras.s]

First off, it's great to see the gold standard of Hammond emulations developed further.

Soundwise, I think it has more character compared to VB3. That doesn't really say much and I don't know why I feel it sounds that way, but anyways. I wonder if there's something specifically that I can listen to so that I figure out the difference?

I've got some redraw issues with it, see the attached screenshot at the bottom. (It's made of two screenshots, hence the top section being out of place.) Hovering the mouse over the setting buttons leaves the previous tooltip visible and then drawn over with the new tooltip. Also moving the setting windows on top of the main view leaves the main view looking like that.

I don't like the plugin creating new windows. When clicking back on the main view to focus on it, the settings windows fall out of the view, but they don't actually disappear as I can find them on the Windows desktop. However they don't appear on the Windows application toolbar. Easiest way to make them visible again is to click on the buttons that pop them up, but with them disappearing it kind of defeats the idea of having the settings in separate windows as I can't edit all the windows at the same time (with the main view making the other windows disappear when focusing on it).

Just rummaging through the presets makes me wish there was an option to 'lock' some of the settings so that they stay in a given position when switching through the presets. For example, if I set the reverb to zero or the vibrato off, I'd like them to stay that way when I'm changing presets. Such an option might fit in the right click menu that's available for the controls.

Should the drawbar presets visibly change the drawbar settings?

And Guido, please do reconsider the copy protection in a future update.

I can see that a major benefit on the end-user side is that the license is now resellable. However, part of VB3's charm -- for me atleast -- was and still is that it just works. I've had it for years and I've had a lot of mileage out of it (I make reggae music) and the plugin has been practically zero maintenance for me, including when changing systems. I haven't had the need to consider other options because the software sounds great and on my end at least, it's been perfected to the point that it just works. I haven't had the need to get in touch with you. In a sense, VB3 feels a bit like a hardware unit.

If Windows doesn't break compatibility for some unknown reason, I'll be able to use VB3 for another ten years. Even as my first impressions of VB3-II are positive, the copy protection scheme is something that I can see being troublesome some time in the future. At the very least I'll need to authorise it on your website, but with some certainty, the software will be unauthorisable if something happens to you or your website. As melodramatic as it sounds, keep in mind that tomorrow isn't promised to anyone. Partly due to its license scheme, the old VB3 might as well work thirty years from now, heck, it's already vintage in its own right.

As a compromise, I would be willing to waive the possibility of reselling the license in order to have a license that just sits in my email folder, possibly for decades.


With all that said, back to testing it out some more, maybe I can find out why I think it has more character ..

[Dewdman42]

, and after the years and years it sat there there is no excuse whatsoever for abandoning it.

So you're assuming that I've spent years doing nothing, just watching my customers complaining for not updating the plugin... sorry, for not updatig it yet

Hey if you update vb3v1 as it should have been you will gain my respect and future business! Hope that is true. As you said and I agree, vb3II is really a whole new product. Asking us to buy a whole new product at a steep price to make up for the abandonment of VB3v1 is simply not reasonable and that’s why you’re hearing complaints now.

[Dewdman42]

Also I want to say that vb3v1 May still have a market if it sounds different then the new one. Some people may still want to use the old one! Not that one is better then the other, just different. Why not update it and continue selling both!

[WOK]

Hey if you update vb3v1 as it should have been you will gain my respect and future business! Hope that is true. As you said and I agree, vb3II is really a whole new product. Asking us to buy a whole new product at a steep price to make up for the abandonment of VB3v1 is simply not reasonable and that’s why you’re hearing complaints now.

Why not seeing it from another side: VB3 was a perfect working VST plugin with a magnificent sound. I don't see it needed an update, because it was working flawless.
Now 10 years later there is a totally new programmed product, and owners of the former VST get a discount when buying it. What's the problem? Noone ever said, it's an "update".

[Dullee]

A programmer bashing other programmer and his product on KVR...

I've seen it all before. I think with aciddouche bashing OBXD out of jealousy OBXD is more popular than his own synth.

Classic as it is classless.

[Dewdman42]

I’m not a competitor of any kind fwiw. I am simply a dissappointed customer that happens to know enough about software development to know the excuses given for abandoning vb3v1 are BS.

[Dewdman42]

No wok, sorry gsi will not get my business ever again.

[EvilDragon]

75€ is far from a steep price, even with VAT added on top of it. Many plugins cost many more.

IMHO VB3 v1 should've costed at least twice for how good it was.

[Dewdman42]

Ok well you have your opinion and I have mine and my opinion dictates my wallet

[Dullee]

IMHO VB3 v1 should've costed at least twice for how good it was.

This.

If anything, Guido's mistake was underpricing VB3 V1.

It should've been 99 notes right from the start. Back in the day VB3 didn't have any rivals, it'd sell just fine anyway.

And now all these cheap, entitled basterds wouldn't whine about the upgrade price.

Problem solved.

Because it's not about C/R at all.

If Tony Klanghelm went C/R tomorrow, but would keep giving away major upgrades like DC8C3 for free, ppl would still be kissing his ass and thanking him forever. Typical for any Klanghelm thread, actually. Sometimes gets too syrupy for one's tastes. But none would whine. Because "FREEEEE"

a disappointed customer that happens to know enough about software development to know the excuses given for abandoning vb3v1 are BS.

yet I don't see you model one Hammond organ. look, when you have a product as quality as VB3 as a virtual instrument, please come back and brag about your programming skills all you want.

until then, all this hot air about how freaking knowledgeable you are and how poor GSI programming is, is purely a lip service. it's all a theory.

you don't know if you'd be able to rewrite VB3 yourself going back to 2007. what did you know in 2007 to do better than Guido did? did you have any expertise in Hammond organs at all back in 2007?

when someone is a skilled master at something, he doesn't wait for someone to do it for him.