Well, it’s whether their approach fits the requirements of users & developers. They’ll lose customers if they have it wrong. The perceived arrogance is not going to win any favours either.
I’ve had a play with CLAP and it’s much simpler, supports MPE, Multi-port output and MIDI 2.0 off the bat, minus the restrictions that SB employ being truly open source and licensed under MIT - meaning it’s a service to the audio world, not a money maker.
Nice slogan though…
VST3 : “Technically and practically better”
Well as a user it’s only my concern if the plugin does what I want. I’ve yet to see VST3 developers tell me that the plugins I’m using have a problem or lack functionality because of VST3. So from my perspective it simply doesn’t matter. And as for losing customers we’ll just have to see I guess. I think it’d be borderline idiotic to swap DAWs because Cubase/Nuendo doesn’t support CLAP, it would have to be because there’s a plugin that doesn’t support VST3, and at that point of course you could just as well ask if the developer is willing to lose out on revenue just to spite Steinberg or if there’s a net profit from avoiding VST3 completely.
very well said…Its pretty clear a lot of big dogs want to consider this. I have been using U-He and Surge plugins in the latest Bitwig beta, and CLAP is truly a remarkable format to work with. It allows some very interesting modulation and automation capabilities.
Midi 2.0 could be a viable answer to CLAP for steinberg if they dont want to support CLAP obviously, and more power to them. These are all options for the end user so everyone has an opportunity to utilize features across every daw. None of it is a bad thing. CLAP isnt a bad thing, neither is VST3. Best to have an open mind and accept as many choices as possible
If you read my post and think about it (!) you’ll notice that I’m saying that if one needs a plugin that doesn’t support VST3 then it makes sense to switch DAWs, and by “support VST3” I actually meant with full functionality.
I’ve seen absolutely nothing about CLAP providing performance gains, but maybe you can point me in a direction where I can read about that. Perhaps it’s about threading control which I remember seeing something somewhere but didn’t read. Is that it?
Steinberg should be leading the way with MIDI 2.0. But right now, I can’t work out the path they’ll take. Particularly in regard to the exchange components and modulation options. There’s just so much at the heart of the DAW that relies on MIDI CC.
I think it will be the turning point where other DAWs really start to take the lead, particuarly with CLAP as an option leaves less reliance on Steinberg and how they control the VST3 spec.
Let’s be honest, VST3 note expression is a flop, the articulation/key switching system is antiquated, and any MIDI 2.0 hardware integration will be heavily biased towards Yamaha/SB gear. As things start to open out in the audio world I think their incestuous nature could be a real hindrance.
To say I’m worried about the future of Cubase is an understatement. Hopefully we see some good developments in the coming years.
I can see this being Blockbuster video all over again. Blockbuster failed because they were not able to forecast and change along with something that was up and coming.
If companies dont have an answer to CLAP or the adoption of CLAP, its going to cause them lots of pain in the future
Then block me and do everyone a favour. You can’t be bothered to even educate yourself on a subject your debating.
You say that A is “Better” than B, when you don’t even know what B is.
I’m trying to have a sensible conversation here, but I’ve got you and another guy who has “Hardcore assembly” friends who say it’s a waste of time and can’t even explain why.
I’m sure it’s just a coincidence you’re both getting free licenses.
On top of that, you’re telling me I have a attitude that sucks, and the other guy is implying I’m a lazy/newbie. Wow, you’re both incredibly great representation for SB.
But it’ll depend on what’s available to users though, right? In order for the companies that don’t support CLAP to suffer financially there would have to be plugins that are either CLAP only or have clearly defined and desired functionality that is CLAP only and then users would choose to leave a DAW because they needed those features so badly they had no choice.
I think the prospect of that isn’t all that great. Perhaps it’ll make a difference at the lower end of the market, but certainly at the top I doubt it’ll change much. For Nuendo and Pro Tools for example I can’t see many professionals ending up switching because a plugin (or its functionality) isn’t available in non-CLAP formats. I think at that level people will just pick plugins that are available rather than spend the time and money to switch DAWs.
Do you comprehend the difference between “is” and “seems to be”?
LoL, what? I’ve paid for every version of Nuendo since version 1. Literally. What “free licenses” are you talking about? I pay for iZotope’s plugins. UA’s plugins. I have exactly zero software that I use professionally that I’ve been given. Zero.
You’ve gone from just “misrepresenting” what I say to straight up lying about me.
