CLAP... thoughts?

[jamcat]

Is it wrong to think any standard that is less of a pita for the developers could also benefit customers of the final product? Dare I say possibly leading to more experimentation of design?

Yes, it is wrong. Because they're not replacing said PITA standards with a less PITA standard. They're just adding yet another standard on top of all the others that they already have to support. If one standard is a 4 on the PITA scale, and you add a new standard that is a 2 on the PITA scale, your net PITA is now 6.

that means a 50% increase in resource allocation, which translates to fewer new plugins, more bugs, and longer wait times between updates for your preferred standard, whatever it may be.

If you'd have read what the actual devs involved wrote, you'd already have understood that CLAP can easily be used as an intermediate format. Only code CLAP, get all other formats for free. This is getting rid of PITA which you as a customer might not see because you get all what you got before + 1 more... ...which then eventually can be reduced one by one to only distribute CLAP at some point when it can be used across DAWs.

That plus I had been reading some posts about Steinberg being a bit slow on the implementation of features in vst3 and announcing dropping support for the vst2 format some devs were still preferring etc
Not having to deal with those hassles on the dev side and how some features in CLAP as well,could ultimately benefit customers of the final products in the end

Dropping support for VST2 is moving closer to MirkoVanHauten's One-Plugin-Format utopia. How does adding a totally new, unfamiliar format in response get us closer to that ideal?

[pdxindy]

If you'd have read what the actual devs involved wrote, you'd already have understood that CLAP can easily be used as an intermediate format.

This person never hears anything and is only trolling... just put them on ignore and move on.

[Boy Wonder]

I don't know what devs pay to Steinberg to license VST 2/3, but since the devs' stuff might be priced lower with CLAP, would they optionally offer more expensive versions that support VST 2/3?

[MirkoVanHauten]

If you'd have read what the actual devs involved wrote, you'd already have understood that CLAP can easily be used as an intermediate format.

This person never hears anything and is only trolling... just put them on ignore and move on.

Yes, I just thought the same, sadly.

[zvenx]

I don't know what devs pay to Steinberg to license VST 2/3, but since the devs' stuff might be priced lower with CLAP, would they optionally offer more expensive versions that support VST 2/3?

There is no licensing fee for vst3.. none.
rsp

[Broken]

This is awesome! Congratulations to all involved.

[mystran]

I don't know what devs pay to Steinberg to license VST 2/3, but since the devs' stuff might be priced lower with CLAP, would they optionally offer more expensive versions that support VST 2/3?

There is no licensing fee for vst3.. none.
rsp

Yes there is: you gotta sell your soul to accept §9.

[jamcat]

If you'd have read what the actual devs involved wrote, you'd already have understood that CLAP can easily be used as an intermediate format.

This person never hears anything and is only trolling... just put them on ignore and move on.

I've read what the devs have said about it. But CLAP as an intermediate format only solves some development/prototyping time. And no such wrapper currently exists to do the work for you.

And it doesn't do anything to mitigate all of the other serious expenses that are incurred by fully supporting yet another platform.

I am raising valid points which contradict the rather laughably polyannaish predictions here. It's you that doesn't want to hear it. Refusing to fall in line or bandwagon doesn't make me a troll. That language is just more politicking from people that can't handle dissenting views.

[Ah_Dziz]

Are Clap plugins designed to use MTS-ESP? Or rather is that something easily added? Seems like with all the individual voice access it's something that could be added almost as a standard. I'm very interested in seeing where this goes. VST 3 probably could have been cool, but it seems that it's way more of a shit show for many developers than it should be.

Does anyone know if there is active development for supporting CLAP in environments like PD, and Supercollider? Vsts are a bit iffy in those environments for me, but I often miss being able to drop in a plugin without a bunch of hassle.

Anyway. I'm interested in CLAP and mostly because developers are interested in it . I've never heard a single developer say "I'm so excited to see what my code can do as a vst3/ AU!". I'm also curious how hard it would be to embed a simple clap host for Bela or RPi. Not being a real coder leaves me not having a clue whether this is something that would be possible (obviously for relatively simple synths and FX), but all the talk of how flexible it is makes me optimistic for some less orthodox uses.

JJ

[muki]

sorry it is just my initials.

rsp

oh...



i see...thx...

[liquidsound]

It’s so entertaining to see denial wrapped in self limiting thought process which eventually and inevitably turns into defeat, acceptance and evangelism.

[dayjob]

Refusing to fall in line or bandwagon doesn't make me a troll. That language is just more politicking from people that can't handle dissenting views.

[someone tries something new in the aim of improving their daily lives as developers and making better products with more functionality for the user base of their products]

"why are they trying something new? don't they know it's a waste of time and even though it will effect me in absolutely no way what so ever i raise a voice of dissent because damn these kids with their chewing gum and ear buds. change is bad and they aim to change things" [shakes fist at clouds]

[pdxindy]

Are Clap plugins designed to use MTS-ESP?

Good question... The u-he synths even before CLAP all work automatically with MTS-EPS (except Zebra).

[jamcat]

Refusing to fall in line or bandwagon doesn't make me a troll. That language is just more politicking from people that can't handle dissenting views.

[someone tries something new in the aim of improving their daily lives as developers and making better products with more functionality for the user base of their products]

"why are they trying something new? don't they know it's a waste of time and even though it will effect me in absolutely no way what so ever i raise a voice of dissent because damn these kids with their chewing gum and ear buds. change is bad and they aim to change things" [shakes fist at clouds]

I'm all for them "trying something new." But there is a real cost for other plugin developers to get onboard with it, and not much benefit. So you shouldn't expect to see much movement from the established major developers on that. Code geeks and indie developers who are looking for any way to distinguish themselves will, sure.

For established developers, this as yet unfulfilled promise of an easy CLAP development platform that will magically port to all other platforms rings a bit hollow, because most developers have already invested heavily in their own platform specific frameworks. They would have to backtrack on all of their existing plugins, at the very least, plus redevelop their frameworks for CLAP. Perhaps that will be easier. But this still sounds much more promising for new developers and small developers than large software companies and established developers with lots of products already.

And the cost of customer support still looms large. If CLAP does prove to be a good development platform with built-in wrapping to other platforms, I'd use that for development but not release the CLAP versions. That would mean less overhead support costs with no lost market share. I'd only release the CLAP versions if there was a major host that didn't support any of the other standards.

[vertibration]

per note expressions......