Bye bye VST2

[jamcat]

It took Steinberg dropping DX support from Cubase 4 to finally force the industry to prioritize VST2. It was much more sudden than the slow decades-long weening of VST2. But Steinberg has been following the same successful playbook.

The reason why some developers had "resisted" VST3 is pretty simple: every DAW already supported VST2, but not all DAWs supported VST3. So why invest in VST3 development if it's not going to expand your market? They still had to support VST2 because of DAWs like Ableton Live that didn't support VST3.

Now that has changed. Though it sounds like Ableton and a few others perhaps have implemented VST3 poorly. But people should place that blame where it belongs.

I dropped VST2 plugins a very long time ago, and I have experienced very few issues with VST3 plugins over the years, and a lot of benefits.

But, when I chose Studio One as my new DAW back in 2010 or so, 64-bit and solid VST3 support were two of my primary criteria. That was a long time ago, but properly supporting VST3 was already on my radar, because I knew that sooner or later that was going to be an issue, and Studio One has always been super solid with VST3. If you didn't do your homework or take that into consideration when choosing your DAW, then you really have no one else to blame if you have VST3 woes today.

Most of the plugins I've used have also been VST3 since then, or soon after. As I said, probably about 90% of them. Waves, for example, has supported VST3 since 2009 (though I ditched Waves for good after the Great Betrayal.) I'm not positive on the dates for others like Eventide and IK and Arturia, but they've been VST3 for so long, I can't remember playing any kind of waiting game with any of them.

[gaf_thit]

The VST2 to CLAP wrapper, is it possible to save the result as CLAP-only and thus avoid the clauses? Or does it retain VST2 data?
Is there any easy conversion method available?
I'm pretty ignorant about formats and SDK etc, but there are so many legacy gems that I would like to see saved in a new format.

[BONES]

Right now VST2 for us end users is just fine, at some point soon VST3 is going to be the only way you get any updates to any of your plugins, DAW, OS etc.

Given that I wouldn't use any host or plugin that didn't work to my satisfaction already, why would I care about upgrades?

Not every DAW is doing fine with VST3, since Steinberg do not care how well it performs for hosts, i.e. the plugins you use now that are stable with VST2 might not be stable with VST3, since that's not a rare thing.

That is precisely why I have no interest in VST3. Why would I move to a less reliable platform?

Because you don't want a plug-in standard to be own by a company.

Why not? It's done us all very well for the last 20-odd years.

It should be open-source, for practical reasons like what is happening now...

What's happening now is that NOVAkILL's latest album and single are both in the charts for the 4th consecutive week and we are rehearsing for a residency that we are trying to make happen. All the same kind of stuff that was happening 5, 10 or 20 years ago. All of that has been enabled largely by the VST plugin standard.

And also why do you want to pay Steinberg each time you are buying a new plug-in ?

Nobody is paying Steinberg for plugins. There is no cost involved in downloading or using the VST SDK, you just have to agree to abide by the terms of the license, like any other piece of software. I've released dozens of plugins and never had to pay Steinberg a penny.

What makes me laugh is that you don't ask any of these questions when Apple decides it's sick of supporting old standards and f**k users and developers around but when Steinberg tries to do something similar that really only affects developers, you're up in arms about it.

[dellboy]

Right now VST2 for us end users is just fine, at some point soon VST3 is going to be the only way you get any updates to any of your plugins, DAW, OS etc.

Given that I wouldn't use any host or plugin that didn't work to my satisfaction already, why would I care about upgrades?

Its not so much about upgrades,but more about being able to continue using what you already have. My main DAW is Studio One, and assuming that the information is correct, Presonus will be forced to stop using VST2's in future DAW updates. So if I want to continue using VST2's (and I do), I will have no other option but to find a DAW that supports CLAP to continue using them.

[bk]

I've read this whole thread, but I'm feeling particularly dense today.
Maybe one too many green beers last night
1: Are DAW devs going to be forced to stop allowing VST2 to be hosted within the DAW?
2: What does the migration process from VST2 to VST3 actually accomplish?

[zvenx]

I can't answer the first, but can attempt the second.
It allows you to open older projects that were created with vst2 plugins that may no longer be available as vst2 or may be incompatible with your current OS or you no longer have installed.

