KVR Audio

pascual · Post by **pascual** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:55 am

Since for ever, I've been ignoring vst3 and sticking with downloading, installing and updating the vst (2?) versions of all my plugins.
Is it time to move on?

Btw. So fantastic to have this community around for all kinds of music tech info. Forever grateful. Over a decade of being a member. Thank you all.
B.

thecontrolcentre · Post by **thecontrolcentre** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 2:05 am

I'm gradually adding vst3 versions of my vst2 plugins, as my DAW & audio editor now support them. It means having two versions of a lot of things installed, but looks like things are heading the way of vst3. I heard you can no longer get a license to produce commercial new vst2 plugins now(?)

BONES · Post by **BONES** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 2:28 am

I only install VST 3 versions if that's the only option. VST2.x gives me far greater compatibility and VST3 offers no advantage so why bother with it?

nix808 · Post by **nix808** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 2:34 am

VST3 seemingly has no disadvantage apart from compatibility,
- I think there is small advantage for a vst3 file not getting flagged by AV protection

it doesn't really matter except for complicating and duplicating installs imo

for me, Robotics DSP has allowed me to start making VST3, so I can think about moving to just the new standard if I want

zoidkirb · Post by **zoidkirb** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 3:20 am

Vst3 has easier side chaining for some daws, and apparently will use less cpu while audio is not flowing thru the vst/vsti. There's a whole big list of improvements but it's up to the developers to actually implement those.

cron · Post by **cron** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:14 am

VST2 here. Keeps my studio smelling fresher as it's been over 10 years since VST3 was dead on arrival.

Vst3 has easier side chaining for some daws

No need to pluralise DAW there. Cubase. Sidechaining with VST3 is easier in Cubase. Why they couldn't make sidechaining hassle-free with VST2 plugins, their own spec, is anyone's guess. Inventing a new standard nobody wanted then pushing its corpse round in a trolley for over a decade is an interesting development roadmap when it comes to implementing hassle-free sidechaining, but I guess it kinda worked.

zoidkirb · Post by **zoidkirb** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:31 am

cron wrote: Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:14 am VST2 here. Keeps my studio smelling fresher as it's been over 10 years since VST3 was dead on arrival.

Vst3 has easier side chaining for some daws
No need to pluralise DAW there. Cubase. Sidechaining with VST3 is easier in Cubase. Why they couldn't make sidechaining hassle-free with VST2 plugins, their own spec, is anyone's guess. Inventing a new standard nobody wanted then pushing its corpse round in a trolley for over a decade is an interesting development roadmap when it comes to implementing hassle-free sidechaining, but I guess it kinda worked.

Thanks for clarifying! I was indeed thinking of Cubase here. I did read a long time ago the list of improvements and nothing leapt out as 'must have' .
Having said that, I always use vst 3 where possible as I can't see a downside. Im already spending time organising my vst's within my daws so it's really no extra work but there's potential benefit there.

Distorted Horizon · Post by **Distorted Horizon** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 6:13 am

Depends.. Softube vst3 works horribly in my system, but vst2 works fine.

So if there's an option and it works, vst3.

imrae · Post by **imrae** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:35 am

From other discussions here, it seems that there are downsides to VST3 but they affect the developers rather than the end users.

How many plugins are out there with capabilities that are only possible in VST3? (Sidechaining doesn't count.)

metaside · Post by **metaside** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:50 am

imrae wrote: Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:35 am From other discussions here, it seems that there are downsides to VST3 but they affect the developers rather than the end users.

Not only that. I keep an extremely ordered collection of VST plugins with prefixes and subfolders, so the thought of only relying on the metadata provided by devs for sorting is a nightmare and an absolute no-go for me personally.

BlackWinny · Post by **BlackWinny** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 7:57 pm

metaside wrote: Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:50 am
imrae wrote: Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:35 am From other discussions here, it seems that there are downsides to VST3 but they affect the developers rather than the end users.
Not only that. I keep an extremely ordered collection of VST plugins with prefixes and subfolders, so the thought of only relying on the metadata provided by devs for sorting is a nightmare and an absolute no-go for me personally.

Same main reason for me, yes.

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:13 pm

metaside wrote: Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:50 am
imrae wrote: Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:35 am From other discussions here, it seems that there are downsides to VST3 but they affect the developers rather than the end users.
Not only that. I keep an extremely ordered collection of VST plugins with prefixes and subfolders, so the thought of only relying on the metadata provided by devs for sorting is a nightmare and an absolute no-go for me personally.

Some plugin installers let you choose the VST3 path.

Just wondering, but... why is it to simportant for you? Most DAW's use their own sorting anyway, so, it doesn't even matter how it looks inside your VST folder. I mean, not that i wouldn't keep my own scheme for VST2's, with folder sorted by manufacturers, but... it's only because i sometimes look for some files in there. It won't matter to my DAW at all.

nix808 · Post by **nix808** » Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:35 pm

from trying the VST3 export in Flowstone,
our metadata is a category, which can be as simple as 'synth' or 'effect'
here is the data that Flowstone gives dialogs for->

VST3 metadata.png

Also the VST3 files can be moved as simply as .dll s,
if they can find their samples/paths etc.
An installer is not required

metaside · Post by **metaside** » Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:58 am

chk071 wrote: Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:13 pm Just wondering, but... why is it to simportant for you? Most DAW's use their own sorting anyway, so, it doesn't even matter how it looks inside your VST folder. I mean, not that i wouldn't keep my own scheme for VST2's, with folder sorted by manufacturers, but... it's only because i sometimes look for some files in there. It won't matter to my DAW at all.

I use multiple DAWs. All of these can display the folder structure and the prefixes for all VST 2 plugins. I don't use dev folders, but instead differentiate by plugin-types. This guarantees the fastest possible workflow for me when selecting or looking for plugins.

enroe · Post by **enroe** » Fri Dec 06, 2019 7:52 am

metaside wrote: Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:50 am
imrae wrote: Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:35 am From other discussions here, it seems that there are downsides to VST3 but they affect the developers rather than the end users.
Not only that. I keep an extremely ordered collection of VST plugins with prefixes and subfolders, so the thought of only relying on the metadata provided by devs for sorting is a nightmare and an absolute no-go for me personally.

Same here.

Yes, and for different DAWs you have the identical vst-trees. You can build up
you own categories easily. And they are identic for ALL DAWs!

According to the topic: I use VST2 and VST3 in peaceful coexistence,
in the same category-tree. Works wonderful!

time for vst3?