What are the best reasons to use VST3 over VST2? or should I just use CLAP?

[killmaster]

And conversely, what are the best reasons to use VST2 over VST3?

I've been using VST2 lately because of things I've heard about some MIDI differences but I've never been really clear on what the significant differences are.

Does CLAP provide the same functionality as the best of both?

Thanks for clarifications.

[_leras]

In theory VST3 allows for simpler audio routing to a plug in - depending on your DAW. I think that's about it.

CLAP probably does the same, if your DAW allows it. Only Bitwig atm?

[pdxindy]

If you have the option to use CLAP (not many CLAP plugins yet), then use it... it's better than either of the vst options.

[Audiority]

CLAP probably does the same, if your DAW allows it. Only Bitwig atm?

Bitwig and Reaper pre-release builds

CLAP has the plus of better threading and non-destructive automations. We have recently updated our Space Station UM282 with these features and it's really fun to modulate multiple parameters with a plethora of different modulators, while still be able to move your controls for fine tunings.

If you are interested on learning more about CLAP, check the new site here: https://cleveraudio.org/1-feature-overview/

My 2 cents!
Luca

[Debutante]

Can't wait for FL to be CLAP sensitive, and I'm absolutely thrilled they are early adopters.

[Jeff McClintock]

And conversely, what are the best reasons to use VST2 over VST3?

I've been using VST2 lately because of things I've heard about some MIDI differences but I've never been really clear on what the significant differences are.

Does CLAP provide the same functionality as the best of both?

Thanks for clarifications.

* VST3 and CLAP offer a simpler threading model. Speaking generally, this leads to fewer crashes.
* VST3 and CLAP offer sample-accurate automation. Which provides more reproducible renders. i.e. if you record your track with a different soundcard buffer-size, it should identical. (VST2s 'jitters' parameter automation by quantizing it to the next buffer boundary).
* VST3 offers the 'silence flag' which can save CPU during silent periods on a track.
* CLAP offers 'real' MIDI, VST3 is a bit painful (MIDI CCs are mapped to parameters) but you can achieve the same result in most cases.

PS: If you're using JUCE-built plugins. Regardless of the format, they are 'dumbed down' internally to a VST2-style threading model. So you lose the advantages of the modern formats.

[a9k1tp]

I believe that all the DAWs which relies on VST2 or VST3 must support CLAP plugin format.

[jamcat]

And conversely, what are the best reasons to use VST2 over VST3?

I've been using VST2 lately because of things I've heard about some MIDI differences but I've never been really clear on what the significant differences are.

Does CLAP provide the same functionality as the best of both?

Thanks for clarifications.

Things you've HEARD?
Seriously?

Have you actually observed any shortcomings in VST3 yourself, or do you always outsource your thinking to others?

[killmaster]

And conversely, what are the best reasons to use VST2 over VST3?

I've been using VST2 lately because of things I've heard about some MIDI differences but I've never been really clear on what the significant differences are.

Does CLAP provide the same functionality as the best of both?

Thanks for clarifications.

Things you've HEARD?
Seriously?

Have you actually observed any shortcomings in VST3 yourself, or do you always outsource your thinking to others?

Sounds like you just want someone to attack. You shouldn't be so hard on yourself.

[killmaster]

And conversely, what are the best reasons to use VST2 over VST3?

I've been using VST2 lately because of things I've heard about some MIDI differences but I've never been really clear on what the significant differences are.

Does CLAP provide the same functionality as the best of both?

Thanks for clarifications.

* VST3 and CLAP offer a simpler threading model. Speaking generally, this leads to fewer crashes.
* VST3 and CLAP offer sample-accurate automation. Which provides more reproducible renders. i.e. if you record your track with a different soundcard buffer-size, it should identical. (VST2s 'jitters' parameter automation by quantizing it to the next buffer boundary).
* VST3 offers the 'silence flag' which can save CPU during silent periods on a track.
* CLAP offers 'real' MIDI, VST3 is a bit painful (MIDI CCs are mapped to parameters) but you can achieve the same result in most cases.

PS: If you're using JUCE-built plugins. Regardless of the format, they are 'dumbed down' internally to a VST2-style threading model. So you lose the advantages of the modern formats.

Thanks a lot! Very interesting!

[jamcat]

And conversely, what are the best reasons to use VST2 over VST3?

I've been using VST2 lately because of things I've heard about some MIDI differences but I've never been really clear on what the significant differences are.

Does CLAP provide the same functionality as the best of both?

Thanks for clarifications.

Things you've HEARD?
Seriously?

Have you actually observed any shortcomings in VST3 yourself, or do you always outsource your thinking to others?

Sounds like you just want someone to attack. You shouldn't be so hard on yourself.

It is a legitimate question.
Have you observed any shortcomings from VST3 yourself?
If not, why are you blindly following stuff you read on the internet without even investigating for yourself? To the point that you are now using a dead, inferior plugin format out of pure fear.

There is a small group of disgruntled developers who ignored Steinberg's VST roadmap for 15 years, then acted surprised when Steinberg finally ended VST2 support, despite them telling developers it was coming to an end 10 years ahead of time. Those developers then went about spreading all sorts of lies about VST3 in forums just like this. And that leads us to where we are now, in this conversation.

[killmaster]

It is a legitimate question.
Have you observed any shortcomings from VST3 yourself?
If not, why are you blindly following stuff you read on the internet without even investigating for yourself? To the point that you are now using a dead, inferior plugin format out of pure fear.

There is a small group of disgruntled developers who ignored Steinberg's VST roadmap for 15 years, then acted surprised when Steinberg ended VST2 support, despite them telling developers 10 years ahead of time. Those developers then went about spreading all sorts of lies about VST3 in forums just like this. And that leads us to where we are now, in this conversation.

What do you think my post is about. I'm trying to get information. Go attack someone else and leave me alone. Better still don't attack someone else and just stop being a jerk.

[jamcat]

OK, I apologize. My problem is with the organized campaign of lies against VST3, not people like you who fell victim to it.

[killmaster]

OK, I apologize. My problem is with the organized campaign of lies against VST3, not people like you who fell victim to it.

This characterization of people like me has nothing to do with me. I don't see myself as falling victim. Kinda the whole point of my original question.

[jamcat]

Well, you did fall victim to it, because as you've stated, you have been using VST2 (a dead, inferior plugin format) specifically because of the lies that you've read about VST3. You altered your behaviour to your own detriment because of it.

Anyways, do understand that what Jeff McClintock said about MIDI applies to developers, not end users. As an end user, MIDI just works. But there are a few extra steps on the development side to talk MIDI, because VST3 was developed to be interface agnostic, so that it can take full advantage of MIDI 2.0 and any future revisions to MIDI as well, while VST2 is confined to legacy MIDI 1.0. That's what all of the (overblown) fuss is about.