How I primarily use it currently mostly:
My Windows 10 PC I think has Kontakt 5 and later, my macbook pro apple silicon has kontakt (6) and later, but this allows me to open (as I do often for work) projects created using Kontakt 4 or 3.5 etc.

But in the long run when/if SB prohibits the distribution of vst2's and plugins only come as vst3 (well the only one relevant for my DAW of choice Cubendo), i can still open older projects that I created years ago using the vst2 versions of the plugin. Perfect example is u-he which I believe Urs has said he will move to a vst3 only (well au, aax, and of course clap too) in his installers... it will allow me to open my older projects that used u-he synths (of which there are tons of such projects).
rsp

[gaggle of hermits]

I've read this whole thread, but I'm feeling particularly dense today.
Maybe one too many green beers last night
1: Are DAW devs going to be forced to stop allowing VST2 to be hosted within the DAW?
2: What does the migration process from VST2 to VST3 actually accomplish?

on point 1: that seems to be the implication of the contract changes and Steinberg's other moves. however, it's not exactly explicitly stated but the apparent, combined effect of older and the latest agreements. and it's not clear steinberg will actually enforce the situation. my belief is that steinberg is likely to find itself in legal hot water if it suspends a vst3 agreement for any competing host that continues to offer vst2 hosting. but it is a possibility.

the trouble for any dev is they're forced to ask themselves: "do I feel lucky?"

those with deeper pockets can probably afford to call Steinberg's bluff until enough of the user base has migrated either to vst3, clap or a mixture of both.

imo, in pursuing these shenanigans I think steinberg has shot itself in the foot more than its done lasting damage to its competition. all the company really had to do was let vst2 age out naturally.

[FrettedSynth]

IMHO, Like most everything for the last 40 years or so! make VST2 a disposable good.
3 is bigger than 2 must be better. Has worked well in most industries.

[bk]

Thanks zvenx and gaggle of hermits!

[donkey tugger]

IMHO, Like most everything for the last 40 years or so! make VST2 a disposable good.
3 is bigger than 2 must be better. Has worked well in most industries.

[machinesworking]

Right now VST2 for us end users is just fine, at some point soon VST3 is going to be the only way you get any updates to any of your plugins, DAW, OS etc.

Given that I wouldn't use any host or plugin that didn't work to my satisfaction already, why would I care about upgrades?

Not every DAW is doing fine with VST3, since Steinberg do not care how well it performs for hosts, i.e. the plugins you use now that are stable with VST2 might not be stable with VST3, since that's not a rare thing.

That is precisely why I have no interest in VST3. Why would I move to a less reliable platform?

This isn't about "right now" it's about when BA-1 gets updated with features you want that are only available in VST 3. I'm not sure why you're missing that point? Same thing applies to Studio One, if the next version has piano roll features that you loved in Orion you will want to move to that version.

I mean you're really just begging the question here, you've upgraded your laptop at least three times in the last ten years, and flatly moved to Studio One from Orion, if you apply the logic you're applying to this concern for VST3 being pushed on us, you would have never changed platforms or hardware.

[dionenoid]

1: Are DAW devs going to be forced to stop allowing VST2 to be hosted within the DAW?

1: No. I'll quote one of the Steinberg VST3 developers on this :

§9.7 does not apply to Host which already supports VST2, in this case your last signed VST2 license agreement is still valid.

[gaggle of hermits]

1: Are DAW devs going to be forced to stop allowing VST2 to be hosted within the DAW?

1: No. I'll quote one of the Steinberg VST3 developers on this :

§9.7 does not apply to Host which already supports VST2, in this case your last signed VST2 license agreement is still valid.

it's often helpful to cite sources.

april 2021: https://forums.steinberg.net/t/vst-3-sd ... /201638/13. that was then and referred to an older contract. the new contract revokes *all* previous agreements. I think urs already referred to this response upthread - further information on the "transition period" never arrived iirc. also, though the link to it is dead, the language in clause 9.7 apparently changed only a week after that post.

now, the lawyers might have cocked it all up and maybe this host exception still applies but if it does, steinberg doesn't appear to have told anyone outside the building about it.

[Urs]

Well, if that was an intended outcome, they better change the agreement.

[No_Use]

the new contract revokes *all* previous agreements.

Where exactly is this in the current VST3 license agreement?

(haven't found it at first glance, but maybe I overlooked it)