3

i wanted to create a Pattern oriented VST MIDI plugin with an editor (no audio processing, just a UI editor with a powerful pattern editor and randomizer).

i've read the terrible VST and VST module SDK documentation. I hope some of you can answer my questions:

  • Did i get this right: the VST SDK is for audio effects and instruments only whereas the VST module SDK is for MIDI effects only?
  • None of the samples of the VST module SDK is running (they require VSTGUI which is not in the VST module SDK. I tried to use VSTUI from: SDK 2.4, SDK 3.5.1 or the VSTGUI.sf but i can't compile it. It ends up with tons of errors.

Anyone there which can point me in the right direction? thx

AcidJunkie
  • 1,878
  • 18
  • 21

1 Answers1

1

Yeah, the VSTGUI source code is a mess. It went through a pretty nasty rewrite a few years ago, as did the VST SDK. BTW, the term "module SDK" is basically the same way of referring to the VST SDK. This term is probably used more frequently since version 3, as VST3 plugins are expanded in this respect.

Anyways, back to your project. If you intend to do no audio processing, I'd instead recommend implementing your plugin as an instrument which sends MIDI out. If you use the awesome Juce framework, you can accomplish this quite easily, as well as a nice GUI toolkit and design tool.

Nik Reiman
  • 39,067
  • 29
  • 104
  • 160
  • Thx for your quick answer. Well, in the developer download section are 3 downloads: VST SDK 3.5.1, VST SDK 2.4 and VST Module SDK. The VST 2.4 & Module SDK are both pretty old. I had the same idea as you. If i implement it as a VST3 plugin (inherited from AudioEffect class or Component Class) the plugin doesn't appear as a MIDI plugin. Instead it appears as a audio effect class. Any hints on this? Theres nothing in the VST 3 SDK to create pure MIDI plugins (the VST Module SDK has support for this). – AcidJunkie Apr 30 '12 at 13:14
  • You people must stop saying "awesome Juce framework" because it isn't that great, atleast it isn't today. Go there and read about the problems they are having at this very day, and you will see why you still want to write almost everything yourself. – Magnus Jan 26 '14 at 09:31
  • 1
    @Morgan, sorry but I respectfully disagree. Having worked with a number if pro audio companies who insisted on rolling everything themselves, Juce is a much better option. Rather than spread FUD, why not offer (or make) a suitable alternative? – Nik Reiman Feb 17 '14 at 08:10
  • @NikReiman why make a better one when that will end in a mess too when everything changes in the core, and the one owning the license abandons the ship more or less in the end. Happens all the time making all old sourcode become all useless, yes I've and is working with all sorts of frameworks and this is just going to be an endless debate. I'm just saying that people must lay down the Jesus sign here. – Magnus Feb 17 '14 at 16:43
  • @Morgan funny, you could make the exact same argument for the VST SDK itself (and with even greater emphasis on crazy licensing, bad ownership, messy code, etc). I guess there's no point in writing VST's at all then :P – Nik Reiman Feb 17 '14 at 20:12
  • @NikReiman You're right about that, the point was about all the praising. – Magnus Feb 19 '14 at 13:51
  • @Morgan fair enough. I admit Juce has its flaws, but I will continue to praise it until something better comes along. :) The best framework is the one which works today. – Nik Reiman Feb 24 '14 at 13:38
  • Hey Nik! Since you've tackled this problem before, what issues existed in the VST 3.* SDK that forced you to make a re-write? Also, what alternatives could you recommend for making software MIDI instruments that also have a solid SDK to support it in application development. I'm looking for something that's portable to a lot of platforms (Xbox, PC, Mac, iPhone) and VST seems like the best option right now. – Awesome-o Apr 06 '14 at 20:12
  • @Awesome-o I think you misread my answer -- I didn't do a rewrite, instead VSTGUI itself was rewritten between version 3 and 3.5. IMHO the VST3 SDK isn't even worth supporting, since it doesn't offer any compelling features and every literally host that supports VST3 also supports VST2.4. I'm a big Juce fan (as seen from my little debate in the comments above), that platform lets you easily export native plugins for all the platforms you mention above (except Xbox, unless it supports ActiveX plugins, I have no idea about that platform). – Nik Reiman Apr 08 '14 at 19:32
  • Thanks for the advice! I was looking at Juce and the API looks really solid. Usually I'm wary of do it all types of libraries but it seems very mature so I'm definitely willing to give it a shot :) – Awesome-o Apr 08 '14 at 22:57