And furthermore: it’s not about the vendors. It’s about the customers who are getting thrown under the bus here.
Rosetta. Rosetta2.
Apple is a religion 
1 Like
You have some selections to use your old plugins. My expectations are that vendors made their products compatible with new technologies (hard-or software), that’s what differs from your expectation 
Steinberg support AU in their VST SDK. Simply compile, and you get VST3, AUv3, AU and AAX. Are there really relevant third parties who publish their plugins as AU but not as VST?
I always thought they support OSX Core Audio the best way possible. Afaik, Apple forbids to use the audio device at hardware or driver level, so all you can do is stream the audio to the HAL. See here. The HAL will always add a few ms additional latency, even if you chose smallest buffer sizes. Even 32 samples buffer size result in 6-8 ms roundtrip latency.
Under Windows, there really is a chance to access any audio device at hardware/driver level, in exclusive mode if you like, with a performance just as good as ASIO (but without the need for a dedicated ASIO driver). Roundtrip latencies of 6 ms are proven to be possible with ordinary onboard sound devices. The magic word is WASAPI. Guess what Steinberg doesn’t support? All you get with Cubase is a generic ASIO driver with 40 ms roundtrip latency. Did I mention that they don’t care about low latency performance since Apple has forbidden it to exist in 2003?
1 Like
Why should vendors fix what is not broken? Especially when there is no economic incentive to do so? They cannot expect customers to be willing to pay again for what they already bought, so who should bear their development cost?
It’s just really bad business judgement from Steinberg, unconditionally obsoleting 3rd party software that works fine. That’s a fight with 3rd party developers about adoption or non-adoption of a new SDK, that 3rd party developers do not like, for a reason. And they are fighting this fight on the back of their customers.
1 Like
This is only partial true. First compare release dates from ASIO and WASAPI. You will see that there are years between the two. Second WASAPI is also not a good choice, because it exists only for Windows and is not easy to develop for. Port Audio as used by the devs of MAME is far better, as it works on all plattforms, with the same results as WASAPI. If you seriously have problems with latency, it could be just outdated hardware. All this stuff is a company (be it Apple, Steinberg, Avid etc.) problem, supporting only drivers that have patents, copyright and other license poop on them. Times have changed and there are a lot of stuff outthere that is free and live WITH the community and not FROM them.
It would be better for you to prepare for it. They have been able to consider removing VST2 support, regardless of the fact that it is a widespread standard file extension that is still supported by many companies and users, so, you can expect anything in the future.
What cost do you mean? They just should drop VST2 versions of their plugins and either keep on developing or start developing VST3 only just like Steinberg gonna do.
You don’t seem to understand.
If I already own plugin XYZ as VST2, I’m not gonna buy XYZ again just because it’s VST3. What I will do instead is stop buying Cubase upgrades as soon as my VST2 plugins don’t work anymore with a new Cubase release.
All of us Cubase users have spend lots and lots of € and $ for VST2 plugins, much much more than for Cubase itself, and most will refuse to pay the same amount again just to get what we already have. So there is no money in there for plugin developers to rewrite their stuff with VST3. It’s an economical no-brainer to NOT do that, if they cannot expect to refinance their development cost with appropriate sales.
So I stand by my attitude that Steinbergs decision is outright stupid.
2 Likes
Can you name a plugin that you have purchased that did not come with both VST2 and VST3 versions?
I keep hearing this uproar but, I’m confused, what did you buy that you would have to buy again? How long ago was it that you purchased a VST2 ONLY plugin? Have you just not updated it since then?
I know of plenty of free VST2 only plugins, that are no longer in development. Anything built with Steinberg’s SDK, or Juce is going to have the VST3 version.
I just can’t imagine a software developer (like myself), deciding that they should only develop the older version. It’s just silly. So please, tell us what plugins you will loose out on, how long it has been since you update them, and how much the developer wants to charge you for the VST3 version upgrade.
I feel foolish with all of this animosity going on around me that I don’t understand.
2 Likes
The entire suite of UAD plugins is VST 2 only.
According to Steinberg’s twitter, Cubase 12 is coming “mid/end march, maybe…”
https://twitter.com/steinbergmedia/status/1494254881041002496?s=21
3 Likes
How does the social media people have an estimate, but the product manager can’t say a word… Doesn’t make sense.
“Not only but also”… and I’d like to know how many here know where that quote came from?
Sooo, when’s C12 realeased then?
It’s been at least 12 years since the community has been asking UAD why they don’t provide VST3 plugins. 12 Years on the UAD forum itself.
