Sadly Giving Up on VST LiVe Pro 2.0

VST Live
1

Hello,
I have spent countles hours , but no matter how hard I try to work with VST Live, it renders a mediocre experience with partially usable results at the most, that are not worth the amount of effort.

The idea of the product is promising, but it is definetly on a beta stage that should not be for sale.

In my case, DMX programming along with playing backing tracks and video sync was the main reason I bought VST Live, and not so much for the virtual instrunents. Maybe VST Live is more focus on the latter.

Im going to go back and work with cubase and DMX as a vst midi plugin that seems a rather more stable platform that has a way more friendly editor.

Anyways, thanks for all the attention. the developers in the past year.

Will try again in the next version

Best regards

Valentin

2

I understand your frustration. The Live editor is extremely cumbersome. For DMXā€¦ I program MIDI in Cubase or Nuendo. The MIDI out for the channel goes to a virual MIDI port which is received in QLC+, and QLC+ ouputs to DMX. I do the light programming that way and after the programming I export to Live project and import the MIDI track there.
Slowly the Live team seem to ironing out issues. And by the speed of pre releases coming out, I am hoping things get resolved soon.

3

ā€¦ thank you, @SDerMan. And I am sorry, @vsosa1314, to read your bad experience with VST Live. Just le us know what exactly bothers you. Every hint is helpful. We are trying our best to get crashes and bugs fixed and missing features and workflow added.

See you,
Michael.

4

Sorry for hijacking, but I kinda agree here. Iā€™m setting up my first live project and VST Live and more than once I feel like just giving up and go back to Cubase.

Itā€™s a great concept, but the execution has been very clunky. Bugs aside, some design choices just doesnā€™t make sense.

-Everything is based on clicking buttons and typing numbers. There are no shortcuts to very basic functions like adding/removing songs/parts/tracks.
-I was really looking forward to the lyrics view. It is great conceptā€¦ once setup properly. Setting it up, however, is a nightmare. You have to paste the lyrics line by line. The block length can only be changed by clicking on the ā€œlengthā€ in the lyrics editor, no dragging in either the lyrics editor or the track. The lyric track is utterly useless, itā€™s thereā€¦ for what? You canā€™t even move the lyric events.
-The fact that automation wasnā€™t even available in V1 and you had to setup and route virtual midi cablesā€¦ I havenā€™t tried the new automation in V2, hopefully thatā€™s better.
-I thought to myself, ā€œeh, letā€™s just setup everything in Cubase and import the media projects into VST Liveā€. Surprise, parts are all messed up if the cubase project had any tempo automation.

Iā€™m a solo vocalist/guitarist, and the way I do live is by setting up backing tracks and automations for my vocal/guitar so I essentially only need to ā€œplayā€ without thinking of anything else. VST Live on paper sounds like it would be the PERFECT companion for that, except setting it up to a usable result takes way too much time and energy.

Iā€™m almost done with the current live setup and will go through til the end. But at its current state, I donā€™t think Iā€™ll return to VST Live for next lives until itā€™s more bearable.

5

Hi @shidostrife,

thank you for your feedback.

Weā€™ll improve it.

The trial version was yesterday released. Give it a try. You can download it here

ā€¦ have you tried with the latest Pre-Release (2.0.13). If the Import is still wrong, could we please get your Cubase project file?

See you,
Michael.

6

Hi Spork, thank you for your prompt response. Iā€™ll be looking forward to improvements in the lyric editing.

I bought VL2 with the intro discount. I just havenā€™t tried the automation features because I decided to use MIDI to control my hardware FX instead. It just baffled me that you guys thought VL1 was good enough to release without it.

Iā€™ll try later today and report back.

Thank you.

7

1) every ā€œtime-savingā€ feature that gets added has, for one, the likelihood that CPU resources will be used. VST LIVE is designed from the GROUND UP to be light on itā€™s feet and responsive. FEATURES and IMPROVEMENTS are added WEEKLY generally. (Friday BETA releases!-)
Adding features well, takes great intellects - youā€™d likely agree ā€“ just wondering.

2) I understand not everyone has slogged through years of computer OS, and computer program, 'cut and paste sessions" literally lasting hours (data tidying, etc. etc.) ā†’ hundred of times over decades. Cut and pasting a few verses and choruses per song, and finding ways to out-smart current limitations - does that, for one, sound overwhelming i wonder.

3) Does anyone else find the Steinberg DEVs ā€“ particularly the VST LIVE Devs at the top of your list, in more than just forum participation ā€“ and with such consistent ā€˜nice-nessā€™.

I could go on.
Iā€™m thinking: sure, not everyoneā€™s a geek keyboard player, though imagining life without VST LIVE has me jotting down my initial thoughts here. Best program EVER for LIVE playing - and watch it get better and better ā€“ and itā€™s already vastly more straight-forward, and promising (WEEKLY!) than the also-rans, whoā€™ve had years to get it right-er. IN MY VIEW that.

That said: I guess a few giving up simply, from the thousands and thousands, isnā€™t a statistic.
I hope everyone here finds a way to make VST LIVE work - Iā€™m always happy when i look for and find that the issue can be overcome by ā€˜out-smartingā€™ ā€“ or figuring out what Iā€™ve missed, or ā†’ just putting in the work and study, even *-)

I came back to STEINBERG ENTIRELY due to VST LIVE PRO after 16+ years away.
Just my own story that.

