VST2 being killed off by steinberg (not)

[Kypresso]

https://www.steinberg.net/en/newsandevents/news/newsdetail/article/vst-2-coming-to-an-end-4727.html

Pathetic.

[shanabit]

About time, goody

[marQs]

May the plugin guys all catch up!

[steve]

For sure, and as the article says,

VST 2 compatibility with Steinberg VST hosts will remain…

I for one would be quite happy to have NI Kontakt in VST3, and supporting the advanced features, like note expression and tuning to name a couple. Tuning was also in VST2, but NI and others never supported it, maybe this will be the push they need.

[MrSoundman]

+1, I think the NI plugins may be the last VST2 plugins remaining on my machine …

[SigiZ58]

I guess NI will not jump on it so fast and also not Ableton. For the near future this might mean, that Steinbergs Flagship Absolute Collection 4 will not be used on all that Hosts, that do not Support VST 3. But I am curious - hope all will come good.
Nevertheless - I was always in the fraction that preferred VST3 over VST2 if possible (beside the unnessecary beeing forced to install vst3 on drive c)

I think it might been have more clever, to come out with VST4 instead. VST3 was not good enough for many vendors to jump on it.


cheers

[steve]

…and lets’ not forget that the standard was invented by Steinberg, maintained by them, and provided for free to devs. Steinberg · GitHub

[MattiasNYC]

@SigiZ58

. VST3 was not good enough for many vendors to jump on it.


cheers

In what way?

[SigiZ58]

@MattiasNYC

@SigiZ58

. VST3 was not good enough for many vendors to jump on it.


cheers

In what way?

F.I. Native Instruments, they did not see any advantage to go to VST3. I dont know why.
But independent from this - what other reason should be there not to jump on a new, shiny product ? The only logical conclusion is: It is not worth the effort for me (the company) to invest ressources in this technology. At least two vendors did this: NI & Ableton.

This are only my thoughts.

[MattiasNYC]

@SigiZ58

F.I. Native Instruments, they did not see any advantage to go to VST3. I dont know why.

If you don’t know the reasoning behind not coding for VST v3 then you can’t really say that “they did not see any advantage” or that “VST3 was not good enough”.

The first statement presumes you know something about NI and its reasoning,and the second is a statement about VST3 itself, technically.

@SigiZ58

But independent from this - what other reason should be there not to jump on a new, shiny product ? The only logical conclusion is: It is not worth the effort for me (the company) to invest ressources in this technology. At least two vendors did this: NI & Ableton.

This are only my thoughts.

Yes, but “not worth the effort” typically means “not worth the expense”. That may be true, but it doesn’t mean that they don’t see an advantage to VST3 or going for it, just that it doesn’t make more money (perhaps that’s what you meant), and it also certainly doesn’t mean VST3 isn’t good enough.

[Stephen57]

Every product, software and technology has an EOL (end of life) and so it seems it’s RIP VST2 (1999-2018) – not a bad run for any product or technology.

I was glad to see the statement say, “VST 2 compatibility with Steinberg VST hosts will remain.” So, correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds like all the instruments/effects that are not blacklisted will continue to operate per normal in future versions of Cubase. True? Anway, “maintaining compatibility” – if I understand it – sounds like a smart idea. "Don’t take away my favorite instrument or effect just because it’s “old.” Olde is good. Vintage!

[MattiasNYC]

Hopefully this will force some latecomers to switch over and in the process take advantage of what v3 has to offer that v2 doesn’t.

[Mauri]

Just the easy ability to use VST3 plugins in side chain mode made it worthwhile to me.

[SigiZ58]

Matthias, please let us not split hairs.
I am no native english Speaker. It looks like you got what I wanted to say.

[Puma0382]

Some interesting other views from 3rd party devs, on the whole VST2 versus 3 topic. There’s a thread on the KVR forum pages under ‘DSP and Plugin Development’ category, with ‘VST3’ in its title. Its a thread started in 2008; I’d suggest starting reading from half-way down page 5, a post from BlueCatAudio.

(don’t think its allowable forum etiquette here, to post the link directly).

I’d paraphrase the content/essence for you here; but its always better having it for yourselves, straight from the horses mouth…

cheers,
puma

[steve]

@Puma0382

(don’t think its allowable forum etiquette here, to post the link directly).

As long as there’s nothing illegal, spammy or nsfw, not a prob.

KVR Forum: Specific technical questions about VST3, and info for users - Page...

