vLINN - Linn LM-1 Drum Machine Emulation - Any Users?

[AstralExistence]

im sorry but this is not guaranteed. anything can happen. you need to advertise these as x32 otherwise your being sneaky and misleading. you know exactly what your doing.

You mean put it at the top of the page:


VLINN DRUM VSTi 1.0
WINDOWS 32BIT

PACK INCLUDED
- VST PLUGIN 32BIT
- STANDALONE 32BIT
- USER MANUAL

http://www.alyjameslab.com/alyjameslabvlinn.html

absolutely. the developer knows well that if he did this, (he should also specify made with synthedit) he would would have very few sales. but in the end, the customer is the one getting screwed. its not the customers responsibility to 'save' his sales by being uninformed. essentially the developer is choosing to fool his customers and increase his sales at the cost of deception. this is not how you build a business. well, actually this is exactly how you build a business but its not how you create happy customers and create a 'honest' business.

:edit: i don't recall this info being here last time i checked. its been changed.

[breakmixer]

I have just copy/pated this from around the buy it now button: (GET IT) It seems quite clear to me to see this before pressing that button..

VLINN DRUM VSTi 1.0
WINDOWS 32BIT

LINNDRUM LM-1 --- A legend never dies!
ADD ON
- EXTERNAL EPROM LOADING
- EPROM MANAGER
TESTED ON
- CUBASE
- ABLETON
- FL STUDIO
- RENOISE
- NI MASCHINE
PACK INCLUDED
- VST PLUGIN 32BIT
- STANDALONE 32BIT
- USER MANUAL
VLINN DRUM VSTi 1.0

[AstralExistence]

I have just copy/pated this from around the buy it now button: (GET IT) It seems quite clear to me to see this before pressing that button..

VLINN DRUM VSTi 1.0
WINDOWS 32BIT

LINNDRUM LM-1 --- A legend never dies!
ADD ON
- EXTERNAL EPROM LOADING
- EPROM MANAGER
TESTED ON
- CUBASE
- ABLETON
- FL STUDIO
- RENOISE
- NI MASCHINE
PACK INCLUDED
- VST PLUGIN 32BIT
- STANDALONE 32BIT
- USER MANUAL
VLINN DRUM VSTi 1.0

well, x32 or not it does look like an awesome plugin.

[bftucker]

well, x32 or not it does look like an awesome plugin.

Yes...it is.

[breakmixer]

I've bought it but not installed it yet,

tommorow!

[VariKusBrainZ]

Runs fine for me in Sonar X3 64bit ya pussies

[Aly James]

well, x32 or not it does look like an awesome plugin.

It is
But THIS >> "essentially the developer is choosing to fool his customers and increase his sales at the cost of deception."
IS NOT.
It is a 32Bit VST for now but Synthedit or not, I suggest you to learn a bit more on the platform then what you heard about it...
This is custom code and it already compile on x64 it is a question of time to make a native version, synthedit is already beta testing OSX btw...
Still I have plenty of choice for frameworks, this is just what suit me well for now as I developed these tools for my personal use first.
(I am running 32bit DAWS and don't have any Mac)
IF it was a greedy thing I will not sale a VST at 10 or 15€
I have a lot of users who runs my plugins on x64 system with JBridge or native bridge, this is a fact, still this is clearly presented as a 32bit plugin so who is fooling who?
I do all these things by myself, mostly a truly passionate work with affordable products, something I could afford myself and a way of sharing music and knowledge.
I respond to each and every Email I receive and even maintain custom build for every user so things can be customized...
So well this is a fantastic journey, awesome feedback and I am learning new things everyday.
If I say it can run Bridged on a x64 system this is simply to let people know that it can!
Last but not least if for any reason in the world a VST would be completely unusable I do complete refund of the donation.

These things are all about fun ! there is no black suit corporate things behind this and If I have that user base it is all because people are happy, simple as that.
Request for OSX are huge this is why I have planned that for next year, time for me to adapt my tools

[Numanoid]

But THIS >> "essentially the developer is choosing to fool his customers and increase his sales at the cost of deception."
IS NOT.
It is a 32Bit VST for now but Synthedit or not, I suggest you to learn a bit more on the platform then what you heard about it...