Now Iā€™m back on CUBASE and it suits my sometimes slightly above, and sometimes slightly below average intellect and wish to complete songs.

AN ASIDE: Cubase has a cozy look and feel for me.

ALL WRITTEN UNDER THE BANNER ā†’ ā€œWeā€™re All Unique - - Best wishes to Allā€

8

alright @Spork , I tried the latest 2.0.14. Great things the tempo and markers are imported correctly, so that helped the lyrics situations. Parts are however still messed up. The triggers are at the wrong places and the last part goes forever, like until bar 50,000 or something.

Hereā€™s a .cpr file of the song. Hope this helps.

9

As additional comparison, hereā€™s another .cpr file where the tempo changes happen AFTER all arranger events, this one gets the parts imported correctly. The wrong import seems to only happens when the arranger events start after a tempo change. Hope this helps!

10

aaah, my bad. I installed 2.0.14 and tried importing on different computers :sweat_smile:
The part triggers imported correctly in 2.0.14. Except with the first CPR, it added two tempo changes at bar 3400-ish and the last part still lasts forever.

image
image487Ɨ753 24.1 KB

EDIT: wait, itā€™s not just the last part. ALL the parts last forever. It seems each part doesnā€™t have duration (theyā€™re all 0000.0.0) so maybe thatā€™s why they do not end?

11

Only features that have any influence on audio or other media processing have impact on CPU. A new ā€œSuper Worklow Improvementā€ button has no impact on anything until pressed (and even then, possibly none or close to none, or only one-time, depending on its function).

Agreed however that it should stay lightweight wherever possible.

2) - you lost me, sorry.

It depends a lot on the nature of those features. Often, value for user has nothing to do with how much work is involved. Some low-impact features (from users point, or, if only applicable for a minority) take much effort, some with much effect only minor. Finding the balance is the hard part in the first place.

12

ā€¦ thank you. Weā€™ll check as soon as possible.

/Michael.

13

TO**@musicullum**

Firstly, my 2) paragraph above, was me not wanting to sound critical of someone mentioning the difficulty of cutting and pasting each lyric line individually. Way to long and windily written though, for sure*-)

I could edit what i wrote above so it wasnā€™t as long-winded though iā€™ll leave it.
HELPFUL though, thanks, it is confusing!-)

SECONDLY: your comments i found fascinating. For example, Iā€™ve always wondered how much GPU refresh penalty lessening and CPU saving there was ā†’ when CUBASE 13 removed all the images that were gradient graphic files. ā†’ The potentially hundreds of mute, record, etc. buttons, for one - - that are WONDERFULLY (to me) no longer gradient image files in CUBASE 13.

NOT asking for a comment on that. I donā€™t need or want to know. I like to believe that VST LIVE isnā€™t ā€˜fat with graphics and code blingā€™ which makes it faster and less RAM and CPU, GPU consuming.

Somewhat over-worded as my nature with greatest thanks!
/s

14

Hi again Spork, deep apologies, it seems the extra tempo changes at the end were IN the .cpr file so it was user error :face_holding_back_tears: So itā€™s just the parts lengths that still needs fixing. Thank you for your hard work!

15

Hello,
Thanks for the reply.
If I understood correctly, you can edit DMX tracks using the midi editor in CUBASE,
then import the midi track into a DMX track in VST Live.
Is that correct?

16

No. Thatā€™s not what I meant.
I use MIDI to trigger DMX events in QLC.
I have a MID track that sends MIDI info to QLC, QLC translates the MIDI to DMX.
I do not send the DMX directly from VL to the DMX USB adapter. It is sent via QLC.

17

Thanks for the quick reply.
Actually that is the deal breaker for me.
I clearly understand that VST Live is not ment for editing midi, audio or video, instead its conception is mainly for playback live prevously edited tracks in platforms suited for them.
Not the case for DMX, as there is no other way to program or edit tracks.
I think they are currently working on it, and will look forward for the implementation of a better editor.
Thanks
Valentin

18

Hello Spork

My frustration is wearing off and decided to give VST a try again

The issues found while trying to use VST Live without any other DMX software is the main drawback for me. (currently using v2)

Setting up straight forward changes in channels renders unreliable results. By unreliable I mean that playback DMX tracks sometimes sends the DMX instructions, and sometimes doesnā€™t.

At first I thought it was a setting in my ENNTEC USB Pro device, but then tested assigning the Vst DMX mixer as the output.

The test consists in setting two scenes with simple value changes in a couple of channels.

Copied this two scenes multiple times in 1/16 note steps to visually see the outcome in the Vst DMX mixer (sort of a visual metronome), and to my surprise it rendered similar unreliable results.

Im sending a project file that might help explain the issue Im having:

Is there any configuration Im missing?

This is the Link where you can download a project with just DMX tracks.

https://1drv.ms/f/s!AteeA0Mcxg6hiP9O6K1Tpev3zsHEeA

Thanks

19

ā€¦ thank you, weā€™ll check,
Michael.

20

Hi @vsosa1314,

Thank you very much for that example project. We could find a problem deep inside the engine. Itā€™s fixed now and the fix will be published with the next Pre-Release (2.0.23, Tomorrow). Could you please re-check your project and workflow with that version and report it back?

See you,
Michael-