The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Steinberg Announces VST2 Ending Virtual Instrument Plugins
Old 18th May 2018
  #31
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FabienTDR View Post
I wonder which features you mean?

All major points in this list is something any modern VST2 host can already do today. Same for AU and AAX btw. Except Steinberg of course.
So, since I'm a tool;

When other DAWs do what that list says VST 3 can provide, does that in as sense circumvent the VST 2 protocol?

And if that's the case, is there more diversity as far as implementation goes? What I'm wondering is basically if the various features listed would apply to all hosts equally due to being a (VST3) standard when using, well VST3, but when DAW makers "circumvent" VST2 (if they do it at all) would that open up for the possibility of either more work in total for some and/or errors due to incompatibilities (since it's now not following a (VST3) standard)?

--- I'm obviously not a programmer ---
Old 19th May 2018
  #32
Gear Maniac
People keep posting this:

https://www.steinberg.net/en/company...gies/vst3.html

Seems people think that is a list of VST3-only features.

But actually, if you pay attention, ONLY ONE feature is described with "Unlike with VST 2.x,, a VST3 plug-in can..."(sic), the "Multiple MIDI inputs/outputs" feature.

As other users already mentioned, VST2 can do all the rest.
Old 19th May 2018
  #33
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by pottering View Post
People keep posting this:

https://www.steinberg.net/en/company...gies/vst3.html

Seems people think that is a list of VST3-only features.

But actually, if you pay attention, ONLY ONE feature is described with "Unlike with VST 2.x,, a VST3 plug-in can..."(sic), the "Multiple MIDI inputs/outputs" feature.

As other users already mentioned, VST2 can do all the rest.
I was told that a VST3 plugin will not use CPU when audio is not passing through it. I know Cubase had that feature anyway (audio guard or something?) and other hosts do not. If so that is a nice feature. Actually it is the first feature in the link you posted.
Old 19th May 2018
  #34
Lives for gear
 
wakestyle's Avatar
Here is another plugin developers point of view on the subject of VST3 VSTi.
U-he developer's install notes
Quote:
Important information about the VST3 version
--------------------------------------------

We recently rewrote our VST3 layer from scratch. The original implementation had some flaws, so we followed Steinberg's recommendation to adapt it to our specific requirements...

Unfortunately, we had to cut down on the MIDI Learn functions. Although its user interface is available in our VST3 plug-ins, nothing happens because VST3 doesn’t use raw MIDI data. In order to receive MIDI Control Changes (CC), the plug-in needs to report hundreds of special parameters to the host - one for each CC in each MIDI channel! A clumsy workaround. As this is a common issue, we proposed that Steinberg extend the VST3 standard with a MIDI Learn option. Until this is directly implemented in VST3 hosts, MIDI Learn is only available in the VST2, AU and AAX versions of our plug-ins.

Settings assigned in any of the other plug-in formats will be adopted by the VST3 version, however. This means you can set up your controllers using the VST2/AU/AAX version, then replace it with the VST3 version afterwards!
I personally see this movement as a cover for Steinberg's instruments department, and to say that it's needed to "progress" (to what, btw?). Other developers are making stunning instruments in VST2.

But I also see this as complex issue as the instrument and effects plugins differ greatly and from developer to developer.

I really like Steinberg's Cubase but they do some really strange things again and again, which usually goes directly against what a lot of customers want or need.

I do like use VST3 for effects but right now the only VST3 VSTi I have installed are ones made by Steinberg (which comes with Cubase).

It sounds to me like they still haven't done the proper work on their end, after 5 years.

Last edited by wakestyle; 19th May 2018 at 03:54 AM..
Old 19th May 2018
  #35
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
When other DAWs do what that list says VST 3 can provide, does that in as sense circumvent the VST 2 protocol?
That's an interesting question.

VST2 is an extremely flexible interface, it basically just consists of a few headers describing which functions the DLL should implement, and partially, how it should be done.

Now when it comes to sample-accurate automation, years ago for example fruity loops started using a dynamic internal buffer size to provide the required level of precision at extremes. This solution doesn't break anything, it's perfectly within specs.

Further, it is also possible to automate via midi.

For side-chaining, or multi-channel, VST2 always allowed arbitrary amount of in and out channels.


The only bottleneck is the plugin host's interpretation of the format, and its creativity and willingness to solve edge cases. When Steinberg decides that VST2 is purely mono and stereo, and "incapable of sidechaining", they interpret their own set of headers (and super scarce documentation) in a very restrictive manner.

Very much like browsers in the webdesign market: Standards are just recommendations, the only relevant question is how these browsers interpret them, and which features they decide to support.

