| Author |
 Topic  |
kylen
Posts: 290
|
 Posted - Thu Jun 19, 2003 9:54 am |
|
|
Hi CEP customers,
I've just been informed by support that VST/DX wrapper usage is unpredictable and unsupported.
I have VST adapter 4.3 (Cakewalk), Spinaudio 1.0, and Directixer 2.3 and they all have some sort of trouble. That's OK, things break from time to time. That's not what this thread is about.
What isn't OK is for Cool Edit Pro not to support wrappers. I've just told support that I understand their current position but would like to speak to someone who can control such things for future releases.
So, CEP customers, is anybody with me ? If you want to use VST wrappers for all of those gorgeous VST effects out there, regardless of whether your wrapper is working at the present time, join me in letting Adobe know what their paying customers want !
I'll let you know where I send my request for VST wrapper support when I find out.
This is a public service announcement. Exercise the [reasonable] power of the customer (you don't have to wear arm bands or anything).:D
kylen
|
|
kylen
Posts: 290
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:26 am |
|
|
Well Support has replied back twice on this one.
A+ for responsiveness, F- for content and attitude.
The jist of it is don't bother asking, there is no one else to talk to abou this request. So I've been stopped at the support level.
I suppose I could contact sales but now I'm starting to get that 'what is the future' feeling over here...X(
kylen
|
|
zemlin
Location: USA
Posts: 1156
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:53 am |
|
|
I own the spin audio wrapper (pro) and I fail to see how you can feel that Syntrillium/Adobe has any obligation to its functionallity. It is code written by someone else that converts a VST plugin to DX. If the DX version doesn't work, that's purely an issue with the wrapper. The wrapper is not even in memory (AFAIK) when using a converted plugin.
FWIW, I have not encountered any "issues" with the Spin Audio wrapper Pro. If you're using the freebee version, spend the $40 on the pro version - it's a different animal altogether, FAR better and well worth the $$.
If you have an issue with a wrapper, contact the company that wrote the wrapper!
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:53 am |
|
|
I must be confused, because.... I've used a VST wrapper in both ver 1.2a and the "Demo" of Ver2.0. I'm almost sure that I've seen folks posting on subjects pertaining to using them in ver 2.1. As noone else has posted in this particular thread, there's no way to clarify the matter... yet! Hopefully, someone will come along and clear it up. And... of course, I could trip'n! 
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 19, 2003 11:00 am |
|
|
Boing! There you go..... Thanks Karl, I was starting to think I was losing it or something. I do agree that it sounds more like an issue with the wrapper itself and not anything to do with Synth/Adobe.
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
kylen
Posts: 290
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 19, 2003 11:25 am |
|
|
Hi zemlin & Voodoo
Yes I have the full versions of all of those things and I have contacted the manufacturer. Two very important tips.
I like contacting both the plug vendor and the host. I've been in software long enough to know that just when I think I know how something works then I've either; #1 made a wrong assumption or #2 something has changed which puts me back to #1 anyway.
Out on the edges where the interfaces touch is where a lot of trouble lies and I want the folks on each side to be working together. I don't have that in this case when Cool Edit Pro support says the results are unpredictable and not supported. That's why I was trying to focus this thread to what their official position should be and get some help from you fine folks. Otherwise you'll be in production and something will hiccup and guess what, you have to tear down and go over to a more VST friendly (support wise) host. Just thinking of your future here ! Don't get grumpy 
It's good to know there are a lot of VST plug users out here when I have a specific question. If we had a (usable) user configuration screen to go to I could find you there too !
Anyway Directixer works fine in Sonar for this particular plug, CurveEQ I think is what I'm complaining about here.
|
|
|
|
|
ozpeter
Location: Australia
Posts: 3200
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 19, 2003 4:28 pm |
|
|
I realise that you are trying to get some help on this issue on behalf of users in general, Kylen, but for myself I wouldn't expect more commitment from Syntrillium / Adobe to wrapped VST support at this time.
I guess the problem with stating that VST wrapping is supported is that it's a three way thing - if there's a problem with any given wrapped effect, it could lie with the effect code, the wrapper code, or the host code. Syntrillium / Adobe must be confident that CE will correctly interface with any DX effect that meets the standards for DX effects. Presumably when a wrapped VST effect doesn't work, it's because the output from the wrapper doesn't meet standards, and in turn the wrapper writers aren't going to certify that regardless of the VST code input to their software, the output will always be a standard DX effect. Before paying money for a VST effect, I'd always try it first with the wrapper and if it won't work, I simply wouldn't buy it. If I felt strongly about it, I might say to the VST author, "90% of VST's work with CE via a wrapper, and yours doesn't - are you sure you've got it right?".
