This was @brad’s last statement (from above):
VST version is unlikely, Rewire support more likely, VST bridge is another possibility.
I think that pretty well said it all, after all the discussions and re-hashes of the same discussions. Any news would come directly from Brad.
What mean exactly this VST bridge?
Never used it, but I think it is a way to link vsts between two different applications. Someone can correct me on that if wrong, or better explain it.
I think there has been a couple of “VST Bridges” from Steinberg over time, one for the apple transition from ppc to intel chips, the other to use 32<->64 bit plugins.
Not sure what did Brad mean by this for Cantabile, anyway that Vst Rack we are talking about could probably be the best “bridge”.
Here is a currently developed product that accomplishes racking in a portable VST format and is apparently highly thought of in Samplitude circles. One feature I really like about it is its ability to split a signal into multiband components for further processing with plugins of choice:
Here is a no longer developed product (VSTForx) that also accomplishes portable racking in both VST and VSTi formats:
I’m currently using VSTForx with no real issues so far…but taking a good look at Metaplugin for possible upgrade. Nice to have these options to augment what Cantabile offers.
For over a year now I’ve been using Unify (Amazing new plug-in Unify). It is a VST that allows you to create patches of all your other VSTs in layers. Has built-in effects, over 500 patches out of the box by a great sound designer, additional sound libraries you can purchase, etc. But you can load Unify into itself as additional layers too. It works both standalone and in Cantabile or a DAW. And they’re doing a ton of continuous development on it.
So I’ve been working on building my favorite “racks” which are just Unify patches, in Unify. Then I use them in Cubase when composing, or Cantabile when performing. No more rebuilding these all over the place. Also, it’s super easy to quickly add another Unify patch into your existing one (can do it live without glitching). Whenever I get a new VST I’ll go to Unify, create a new library for that VST, and start saving patches in there of my favorite sounds, along with a mastering layer of effects. I have tags and categories for patches so they’re much easier to find in one place.
Unify isn’t a Cantabile replacement, but an awesome VST that is incredibly flexible and I never do any live or composing without it now. So I don’t need Cantabile as a VST; would rather Brad work on other things that make Cantabile great.
@Lowell, not sure if I fully agree with you on this…
I have been a Unify user from the start, but I am still wondering how to use Unify in linked racks and benefit from Cantabile memory management (preloading an entire setlist). Does that work with Unify?
Also, Unify adds 2-3% CPU for every instance; so if we package a VST with Unify, and we have several for a live song, it could easily add up 10% or more to CPU, which is something we do not want
Plus it adds a level of complexity for Cantabile, which is also something we might want to avoid in a live situation
Having loads of racks in Cantabile done (especially last year in Covid times), I’d still love to see Brad providing an option to have the racks available in (other) DAWs
If you found a solution for the linked racks with Unify, I’d be happy to learn…
Update on Kushview Element as a portable rack solution, it does support automation of 8 VST parms in its current build in addition to supporting midi learn in plugins so equipped. Its similar to DDMF’s Metaplugin, and given that Element is opensource, I have at least some suspicions that Meta may be a derivative of Element. Element is a bit green feeling with a few quirks, but the more I use it the better I like it.
I have looked at Unify, but would love to see Brad do an equivalent where you have a Cantabile rack without extra performance overhead that you can use in other hosts.
Appreciate it is not likely, but if you don’t ask…
I guess if nothing like what I am asking for is on the horizon by the end of the year, then I may go the unify route - no rush right now whilst you can’t gig…
I’m not sure why Unify would be any different in preloading entire setlists. It is a VST, so it preloads just like any other VST. I use it a lot in Cantabile for all live work. As to CPU, I’ve not seen Unify add any more overhead than loading the VSTs themselves into a Cantabile rack.
I’ve been converting my Cantabile racks into single Unify patches, so one patch has 3-5 VSTs in it; you don’t need a single Unify instance for a single VST. I’m sure you know this, but it sounds like you’re packaging “a VST with Unify and have several for a live song”… sounds like you’re doing these individually. Am I missing something?
Even if you don’t use Unify to replace racks, it’s an amazing VST. Even with the built-in 500+ patches, I’ve never favorited a larger percentage of built-in patches from any other instrument I’ve used. The sound designer does work for Korg and other synth companies and really has an ear for it.
Then what they’ve just done with their Discover Station library for the BBC Orchestra is very cool…
@Lowell: A bit longer response to explain my reasoning
First let me repeat my wish for the option to have Cantabile racks available in other VSTs. And I do like Unify, so this is not to bash Unify…
UNIFY fulfills a part of the need to be able to have setups portable between DAWS, but in my view misses out on a number of key features available in Cantabile
UNIFY DOES NOT REPLACE CANTABILE
This is what we agree on. UNIFY is a nice new development that enables us to have preset/setups portable between DAWS. But the strong points of CANTABILE are - for me at least – the setlists that can be preloaded, using linked racks in various songs. Like this, if I have for example five songs all with my favorite Omnisphere strings patch of let say 2GB ram inside, it only loads that linked rack once - using 2Gb RAM instead of 10Gb RAM memory -, with no waiting times between the songs. UNIFY and DAWs cannot do this. Furthermore, UNIFY does not have setlists. Reaper for example does have setlists, but does not have the linked racks memory saving option, so your memory is pretty full if you load already a few songs. As far as I know, Unify cannot load two songs at the same time. So there are waiting times between loading two songs.
So we want to explore if it makes sense to use UNIFY within CANTABILE. At least this is what I am trying.
