search

LMMS / lmms

Cross-platform music production software
https://lmms.io
GNU General Public License v2.0
8.04k stars 1k forks source link

VST3 Support #4715

Open T0NIT0RMX opened 5 years ago

T0NIT0RMX commented 5 years ago

Hello, I'm re-opening issue #2352 It was from 2015, it was a copy-paste, and today, in 2018, the context is different.

Context : On the 1st Oct 2018, Steinberg stopped suporting VST2. What does that means ? (The way I understand it, based on this topic)

Since may, I'm working on a big project, a free EDM synthesizer, using Cabbage framework.. Unfortunately I can't release it as a VST2, because I'm too late in the game...

The only way I will be able to distribute it is by the form of a VST3, which support GPL3 licensing.

Request

I think it would be a really good improvement for LMMS, and I'd be pleased if my plugin could be compatible with the DAW I use.

Unfortunately, my knowledge to add this support is I think, too limited to lead the project, but I would be pleased to help & learn, so if you guys have knowldge about it, feel free to share it here so I can learn how it works in the same time (I know some devs have solid knowledge on this field, and would be interested to implement VST3 support for LMMS)

Thanks in advance,

T0NIT0RMX commented 5 years ago

@jasp00 @DomClark @PhysSong Could you guys help here ? Thanks in adance

jasp00 commented 5 years ago

For devs who don't have a license, unfortunately, they are not allowed to distribute VST2 in any ways

You can always use aeffectx.h from LMMS. There is no reason to ever drop VST2 support.

I do not think VST3 support is unwelcome. It should be optional because LMMS is GPL-2+. I believe this feature could be in 1.3.0, since you are volunteering.

Speaking for myself, 1.2.0 is the priority, so I will probably not help yet.

T0NIT0RMX commented 5 years ago

You can always use aeffectx.h from LMMS, they are not allowed to distribute VST2 in any ways

I don't talk about droping VST2 support in LMMS, but in Cabbage, the VST2 support will be dropped, and I don't know if it's really possible for Cabbage to use Vestige, because it relies on JUCE, so it would need a kind of wrapper to work with Vestige, if I understand well. Also, at the moment I don't really understand why using this aeffectx.h header would allow me to release VST2 plugins, Steinberg seems very clear about that so..

I would love a support of VST3 yeah, and @DomClark told me that he worked on a VST3 host, so I guess he could be able to implement that support (of course after lmms 1.2)

I'm volunteering, I don't have much knowledge in the LMMS project, but I'm here to learn.

jpcima commented 5 years ago

@T0NIT0RMX I implemented VeSTige support in JUCE for my own needs, and I submitted an answer at a Debian bug of the same topic. It's not yet answered but you may find this of interest. See https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=913915

T0NIT0RMX commented 5 years ago

@jpcima Sorry for the delay, i missed the notification mail.. so I read the mail on your link and this seems like a great solution ! I wonder something tho : do you think I could get Cabbage to work if I put your modified JUCE and then compile ? Do you used the same methods (sorry maybe it's not the right word here, I'm still learning) as in the original JUCE Version ?

jpcima commented 5 years ago

@T0NIT0RMX A simple way may be to follow identical steps as the Debian maintainer did to upgrade Juce without breaking the packages. The former GPL'd VST code from 5.3.2 can be backported in the recent releases, and the debian sources provide the way to patch it.

Inside the debian source archive, you will be able to locate needed files.

T0NIT0RMX commented 5 years ago

@jpcima Thanks for the explanation. Let's suppose I do this, will the resulting JUCE be free to all Steinberg code ?

At first sight, it seems like I'm just downgrading JUCE, but it would still contain some proprietary code, is this true ?

This is a real problem for me, I'm trying to find a way to build a vst from Cabbage using no proprietary vst code (so using vestige seems the way to go)

jpcima commented 5 years ago

Let's suppose I do this, will the resulting JUCE be free to all Steinberg code ?

It will be Steinberg-free. If the solution was fine enough for Debian, I expect it's probably good for free software use.

The former Juce version contained its own substitute of VST2 SDK, somehat similar to vestige, lincensed under GPL3 as you can observe by a look at the source file. https://github.com/WeAreROLI/JUCE/blob/5.3.2/modules/juce_audio_processors/format_types/juce_VSTInterface.h

You can look at juce forums for information, the VST2 issue has been discussed at great length.

T0NIT0RMX commented 5 years ago

Alright ! I get it ! But what about your JUCE fork with vestige ? I mean, okay going back to an old version of JUCE may solve the problem, but wouldn't it be better if I use you vestige JUCE in Cabbage ?

Sorry for all the questions, im still learning things about all of this and now I have to figure out a solution to release my vst legally for free, if applying the patch you mentioned earlier can help I'll go with it ! I may still have some other questions during the process

I just need to make sure their version was legally reverse engineered

jpcima commented 5 years ago

The use of vestige remains probably the option of least legal uncertainty. I am just a developer not lawyer, and don't have the clear answer, and probably no one else has.

What is known: (1) vestige has remained unattacked after years of use, including after the increased hostility of Steinberg towards legacy VST (2) Juce VSTInterface backporting was taken as official method for Juce 5.4.1 in Debian Sid.

Just know that vestige comes with a few elements of lost functionality in comparison to Juce or SDK. (as listed on Debian thread)

I just need to make sure their version was legally reverse engineered

Despite that it's marked as GPL, Juce VSTinterface most likely was not. As I recall, it was agreed for distribution in that way by an agreement of the two companies.

