Bitwig

gennargiu · Post by **gennargiu** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 7:00 pm

Bitwig 3 foresees in a short time the native insertion of the lv2 format for gnu linux system ? Many thanks for your support.

Gennaro

mclstr · Post by **mclstr** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 8:00 pm

Awesome.

ejgallego · Post by **ejgallego** » Mon Jul 22, 2019 10:50 pm

So far the answer to your question is no. And indeed, while LV2 and VST3 do have important differences, and LV2 is quite cool in projects like the MOD Duo, it doesn't make a lot of sense for Bitwig to add LV2 support given that VST3 is open source these days.

sth · Post by **sth** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 12:05 am

VST3 is hardly open-source. Besides that, there's ideological differences between the formats, and it's unlikely that the majority of either side would support both. LV2 support would be great, but for now we have workarounds like running them in a Carla Rack in its VST form.

lunardigs · Post by **lunardigs** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 2:14 am

Speaking of Carla, here's what FalkTX has said about VST3 licensing: https://linuxmusicians.com/viewtopic.ph ... =15#p81027

Personally, I'd really like to see LV2 support come to Bitwig. There's a lot of great LV2 stuff out there. Plus, LV2 is a really good technology.

gennargiu · Post by **gennargiu** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:29 am

hello friends, thanks for your answers, we hope in the future it is possible to have this technology natively on bitwig

gennaro

ejgallego · Post by **ejgallego** » Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:55 am

sth wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2019 12:05 am VST3 is hardly open-source.

This seems not correct, Robin Gareus confirmed it is OK https://github.com/steinbergmedia/vst3s ... -356310452

Besides that, there's ideological differences between the formats, and it's unlikely that the majority of either side would support both. LV2 support would be great, but for now we have workarounds like running them in a Carla Rack in its VST form.

Indeed support would be great but as long as LV2 is Linux-only it doesn't make a lot of sense for a cross-platform software to invest on it.

sth · Post by **sth** » Wed Jul 24, 2019 12:18 am

ejgallego wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:55 am This seems not correct, Robin Gareus confirmed it is OK https://github.com/steinbergmedia/vst3s ... -356310452

I wasn't saying that it wasn't open-source, but that it's hard to consider it as such given their past and current behavior with licenses. Technically, you may use some portions of the code they provide under a GPLv3 license. Although, if you tried to do that without signing their other license agreements then you'd be in violation!

ejgallego wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:55 am Indeed support would be great but as long as LV2 is Linux-only it doesn't make a lot of sense for a cross-platform software to invest on it.

LV2 is not Linux-only. Something like Audio Units (AUs) is specific to a certain platform, and my guess is Bitwig would go for that sooner than LV2 so I don't think this argument makes much sense. In any case, it's unfortunate for us.

ejgallego · Post by **ejgallego** » Wed Jul 24, 2019 1:48 pm

sth wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2019 12:18 am Technically, you may use some portions of the code they provide under a GPLv3 license. Although, if you tried to do that without signing their other license agreements then you'd be in violation!

This is not correct, some portions are under GPLv3 , some others are on other licenses, but all of them are compatible and suitable for distribution of binaries derived from open source plugins without signing any agreement.

lunardigs · Post by **lunardigs** » Wed Jul 24, 2019 8:32 pm

LV2 can run on any compatible host, regardless of OS. The developer would have to see to some details for full x-platform functionality, but nonetheless.

VST3 is license encumbered. It's not a matter open source code; the snares are within the licensing. Steinberg is simply adapting to the inevitable by making development easier. Otherwise, people would begin to leave. LV2 is a better technology by many accounts and vary well could be such an avenue.

VST is merely most functional right now and that's why we all use it.

ejgallego · Post by **ejgallego** » Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:19 pm

lunardigs wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2019 8:32 pm VST3 is license encumbered. It's not a matter open source code; the snares are within the licensing.

What does "license encumbered" mean?

sth · Post by **sth** » Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:31 am

ejgallego wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2019 1:48 pm
sth wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2019 12:18 am Technically, you may use some portions of the code they provide under a GPLv3 license. Although, if you tried to do that without signing their other license agreements then you'd be in violation!
This is not correct, some portions are under GPLv3 , some others are on other licenses, but all of them are compatible and suitable for distribution of binaries derived from open source plugins without signing any agreement.

Since we're speaking of Open Source, let's focus on that license. Yes, some portions are under GPLv3, and you can develop against that and release binaries and the source code; that of course makes sense and follows the GPLv3 license.

What I'm saying is that, under any circumstance, you can not develop with that or other portions of the SDK without agreeing to and signing a separate license agreement with Steinberg, as mentioned here by reference from their dual-license text: www.steinberg.net/sdklicenses_vst3

That, plus the additional required attributions to Steinberg, is what I believe is meant by "license encumbered."

Tj Shredder · Post by **Tj Shredder** » Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:49 am

The VST3 sdk has a wrapper for VST2, that is the only part which is not GPL. If you haven‘t signed the VST2 license in the past, you will not get it anymore. There is nothing wrong with Steinbergs VST3 GPL...
If Bitwig doesn‘t even support AU I would not expect them to support LV2. As there are wrappers, this isn‘t a show stopper at all...

ejgallego · Post by **ejgallego** » Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:32 am

sth wrote: ↑Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:31 am Since we're speaking of Open Source, let's focus on that license. Yes, some portions are under GPLv3, and you can develop against that and release binaries and the source code; that of course makes sense and follows the GPLv3 license.

What I'm saying is that, under any circumstance, you can not develop with that or other portions of the SDK without agreeing to and signing a separate license agreement with Steinberg, as mentioned here by reference from their dual-license text: www.steinberg.net/sdklicenses_vst3

That, plus the additional required attributions to Steinberg, is what I believe is meant by "license encumbered."

The license link you point about is very clear:

This Software Development Kit is licensed under the terms of the Steinberg VST3 License,
or alternatively under the terms of the General Public License (GPL) Version 3.

So I am not sure what you mean, but there is no problem that I can see with the license of VST3 from the free software point of view. It is not more encumbered than any other license.

Benutzername · Post by **Benutzername** » Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:31 am

Just wait until Steinberg releases VST4 and start to sue developers who still use VST3 for new projects. Then we'll see what the open source part of the license is worth.

Bitwig

KVR Audio

Bitwig 3 and future developer lv2 support gnu linux