The ivory tower

[LEX]

Strange ... read this forums through and you will find tons of posts where people are screaming for more supervision, QC, certification, etc ... from Steinberg for Third PArty manufacturers. A well designed VST2 plugin will not cause any problem. There are vst2 plugins that run since a decade and have never been updated. There are other who need an update for each new host version Steinberg provides. Creating a VST2 plugin without tricks and shortcuts is as much work as creating a VST3 plugin. And as said, any VST plugin developer who takes his business seriously, and wants to sell his product in the VST market, has every benefit to start working on VST3. Yes, some things can be done in VST2 too; but not as good, as efficient, and with much less features. If a third Party desinger chooses not to sell to the VST market, then this has nothing to do with "Ivory Tower', but mainly about economical concerns. Yes, you can argue that Steinber should lower the specs so thrid parties can develop their plugins easier, but that will be at the expense of the users. So the circle is round.

Fredo

It is kind of interesting. When VST3 was introduced, the SDK wasn't available for about a year or so.
When it was finally released, there was a whole uproar on KVT (whateer it is called) forums from the developers about how the new VST was such a chore to do, many said they wouldn;t do it. (feel free to post that link)

Then there is VST3.1 which is suppose to "help" with this factor, but I'm starting to wonder who many plugin programmers have given up on the SB way.

I'm not sure if Sb understand that releasing something no one can deal with is a good idea.

When PT Native comes, you can bet that the plugin developers will have had the new code, and time to develop the plugins.
And those not ready by the time of its release, will be ready with in a few months.

I don't understand why SB thinks by setting everyone back, everyone will be forgiving.
The forgiving days are over. WE want results. No more excuses. We've already heard them.

LEX

[Andrew J]

The general opinion on the VST mailing lists is that the biggest issue with VST3 is that only a few hosts support it, the rest of the VST host market is at 2.x. IMHO that single fact outweighs the speedbump involved in changing to the new spec - hence the wrapper introduced in VST3.1.

[TerryG]

The general opinion on the VST mailing lists is that the biggest issue with VST3 is that only a few hosts support it, the rest of the VST host market is at 2.x. IMHO that single fact outweighs the speedbump involved in changing to the new spec - hence the wrapper introduced in VST3.1.

Exactly.... I brought that up at n.com with Fredo...
Until every other DAW starts using VST3, there will not be enough payoff for plugin developers. And, if Avid is working behind the scenes to gain favor for their native version software, the plugin developers will be putting their efforts there instead.

The winner will be determined when you see what the other DAW builders choose to implement... Steinberg's spec, or Avid's.
Something tells me that Avid won't want to implement VST... unless they buy it.

In any case, it's no wonder that Fredo has broken his own forum rules by sending the entire RAM consumption thread entirely off-topic at n.com...

[Audiocave]

What's all this talk about native PT?

[LEX]

What's all this talk about native PT?

Pro Tools is coming out with a Native version. When? Don't know.

LEX