+1 SynthEdit get far too much flak, it is a worthwhile platform, many of the plugs I like the most are made with SynthEdit

[Numanoid]

its like me selling my car as a indie 500 racecar when i know that i may not be able to afford the engine.

That's a very far fetched analogy

The main difference between 32 and 64 bit plugs, is that 32 bit plugs only can access 4GB RAM, while 64 bit plugs can access all you got on your computer and then some.

For the very big sample libraries, and plugs like Omnisphere 64 bit is a must, but do most other plugs really need to have access to over 4GB RAM?

My experience is no they don't.

[BlackWinny]

But THIS >> "essentially the developer is choosing to fool his customers and increase his sales at the cost of deception."
IS NOT.
It is a 32Bit VST for now but Synthedit or not, I suggest you to learn a bit more on the platform then what you heard about it...

+1 SynthEdit get far too much flak, it is a worthwhile platform, many of the plugs I like the most are made with SynthEdit

The same.

• Alpha-Ray ? SynthEdit
• Arppe2600va ? SynthEdit
• Dionysos EX ? SynthEdit
• Drumatic 3 ? SynthEdit
• FMMF ? SynthEdit
• Hahaha CS33 ? SynthEdit
• Horus ? SynthEdit
• Karnage ? SynthEdit
• Kx-Polym-CSE ? SynthEdit
• KX-Synth-X16 ? SynthEdit
• M-theory ? SynthEdit
• ME80 ? SynthEdit
• Memorymoon ? SynthEdit
• Messiah ? SynthEdit
• MinimogueVA ? SynthEdit
• Night Flight ? SynthEdit
• Rez ? SynthEdit
• String Synthesizer ? SynthEdit
• String Theory ? SynthEdit
• Superwave P8 ? SynthEdit
• Texture ? SynthEdit
• Trans Computer Maschine ? SynthEdit

And so many more...!

All these synths that I've listed above are among the most popular and the most appreciated of all times !

It's not SynthEdit which makes bad synths... it's bad developers! They would have C++ in their hands, their synths would be as bad!

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

The main difference between 32 and 64 bit plugs, is that 32 bit plugs only can access 4GB RAM, while 64 bit plugs can access all you got on your computer and then some.

For the very big sample libraries, and plugs like Omnisphere 64 bit is a must, but do most other plugs really need to have access to over 4GB RAM?

My experience is no they don't.

For some, myself included, it's a question of not wanting to run bridged plugins due to the overhead and possibility for incompatibility/stability issues. The audio plugin market is overwhelmingly 64-bit at this point, so it's disappointing to see commercial development still taking place exclusively in 32-bit, thus requiring a bridge in the first place.

I can understand that SynthEdit makes it easy to compile plugins from a development perspective, but as a user/customer, the limitations make it a huge negative. If the developer is using custom modules/code, then it's even more puzzling, as I can't help but wonder "if you can do all that, can't you just go to the next logical place and compile a version without SE?" I'm not a developer though. I'm sure that's easier said than done, or else more people would do it.

Anyway, the only reason I even started this thread was because this seems like a cool plugin, and the interest in a native x64 version shown here is just further proof of this plugin's appeal. People wouldn't be asking if they didn't want it.

I hope the developer can ditch SE and create a native version. If so, I'm all in, even if the cost had to double or triple to make it worthwhile. I wouldn't mind paying extra (it's incredibly inexpensive already) to get a native version.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

It's not SynthEdit which makes bad synths... it's bad developers! They would have C++ in their hands, their synths would be as bad!

I'm not sure I understand this last point. Are you implying that native (non-SE) versions of those same synths would somehow be worse? Or are you saying there would be no difference between native and SE? I assure you, I would not have avoided buying those synths if they were not SE plugins. A lot of others feel the same. So it's great that the developers can make cool synths, but them being developed in Synth Edit means some people will never buy them, so how is that better?

Cons to SynthEdit:
No 64-bit Windows version
No OSX versions
No AU
No AAX
Requires bridge to run in 64-bit Windows hosts

Pros to SynthEdit:
Easier for the developer to create?
Allows for standalone versions

As a user, the pros do not outweigh the cons. I want to know that if I ever decide to move to Mac, that I can take my commercial plugins with me. Or not have to go through the additional hoop of bridging my plugins to get them to work in my host.

