Well this is a kick in the nuts: VST2 plug-ins

DSP, Plug-in and Host development discussion.
User avatar
KVRist
427 posts since 30 May, 2007

Post Thu Apr 22, 2021 10:20 pm

syntonica wrote:
Thu Apr 22, 2021 8:27 pm
There was a project where the programmer who had never even seen the VST headers black boxed a VST and recreated the whole shebang. However, I can no longer find it, nor did I download a copy of it, as far as I can see.
Pity as it would have been an excellent starting point. I can only guess that they received a takedown notice and didn't feel like fighting it.
any of these?

fst / fts
https://git.iem.at/zmoelnig/FST
https://github.com/pierreguillot/FTS

vestige
https://github.com/osxmidi/LinVst/blob/master/vestige.h
https://github.com/rncbc/qtractor/blob/ ... /vestige.h
https://github.com/x42/lv2vst/blob/mast ... /vestige.h

User avatar
KVRAF
5199 posts since 18 Jul, 2002

Post Thu Apr 22, 2021 10:35 pm

Their license isn't precisely promising for closed source.
There are no plans to release FST under a more permissive license. If you want to build closed-source plugins (or plugin hosts), you have to use the official Steinberg VST2 SDK, and comply with their licensing terms.
Synthesizers • Bliss sampler • Effects • Soundware
https://www.discodsp.com/

User avatar
Urs
u-he
25623 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 12:07 am

I have mentally abandoned the idea to live with an API that is compatible to VST2.

I think the best way forward is to create a completely independent standard that is controlled like industry standards commonly are and which allows for a very easy transition from VST2. And for which anyone who's keeping there original VST 2.x perpetual license can create a NewFormat-to-VST2 adapter, which anyone who does not have that perpetual license can redistribute (free or otherwise).

User avatar
KVRist
222 posts since 24 Aug, 2014 from Moscow

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 12:16 am

If "VST2 compatible" means a functional copy of VST2 API in another header file, won't it still be an IP of Steinberg or something Steinberg potentially may claim rights to?

User avatar
KVRAF
3922 posts since 8 Mar, 2004 from Berlin, Germany

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 12:36 am

Urs wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 12:07 am
I think the best way forward is to create a completely independent standard that is controlled like industry standards commonly are ...
are you talking about forming something like the midi association but for audio plugins?

https://www.midi.org/about

the parallels are indeed obvious:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIDI#History
Wikipedia wrote:In the early 1980s, there was no standardized means of synchronizing electronic musical instruments manufactured by different companies.[6] Manufacturers had their own proprietary standards to synchronize instruments, such as CV/gate and Digital Control Bus (DCB).[7] Roland founder Ikutaro Kakehashi felt the lack of standardization was limiting the growth of the electronic music industry.
...with the important difference, that we actually have a de-facto standard - but one that is controlled by a single company that is determined to kill it

User avatar
Urs
u-he
25623 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 1:12 am

Yes

User avatar
KVRAF
3922 posts since 8 Mar, 2004 from Berlin, Germany

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 1:19 am

that would indeed be a great step forward! now we just need to create the momentum for this among the relevant people!

User avatar
Urs
u-he
25623 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 1:23 am

Vokbuz wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 12:16 am
If "VST2 compatible" means a functional copy of VST2 API in another header file, won't it still be an IP of Steinberg or something Steinberg potentially may claim rights to?
Well, there's a very simple problem: Even if you use none of their SDK whatsoever, you'd still call it "VST" or whatever brand names they own on it. On Mac, a plug-in even uses .vstplugin as the filename suffix. The brand name is cemented into it, and the only way to shield your property from their control is to simply not do VST, but instead have an as simple format and a body (non-corporate) that offers compatibility for free/donation/cheap.

User avatar
KVRAF
2670 posts since 15 Oct, 2017 from U.S.

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 2:49 am

With all the determination to kill it they still offer VST2 versions of their own instruments on their site. Just observing.

