Re: VST3 Support!
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 11:15 pm
I have some plug ins I still can't use. So how bout it Ableton, it's not like vst3 isn't free to support.
No reason they can't support both, doesn't have to be one or the other. And my vst3s are perfectly stable on studio one. So not sure where all this bug talk is coming from?Machinesworking wrote:Imma say gonna thing.
This is the original reason why Apple and Emagic MOTU etc. were all interested in an native OSX plug in and Audio Units happened.
Every time Steinberg updates the VST spec all hosts have a bit of a hassle because although the manuals etc. for making VST plugins is nicely complete, surprisingly the information for hosting VSTs isn't so hot.
^^^ This is why it's not surprising that Ableton aren't jumping on VST3 support, they don't want buggy support with Live, early versions of 8 were embarrassing enough for them.
The point isn't one or the other, both have flaws, just that VST support is more difficult than people think because Stienberg aren't very supportive of host implementation. Not surprised that Studio 1 has good vst3 support, Studio One was founded very similar to Bitwig, from ex Nuendo developers.HamHat wrote:No reason they can't support both, doesn't have to be one or the other. And my vst3s are perfectly stable on studio one. So not sure where all this bug talk is coming from?Machinesworking wrote:Imma say gonna thing.
This is the original reason why Apple and Emagic MOTU etc. were all interested in an native OSX plug in and Audio Units happened.
Every time Steinberg updates the VST spec all hosts have a bit of a hassle because although the manuals etc. for making VST plugins is nicely complete, surprisingly the information for hosting VSTs isn't so hot.
^^^ This is why it's not surprising that Ableton aren't jumping on VST3 support, they don't want buggy support with Live, early versions of 8 were embarrassing enough for them.
Some of my vst3s actually run better than my vst2s. Very frustrating. I guess it all just depends on what developers find they need to put more time into.Machinesworking wrote:The point isn't one or the other, both have flaws, just that VST support is more difficult than people think because Stienberg aren't very supportive of host implementation. Not surprised that Studio 1 has good vst3 support, Studio One was founded very similar to Bitwig, from ex Nuendo developers.HamHat wrote:No reason they can't support both, doesn't have to be one or the other. And my vst3s are perfectly stable on studio one. So not sure where all this bug talk is coming from?Machinesworking wrote:Imma say gonna thing.
This is the original reason why Apple and Emagic MOTU etc. were all interested in an native OSX plug in and Audio Units happened.
Every time Steinberg updates the VST spec all hosts have a bit of a hassle because although the manuals etc. for making VST plugins is nicely complete, surprisingly the information for hosting VSTs isn't so hot.
^^^ This is why it's not surprising that Ableton aren't jumping on VST3 support, they don't want buggy support with Live, early versions of 8 were embarrassing enough for them.
Nuendo is the Pro version of Cubase, Cubase is made by Steinberg the company that develops the VST format. So Studio One developers who used to work on the code for Nuendo would have probably the easiest time implementing VST3.HamHat wrote:
Some of my vst3s actually run better than my vst2s. Very frustrating. I guess it all just depends on what developers find they need to put more time into.
One can only hope, but i'm not paying another $300 for vst3 I will switch over to bitwig before that happens.jlgrimes wrote:VST 3.0 has actually been out since 2008. The spec is actually at 3.5 now.
I'm guessing that 4.0 is probably around the corner.
Actually at the end of 2013 Steinberg stopped distributing the 2.4 SDK.
I'm guessing the next version of Live will have this since many plugin manufactures are now converting over.