Another factor is that you don't have to be much of a software house to produce VST effects, and I'm sure the CE people wouldn't want to spend time teaching semi-amateurs with a VST code generator how to do the job properly, which is what the might get into if they stated that all VST's are supported via all wrappers.
I too am a happy little wrapper - using the full version of the SpinAudio wrapper - and if Syntrillium said that CE should normally work with wrapped VSTs, which in my experience it does, then that's all that I'd personally expect of them.
- Ozpeter
|
|
|
|
|
kylen
Posts: 290
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 19, 2003 5:37 pm |
|
|
OK, end of day tally:
:)Cool Edit VST users statisfied with Adobe VST policy = 3
:(Cool Edit VST user not satisfied with Adobe VST policy = 1.2
Well then if I round my vote up to 2 (.2 extra cause it's my thread) then I still lose 3 to 2. Hmmm... let me think about this.
|
|
rjt
Posts: 91
|
| Posted - Sat Jun 21, 2003 6:35 am |
|
|
You could add to me those who think that Synt/Adobe has the right to say what they want. If they don't want to support wrappers, that's their business. That fact is, that may make their software less marketable or desirable for a number of musicians who would like access to the vast number of VST effects and synths offered. It is a business decision.
On the other hand, I have the latest version of the FXpansion wrapper and have not had problems with it in CEP.... at all. I bought Project 5 and their wrapper, (which cakewalk bought out from FXpansion) crashes CEP when you exit the plug in. Cakewalk is aware of this bug and they may or may not decide to fix it.
On the other hand, I had some Steinberg plug ins, and the directX versions did not work in CEP. When I e-mail support, CEP tried to look into it. Although Steinberg admitted the problem, apparently they wouldn't share code with CEP so the problem never got fixed. As CEP adversitises they work with DirectX, they wanted to make it right, at least they gave it the old college try!
Take Care
|
|
|
|
|
kylen
Posts: 290
|
| Posted - Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:23 am |
|
|
| Quote: | | You could add to me those who think that Synt/Adobe has the right to say what they want. If they don't want to support wrappers, that's their business. That fact is, that may make their software less marketable or desirable for a number of musicians who would like access to the vast number of VST effects and synths offered. It is a business decision. |
Hi rjt,
I think your quote pretty much sums up the views on this forum.
That's cool ! The fact that only 3 or 4 people have replied says a few things also.
For everyone else following this,
I've been thinking about this for a few days now and my attitude is that I am an Adobe customer and they should include my requirements in business decisions they make. Since they don't want to include VST support and the Cool Edit users don't want it either then it's really a simple problem for me to solve. I won't build a production platform using a component where the vendor tells me directly that they don't support it. It's hard enough to get a vendors' support on supported stuff in some cases.
So my problem is to find a vendor who supports the additions, extentions, interfaces, etc that I am building on top of their platform. I have grown in a new direction to support my current mastering technique that CEP native plugs and DX plugs do not entirely support. (We can start another thread on CEP and mastering issues if anyone wants but that's not the point here in this thread)
So in this case where I need VST plug support I'll simply use Sonar 2.1, Directixer 2.3, and Xlutop Chainer (featured in April 2003 Computers and Music) and any of my DX and VST plugins I need for final [pre]-mastering. Everything works fine over there, for, now, knock on a fir.
I've been using Cool Edit since '96 and it's worked perfectly for me since then for capturing, transcribing, archiving. In fact you guys haven't seen me here at the forums till recently when I decided to get into mastering.
So I'll see you pardners around for other things, not VST though.
Like John Wayne might have said, "Use a similie face when you say that mister !":)
kylen
|
|
|
|
|
jonrose
Location: USA
Posts: 2901
|
| Posted - Sat Jun 21, 2003 9:14 pm |
|
|
| kylen wrote: | | Quote: | The fact that only 3 or 4 people have replied says a few things also.
|
Yes, it does... it's says that a few people have weighed-in on this issue. However, I'd also point out that not everyone frequents this third-party plugin forum, and certainly not all the time. And, it's been only two days since you posted this thread (on a weekend, no less, and last night there were virtually no members logged-in for several hours, which is rare). And you might not realize this, but some members just won't post when things are controversial, because they're not at all comfortable getting into the fray.