User avatar
KVRian
776 posts since 25 Sep, 2014 from Specific Northwest

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 9:00 am

tor.helge.skei wrote:
Thu Apr 22, 2021 10:20 pm
syntonica wrote:
Thu Apr 22, 2021 8:27 pm
There was a project where the programmer who had never even seen the VST headers black boxed a VST and recreated the whole shebang. However, I can no longer find it, nor did I download a copy of it, as far as I can see.
Pity as it would have been an excellent starting point. I can only guess that they received a takedown notice and didn't feel like fighting it.
any of these?

fst / fts
https://git.iem.at/zmoelnig/FST
https://github.com/pierreguillot/FTS

vestige
https://github.com/osxmidi/LinVst/blob/master/vestige.h
https://github.com/rncbc/qtractor/blob/ ... /vestige.h
https://github.com/x42/lv2vst/blob/mast ... /vestige.h
Sadly, no. The one I saw was complete and actually, somewhat elegant in its own way.

User avatar
KVRian
881 posts since 31 Dec, 2008

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 9:45 am

Urs wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 1:23 am
Vokbuz wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 12:16 am
If "VST2 compatible" means a functional copy of VST2 API in another header file, won't it still be an IP of Steinberg or something Steinberg potentially may claim rights to?
Well, there's a very simple problem: Even if you use none of their SDK whatsoever, you'd still call it "VST" or whatever brand names they own on it. On Mac, a plug-in even uses .vstplugin as the filename suffix. The brand name is cemented into it, and the only way to shield your property from their control is to simply not do VST, but instead have an as simple format and a body (non-corporate) that offers compatibility for free/donation/cheap.
I'm under the impression that trademarks can't be infringed by something like a file name. It has to be a product name or company name. I could be wrong.

Regardless, the user could take control of naming the file after the installer, or at the end of it. Then it wouldn't be the devs responsibility. It would be a user choice, no ? (Edit: a bit silly now that I think of it :) )
Last edited by S0lo on Fri Apr 23, 2021 10:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Urs
u-he
25623 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 10:19 am

It's not elegant, but it's possible. The filename was just an example though. I don't see much chance for an industry wide culture of wink-wink now change the filename wink-wink ;)

After much thought I think putting VST2 into the public domain is the best path for Steinberg, but adopting a really good standard that's not over engineered and free of baggage is the best path forward for all of us.

User avatar
KVRian
776 posts since 25 Sep, 2014 from Specific Northwest

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 10:28 am

One standard to rule them all, and in KVR bind them!

Sounds good, actually. Probably need to bake in a gatekeeper method so the Apples and the Avids of the world can continue to control their own little fiefdoms with iron fists. But imagine getting the blessing from them and just flipping a bit to be compatible rather than rewriting/rearranging all your code with additional testing... We all might get some decent plugins released! :P

User avatar
KVRAF
3922 posts since 8 Mar, 2004 from Berlin, Germany

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 10:51 am

Urs wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 10:19 am
The filename was just an example though. I don't see much chance for an industry wide culture of wink-wink now change the filename wink-wink
why would the user have to change filenames? host vendors could just recognize the new file extension*. a one line code change. on windows, where vst-plugins are just plain .dll files with the standard extension, it's not even an issue

(*) how about .grmpf - for "great music plugin format" - and also to express my discontent about the situation :hihi:

KVRist
184 posts since 13 Oct, 2012

Post Fri Apr 23, 2021 11:36 am

Urs wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 10:19 am
After much thought I think putting VST2 into the public domain is the best path for Steinberg, but adopting a really good standard that's not over engineered and free of baggage is the best path forward for all of us.
I don't think Steinberg is unhappy with their chosen path. Otherwise it would be quite simple for them to change it.

And while the VST license stuff regularily comes up at kvr this probably isn't representative for a large number of developers. To put it bluntly, why should Steinberg care about a few more or less small developers?

As for the "community plugin format" which also appears here from time to time there is probably the same problem as mentioned in the last paragraph: If a new format could really be established there were also enough developers included to allow negotiating about Steinberg's VST license terms in the first place.

Don't get me wrong. I'd also prefere if the VST licenses were more permissive but the VST related threads here are all alike with high emotions, lots of ideas and not much outcome.

Return to “DSP and Plug-in Development”