From Steinberg News, May 16, 2018:

Late 2013 we announced that the Software Development Kit (SDK) for VST 2 would no longer be maintained and would only be available as subset of the VST 3 SDK. Five years down the line and this transitional phase is now also coming to an end.

From October 2018 onward we are closing down the second version of VST for good. While the VST 2 SDK has been unavailable, and so have maintenance and technical support, the subset within the VST 3 SDK will also be omitted.

VST 2 compatibility with Steinberg VST hosts will remain, however, we recommend to root for the latest version of VST. VST 2 was introduced in 1999 and since then the technology has evolved dramatically. Since 2008, the SDK for the third iteration of VST, VST 3, has been available and since then efforts are focused entirely on the further development of VST 3.

“We appreciate that developers and users alike gravitate strongly toward the VST 3 interface that comes with many technological advancements. By bidding farewell to VST 2, we hope to offer everyone a clear direction,” comments Yvan Grabit, technology lead at Steinberg.

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

 

I have a problem with this sentence: "We appreciate that developers and users alike gravitate strongly toward the VST 3 interface that comes with many technological advancements."

First, it should read: "We appreciate *the* developers and users alike *who* gravitate strongly toward the VST 3 interface..." Those 2.5 developers, and thousands of ignorant users who blindly embrace everything with a bigger number on it, or just blindly trust corporations who's P.R. articles are made by a team of solicitors, psychologists, sociologists...

Second: "...that comes with many technological advancements." Is generally about the sidechaning feature that Steinberg DAWs didn't have until VST3, but many other DAWs are capable of providing it without the VST3. There is really not many benefits for using VST3. This is straight from developer's mouths. Most of these "technological advancements" got implemented by the developers with VST2 already, like sidechainjng, and no CPU usage when not in use.

Steinberg you suck. *Badly.* In a monopolist way.
Reminds me of that old Pet Shop Boys song "Opportunities [Let's Make Lots of Money]".

 

Last edited: May 17, 2018

Does this mean that I cannot decide anymore in which (sub)folder I want to install a plugin? AFAIK them shitty vst3's decide that "themself".

 

Glad that I'm using Reaper

 

Fuck!
I really dislike this "we can't allow you to use your favorite plugins" BS. There should at least be an option in the preferences (or something) that lets you choose.

 

The several VST I use I never found any superiority of VST3 over VST2. As a user.
So I Always installed VST2 versions. No interference with several programs using the same VSTs

I think It's just easier for Steinberg to maintain only one VST Version. And this way it's easy for them to bring other vendors problems just by quitting VST2 support. e.g. Ableton

Yeah, and it's the same behaviour as with 32bit VSTs. There was no real need to quit the 32bit bridge.

 

Last edited: May 17, 2018

Will this just affect the user choosing Cubase or other iterations?

 

Dear Steinbergers,

No, I don't, really, believe me, not even close. I strongly anit-gravitate.

 

@superliquidsunshine: At the Moment this won't affect no one I think. Unless Steinberg forbids others to use their VST2 API. In this case no developer would be allowed to use it for a new Plugin or update any longer.

Do you remember the .GIF problem back in the 90ies. Compuserve gave it (the API) away to everyone for free and afterwards changed their policy and some years, after GIF spreaded, they demanded every developer to obtain a Paid license to use it.

 

Last edited: May 17, 2018

Yep.
Though you can always move them later, and for example REAPER would allow you to load VST3 from another directory, it's still a pain.
VST3 provides only marginal improvements over 2.5, discontinuting it on SDK level would greatly hurt DAW developers who haven't yet made the transition, and in effect, the customers.

LV2 FTW.

 

All they need to do is allow custom installations of the vst3 plugins - as everyone is complaining - to change names, root and subfolders.-- That is all. But this is the same shit as win 10 and all modern desperation to control and let no individual have any freedom.

 

WOW.

Installing every VST3 in C is my worst nightmare; DAW and the VST3 compatibility issue too.

 

time to remove all vst2 and improve daw performance

 

If you don't like the VST3 to reside on C you could easily move them to, say, D and set a symbolic link, this way I hope no need for panicing

 

Teach me how to do that.

 

They could open 2v source for the community to maintain. Chamunnity! Where’s my Linux dogz at?!

 

THIS IS FOR PC ONLY!

Syntax:
mklink /j "LINK" "TARGET"

Example:
LINK usually is C:\Program Files\Common Files\VST3 ... this is where VST3 plugins are (automatically) installed by setup (Steinberg VST3 standard location for 64bit plugs)
TARGET may be D:\VST3 ... this is the location where you want to put your plugin files physically

So the command is:
mklink /j "C:\Program Files\Common Files\VST3" "D:\VST3"

Procedure:
1st, create TARGET folder (mkdir "D:\VST3")
2nd, move existing folders/files to TARGET
3rd, delete physical C:\Program Files\Common Files\VST3 folder
4th, put the line into a command file (*.cmd) or command prompt

From that on, any program (Setup, DAW, ...) will "see" the standard folder (C:\...), but Windows will physically store the files on the location of your choice (e.g. D:\...)

If you want to get rid of a symbolic LINK just delete it. The files in the TARGET location will remain!

Naturally, the whole thing can also be done with other folders (for example, huge sampling libraries).

 

Last edited: May 17, 2018

@Pagurida

I LOVE this forum.
Thank you mate

 

Fuck Compuserve...excuse my French. What could it possibly matter to Steinberg if developers paid then cash for VST2 or something else that they go forward with?