T0NIT0RMX commented 5 years ago

Thanks, I documented on the topic from JUCE forum And now, since October 2018, it seems like the old implementation of vst used in previous versions of JUCE is now forbidden (but again it's a hard to understand topic)

So that seems to remove using JUCE old implementation fromy list of options.

So I will use your JUCE fork, or maybe I can use Cabbage's JUCE and then apply some of your commits to it to make it work with vestige ?

What commits are actually responsible of that change ? (Btw, just saw some of your comment on a tuxfalily forum, seems you are french too, so if I can contact you by email and write in french it would be easier I think)

jpcima commented 5 years ago

if I can contact you by email and write in french it would be easier I think

I'm reachable on linuxmao IRC and I watch a number of forums there, and the mail address is on the website on my profile page. It's better to continue the discussion somewhere else, given it's somewhat deviated of the original VST3 topic.

Spekular commented 4 years ago

Closing and consolidating into #5433

DomClark commented 4 years ago

VST3 is VST in name only - as far as the code goes, it's as different to VST2 as something like LV2 or LADSPA is. I don't think it's meaningful to consolidate it with other VST issues unless the intention is to create a generic "external plugins" meta-issue.

Spekular commented 3 years ago

I've hidden off-topic comments and removed the preview of Tone-Z to keep this issue more focused. As pointed out in #5746, it strayed from the topic quite a bit for a while.

LoveBodhi commented 3 years ago

VST2 SDK is non-free (no longer licensed by Steinberg!) and this doesn't support VST3 (Stardream Error Code G1811)......

tresf commented 4 months ago

🇻🇸🇹 2️⃣ SDK is non-free (no longer licensed by 🍺 berg!) and this doesn't support 🇻🇸🇹 3️⃣ (Stardream Error Code G1811)......

Just for clarification, our 🇻🇸🇹 2️⃣ header is not from Steinberg, it's a clean room reverse engineered header from long ago (and we're likely switching to a new one soon): https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/issues/2003#issuecomment-2110865405

I understand that there's a history of 🍺 berg bullying projects still using the old API. I can only hope we don't fall subject to this. (Text obfuscated to thwart keyword crawlers).

ghost commented 1 month ago

Does anyone have an idea when LMMS will finally start supporting VST3 plugins? It’s 2024 now, and adding VST3 plugin support to LMMS would greatly benefit many music producers. The sooner this feature is implemented, the better.

tresf commented 1 month ago

LMMS is open source. Features are added by volunteers. If you want a feature sooner, we're always welcoming new contributors. Statements like "the sooner the better" or "it's 2024 now" do not help, not in the slightest. Please do not come here to complain.

ghost commented 1 month ago

LMMS is open source. Features are added by volunteers. If you want a feature sooner, we're always welcoming new contributors. Statements like "the sooner the better" or "it's 2024 now" do not help, not in the slightest. Please do not come here to complain.

I sincerely apologize if my comment came across the wrong way. My intention was to highlight the benefits of VST3 support for many producers, not to pressure anyone. I appreciate all the hard work being done by the volunteers.

ghost commented 1 month ago

Hi everyone,

I noticed that my second most recent comment regarding VST3 plugin support for LMMS was marked as off-topic. I believe this feature is crucial for many music producers, including myself, and aligns with the ongoing discussions about enhancing LMMS.

Could you please review my comment and consider unmarking it as off-topic? If there are specific guidelines I should follow to ensure my contributions are on-topic, I would appreciate any feedback.

Thank you for your understanding and support.

Best regards, Unerium

tresf commented 1 month ago

I noticed that my second most recent comment regarding VST3 plugin support for LMMS was marked as off-topic.

It's closer to spam/too repetitive. Off-topic was chosen to be polite.

ghost commented 1 month ago

I noticed that my second most recent comment regarding VST3 plugin support for LMMS was marked as off-topic.

It's closer to spam/too repetitive. Off-topic was chosen to be polite.

  • Telling us what year it is not helpful to this bug report
  • Demanding a timeline for this feature is not helpful to this bug report
  • Expressing how important VST3s are is not helpful as this is widely known by devs and the community.

I understand and apologize for any confusion or frustration my comments may have caused. My intention is to help other music producers and bring the best possible value to our community. I realize that my approach might have come across as repetitive or demanding, and for that, I’m sorry. I’m passionate about accelerating the feature of VST3 support in LMMS because I believe it will greatly benefit many users. While I can’t help with coding, I’m eager to support in any other way I can without causing stress. Thank you for your understanding.

tresf commented 1 month ago

I’m passionate about accelerating the feature of VST3 [...] I can’t help with coding

This is a code repository; these are coding tasks so that's always the best place to start.

Click to expand off-topic-stuff...
Every developer that's here helping with LMMS came here because something wasn't working properly or something was missing. Each developer was passionate enough to ask for help and then took time to get the bug/feature working. Here's my story: In my case, I had some basic coding experience, not much experience with C++ or with CMake... but had drive and motivation to get it working. Perhaps VST3 can be your story. (/end off-topic-stuff)

We do tolerate the occasional thread bump here, especially for major bugs or small code fixes that get forgotten. This is a missing feature that requires significant coding to get working, so bumping it isn't going to make it happen any faster. If the final holdup comes down to licensing, I'd be happy to help with that portion.