KVR Audio

Kevin63101 · Post by **Kevin63101** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 12:01 am

No discrediting your opinion. You're unhappy ... I understand. I was unhappy about NI B4-II (no 64 bit) ending, Camel Alchemy going to Apple, etc. And you've made your point ... legit opinion.

I just would like to get back on topic about insights of actual new VB3-II product I plan to buy.

Dullee · Post by **Dullee** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 12:47 am

I actually did not criticize guido's programming at all

At no point did I brag about myself or say that I would do it

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.

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

he put a plugin wrapper around the VB3II software form to sell it without hardware.

I'll just leave this here for everyone to see who's really a lame, self-contradicting, ignorant liar and an entitled douche.

No, mate, you actually act like a smartass, who thinks he knows "how it's done". You bragged. You can't retract now. You came here to preach.

Don't say you didn't mean nothing. You said "it's not that hard" to do. You said it twice. So you really must know what's up, you are the brains here.

Guido challenged you to take the code and show him how it's done and you what? It shouldn't be a problem for you, right? You are the guru here. You said something like "a few weeks job", right? Suggesting the conversation is ridiculous. So no problem, easy peasy, accept the challenge, prove you're worthy of two shits.

But you'll just chicken out.

Man, just GTFO. You are an embarrassment.

And before you post on any forum, please, learn to form sentences. You're hardly readable at all.

A cheap basterd whining about price for three pages straight.

You're not at a focking bazaar, mate. Go back to bargaining with peasants over potatoes for a few coins. KVR is not the place to do it.

People been calling you pathetic and they're bloody well right. You are pathetic and even more so that you don't realize it.

i only respond to what others direct at me. If people keep trying to discredit me as you just did, then I will respond again and again again. so here is #29

You really think you're all that important, do you? Too much self-importance is your problem. And you've crapped in this thread for 29 times like a dirty dog because of your self-importance.

Don't worry, I have a cure for you. Adding your sorry ass to my block list and suggesting others to follow suit.

Now you can respond,respond,respond #30,31,32... and talk to the hand #30,31,32... kapish, mate? good.

Truly, bless the man who added a block button to this forum. That man was a wise man.

Dewdman42 · Post by **Dewdman42** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 2:44 am

The first two bolded statements are correct. You are correct in the third one that I misstated about putting a plugin wrapper around the standalone, it had been a while since I looked at that, it as has been clarified what he has recently done is add the new juce GUI around the vb3ii sound engine that already existed. Already said that. Why are we going round and round about it?

I can tell you why. Because someone here made the ridiculous statement that vb3v1 never made it to 64bit on Mac because it’s such a hard task that guido apparently couldn’t be bothered to work in it and it was stated that this was all Apple’s fault. I called out those statements as the balconie that it is and several of you have been on the attack at me ever since. Rather then admit that the 64bit version could have been done and wouldn’t have been that hard and should have been done, some of you, including guido, have gone to great lengths to try to Demonize me and deflect from the original statement which is still hanging there. Typical internet rhetoric

Dewdman42 · Post by **Dewdman42** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 2:47 am

And just to reiterate, I have definitely not criticized guido’s programming skills, I have rather challenged the notion put forth by some of you that it would have been too hard for him to do it. I think he could have done it and chose not to for business reasons.

waiting man · Post by **waiting man** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 6:17 am

My experience through the years as a GSI and Guido customer for most of the old product line has given me so much more than just plugins and support.

Wish him all the best.

Spitfire31 · Post by **Spitfire31** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 7:04 am

waiting man wrote:My experience through the years as a GSI and Guido customer for most of the old product line has given me so much more than just plugins and support.

Wish him all the best.

My experience exactly. Guido is a passionate and helpful dev – and a gentleman.