It's these gate-keepers who define and extend real world standards. Not the W3C.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
And if that's the case, is there more diversity as far as implementation goes?
Diversity across plugins host, even within the same plugin format, is as wide as the format allows. Usually, you have vital core features, but also several optional features. Some hosts simply ignore sidechaining, accurate automation, 64bit i/o and whatever. Others introduce bugs, or do unexpected stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
What I'm wondering is basically if the various features listed would apply to all hosts equally due to being a (VST3) standard when using, well VST3, but when DAW makers "circumvent" VST2 (if they do it at all) would that open up for the possibility of either more work in total for some and/or errors due to incompatibilities (since it's now not following a (VST3) standard)?
They really don't circumvent the recommendation. Quite the opposite, they take it seriously, word by word.

Tighter standards have their benefits, too. AAX for example is much easier to debug, simply because there's only one host. The format offers clever usability features, too, and is really well documented and maintained.

My personal motivation behind all this is purely economical. Technically, all formats have practically the same core. Even VST3 works very much like VST2. When Steinberg decides to drop VST2 support in their products, I'll have to swallow the extra cost and effort. But I see little benefit in these barriers.

Last edited by FabienTDR; 19th May 2018 at 05:38 AM..
Old 19th May 2018
  #36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alndln View Post
I was told that a VST3 plugin will not use CPU when audio is not passing through it. I know Cubase had that feature anyway (audio guard or something?) and other hosts do not.
This feature is a flag the plugin reports to the host, it says:

zero input = zero output.

...and the plugin dev has to make sure this is true of course. Problem is that only trivial processes can be optimized that way (static amps and waveshapers). The term "infinite impulse response" gives a clue about why basically any interesting effect's output can't be predicted that easily.

btw, most plugin devs will already do this on their own, and bypass calculations that have no effect.
Old 20th May 2018
  #37
Lives for gear
 

VST 3 might be the choice for some plugin developers to program external sidechains for their plugins as well as to make scalable plugins. Makes sense to minimize costs even if they could have delivered on VST 2.

On Mac you always could use the AU version of a plugin if a DAW doesn´t support VST 3 like Ableton.On PC not really.
Old 20th May 2018
  #38
Here for the gear
 

now i hate steinberg, VST2 is more reliable , easy to manipulate in folders, has built-in presets, i had few problems with VST3, when i tried it, while VST2 were working like clocks and now i need to rebuild my plugin library, reinstall and rebuild whole directory, because this suckers are suckers!

and what about old plugins, which are not developed anymore, at some point , some DAWs can exclude support of VST2 from their DAW and old plugins won't work anymore!
Old 20th May 2018
  #39
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by maggot22 View Post
now i hate steinberg, VST2 is more reliable , easy to manipulate in folders, has built-in presets, i had few problems with VST3, when i tried it, while VST2 were working like clocks and now i need to rebuild my plugin library, reinstall and rebuild whole directory, because this suckers are suckers!
As I said before. I'll just stay on 9.5 and not update anymore.
Old 20th May 2018
  #40
Lives for gear
I think this thread would be better in the Steiny forum where we know their rep monitors.
Old 20th May 2018
  #41
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FabienTDR View Post
Diversity across plugins host, even within the same plugin format, is as wide as the format allows. Usually, you have vital core features, but also several optional features. Some hosts simply ignore sidechaining, accurate automation, 64bit i/o and whatever. Others introduce bugs, or do unexpected stuff.
Really interesting, Fabien. If I've had a problem with a plug-in in S1 f.i., PreSonus will usually tell me that the plug-in vendor is to blame, even though the same plug-in works in any other DAW. Can you shed some more light on this topic and tell us more about what your experiences are with the different DAWs and the way they handle plug-ins? Thanks so much for all your contributions of great information on these forums!
Old 20th May 2018
  #42
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
Looks to me like the announcement was only saying they would stop distributing the developer tools, but would keep supporting plug ins in cubase. I did not see an end date for that. I note that the latest version of ni komplete is 2.4. If cubase 10 does not support that, would make it harder for them to sell me the 10 upgrade.
Old 21st May 2018
  #43
Gear Addict
 
Pollo's Avatar
 

I never install the VST3 version of plugins, as I also don't install RTAS or AAX or what have you. I never saw the point of the VST3 format and still don't. Steinberg have shot themselves in the foot with it. In the beginning you couldn't even get the VST3 SDK but by special request. That situation has lasted for years. It hasn't helped the spread of VST3. Hardly anybody saw the benefits of using it (they are mostly imaginary). Now most big name plugin developers also release in VST3 format. Probably to cater for Cubase users mainly (I'm speculating). VST2 is great. It's all I need. VST3, no thanks.

But Steinberg have lost me to Reaper as a customer many years ago anyway. This is not going to bring me back.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump