Looks like a dead site … Last entry on the homepage is 5 years old and the plugins are VST2 only. Waiting for updates to VST3/Apple Silicon native though.
Hi. This is so ugly. I wish I bought a more feature-stable DAW. A professional music studio should not break songs with every update.
Update from Cubase VST broke the file format and many good plug-ins. And now this. Bad, really bad.
2 Likes
Do Logic, Tracktion or one of the many other DAWs also end plug-ins so often? Maybe I should get one of these…
I have already de-installed Cubase 11. What can I do to get Prologue back?
Hi Maarten,
You can reinstall C11, extract the files you need, then deintsall it.
You should be able to do that through Download Manager.
HTH,
Dean
But I guess the plug-ins will stop working soon even if you copy them from cubase 11? What if we write fantastic songs and then in 5 years they can’t be opened anymore? You should tell your requirements engineering that great songs need to be opened a 100 years later, too. Don’t just end plug-ins. This is more important than new features even though I understand you need an argument to sell updates.
I guess it is not easy to play recordings from tape machines from the 1950s, 60s, 70s and so on. But in the digital world this should be theoretically possible to keep the file format and plug-ins as they are.
1 Like
It’ perfectly easy if you maintained the equipment you had then. Just as now. If being able to open those old masterpieces and work on them in exactly the same environment as the one in which they were created, keep the old software versions around, and also the old machines if necessary.
What if we write fantastic songs and then in 5 years they can’t be opened anymore?
Finalize your work. It’s not only a question of whether a particular program can open your ancient files, but the vagaries of life might cause you not to have the equipment needed to open a project in the distant future.
We have to be realistic. Computers and the digital “revolution” do not change essential truths about living.
2 Likes
About 15 years ago I read an article in Dr. Dobbs or IEEE or some such. It was about how MS had sold people on this idea of infinite backwards compatibility, and how it was a false feature, and was only an excuse for not fixing defects, or investing in the future of the operating system.
The truth is, there are constant changes and updates in the Windows operating system, and the article was biased. MS never promised anyone that. But the idea was there, and it has stuck in the minds of many software users.
Software is a hybrid subscription service whether it is sold that way or not. Sure there are greedy suits who have picked up on the idea, and the realization that do to the speed of technological advance, software is service like. The primary difference being, that if you have a machine that can run the original software that you purchased, then you can continue to use it, unlike subscriptions where they actively cut you off if you stop paying.
The primary difference in the “essential truth” is in how fast the software and hardware change. If you recorded on a Sel-Sync in the early 60s, you didn’t expect to be remixing it on a MM1200 in the late 70s.
But now, it’s just a few years between changes. The hardware doesn’t last. Computers break down. The software of the time was just the tape. You could ruin a head by using the wrong tape repeatedly, but just you didn’t risk having old recordings not work because you used a new technique. There was a greater degree of permanence. Now you can install new software, that makes the old software not work any more.
Then there is the perception of what that software is. You didn’t use to buy an instrument and then somehow have that instrument not work with the new recording device. Instruments worked as long as you maintained them. A violin doesn’t stop working because you record it with a a new microphone.
Through this journey from the 90s to now, we are only just starting to learn the ramifications of what it means to purchase software, or to make software based business deals. There was a time when every software engineer had a healthy fear of code that was not developed in house. The business mindset was to use as much as possible that was already coded. Both philosophies have their benefits, and the off-the-shelf mindset won out for a time. But since software companies have died because of bad deals, bad contracts. The shortsighted feature grab that doesn’t come with full rights to the source code was commonplace for a long time. But thankfully those days seem to be behind us now.
We seem to have finally reached a time when features are built in house, or are built with code that the company has full rights to maintain. It’s the best of both philosophies, with the irksome side effect that customers are now feeling the final pangs of previous mistakes. Features are being dropped.
Unfortunately, this is only the beginning. This is a step in the right direction for the consumer, and the business, but there is still a battle being waged. How do you maintain control of a platform so that it does not degrade into chaos, while still having it be open enough, and trusted enough that everyone will adopt it? How do you interoperate without giving up market advantage?
As consumers and engineers we want stability, we don’t want to have to learn a new way of doing the same thing over and over, it’s a waste of time we could be spending doing new things, being creative. Once there is a way, we don’t want it to change, but we also want new features, and sometimes those new features come at the cost of the realization that the way we use to do it was inferior. We could insist on that stability, but the more stability we get, the more likely the whole thing will be outdone to the point that the systems and tools we know are outdated, and we have to start all over again anyway.
