Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

DSP, Plug-in and Host development discussion.
User avatar
Vertion
KVRist
492 posts since 29 Oct, 2016

Post Sat Jan 12, 2019 9:01 pm

No one will contribute unless the DAWs use them first to continue sales..

Allow me to meta-code for a minute:

If a group of the top devs come together, I'll bet they can implement a new DAW (multi platform) and a single standard they can argue about themselves.

Then, convert all their plugins ro only support the new standard, this will move the remaining DAW makers to adapt the standard to support the top devs plugins. It's conceptually straight forwards. But the group has to be the best plugins in the market.

Make the DAW a low low price to guide the market jump into it (10 to 45 dollars). Cannot be free, but should be offline serial to maximize motivators (yes, let the penniless find kgens, it's part of the motivation strategy to habitual usage, Urs knows).

All major plugin makers fall in line behind them as they pull rank on the market, removing all future support for VST for an uncontrolled standard, think ahead to combat takeovers of the standard.

I would elect Urs and his team (Uhe), Andy(Cytomic), Richard (Synapse) and his team, Angus (Fxp), Steve (Xfer), Jakob (Cableguys), Markus (Tone2), Quikquak, Discodsp, Stratum, Aciddose. All I can think of at the moment, who else?

User avatar
vortico
KVRist
219 posts since 19 Jul, 2008

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Sun Jan 13, 2019 12:53 am

Yeah, that's a great move to reduce their plugin sales by 99%.
VCV Rack open-source virtual modular synthesizer

stratum
KVRAF
2202 posts since 29 May, 2012

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Sun Jan 13, 2019 6:29 am

Vertion wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 9:01 pm
No one will contribute unless the DAWs use them first to continue sales..

Allow me to meta-code for a minute:

If a group of the top devs come together, I'll bet they can implement a new DAW (multi platform) and a single standard they can argue about themselves.

Then, convert all their plugins ro only support the new standard, this will move the remaining DAW makers to adapt the standard to support the top devs plugins. It's conceptually straight forwards. But the group has to be the best plugins in the market.

Make the DAW a low low price to guide the market jump into it (10 to 45 dollars). Cannot be free, but should be offline serial to maximize motivators (yes, let the penniless find kgens, it's part of the motivation strategy to habitual usage, Urs knows).

All major plugin makers fall in line behind them as they pull rank on the market, removing all future support for VST for an uncontrolled standard, think ahead to combat takeovers of the standard.

I would elect Urs and his team (Uhe), Andy(Cytomic), Richard (Synapse) and his team, Angus (Fxp), Steve (Xfer), Jakob (Cableguys), Markus (Tone2), Quikquak, Discodsp, Stratum, Aciddose. All I can think of at the moment, who else?
While you kindly mentioned me for that job, may I remind that open source DAWs already exist, and if people do not like them, there is nothing to do about it. Unpopular software is not in a position to dictate new standards.

https://lmms.io/
https://ardour.org/
~stratum~

Benutzername
KVRist
287 posts since 23 Jan, 2008 from Hamburg, Germany

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Sun Jan 13, 2019 9:14 am

Creating a good DAW is only half of the story. You will also need a lot of users, especially in the open source world. Many users usually also means many contributors. But they will have to like to work with an application on a daily basis so a certain level of quality is needed for success. This is currently much harder for open source software as for all others.

One of the biggest problems of current open source music applications is that they usually can't work with proprietary closed source plugin standards like VST, AU or AAX without jumping through giant hoops (NDAs, licensing, distribution, fear of take down, user has to compile DAW, WINE wrappers etc). Not even talking about ASIO, Rewire, extreme DRM and so on. Still many users are going that route even though it's hard at times as a DAW without access to popular plugins is not worth using in this day and age.

On the other hand almost all plugin companies only offer plugins in proprietary closed source formats for proprietary closed source DAWs running on proprietary closed source operating systems and they don't seem to have the intention to change the status quo anytime soon.

That's fine but this also means that most open source developers will not waste their precious spare time for something that is doomed right from the start. They already have open standards so they would need to see a strong signal from the closed source side of things to jump into the boat.

However, the situation is actually really simple. If you want to live in a proprietary closed source world then you will have to live with the consequences. Stop whining just because the owner of the rules changes the rules whenever he likes just because he can. That was the deal to begin with. Live with it.

If you want to change the status quo then we will have to do it. Nobody else will do it for us. The good news is that we have the power to enforce a change if all developers stand united.

IMHO this is the only way this can work:

1. Define an open plugin format with a very liberal license. The definition can still be owned by a closed group of companies or certain people or something like that. There are many examples out there about how a standard can be organized.

The format should be very strict and well documented from the start. It has to support all desktop operating systems as well as mobile devices and maybe even web based applications.

2. Add full support for this format to the frameworks that people are using to make transition as easy as possible.

3. Try to get most of the big guys on board.

4. Release and support(!) plugins in this format even if only open source and freeware DAWs support it from the start. Especially release the plugins on platforms where the underdogs are at home. Sooner or later cross platform applications will adapt the format too and it will finally swap over to other DAWs when there are enough plugins in the pool.

5. Be patient. Don't give up.

I think the last point is the hardest one. But it is the only way to go if you don't want to base your entire business model forever on the good will of Apple, Avid and Steinberg.