Comments such as “… much as I love UAD plug-ins I won’t make this mistake again.” That was 7 years ago! let that sink in a moment. I had no idea that their plugins were VST2 only, but they certainly don’t provide much information on their website. There isn’t a technical specifications section. Do they even work in Logic? I can’t tell. Never considered buying them.
This is 5 years ago. On the UAD forum: “Now, imagine you are hardware company that builds CPU/SHARC devices. VST3 coded plugins would allow an engineers to need Less hardware for any given mix. Thinking as a conspiracy theorist, would it be in the interests of said hardware company to include VST3 code into their proprietary plugin code?”
12 years ago people on that forum were complaining that they didn’t get “CPU-saving and side-chaining for native plugins” with VST2. And then, get this, blaming Steinberg for providing the feature, and making them feel left out because UAD plugins were not VST3.
12 years ago!!! UAD has had 12 years from when their customers were asking for VST3. If we compare that to Windows, which was brand new that year, Windows 7. So if you were on the most recent version of Windows when UAD customers were wondering why no VST3, which is somewhat unlikely, but even if you were on the latest, that version of Windows ended support 2 Years ago!
That is really unfortunate, and it’s horrible that UAD has sat on this for so long, and not provided updates to their customers.
If DAW Manufacturer were refusing to update their DAW past Windows 7, I think you would have a reason to be upset at them, but certainly not Microsoft! Right? If CPU Manufacturer were still selling you CPUs but they wouldn’t run Windows OS past Windows 7 you wouldn’t buy them. Right?
You wouldn’t be complaining to Microsoft that their OS wouldn’t run on brand new CPUs because they stopped supporting Windows 7?, Or that it ruins your DAW that they stopped supporting Windows 7? And now you have to buy a brand new DAW. Would you? No, you would be upset at the CPU Manufacturer or the DAW Manufacturer. This is no different here.
I am truly shocked. Why would they go for so long and not stay up to date? I almost don’t want to post all of this because it seems like they might be hiring VST3 engineers real soon, and I don’t want to ruin my chances. They have to be working on it right? I mean, they have to be.
Are there any others? Where should I be looking to apply?
1 Like
Exactly.
UAD is expensive snake oil. Native plug-ins can do the job just as well, if not better,
The best thing Steinberg could do is ditch VST2 completely with C12. If UAD want to continue to sell their stuff then they better get their shirt together.
1 Like
Will only post once as I don’t want to derail but UAD’s stuff is the industry standard when it comes to accurate emulations and you’ll find them in every self respecting studio operation.
I’ve never bought a UAD plugin for more than $100 and even if you think native offerings are similar (I disagree) , you absolutely cannot track live with a chain of native plugins on a 100 track production that is full of plugins and bus processing, so DSP is absolutely necessary in many situations.
Their hardware is expensive, for good reason - I’m not sure if that’s the barrier you are referring to.
I would imagine that whilst Cubase is popular around here, it hasn’t been a major focus for them as it would not be particularly popular as a platform relative to things like Pro Tools, Logic and even their own LUNA offering. A bit like how they release things on Mac first, then take a while to get to PC (because it’s less of their user base).
My understanding is that yes, UAD is working on VST 3 compatibility - I would expect to see it not too long after Cubase 12 comes out.
This issue will, of course, only effect those on Mac M1 systems.
1 Like
Ouch! So personal.
I don’t know if that’s true. Do you need Fifty Thousand USD Dollars to be self respecting?
I get what you mean though, I can’t imagine trying to track live with a 100 track production native. At that point though, if you have that much …“self respect”… to spend, why not just buy the hardware?
And if you have that much “self respect”, do you even care about this issue? I wouldn’t think so.
Who do you know that’s tracking live on a 100 track production and bus processing that doesn’t have the hardware?
I guess I knew that this kind of stuff happened 20 years ago, and I know Avid still makes money, but I kind of thought those days were over. I mean, you don’t throw on a bunch of plugins recording an orchestra, there is plenty of time for that in post, and you don’t need 100 tracks for a 4 piece. Who is doing this?
Jean-Paul Fung?
1 Like
KOMPLETE - Native Instruments
UAD tools
Access Virus
Sylenth1
No, of course it’s not 1998, don’t be ridiculous…
Do you work professionally in music? or do you do it as a hobby? If you, did it professionally maybe you would know that many times it is required to open old projects … but that is not understood by those who think they are very “modernist” for leaving behind a standard file extension in the entire production industry.
1 Like