Syntrillium has always said it doesn't support VST. And yes, that's (overwhelmingly) a business decision. The simple fact is, they didn't want to have to charge more for this program, which licensing the technology from Steinberg would most certainly have forced them to do. It then easily follows that they wouldn't put any time or money into wrapper-support (although many of us have used them successfully despite this).
I think I'd at least let the glue dry for awhile, if I were you - Adobe just purchased Syntrillium's technology assets a short time ago. We have absolutely no idea what they have in mind for this program, and I wouldn't begin to second guess them, now.
All the best.... -Jon
_________________
|
|
|
|
rjt
Posts: 91
|
| Posted - Sun Jun 22, 2003 5:31 am |
|
|
I don't think Adobe would have to license VST technology to offer occasional tech support for a wrapper developed by a 3rd party. If they did that, they could offer some suggestions to the person needing support or possibly work a bit with the wrapper developer. That is a lot different than including support in the program itself. For many years Cakewalk didn't formally offer support, (like they do now, buying out FXpansions wrapper), but their staff would try to answer questions about wrappers. At least the one time I had a plug in which didn't work with the wrapper they answered my question.... turned out to be a problem with the plug-in which was quickly updated. In any event, kind of moot point.... 1)Adobe/Synt is not supportive of VST, 2)wrappers generally work well in CEP and 3)Sonar is available to those of us who want a compnay with VST support (and midi editing and softsynths etc. etc.)
Take Care
|
|
Bernie
Posts: 15
|
| Posted - Fri Jun 27, 2003 9:44 am |
|
|
| rjt wrote: | | ....That fact is, that may make their software less marketable or desirable for a number of musicians who would like access to the vast number of VST effects and synths offered. It is a business decision. |
And there is the bottom-line! All Adobe products are professional software. So I think we can expect Adobe Cool Edit to support VSTs if it's going to compete with Cakewalk, Steinberg and the like. Unless someone can give a good technical reason why it would be out of the question to add VTS support to Cool Edit.
Bernie.
|
|
Graeme
Member
Location: Spain
Posts: 4663
|
| Posted - Fri Jun 27, 2003 11:34 am |
|
|
| Bernie wrote: | | And there is the bottom-line! All Adobe products are professional software. |
The implication being that Syntrillium products aren't? I think you're treading on dangerous ground here - this forum is stuffed with users working within a professional environment.
| Bernie wrote: | | So I think we can expect Adobe Cool Edit to support VSTs if it's going to compete with Cakewalk, Steinberg and the like. Unless someone can give a good technical reason why it would be out of the question to add VTS support to Cool Edit. |
I don't think there any technical reasons against it. You may well be right and Adobe will actually do it - but you can be sure that we are going to be the ones to pay for it!
VST is a proprietary standard, which simply means, if you want it, someone has to pay for it. I suspect this is the reason that Syntrillium have never incorporated VST - they would have had to buy a licence and then charge us for the privilege.
Personally, I have experienced very few problems with using a wrapper for VST. Other than a couple of rogue plug-ins, it always seems to have worked fine. There are so many plug-ins available - for virtually every different function you can think of - with such duplication of effort that, should you find one from software house A doesn't work, try one from B - it probably will.
|
|
Bernie
Posts: 15
|
| Posted - Fri Jun 27, 2003 2:29 pm |
|
|
Oh I think that the Adobe Cool Edit will be a more expensive program anyway. Just pop over to the Adobe site and tell me whether their products are "value-for-money" or top-of-the-range products aimed at professionals  . Adobe (so far) have not made cheap products. If we have to pay twice or triple the current price, you can be sure that the product will be twice or three times as good! . Or does every Cool Edit user think that the program is so great that it can't be made that much better? It can and will be, or Adobe would not have bothered. As much as I love Cool Edit, it's wanting in several important areas. This is why Cool Edit is not my ONLY audio tool. I also love Sequoia for instance. Adobe should take a look at that baby.
The issue with VST is a huge one, and I hope it's addessed by Adobe's release of Cool Edit, we really are missing out on so many tools, synths, plugins, and we shouldn't be deprived of those just because we like to use Cool Edit. There aren't just half a dozen VST plugs and synths, there are literally hundreds! Why would so many companies even think about creating VSTs if they were not used much? Cakewalk have a VST adapter now, why would that be? There are people in here screaming out for a VST wrapper solution, why is that?
I've addressed your other point in another thread, I won't repeat myself.
