My opinion on VST LIVE

My impressions on vst live, I would like to share my thoughts on using vst live, I own both Cubase Pro 13.41 and vst live 2, I see that many people try to use vst live to edit the midi in vst live which according to I’m wrong, the production and editing of both audio and midi tracks is better left to Cubase, and they encounter many problems at the moment, but unfortunately in no situation
of editing vst live can compete with Cubase, at this point I wonder if it should be used for editing Steinberg would have done better to make a version of Cubase+ that introduced the Layer and part functions so that it could be used in live performances the performances of the users, and regarding the fact of DMX in my opinion it should be left alone and done by the lighting technicians, most of the users will use vst live to make music, not control the lights, and I have been following it for a couple of months the vst live bugs and I see the developers busy with weekly solutions, continuing like this will be a very long road. I hope that everything will be resolved soon and that everything will work as it should, perhaps as Cubase in the future.

There are different way of usage of VSTlive. As it started to be a multitrack audio-, video-, dmx-, lyrics-, chords-, notes- , TC- player FX-stack and VST-Layer container…

While you think it’s not easy to edit MIDI with, maybe most of users doesn’t care about MIDI editing in VSLive at all… (for sure using a few midi cc’s for controlling things…)

Furthermore personally being frustrated see the pressure for newer and newer MIDI feature requests (therefore their quick introducion to the app) while there are another parts of the app would give me (us) another kind of benefits on stage. But can’t understand your blaming developers because current versions of Cubase DAW (founded in 1989(??)) does better job for midi/aud editing then a new-born show-control app for 100EUR (or 50EUR discounted pr)


I was considering making the transition to Cubase for the easier import of songs to VST Live but I’ve never encountered so many bugs and promised features not working in a paid software release.
I was going to say it feels like an early beta but it’s more like an alpha release!
I’ve spent far more time troubleshooting problems than in any other software in 30+ years.
I assume Cubase isn’t this bad or it wouldn’t have survived but I’m going back to Cantabile Performer for something that actually works reliably.
It’s a shame because there is so much promise here but I can’t understand how a company with Steinberg’s reputation has released something so shoddy!

I apologize if I offended anyone unintentionally,
I’m not blaming anyone, in fact I congratulate all the developers involved, my thought is to help find a solution to everything with my opinion if it can help. I also wanted to tell you that I’m not interested in midi editing in vst live. I hope I explained myself, a hug.

1 Like

I really don’t understand all the noise. This is an EXCEPTIONAL piece of software, no other live hosts has all the features daw oriented like vst live, actively developed week by week adding features and solving bugs as requested by us users!!

I’m using ALL the features of a live show, except MIDI tracks live ( just a midi track to send automation changes to effects), i don’t expect a midi sequencer and editor embedded in a live host. I bounce to audio all my finished backings previosly worked on a proper daw, including midi vsti nstruments. I run only audio tracks for the show, low on cpu usage. I bounce also backing tracks vst plugins. The less i process live the better.

Then i enter in vst with ALL the live audio of the band, i have 8 live input stacks, all with loads of vst effects automated, all premixed, all recorded as clean signal in multitracks during the show, i have metronome and cues, 4 in ear sends, 13 single channels output to foh, video to projector, second video with break-out lyrics for the singer, DMX that controls 13 fixtures … all with less than 100€ software that can run all on a single pc.

I agree that better dmx editor is needed, with auto effects for pan/tilt, a matrix pad, something more lights friendly. But this is also the only program that has a transport tempo based dmx,daw like and midi like, for controlling dmx channels and once i drawed basic colors and movement in single events, it’s a matter of copy paste and it adapts to different tempo when i copy between songs …

You shold really fovus on th LIVE part and bounce to audio every fixed backing track.

My two cents, Ciao!!


Hey @ciro1983811 thatbis MEGA COOL !!

1 Like

I agree with what you say, and I’m glad it’s working well for you, but from what I see you don’t use keyboards with virtual sounds and preset changes along with the audio tracks or am I wrong? While my goal is to use it live without DMX with the mastery of all the midi controls needed by a keyboard player like me who likes to use vst instead of keyboards and send audio tracks. Which means it’s almost time, in fact version 24 seems to be working well for me at the moment. Let’s hope everything stabilizes.


Yes, i tried to let my keyboard player use vst layers, but he prefer to use his juno roland and yamaha keybards instead, so he enter vstlive as audio stack. I send program changes to his keyboard and to guitarist kemper via vst live. And to all vst effects plugins that are on voice, bass, drums and submixes. We are rehearsing since february, and i agree, finally on 2.0.24 things are pretty stable and given we have first big (for us :grinning:) live in pistoia on the 4th august, i’ll stay on 24 since after the gig if no major upgrade happens.

1 Like

Here a snippet from last rehersal with recorded stacks, bonus a young Monica Bellucci on video tracks :rofl::rofl::stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye::stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:


I use the internal VST’s for live keyboards and it’s a god send. Works well. Sure there are some minor annoyances in bits of it but the development rate is amazing. It’s come a long way since V1.

