VST2 → VST3
is much the same argument/discussion as
32-bit → 64-bit.
As so many like to say: It’s 2025, guys! Keep up!
Can someone confirm this for certain
Well no, it’s obviously impossible for anyone to confirm whether an unknown plug that is failing scan and crashing C14 will or won’t do it in C13. Just because you don’t have to push the button, it doesn’t mean the scan is any different.
But yes, if you want to give it a go, you can install all versions and use whichever you like.
Others have mentioned this, but I figured I’d point it out again. If you own “must have vst2 synths,” then it may be worth your time to look at Blue Cat Patchwork or Metaplugin which are VST3 hosts in themselves. I’ll use iZotope Iris 2 as an example - it’s a great little synth that is rather unique, and I’ve got some wonderful patches of custom sound design work with it. It’s out of production now. I’m using Apple Silicon in native mode (not Rosetta). Not only is Iris 2 out of production, and I can’t (won’t) load the Intel version, but it’s also an AU format.
Using Blue Cat Patchwork, I can just load the AU and go nuts:
I wouldn’t recommend this for ALL your VST2’s, but if you’re in a similar situation, this may work for you while still allowing you to use the current version of Cubase. It may at least buy you time to get work done now and give you a chance to approach a more planned decommissioning of old plug-ins.
You’ll have to rebuilt the inserts, of course, but presets and such should work fine. If this works for you, then there’s no real “sunset” to this approach. Maybe buying you some time is worth the effort.
2 Likes
Forgive my ignorance but what exactly is Bluecat Patchwork and how does it work?
It’s a vst3 that works like a mini host and scans your vst2 plugs and can load them inside of it.. It doesn’t help with opening older projects though…any vst2 will still be seen as missing by Cubase.
If Windows is your system, give a try to jBridge :
Thanks
Ok, I I don’t think your answer is the fact that a member of the dev team is no longer with us. But a dev team cannot consist of a single person if it is going to truly support a commercial application and keep it updated, etc… I mean I have “fav-all-time” pieces of software … but they don’t run now? Not supported on current OS’s.
I like your passion for these old VST’s but they are un-supported, they crash Cubase (and other DAWs) and just like any old synth that eventually die, you move on get a new one that has those sounds and start again.
But going back to your post rather than your passion: I have explained why Cubase crashes, I have explained why settings are not saved. I have answered your problem and you have as well in your response. Use old/unsupported VST2 plugins and “long time Cubase users” will be “unhappy”. 
Okay, Patchwork did the trick. Thanks again.
3 Likes
Disagree…
The kind of post excerpt that I would like to see more often. Strangely, and most of the time when there is a kind of VST2 vs VST3 debate occuring, this is not taken into account. FWIW, and with C14.0.32, I use more VST 2.4 instruments than VST 3 ones, and as @DosWasBest rightly stated, there are no VST3 equivalent for them (Camel Audio Alchemy, Emulator X3, GSi VB3, among others…) and I want to be able to use the unique sounds that they deliver, no matter the year in which we are.
If I remember well, you are a guitarist : why on earth are you still using a 1962 Gibson SG ? It’s 2025 : you should keep up…
5 Likes
Did you mean 64bit float over 32?
Honestly cI am using 48000 and 32 but float at this moment. So does 64 is better? Or can you explain please. Because the situation with vst2 and vst3 is much cleaner for me. I am use only vst3 right now
No, he was talking about the 32 vs 64 bits programs format. It’s a completely different thing from the audio sample bit depth resolution : apples and oranges…
Ah, ok. Thanks for the explain
My '52 Telecaster and '70 Fender Deluxe are still fully supported and repairable/upgradeable. They do not make anything “crash” when I use them on stage. Silly comparison. Software compatibility is a very different thing.
My response explains why this “long time user of Cubase” is “unhappy” and why clicking the VST2 option crashes his machine. It is not a VST2 vs VST3 discussion or comparison. Steinberg already had that discussion internally when they moved the technology to VST3 12 years ago. Internally VST3 is way more functional and can be interrogated externally to see if it is structured correctly by the developer(s) … hence why Cubase now does not allow some VST2’s to even load. They are flawed internally. VST2.5 was a good move in the right direction … but more importantly allowed developers to adopt a lot of the safety features missing in VST2. So moving your code from 2.5 to 3 was probably just a couple of hours work on a standard VST2.5
But … back to the post: That is why “wagtunes” is unhappy. VST2 is dead and will crash DAW’s more and more in the future. If the VST supplier were serious about their original work but not interested in updating to stop their software crashing they could have put their source code in ESCROW or simply made it public.
2 Likes
I was being facetious. Too many people saying “It’s 2025!”, as though that means anything.
And it is a Les Paul. Black, with cream binding. (Not actual cream…)
And, also too, it’s still supported.
Unlike VST2.
And 32 bit! 
1 Like
I meant the change from 32 bit operating systems to 64 bit.
The arguments for and against were much the same as found in this thread - dead devs/ no longer available to update to 64 bit, and “It’s 2005!”, etc, etc.
When I bit the bullet and went 64 bit, I had to dump a lot of plugins that I used regularly. Some got updated, years later - Bootsy’s for example.
I think two of the fundamental problems in software development (and maintenance) is to avoid critical bloating of the code and to minimize restrictions posed bytrying to keep maximum compatibility with all kinds of legacy data and file formats.
After all, VST2 was introduced in 1999 (!) - it’s an old format that has been replaced by its successor (VST3) in 2008.
Keeping up the compatibility with such ultra-old formats can interfere with other, more modern parts and modules of the code base and thus hamper stability and performance - and bloat up the code.
What we want is a lean, fast and snappy DAW and not one that needs like 30 minutes to boot/load until it finally starts.
So, being myself an “old school” DAW user since the late 90ies, I too have purchased and stored a lot of VST2 plugins, which I sometimes miss. But all nostalgia aside - their VST3 successors typically look and work much better, so there’s that!
3 Likes
The comparison I was making is about the sounds delivered - each of our “instruments” having sounds unique in their own kind, whether a 1952 Fender Tele or a Camel Audio Alchemy VSTi : they are irreplaceable - NOT about eventual stability issues. From which, you can call it ‘silly’, I stand by my opinion.
Be sure of what you states : VST3 was first introduced in Cubase 4 (19 years ago) and there has never been any VST 2.5 standard…
Beside this, you feel like VST2.x is going in the way ? Solution : uncheck the VST 2 option in the Studio > VST Plug-in Manager window. Life can be simple, sometimes…
I doubt that supporting VST2 causes the current performance issues we see in Cubase 14. Sure, dropping old croft can help cleanup stuff. But IMHO this is not related to the current problems (see Cubase 14.0.20 Performance meter is going nuts - #69 by Gsus2).
We’re on the same track on that one. For the rest, I already stated the reason why the VST 2.x is important, and I’m not the only one. I don’t ask for any ‘support’ but just the preservation of what is existing and, seeing other posts from you, I’m almost sure that you’ll also agree with that. 