I know that I'm dreaming. The current way is much easier even though you have to pray every evening that your license giver will still allow you to do your business next morning.

tony10000
KVRist
227 posts since 4 Aug, 2017

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Sun Jan 13, 2019 9:33 am

Well, it happened with MIDI and that created a wave of prosperity for synth makers that lasted over a decade. It can happen again.

User avatar
WilliamK
KVRAF
4344 posts since 12 Jun, 2001 from Wusik Dot Com

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Sun Jan 13, 2019 10:53 am

AFAIK it's impossible to compile AAX on the free. And it takes some effort. I had far too many problems with AAX, and hated to have to pay an annual fee just to support it. But that's me...

quikquak
KVRist
445 posts since 6 Aug, 2005 from England

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Sun Jan 13, 2019 11:29 am

I got setup for Protools completely free this year. As a dev, Avid covers the basic iLok costs for you (apart from the physical key). It was a pain trying to understand what the the hell Pace were on about half the time, but that was probably just me being a block-head! 😀
Dave H.

User avatar
WilliamK
KVRAF
4344 posts since 12 Jun, 2001 from Wusik Dot Com

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Sun Jan 13, 2019 12:39 pm

I also got it free for the first year. But I couldn't really get things working, as I have mental issues of my own. :oops:

User avatar
z.prime
KVRAF
1705 posts since 29 Sep, 2011

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Sun Jan 13, 2019 1:34 pm

Dude, WilliamK, welcome to the family!

User avatar
WilliamK
KVRAF
4344 posts since 12 Jun, 2001 from Wusik Dot Com

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Sun Jan 13, 2019 1:36 pm

:hug: thanks, it has been a while. ;-)

Steinbergs_Lawyer
KVRer
1 posts since 14 Jan, 2019

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Mon Jan 14, 2019 4:19 am

I think this is a very TRAGIC news/topic, please let me recap:

if TODAY you want to download the VST SDK (including VST3 and VST2) you MUST agrre their license. Period. This means that you can't distribute VST2 plugins if you are NOT "registered" at Steinberg (using their agreement papers).And now it is IMPOSSIBLE because registrations are closed forever. Period. Goodbye stupid Developers.

Ok, BUT...

If someone downloaded the VST2 SDK , uhm, let's say in 2002, and she/he NEVER DOWNLOADED an updated Steinberg VST2 SDK version since then, she/he can continue using that (downloaded in 2002) SDK to produce and sell VST2 plugins without limitations (= without being registered at Steinberg or anywhere else).

The new Steinberg (ridiculous) agreement applies only for the VST2 SDK contained in the latest "VST SDK" package. If you don't want to use it or download it or agree it, you can use the VST2 SDK from 2002.

Anyone knows?

Anyone know if there's some kind of time-extension for registering at Steinberg?

If an individual or company during the passed years registered a VST2 PLUGIN via the famous YGrabit Steinberg Form page, is it the equivalent for a full Registration?

User avatar
Vertion
KVRist
492 posts since 29 Oct, 2016

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Mon Jan 14, 2019 4:59 pm

I just found out there is a powerful cutting-edge DAW made in a combined effort from Uhe, Cytomic, Synapse, FxPansion, Xfer, Cableguys, Tone2, QuikQuak, BlueCat, DiscoDsp. Costs 30 bucks, supports all their plugins. Only problem is, no VST support, instead a new advanced open plugin standard they created. Would you buy it?

I know I would. Tell me the idea didn't peak your interest when you read it. I just hope I wear brown pants the day this comes true.

Couldn't think of a clever name for the DAW.

Ben H
KVRAF
2032 posts since 28 Jul, 2003

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Mon Jan 14, 2019 5:19 pm

Vertion wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 4:59 pm
I just found out there is a powerful cutting-edge DAW made in a combined effort from Uhe, Cytomic, Synapse, FxPansion, Xfer, Cableguys, Tone2, QuikQuak, DiscoDsp. Costs 30 bucks, supports all their plugins. Only problem is, no VST support, instead a new advanced open plugin standard they created. Would you buy it?
Not really, no.

I wouldn't abandon all of my current VST tools, which I have easilly spent 1000s of dollars on, and 100s of hours learning/using.

And that is even assuming there ARE 1:1 replacements for each of the plugins I use.
My main tools: Kontakt 5, Omnisphere 2, Iris 1 (not interested in V2), Padshop Pro, Samplemodeling SWAM and Zebra 2.

User avatar
Vertion
KVRist
492 posts since 29 Oct, 2016

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:05 pm

If Steinberg is further allowed to control plugin distribution under legal threat, there is a good chance you may be spending 1000s more.

Ben H
KVRAF
2032 posts since 28 Jul, 2003

Re: Selling VST2 after October 2018: Steinberg agreement

Post Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:54 pm

Vertion wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:05 pm
If Steinberg is further allowed to control plugin distribution under legal threat, there is a good chance you may be spending 1000s more.
Why?
None of my perfectly usable VST2s will stop working!

It's not f*cking Apple we are talking about here, which break stuff with each and every OS update.

Also, do you seriously think that all the DAW manufacturers are going to drop VST2 support en masse and follow Steinbergs lead of making their software VST3 only?

Everything that you write is hyperbole about a hypothetical scenario.

None of what you have suggested about Steinberg suing anyone has come to fruition.
My main tools: Kontakt 5, Omnisphere 2, Iris 1 (not interested in V2), Padshop Pro, Samplemodeling SWAM and Zebra 2.

Return to “DSP and Plug-in Development”