Routing from a VST instrument directly to a audio track?

[thinkingcap]

@Audiocave

…-Just create some busses (outputs in VST Outputs) to use for this, don’t assign them to any hardware,…-

Just for the records: It even works with assigned busses (for the sake of streamlined and fast workflow)…

[Audiocave]

@thinkingcap

@Audiocave

…-Just create some busses (outputs in VST Outputs) to use for this, don’t assign them to any hardware,…-

Just for the records: It even works with assigned busses (for the sake of streamlined and fast workflow)…

Cheers. True.

Making them unassigned was (for me) a housekeeping thing, I didn’t want those signals going anywhere else like actually traveling out of a hardware output by accident when I was only routing internally … but yeah, it still works.

IIRC, mine were named D1 through D8 and/or DS1 - 8 (S for stereo) for “dummy” 1-8.

Thanks.

[Conman]

Good to see at least two people read the manual. Others’ tracks are, for the sake of streamlining, connected directly to the Cubase link to the forum complaints (aka WTF?!) department.

The THREE explanations are as loud and clear as anyone would need, but somehow it goes over the WTFheads. Thanks. Great stuff.

[mustech]

@Audiocave

Just create some busses (outputs in VST Outputs) to use for this, don’t assign them to any hardware, name them so you know what they are, and store them in your default I/O setup.
To send the output of a VI into a audio track point (send, assign directly, whatever) it to one of the dummy outs and assign the input of the audio track to that path.

Thanks, Audiocave!
That was very useful information. It works great!

[system]

@dennisjr

Ok I admit I know nothing about DAW’s when it comes to programming, but please tell me why it is easy as saying cheese doing the same in Ableton? Shouldn’t it be easy implementing it?

It is simply a case of how Steinberg DAW software has evolved.

Basically there would need to be a new routing system developed on top of the existing situation.

[dennisjr]

@mustech

@Audiocave

Just create some busses (outputs in VST Outputs) to use for this, don’t assign them to any hardware, name them so you know what they are, and store them in your default I/O setup.
To send the output of a VI into a audio track point (send, assign directly, whatever) it to one of the dummy outs and assign the input of the audio track to that path.

Thanks, Audiocave!
That was very useful information. It works great!

Yes, thank you! Great bit of information.

[Jeff_Cecil]

@bentley

@dennisjr

Ok I admit I know nothing about DAW’s when it comes to programming, but please tell me why it is easy as saying cheese doing the same in Ableton? Shouldn’t it be easy implementing it?

It is simply a case of how Steinberg DAW software has evolved.

Basically there would need to be a new routing system developed on top of the existing situation.

Not true at all. Adding the button that performs the routing done in VST connections onto the audio output track of the VSTi can be done right now without any plumbing changes to below that point. It’s a software connection that can already be made. All Reaper and Ableton do is put that configuration on the track as a button. They take care of the “connection” for you.

[system]

Not true at all.

Who was talking about any other software besides cubase?

[Jeff_Cecil]

@bentley

Not true at all.

Who was talking about any other software besides cubase?

You were talking about Cubase would have to evolve the routing …
I’m saying no they wouldn’t. I’ve actually written a VST Stack like app using the ASIO SDK. And there is nothing stopping them from making the manual steps of setting up that connection an output option on a track. They would not have to change anything in the routing to support it. The capability is already completely in the code.

[system]

Sure but one thing you can’t do is go from an output buss back to a VST, this simply isn’t possible without using VST3.

[Jeff_Cecil]

@bentley

Sure but one thing you can’t do is go from an output buss back to a VST, this simply isn’t possible without using VST3.

I’m not talking about the VST. When you instantiate your plug you tell the host how many outs to create. The host wires it up. I’m saying on the host side that connection are avaialble to the calling code. Since you can manually create a VST Connection, you can also do so programatically. You would write the track instantiation code to do the connection. No routing plumbing would change. Again, I know because that’s exactly what I did. And that was back in the early ASIO and VST 2 SDK days. How do you think multi-out VST do there internal mappings to stereo and mono outs on the fly?

[system]

@JMCecil

Since you can manually create a VST Connection, you can also do so programatically. You would write the track instantiation code to do the connection. No routing plumbing would change. Again, I know because that’s exactly what I did. And that was back in the early ASIO and VST 2 SDK days. How do you think multi-out VST do there internal mappings to stereo and mono outs on the fly?

