Bye bye VST2

[farlukar]

That tells me nothing about the advantages. Does VST 3 work better? Does it make my plugins more stable? Does it reduce memory usage? I mean come on man, give me an ADVANTAGE.

You've given me nothing.

It's not my job to convince you of the future, sorry.

"3 > 2, sheesh"

[RSL369]

I leave this endless discussion...

Please do, by all means.

[Stefken]

Give me something tangible like that in regard to VST 3 vs VST 2.

Industry standard support and maintenance is pretty much the core of any software's longevity and survival.

Still not hearing anything why vst3 should replace vst2 as a standard. You're just telling the benefits of any standard. And what is the maintenance benefit of a shithole implementation?

[Grizzellda]

What if a new standard emerged, that was easily accessible to developers and simply just worked.

If a few bigger type companies, and a few smaller type companies, decide to push in that direction, and make practical products available, it could work.

They would, of course, have to analyze why Direct X did not last,

and learn from that...

[dangayle]

I don't really care about independent developers' personal opinions on the industry standard. I use products made by companies that are on the leading edge of innovation.

I drive a modern car too, I'm not into classics, because they break down too much.

Ha. You think the real innovation is coming from the big boys? This is such a slap in the face to guys like Cytomic, U-he, DMG Audio, etc., who consistently put out product after product that push the edges of innovation like non other.

Besides, we only have these standards BECAUSE of the independent devs. Steinberg and Apple and Ableton and Bitwig can’t write all the plugins, neither do we want them to. Otherwise, why release a standard at all? Just keep it in-house.

[Reefius]

Looks like we've got some smartass here who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. So far I have seen no valid argument from him about the advantages of VST3 over VST2.

Cluelessly saying 'VST3 is the future' does not qualify as a valid argument. I could teach a parrot that sentence and he would also have no clue what it means.

[farlukar]

Looks like we've got some smartass here who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

Smacks of new trolling account for previously-banned user

[Grizzellda]

Besides, we only have these standards BECAUSE of the independent devs. Steinberg and Apple and Ableton and Bitwig can’t write all the plugins, neither do we want them to. Otherwise, why release a standard at all?

I guess because "variety is the spice of life"

Man, I think Linux will come into this discussion,because once those Linux obstacles are confronted, (*ease of use*, *geek factor*, simple stuff like that ) heh heh,

Lots of options from there on in! Well, talk about plug-in standards...they would be available, right?

LADSPA???

no brainer, baby.

[chk071]

This discussion has it all... personal low blows, shill accusations, and, last but not least, call for Linux support, for those 1 % of audio software users, which always feel neglected.

Seriously though, i don't think this is going anywhere. Even with the usual suspect developers engaging also, to claim that they have a much better idea for the new audio plugin standard, which only isn't implemented, because, yo, then we would have even another standard. In the meantime, the world keeps turning, devs will support VST2, and even some will support VST3. It's like those 32-bit fanatics, which rather go down fighting, than trying to familiarize with a new standard. Especially when it's coming from teh evil quasi industry standard.

[Stefken]

It's like those 32-bit fanatics, which rather go down fighting, than trying to familiarize with a new standard. Especially when it's coming from teh evil quasi industry standard.

It may look like it but it's not. There is a good reason to go 64 bit and to stay on vst2. 3 is not always better than 2.

Also, i read a pretty good consensus on the last posts so i guess we are getting somewhere... for what it's worth.

[chk071]

It's like those 32-bit fanatics, which rather go down fighting, than trying to familiarize with a new standard. Especially when it's coming from teh evil quasi industry standard.

It may look like it but it's not. There is a good reason to go 64 bit and to stay on vst2. 3 is not always better than 2.

No. And i can understand some devs objection towards VST3, when it's all more complicated, and there's even things which are not possible, which were possible with VST2. Saying that there's nothing in it which is an improvement is surely wrong though. It's just that Cubase is one of the few (or only?) host which supports the improvements.

[wagtunes]

Give me something tangible like that in regard to VST 3 vs VST 2.

Industry standard support and maintenance is pretty much the core of any software's longevity and survival.

Are you for real? I see you just opened this account yesterday so God only knows who you were in a previously incarnation to come here with this mountain of manure. Boggles my mind how somebody can say absolutely NOTHING in 16 words.

Can somebody, ANYBODY, tell me how VST 3 is better than VST 2?

I'm still waiting for an answer that doesn't sound like an advertisement for some drug where they only tell you the side effects but don't tell you what the damn drug even does.

Sheesh.

[Robert Randolph]

Give me something tangible like that in regard to VST 3 vs VST 2.

Industry standard support and maintenance is pretty much the core of any software's longevity and survival.

Are you for real? I see you just opened this account yesterday so God only knows who you were in a previously incarnation to come here with this mountain of manure. Boggles my mind how somebody can say absolutely NOTHING in 16 words.

Can somebody, ANYBODY, tell me how VST 3 is better than VST 2?

I'm still waiting for an answer that doesn't sound like an advertisement for some drug where they only tell you the side effects but don't tell you what the damn drug even does.

Sheesh.

VST3 allows

• sample accurate automation.
• dynamic I/O creation for plugins.
• better parameter management.
• better preset management.
• audio in for VSTis.
• dynamic processing (not using CPU when there's no signal).

Those are the most notable benefits.

I can go more in depth on most of those if needed.

[EvilDragon]

Many VST3s don't even have sample accurate automation implemented, though (at least AFAIK)... And audio in for VSTis was possible with VST2 (but obviously not supported in Cubase because Steinberg).

Better parameter and preset management - only if host implements it?

[noiseboyuk]

Hey, I can give one solid real-world example of VST3 being better than VST2. In VE Pro, the VST3 version has 8x 16 channels bandwidth, while the VST2 version has only 1x 16. Makes a huge difference for those who use it in templates.

But, er, that's all I got. Oh wait... CCs on a per-note basis was meant to hearld a new era of control for VST3, but I don't think anyone supports it other than Steinberg themselves, and I've never heard of anyone actually using it.

I'm aware u-he plugs don't work well in the VST 3 incarnation for one thing. Having read all (well, nearly all) the posts here, I think it's pretty tenuous to use the 32/64 bit as a direct analogy. Clearly this is a different case. 64 bit had many tangible advantages, 32 bit had none, save keeping old stuff working. There are, seemingly, a good deal of advantages of VST2 over VST3, and VST3 support is still pretty patchy and doesn't work as well in some cases. This does feel like a forced manoeuvre.