Joachim

Burillo · Post by **Burillo** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 8:02 am

Dewdman42 wrote:i only respond to what others direct at me. If people keep trying to discredit me as you just did, then I will respond again and again again. so here is #29

unfortunately for you, Guido's right. it's relatively straightforward to recompile software for 64-bit if you wrote your code right, but that only applies to code you have control over. if your way of "getting 64-bit support" involves porting your code to a new library, then this is no longer just a "64-bit update". it's especially true if the library you're porting to is vastly different in terms of internals, from the one you had before.

for example, it's relatively straightforward to port your code to Qt5 if you've had Qt4 previously (in fact, it's mostly source-compatible), but it would've involved far more work if you were porting even from Qt3, let alone Qt2, GTK+, .NET or (god forbid) MFC. again, Guido told you that much - GUI code is like 70% of the plugin. different frameworks have very different ideas about how things should work - i'm sure you know that much, since you're such a self-proclaimed expert coder - so porting from one to another is not an easy job, and things don't always map 1:1 from one framework to another. and that's just porting - you also have to learn the thing first, to know how your existing code structure maps to the new realities.

to port a plugin from VSTGUI to JUCE is essentially a rewrite of ~70% of its code. however, Guido even didn't do that - he didn't port his old code to JUCE. he developed new DSP (which, as you've pointed out, has been in the Mojo and distributed with his MIDI controllers), and then slapped a JUCE GUI on top of it later. it's basically new software, top to bottom. you think Guido should've ported VB3 to JUCE first, before embarking on creating a GUI for VB3-II - fine, but to me that sounds horribly inefficient use of developer's time. why would he port v1 if he already has newer, better DSP?

WOK · Post by **WOK** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 8:43 am

Dewdman42 wrote:64bit!!! Just because he never addressed that, I will simply not even consider VB3II and frankly I'm offended at the update price, particularly in light of what happened with v1 never getting that update.

VB3-I was eventually available in 64bit for Windows. 32bit was fine ten years ago when VB3 was developed.
And VB3-II is not an update. It's a new program of a Hammond B3 emulation with a discount for owners of his first program of a B3 emulation......

In Germany we have DVBT for digital terrestrial television braodcasting. Now they changed it to the higher quality DVBT-2 (switching off the old transmission), which is incompatible to the old receivers, built in many flat screen TV's. Do Samsung, Toshiba or others offer me a free (or cheap) update of my ten year old TV to the new standard? Of course not. I'll have to pay a new TV set (or a seperate DVBT-2 receiver).

pyer · Post by **pyer** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 9:38 am

wow, 10 pages, and maybe 3 posts about the sound, from people who actually gave it a try.
Give it a try, and don't update if you don't like it.
What's the point of having a fight about the customer service of a software that you didn't try?

Kees49 · Post by **Kees49** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 10:19 am

I tried v II and I didn't like it at all. Version I sounds more 3D and have a very nice, authentic whine in the sound, which I both don't hear back in v II. I don't understand how this is possible...

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 10:24 am

Did you check all the variations of Hammonds in the Organ section? I really doubt you did.

jbraner · Post by **jbraner** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 10:49 am

so guess what..he's not going to get my future business..

How many more times do you need to tell us? We get it - you won't be buying VB3 II.
Why don't you move on?

Anybody want to talk about VB3 II, and how it compares to v1?

WOK · Post by **WOK** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:32 pm

pyer wrote:wow, 10 pages, and maybe 3 posts about the sound, from people who actually gave it a try.

Unfortunately, my music PC is (and will stay) 32 bit (for all the 32 bit plugins I have and love).
I would need the VB3 for live situations, but there I use an old (and rock-stable) version of EnergyXT modular (32 bit obviously).
Too sad, it's 64bit only. I know the problems of converting a 32b source to 64b, but is it impossible to compile this as a 32bit plugin?

rasmusklump · Post by **rasmusklump** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:42 pm

Now it's getting bizarre...

waiting man · Post by **waiting man** » Fri Jul 06, 2018 5:23 pm

GSI VB3-II