If we use SINGLE VSTs with a UNIFY patch, the 2-3% CPU load of each Unify instance will add up in songs that would contain then several UNIFY patches. Also, CANTABILE in a preload setlist mode would recognise all these single UNIFY patches as separate items and accumulate on memory and CPU usage.
If we use MUTIPLE VSTs within a single UNIFY song patch within a CANTABILE song, we indeed only add little CPU and we do have the advantage to be able to port the patch to a DAW for recording etc. BUT, we lose here the option to have linked racks. Also, again, CANTABILE setlist with songs build from single UNIFY song patches will be pre- loaded as if they are all unique items, so accumulating all the memory and CPU needed for the individual VST and patches.
So I came to a point where I am wondering where UNIFY does help me out with respect to CANTABILE, and as it stands I do not see the benefit of using UNIFY within CANTABILE, at least not if you have songs with demanding sample-based VSTs like Omnisphere etc. that you want to use in live situations.
What UNIFY does well in my judgement is using multiple core functionality.
Perhaps UNIFY still grows in functionality, but I do hope @Brad is able to develop the Cantabile Rack porting possibility. A bit like the Reason Rack option.
Though I fully agree that it would be nice to have a Cantabile rack in the DAW I can imagine that it’s not so easy to implement since cantabile has its own preset management system.
BTW: Recently I tried out the Studio One Show Page. Though it is nice to have it as a Studio One user it its far away from the flexibility Cantabile has. You can’t even set split points for virtual instruments. I asked Presonus and they answered something like “… you can do that with your hardware”. Hm, I have 3 masterkeyboards at different locations and I don’t want to reprogram the hardware everytime I make a new song. This must be possible in the software.
There are many vst hosts which could do the bridge but no one will be like a “Rack vst host” this will be the best.
About Unify its a great idea, great host, great Synth, but it lacks audio input in any way and that limits it very much to serve the pourpose we are talking here, because not all people are using VSTIS some do process audio live with Cantabile. Will love unify if it will do that as well.
After a time researching this matter I think Patchwork is one of the best options and probably the one I will end purchasing wiht a Cantabile Solo version, otherwise I would purchase Cantabile Performer, I will do in the future if it adds this function, because its very important to have the same presets in Cantabile and in the Daw.
So to clarify, it seems like folks who want Cantabile as a VST want it so they can use their existing rack setups in a DAW (i.e. not in live performance). That is why I’m talking about Unify. It is “platform agnostic” in that sense. Use it in Cantabile, use it in a DAW. So we don’t need Unify to have setlists, etc.; Cantabile is IMO the best live performance tool for us Windows users.
For live performances, yes, Cantabile can load a linked rack with the resources of the 1 rack across multiple songs. This is only a benefit if your songs actually use similar racks, which is a scenario I suspect many people have, though not all of us. So that efficiency diminishes if you don’t use the same setups across songs as much.
So regarding using Unify for your setups, and then using it in Cantabile not just your DAW… You can create linked racks with Unify inside no problem; it’s a VST of course. So you can take advantage of both the power of Unify and the resource usage of Cantabile. Yes, this does require creating a rack with Unify in it, but little needs to be done with that rack setup other than just adding in Unify because you’ve already set up all your FX, layers, other VSTs, macro/CC controls, keyboard splitting and dynamics, routing (via ComboBox), etc. inside of the Unify patch.
What I do is use Unify to build my favorite patches, and use them anywhere; standalone, DAW, Cantabile. In Cantabile for live performances I build a simple rack with the Unify patch (or patches) in it. Best of both worlds.
Also, with Unify’s PolyBox you can make a monophonic instrument polyphonic, or use it to tame crazy CPU usage in heavy multis in Omnisphere, for example. Those things I can’t do in a Cantabile rack (and don’t need it to, frankly; it’s not really the purpose of Cantabile).
I’m curious, what would you need audio input for in Unify? Again, Unify is not a replacement for Cantabile. You can process live audio in Cantabile and use Unify as a platform agnostic “rack” system for your setups.
If I am not mistaken, Blue Cat could also be used. I could build my BC racks in Cantabile, and pick them up in the DAW. I haven’t tried it, but seems very possible. Regardless, rebuilding racks in outside software is time consuming, so might as well rebuild them in the DAW to begin with, instead of wasting time going through other software. Just saying…
Oh yeah, rebuilding “racks” anywhere is time consuming. I’ve been looking for a platform-agnostic tool that can be that “one place” I have all my favorite patches, categorized and tagged and searchable. I thought Akai’s VIP could be that, but it seemed really clunky and confusing to work with. I watched some videos on how to use but still, it didn’t seem to do what I wanted.
When I started with Unify, and now a year later, I still think this is that one place for me. They keep adding pretty useful and cool functionality to the app, increasing its “instrumentality” but even if they didn’t it’s still the simplest, most lightweight VST I can find to do everything I need in a “rack” solution.
Before Cantabile I was building all my setups in the DAW, which is clumsy and hard to catalog, and hard to use across songs. What I can do in Unify in seconds takes WAY longer in a DAW, but also increases my ability to quickly add in a new layer (could be a single VST, or another Unify patch that has multiple VSTs, as you can load Unify into a Unify layer) to creatively make new patches easier.
Also, being able to save FX preset layers (i.e. there are some built-in basic mastering layers, or you can build your own with your preferred FX) and pop them into any Unify patch in a couple of clicks is really cool and speeds up my workflow when building setups. Way easier and far more flexible than a DAW.
Glad that works for you.