How to update projects using Kontakt 4 with Kontakt 5?

Hi, I want to update all my projects using Kontakt 4 with Kontakt 5 instances. What’s the best and easiest way to do so?

I tried renaming Kontakt 5 dll into Kontakt 4 dlls but it didn’t work. Cubase seemed to recognize this is not the same file and report Kontakt 4 as a missing plugin.

The thing is that on many projects I have about 20 Kontakt 4 instances in use and a lot of effects/automations linked to those channels. And as soon as I unload a Kontakt 4 instance, C6 deletes all the associated Kontakt 4 audio tracks with their effects/automations. Of course, I would like to keep those audio tracks and associate them to Kontakt 5. How to do so?

Easiest way is to load your projects in Kontakt 4 mode.

Save each instance as a multi

Open K5 and load multi back in, then re-assign channels

Long winded but it should work.

Failing that, you can always leave K4 and K5 installed on your computer.

Longtime Kontakt user here. I could not add anything to what Dave has just said.

If you’re not changing the PC - not moving old Cubase files that used Kontakt 4 to a new PC - then the easiest thing will be as Dave Wise said - just keep Kontakt 4 installed alongside Kontakt 5. Even if you are moving the files to a new PC where you just want Kontakt 5 installed, it might be worth considering installing Kontakt 4 on that as well.

I’ve always left the Cubase files still using the old Kontakt versions, rather than go to the trouble of updating them for each new version of Kontakt. I don’t think there’s a quick way to update the Cubase files for a new Kontakt version - just have to set eveything up using the new version of Kontakt and save the Cubase file (under a new name). Not much fun - and not something you’d ordinarily want to do with all your previous Cubase files every time you get a new version of Kontakt.

It does mean that if/when I want to move all my Cubase files on to a new (replacement) PC, I’ll have to install every one of the older Kontakt versions that I’ve used in the Cubase files. But I’d rather do that (assuming I can still get the old ones authorised on the new PC, and assuming they’ll install under the latest OS) than update the Cubase files to use the latest Kontakt version. Actually, IIRC, there aren’t always direct equivalents in the latest Kontakt to library patches found in the earlier versions, anyway.

If you absolutely must convert the old CUbase files to use Kontakt 5, check whether you can copy the automation from track to track - IIRC that can be done. Then, for each instance of Kontakt 4 in the Cubase file (one at a time) you could open an instance of Kontakt 5, create new MIDI tracks as copies of the old MIDI tracks, and then set up the effects, etc, as in the original Cubase tracks, and copy the automation from the old Kontakt audio tracks (etc) to the new ones. Sounds like a lot of work.


Same experience here. Best way is to use Kontakt 4 for these tracks for ever. :-/

Yeah well, I’m not going to update every project using Kontakt 4 with Kontakt 5 track by track, this would take weeks to do so… I read that Reaper can replace plugins. That’s clearly a feature Cubase is missing here… Nobody has ever requested it?

Same here. I basically would just leave them as Kontakt 4, and use then as kontakt 4. Its not a great answer for you but other than saving everything and transferring it bit by bit into a new instance of 5, im not sure theres any quick and easy way of just doing this.

Well, that SUCKS! How come NI and Steinberg didn’t work on something in the last 10 years to make project updates easy?

This approach assumes that when using a format in version 1, that version 2 will even be able to read it without jumping through hoops. For example NI changed all the preset formats (and associated file extensions) for Massive, FM8, and Absynth, and the only way to load the older files is to do a batch conversion using NI’s proprietary offline process. Kontakt can load the older formats (for the time being), but you still get the message to save using the newer version to decrease the loading time. It’s probably just a matter of time before this requires a batch resave as well. Having the actual DAW manufacturer be the version control arbiter would be a maintenance headache to end them all…if I were in the room while this decision was being made, I would start backing away slowly.

One man’s opinion of course :nerd:

NI has chosen for whatever reason to change the plug-in ID between versions and not maintain backward compatibility.

This was NI’s call.

I use Kontakt player and have never looked back with V5.

This is actually a feature…please do not disturb. If a part was played with K4…why on earth would you want the default to be K5? Anything that changed (for subjective better or worse) is a change…meaning, now the project doesn’t sound like it did before. You can always do the above if you’re not caring about the recall. If it automatically did it, you would lose recall.

I hear Reapers IO compensation doesn’t work. And know their direct monitoring is not so direct . Sounds like they have THEIR priorities in the right place…not. :smiling_imp:

I just went through this recently. I think it was a really bad idea for NI to put the version number in the name of the plugin. It was the case with a few of their other plugins (forgetting which ones now), and Cubase sometimes really falls apart when it’s missing a plugin, like locks up and freezes until you figure out how to restore the plugin (or start with a new plugin prefs file). I ended up re-installing Kontakt 4 for compatability and then am changing each project to Kontakt 5 as needed.

PS. And dropping Kore really caused a mess. There’s a new 64-bit version but it crashes on launch… but that’s another story for another time.

The lesson for developers: Make all the new versions you want, but don’t add the version number to the plugin!

dpolcino, IMHO, doing that (even if it’s always feasible) would be a bad idea. There are two strong arguments against it, above:

Assuming you didn’t forget to read those before posting, where do you disagree with them.

  • 1 !!
  • 1 !!!

So, as I asked dpolcino in my post two above yours, I wonder what you disagree with in the following two extracts from earlier posts …