Bernie.
|
|
|
|
|
kylen
Posts: 290
|
| Posted - Fri Jun 27, 2003 3:56 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | | I've addressed your other point in another thread, I won't repeat myself. |
Hi Bernie, who ya talkin to and what about? Can you try usin those quote thingies that way I don't have to take a jet out of Oakland, switch at Kennedy, get off at Heathrow, find out what pub you're hangin in so I can watch your eyes and body language and see for myself!
Save me some money!:D
Thanks for your interest in VST on CEP, per someone elses suggestion, jonrose, I'm just listening and learning what the 'People's Voice' is concerning official support of the interface. VST is half my mastering setup right now so it's kind of important. Plus I'm thinkin of gettin into it myself who knows, it's down the list though (behind my RNC that came in today - did I mention that anywhere?). Maybe a grass-roots uprising will change the future, maybe not.
kylen
|
|
Graeme
Member
Location: Spain
Posts: 4663
|
| Posted - Fri Jun 27, 2003 4:10 pm |
|
|
AIR, Sequoia sells for something like $2,500. For that money I would expect it to be somewhat more advanced than CEP. Whether or not it offers ten times the 'value for money' is highly debatable.
I would love to own a full CEDAR system, but the cost far outstrips its earning potential for me, so I'll just have to stagger along using stuff mere mortals can afford. Funnily enough, I get just as good results for very little extra effort.
|
|
ozpeter
Location: Australia
Posts: 3200
|
| Posted - Fri Jun 27, 2003 5:11 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | | Adobe (so far) have not made cheap products. |
That's a bit of a sweeping statement. I have three Adobe products that I can think of on my PC and I didn't pay anything for them (give-away software bundled with other stuff). But perhaps their flagship products are sold for flagship prices.
- Ozpeter
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
| Posted - Fri Jun 27, 2003 5:15 pm |
|
|
IMO, the whole, "it's more expensive, so it's gotta be better...." thing is the very reason so many studio's are STUCK with their P/T investments. Face it, it ain't better just because it cost more. A software's capabilities have alot to do with the end user. 
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
kylen
Posts: 290
|
| Posted - Fri Jun 27, 2003 8:34 pm |
|
|
Allright you guys, we're not doin a feature comparison on a $2500 software to a $250 software host - no orders of magnitudes please !:)
VST license fees do keep coming up though, does anyone know what the range of fees are off the top of their heads:???:
I've paid $15 or $25 dollar license fees for mp3 so if it's in that range it's one thing for my wallet and maybe not so good for someone elses.
"Feature Creep" can end up defocusing some products but improving others...my view from the bottom!
Like, what features does the Cool Edit User community want supported in your host - if it's VST then Post This thread - pro,con keep it comin...
kylen
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
| Posted - Sat Jun 28, 2003 6:50 am |
|
|
There was a "similiar" thread way back after the 1.2a release where folks "expressed" their desires for various implements. I still maintain today (as I did then) that I have no use for MIDI capabilities and.... most pertenent effect programs offer both VST and DX, so I don't require the VST capabilities either. Of course, I realize that others mileage may (does) vary.
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
Bernie
Posts: 15
|
| Posted - Sat Jun 28, 2003 5:06 pm |
|
|
True Graeme, Sequoia isn't a consumer product, I used it at the BBC, and was very impressed!
Just wondering kylen, do you think you might get better support from Adobe on this question?
|
|
kylen
Posts: 290
|
| Posted - Sat Jun 28, 2003 6:07 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | | Just wondering kylen, do you think you might get better support from Adobe on this question? |
Hi Bernie,
I contacted Adobe/Syntrillium support recently about that very thing but I think due to the merger, trying to do the next thing (whatever it is), and do sustaining support on Cool Edit it's not a hot issue. In fact they have made it clear that it's not any issue for the present anyway.
I'm hoping that folks will continue to post here with pro/con statements so if there is enough of a need then the new company could see that at least. So far everyone seems to be happy with the support of Cool Edit in its' current form.
VST (in a wrapper) works for me 99% of the time in CEP and when it doesn't the kind folks on the forum here usually have suggestion or 2. When I need to I go over to another platform to work out stuff (like Sonar who supports VST adapters) but it just depends what I'm doing.
So, what's the score now ?
2 members for VST (in wrappers) support
8999 members against (current membership)
We're growing !
kylen
|
|
| |
Topic
|
|
All Forums
VST plugin wrapper support in CEP 2.1
