Excerpts from david's message of 2011-07-02 22:08:02 +0200: > Philipp Überbacher wrote: > > Excerpts from Leigh Dyer's message of 2011-07-02 18:55:07 +0200: > >> On 07/03/2011 02:24 AM, rosea grammostola wrote: > >>> They should release a LV2 version instead imho. LV2 is much better > >>> supported on Linux then VST. LV2 is ready for it... > >> I'm not sure that LV2 is really that much better supported -- it has > >> better support in open-source apps (notably Ardour 3), but Renoise > >> apparently has very solid native VST support. > > > > How many commercial hosts are there? There are certainly more free > > software hosts on Linux. > > > >> I'd love to have an LV2 Pianoteq, but being realistic, I know that > >> there's a good chance that it won't happen. I'm sure it's a lot of extra > >> work to implement support for a new plugin format, compared to simply > >> porting the existing VST code to a new platform. > > > > Both requires porting. I don't dare to judge how much work each case is. > > There aren't that many native VST plugins, so I guess it's far from > > simple. > > > >> If we want to encourage more commercial developers to bring their > >> Windows/OS X VST plugins across to Linux, I think having good native VST > >> support in common hosts is going to help. I know that's not a goal some > >> would share, but I'm personally in favour of having as many options > >> available as possible. > >> > >> Thanks > >> Leigh > > > > Native VST support is a bane. It will drag along the VST license > > troubles indefinitely. In my opinion every work done for native VST is > > work lost for LV2, and it's not like there are a lot of developers > > around. > > At one point native VST might have seemed attractive (VST but more > > stable than non-native, what else is the point of it?), but this > > must have been the time before LV2. DSSI and especially ladspa might > > have been limited in one way or another, but LV2 is potentially superior > > to VST and while there's certainly much that can be done, I doubt that > > it really lacks behind in capabilities even now. > > So in my opinion native VST should be forgotten about as fast as > > possible. > > Is LV2 available on Windows & Mac? > > If not, and VST wasn't a working option on Linux, then there'd be no > effort by makers of commercial VSTs for Windows/Mac to make them work on > Linux. Why do what might be difficult custom work (porting to LV2) for a > very small set of customers? The point was that to get native VSTs the windows VSTs need to be ported too. I really don't know what's easier, someone who's done both might know. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