Like @ciro1983811 I prep songs in Cubase (and dot2 for DMX) before I move them into VL. I bring them in the old fashioned way using track import so have yet to deal with the project import function and they’re not as complex in IO as Ciro’s. Let’s face it - most of us have a decent DAW that will out perform VL for editing so why not use it? I don’t expect Cubase like editing at this price point,


Yep, occasionally a post like this one pops up - sometimes angry sometimes passive-*.

In the past I’ve wondered if users of other programs perhaps pop over here to, “make a comment”.


My entire musical life and projections for great-times through live playing were inspired
and then solved by finding and then using VST LIVE when it first came out.

It’s now breath-takingly usable. Nothing touches it, and it’s, what, less than 24 months now since the 1st release?

I’ll be stickin’ with STEINBERG.
We can get a reply FROM the writers! (the Devs)
How AWESOME is that!

Outsmarting temporary software quirks is a skill, a power, that can be developed, which benefits from passion and drive and questioning oneself, you may agree.

Heck, clear, well written reports of weirdnesses are what the DEVs love to receive.

I came back to Steinberg after 16+ years because of VST LIVE.

Discovering that Cubase is now SO cozy. (yep, ‘cozy’, my word for Cubase this year)

I complete songs now.

Best wishes to everyone.
Brief-ish, as I’ve covered so much in previous posts, for one.
me, verbose?!-)


I see where you’re coming from. But I strongly disagree with your opinion on DMX especially, as it is the main reason I even considered going for this software over others. It finally let’s me stay in the Steinberg universe for Backing Tracks and stage lighting. and the flexloop feature is something we’ll be using a lot to stay spontaneous for live shows. There are many other features I won’t be touching in here and that’s fine, I don’t conclude to other people’s needs from my own.
That being said, there is more work to be done on this software before it runs super smoothly. But I’m totally ok with that and am happy to watch it grow out of it’s baby shoes in real time :slight_smile:

Thanks a lot!

It is unfair to post a generalized statement like this without any specifics. We’re here to help, and we are beeing honest and admit when something is wrong, and we’re here to try and fix it.


I agree about the availability of the team, for being present on the forum and for admitting and working on solutions to things that don’t work.

I purchased version 2 “with my eyes closed” precisely to support the team, but I honestly don’t understand what the direction of the software is, the development priorities.

Honestly, I’m a little taken aback.

I use Live for a minimal part of its potential (I don’t use DMX, nor score viewer, etc.), my use is purely keyboard-based, and there are some fundamental things that I have reported and which should be improved for MY personal use.

Sometimes I found the team willing to understand the importance and necessity of my requests, other times not.

(some examples: when you duplicate a part or duplicate it as “shared” that it is inserted AFTER the selected part position - Possibility to trigger the same part several times (it makes no sense to add the exact same part 10 times, which if you have to modify three volumes of a layer you have to do it 30 times) - possibility of blocking the view in concert mode, to avoid unwanted changes when you are playing

I’d like to understand what direction Live’s development priority is taking, because since I spend many days putting together a project, having to migrate to another platform is extremely complicated… it means starting from scratch.

I believe I have and have had patience, but I often notice that for some reason the team’s priorities do not coincide with mine.

so I stand at the window and observe the evolution of the thing.

This is not a criticism of the Team, which I repeat, should be praised both for the work and for the active presence here, it is just a question of understanding whether LIVE meets my needs, or will be able to do so shortly, because the investment of time for my projects is really huge

1 Like

That is a actually good example (well, bad from your point of view). There is a workaround for this, and our priority ranking is stability first, basic operation flaws second (that is not about workflow issues, but basic operations to work reliably), then everything else.
And in this case it is even questionable because duplicates are supposed to be appended and not inserted before selection in the first place.
Didn’t quite get your problem with that, but it looks like you are talking about Part Triggers, but for a cloned Part, trigger time is removed, so it is not beeing triggered…but happy to help with the problem if you explain in detail.

See above. Direction or priorities have not changed at any time. You cannot please everybody, so we need to prioritize.

When I plan a Song, I obviously “follow” the progress of the song.
I have 10 parts in a song, now I want to copy and paste part 2 as shared into a new part (11). According to my logic I position myself on part 2, copy, I position myself on the last part (10) of my song, Paste Shared, and I expect this to be positioned AFTER part 10.
It seems consistent to me…

thanks for your time

That would be true for Duplicate and Append, but Paste actions are defined to be Insert actions for all sorts of documents.
Really don’t want to be the know-it-all, it’s just what we learned how to implement edit actions for documents and lists.

I absolutely don’t want to be controversial, but it’s just a “musical” question in my opinion.

Think about Cubase, if I select something and paste it it is positioned starting from the cursor to the right, that is, after the cursor itself. because it is obvious that I establish a starting point and I want my pasted event to start from there.

Live works vertically, part 1 is higher up, part 2 is below, part 3 is still below and so on down.
When I work on a song I add Parts as needed, as the song continues, so the procedure is straightforward. If I have created 5 parts (in my opinion) it is quite obvious that if I want to add one I continue downwards, following the software design, and it is ok, absolutely right. And that’s exactly what I expect if I paste something.

That’s all.

Thanks for your time

We can make it paste after the selected item, no problem.

1 Like