This “essential truth” is thrilling to a business person. They get tingles just thinking about surfing the market waves, finding the pocket, getting barreled and riding out to join the next wave. But to the creative, the musician, the tinkerer, the engineer, or the scientist, this is angering and even depressing. If they are forced to make too many changes, they will leave for a new product, especially when those other products have new features unavailable to them otherwise.
Why else would the market be so completely over-saturated with Digital Audio Workstations?
1 Like
Well, to chime in in this discussion…
-
As long as the dongle remains connected and the eLicenser Control Center is running, you should be able to open this plugins in the foreseeable future. The dongle will then be checked when loading on of the older plugins.
-
Talking about re-cover recordings from the 50s, 60s etc…there you actually have a point, but it´s not the tape recorders, that could stop working soon, it´s more that the tapes are dissolving themselves and you won´t be able to play them successfully anymore, which brings us to point 3…
-
The recordings from the olden days are nowadays conserved in a digital format, meaning that the tapes are recorded into a DAW, and after that you work with the files inside the DAW. This way you can even find the multitrack of Bohemian Rhapsody…
I actually try to prevent incompatibilities by RENDERING EACH AND EVERY MIDI/INSTRUMENT CLIP INTO AN AUDIO FILE.
Two benefits come to mind:
-
It is highly unlikely, that WAV files would disappear soon, and if they do, there will most probably exist a file converter to convert it into the new format. This makes it a bit more independant from changes in Operating Systems, plugin formats etc.
-
It´s easier to mix, as the audio files do not consume CPU cycles, so you will have all the power of your CPU for effects, automation etc.
Hopes this helps.
2 Likes
Very true. Im very dissapointed because they are terrific versatile synths that i love and used in all my songs
Im totally against the workaround of exporting a vst channel to audio purley because i am always reacting and tweaking my sounds to fit the ever changing landscape. For me, i need access to the synth settings on the fly even when im happy, i always looking for more variations of the sound, however small or big the difference. You should always be tweaking your sounds at various stages of the project, can this sound be better? Most probably it can
1 Like
as far as I’m concerned a paid upgrade should consist of every thing you had plus more … and not quietly sneak away previous items … steinberg seem driven by profit at the expense of users having to remix hundreds of tracks every time an upgrade is released … being a steinberg user for over 30 years i think they know many are trapped and just have to continue or lose songs.
LoopMash2 in Cubase 12…
1 - Copy “pulseOSC_x64.dll” into Cubase 12 directory in Cubase Folder
2 - Copy “LoopMash_x64.vst3” into “VST3” directory in Cubase Folder
3 - Copy “VST3 Presets” Folder into Cubase 12 Folder… for Preset Mystic - Spector - Prologue - LoopMash
4 Likes
most are missing the point here… steinberg could update these vst plugins and not make quite so much profit . too many big companies are pushing the boundaries of product support etc and nobody says anything . so they take a bit more next time and see if they can get away with that … now we all have to live with this "do it yourself " culture … i don’t remember getting paid for doing the work for any of these companies
1 Like
Totally agree, I have also been with Steinberg for 30 years and I refuse to remove VSTi plugins that were there before, that’s why I provide you with the way to leave 12 equal to 11 without losing VSTi Plugins
GrooveAgentONE
Copy “Groove Agent ONE.bin” & “Groove Agent ONE.vst3” into VST3 folder in Cubase 12
Mystic - Spector - Prologue
Copy “SynthEngine.vst3” into VST3 in Cubase 12 folder
Copy “VST Presets” folder into Cubase 12 for all Presets…
1 Like
thanks , but its the users doing work that shouldn’t have to be done
Where is the “VST Presets” folder located in Windows 10?
Document - Steinberg - VST Preset…
or -
C:\Users\myname\AppData\Roaming…
If the directory does not appear anywhere, install an old version of Cubase 8, 9, 10 those versions if they create the VST Presets Directory
Do a search on “C” enter “VST Presets” and it will appear where the directory is
Thanks Edu. By any chance could has anyone got Monologue and Embracer working in cubase 11/12? Apparently the coding is ancient and even jbridge doesnt do the trick.
If possible, I have them active in Cubase 12 “Monologue and Embracer”
Create VSTPlungins folder inside Cubase 12 with native “Synth” content same as in old versions of Cubase,
- Copy “VSTPlugManager.dll” and “VSTBridgeApp.dll” from old versions of Cubase Pro 8 to the “Components” folder of Cubase 12 and you already have them active… better 12.0.0 than the new 12.0.10
a greeting
5 Likes