[BlackWinny]

its like me selling my car as a indie 500 racecar when i know that i may not be able to afford the engine.

That's a very far fetched analogy

The main difference between 32 and 64 bit plugs, is that 32 bit plugs only can access 4GB RAM, while 64 bit plugs can access all you got on your computer and then some.

For the very big sample libraries, and plugs like Omnisphere 64 bit is a must, but do most other plugs really need to have access to over 4GB RAM?

My experience is no they don't.

In fact the only real reason to want exclusively 64-bit plug-ins is the use of the sample based instruments having huge size sample banks. It is the one and lonely reason. They have their reason, and Numanoid and me we respect it and we respect them. It is called tolerance and peaceful way of life.

Now many physically or electronically modelled synthesis based instruments bring the proof that the quality of this synthesis is far more superior to all the sample banks of the world. There is currently a superb discussion about that in a thread of Pianoteq where many people have understood at what point they are screwed by the sample based synthesis instruments having many Gigabytes size and which are beaten hollow by physically or electronically modelling synths like the simple 40 Megabytes of Pianoteq.

And yet... I'm although one of the first supporters of Sampletank 3 for example. Why? Simply because I still wait for modelling synthesis creations for a crowd of instruments that for the moment ST includes as it can simply by samples (even it is just by samples, at least they are good samples for lack of what I prefer) and in the meanwhile I really like the quality of Sampletank. But as soon as I can replace one of its sampled instruments by a modelled instrument... I do (and I keep on using the others). First because the quality is hugely superior but also because the load in memory is hugely inferior.

As long as I use an instrument, whatever it is, I find my pleasure as well as the developer of this instrument (this or that other one) finds his interest in my use, and it is normal because it is his breadwinner. And if I don't like something, I simply pass my way. Period. But as we say in France I don't spit on the fruit that a merchant suggests me to buy because I don't like his fruits. I pass my way, leaving his fruits to others and I see what suggests another merchant. That's all.

If SynthEdit can't do this or that, nobody is in right to spit on SynthEdit nor on the developer of the instrument. Those who absolutely want this or that which can't be done by SynthEdit, they have hundreds of other instruments which can fit their demand. For example I know that our friend murnau selects his instruments with this criteria which is important for him: 64-bit or nothing. If not 64-bit he passes his way (or even he also often stays to discuss with a very nice humour wihout passing his time to complain). And it is that which is the best behavior and the most tolerant to the variety of people.

[BlackWinny]

It's not SynthEdit which makes bad synths... it's bad developers! They would have C++ in their hands, their synths would be as bad!

I'm not sure I understand this last point. Are you implying that native (non-SE) versions of those same synths would somehow be worse? Or are you saying there would be no difference between native and SE? I assure you, I would not have avoided buying those synths if they were not SE plugins. A lot of others feel the same. So it's great that the developers can make cool synths, but them being developed in Synth Edit means some people will never buy them, so how is that better?

Cons to SynthEdit:
No 64-bit Windows version
No OSX versions
No AU
No AAX
Requires bridge to run in 64-bit Windows hosts

Pros to SynthEdit:
Easier for the developer to create?
Allows for standalone versions

As a user, the pros do not outweigh the cons. I want to know that if I ever decide to move to Mac, that I can take my commercial plugins with me. Or not have to go through the additional hoop of bridging my plugins to get them to work in my host.

What I say is that SynthEdit makes excellent synths if it is in hands of excellent developers. That's all.

And Aly is one of them ! We can see it by this excellent proof!

All the synths I have cited are among the best synths ever. And I use them with the best enjoyment possible. And they are made with SynthEdit.

After that, if some people prefer to use a system where SynthEdit doesn't yet work, why do they have systematically to accuse SynthEdit? It's not the fault of SynthEdit. Period.

[Numanoid]

For some, myself included, it's a question of not wanting to run bridged plugins due to the overhead and possibility for incompatibility/stability issues

Fair enough, but nobody is forcing anybody to buy a plug, this is not a soviet economy, if a plug doesn't meet the requirements of the buyer, the buyer can move on and buy from a different vendor who offers what the buyer wants.