[alexis]

This is what BlueCat Audio had to say about VST3 in that thread (written April 18, 2018, before Steinberg’s announcement):

Regardless of implementation and design considerations, our feeling, both as a host and plug-in manufacturer, is that VST3 is still not as mature as VST2 today . Many (if not most) hosts and plug-ins (including Steinberg’s…) are still more stable and predictable in VST2 format. So we still strongly advise customers to use VST2 versions when possible. There are far less surprises and strange bugs with VST2 so far.

Also, the lack of proper MIDI support in VST3 causes many problems. For example, it looks like every developer is using the same hack to receive MIDI CC events (and we do too), but it causes thousands of extra parameters to be exposed when they have not been properly disabled for automation. And if you want to output MIDI CC messages from a plug-in, there is still no solution.

So we implemented VST3 support because customers were asking for it (mainly for Cubase side chain and because of Cubase’s window resize bug on Windows for plug-ins - and on the host side because some plug-ins only exists as VST3). But honestly, if there is no strong incentive of doing it, just skip it for now.

Wow, it seems quit damnng. Does anyone here have any thoughts, pro vs. con, about BlueCat Audio’s opinion there?

I like VST3 from the point of view of: a) It is easier on the CPU (no processing performed if no audio is being run through it), b) and ease of sidechaining.

How does Reaper do sidechaining, if it doesn’t have VST3?

[MattiasNYC]

Here is what one programmer wrote on Gearslutz…. (I wish I had programming skills so I could fully understand it):

@FabienTDR;13325074

Originally Posted by mattiasnyc

When other DAWs do what that list says VST 3 can provide, does that in as sense circumvent the VST 2 protocol?

That’s an interesting question.

VST2 is an extremely flexible interface, it basically just consists of a few headers describing which functions the DLL should implement, and partially, how it should be done.

Now when it comes to sample-accurate automation, years ago for example fruity loops started using a dynamic internal buffer size to provide the required level of precision at extremes. This solution doesn’t break anything, it’s perfectly within specs.

Further, it is also possible to automate via midi.

For side-chaining, or multi-channel, VST2 always allowed arbitrary amount of in and out channels.


The only bottleneck is the plugin host’s interpretation of the format, and its creativity and willingness to solve edge cases. When Steinberg decides that VST2 is purely mono and stereo, and “incapable of sidechaining”, they interpret their own set of headers (and super scarce documentation) in a very restrictive manner.

Very much like browsers in the webdesign market: Standards are just recommendations, the only relevant question is how these browsers interpret them, and which features they decide to support.

It’s these gate-keepers who define and extend real world standards. Not the W3C.

Originally Posted by mattiasnyc

And if that’s the case, is there more diversity as far as implementation goes?

Diversity across plugins host, even within the same plugin format, is as wide as the format allows. Usually, you have vital core features, but also several optional features. Some hosts simply ignore sidechaining, accurate automation, 64bit i/o and whatever. Others introduce bugs, or do unexpected stuff.

Originally Posted by mattiasnyc

What I’m wondering is basically if the various features listed would apply to all hosts equally due to being a (VST3) standard when using, well VST3, but when DAW makers “circumvent” VST2 (if they do it at all) would that open up for the possibility of either more work in total for some and/or errors due to incompatibilities (since it’s now not following a (VST3) standard)?

They really don’t circumvent the recommendation. Quite the opposite, they take it seriously, word by word.

Tighter standards have their benefits, too. AAX for example is much easier to debug, simply because there’s only one host. The format offers clever usability features, too, and is really well documented and maintained.

My personal motivation behind all this is purely economical. Technically, all formats have practically the same core. Even VST3 works very much like VST2. When Steinberg decides to drop VST2 support in their products, I’ll have to swallow the extra cost and effort. But I see little benefit in these barriers.

[msy]

“VST3 is not that bad except that is doesn’t even support the most basic MIDI spec(plugin side), so if you ever dreamed of a new MIDI plug-in, Steinberg just killed MIDI plug-ins.”

Is this true?

[Puma0382]

More on the topic of MIDI, its a concerning read from BlueCatAudio when they say:-

“Also, the lack of proper MIDI support in VST3 causes many problems. For example, it looks like every developer is using the same hack to receive MIDI CC events (and we do too), but it causes thousands of extra parameters to be exposed when they have not been properly disabled for automation. And if you want to output MIDI CC messages from a plug-in, there is still no solution.”

I read some real-world evidence, that this is appearing in the ‘Fairlight’ module of DaVinci Resolve 15 Beta; complainers (3rd party plugin Devs) through BlackMagicDesigns forum, are asking how on earth they’re supposed to cope with VST3 plugins displaying/exposing over 2000 automation parameters to the user.!

They (plugin Devs) think its a BlackMagicDesigns ‘problem’ to fix…