Leave it at the VST, as it is now, steinberg won’t change it unless there is some overarching way to do it, ie VST 3.5.

[Jeff_Cecil]

@bentley

@JMCecil

Since you can manually create a VST Connection, you can also do so programatically. You would write the track instantiation code to do the connection. No routing plumbing would change. Again, I know because that’s exactly what I did. And that was back in the early ASIO and VST 2 SDK days. How do you think multi-out VST do there internal mappings to stereo and mono outs on the fly?

Leave it at the VST, as it is now, steinberg won’t change it unless there is some overarching way to do it, ie VST 3.5.

It has absolutely ZERO to do with the VST API. NADDA, ZIP, ZILCH, BUPKISS.

[Jeff_Cecil]

Just for giggles, here’s the SDK introduction to creating your busses.

Steinberg::Vst::IComponent

Edit controller association: In order to enable the host to create a corresponding edit controller the processing component has to provide the matching class-ID. The host uses the module's class factory to create the controller component. (Steinberg::Vst::IComponent::getControllerClassId) 

Steinberg::Vst::BusInfo - Bus Description.
A bus can be understood as a 'collection of data channels' belonging together. It describes a data input or a data output of the plug-in. A VST component can define any desired number of buses, but this number must never change. Dynamic usage of buses is handled in the host by activating and deactivating buses. The component has to define the maximum number of supported buses and it has to define which of them are active by default. A host that can handle multiple buses, allows the user to activate buses that were initially inactive.

See also: IComponent::getBusInfo , IComponent::activateBus 

Routing Information.
When the plug-in supports multiple I/O buses, a host may want to know how the buses are related. The relation of an event-input-channel to an audio-output-bus in particular is of interest to the host (in order to relate MIDI-tracks to audio-channels) 
See also: IComponent::getRoutingInfo, Routing

Notice it says “the host may be interested …” That’s because the VSTi has no idea what is going to feed it or where it is going to send stuff. It just knows to OPEN x number input locations and x number of output locations. What happens to those is up to the host.

Again, once that output reaches the host, the host is free to do with it as it wants. In terms of Cubase, that point is typically the green audio channel

The audio is being received here, but it is at the end of the audio chain. However, there is nothing stopping them adding code that instantiates a VST Connection and routes it back to this visual track. They could even trick you by making it a record button … So it’s live to the main out when not in record mode, and auto-maps to a dynamic VST Connection when you click the record button. Which is basically what Ableton and others are doing.

None of that would change routing code in any way shape or form.

[Audiocave]

@mustech

That was very useful information. It works great!

You’re welcome. I really thought all Cubase users had been aware of that method for a long time but obviously there are new users coming on all the time I suppose so … I guess that’s the same reason the music mags seem to cover the same things (methods) over and over… because there’s always someone who hasn’t read it yet.

[Atardecer]

Steinberg should take their lead from Ableton and implement something like the resampling feature. Its painfully simple, straighforward & effective to use. At least they make it so. The Cubase method is embarrassing in comparison

[More_Cowbell]

i am just frustrated that you cant send output from VI to dummy when you use virtuell instrument option. I must use vst rack so the vst audio is on a “audiochannel” and not VI (midi). All midi channel has the VI as output… Or am I missing something?

[system]

@More Cowbell

i am just frustrated that you cant send output from VI to dummy when you use virtuell instrument option. I must use vst rack so the vst audio is on a “audiochannel” and not VI (midi). All midi channel has the VI as output… Or am I missing something?

I think there is batch export or are you trying to record something live.

[thinkingcap]

@More Cowbell

i am just frustrated that you cant send output from VI to dummy when you use virtuell instrument option. I must use vst rack so the vst audio is on a “audiochannel” and not VI (midi). All midi channel has the VI as output… Or am I missing something?

What do you mean with “virtuell instrument option”…? MIDI Data can not be sent to or recorded on an audio track. If you meanInstrument tracks, then the audio output can be routed from the mixer instead of the inspector…

[JJDekker]

Ok, tell me, WHY would i like to do all that stuff above and record realtime, if i can just put my markers and export selected region within seconds. seems a bit cumbersome to me?