RTAS to AAX Wrapper?

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by DonaldM

As you may know, Propellerhead held out for years with opening up Reason to 3rd party plugins. But with 6.5 they added Rack Extensions, and many developers have created some dynamite stuff to add to the Reason rack.

How come we haven't seen a VST or AU Rack Extension Wrapper? I'd probably buy Reason if I could wrap my plugs.

[remute]

This has to be one of the most fallacious arguments I've seen in the DUC - somehow the limiting of choice, it's for our own good, to preserve the flawless functioning of Pro Tools?

The FXpansion wrapper has been around for years - giving us, the customers, the choice to decide what we want to use in PT.

That's if I've understood, "potential comprising satiability" correctly.

Originally Posted by Craig F

a wrapper would allow poorly done plugs to be used potential comprising satiability

[DonaldM]

Originally Posted by remute

This has to be one of the most fallacious arguments I've seen in the DUC - somehow the limiting of choice, it's for our own good, to preserve the flawless functioning of Pro Tools?

The FXpansion wrapper has been around for years - giving us, the customers, the choice to decide what we want to use in PT.

That's if I've understood, "potential comprising satiability" correctly.

I have to agree on this point. No one is going to blame Pro Tools if a wrapped plugged causes instability. I've been using the FXpansion wrapper for years so I could use some VST plug-ins. Some just don't play nice with PT even when wrapped. So, I don't use them anymore. But not once did I see that as PT fault. One work around that has worked well...for me anyways...is using Reaper inside PT. Reaper seems to run several of the VST's with pretty fair stability and I can use the Rewire to keep everything in PT, and its easy on the resources too.

[remute]

Originally Posted by DonaldM

I have to agree on this point. No one is going to blame Pro Tools if a wrapped plugged causes instability. I've been using the FXpansion wrapper for years so I could use some VST plug-ins...

It's a very worrying step backwards for Pro Tools AFAIC.
And to know that Sugar Bytes, whose other products are rock-solid in all the DAWs I've used them in, have a working wrapper just sitting there being blocked by Avid due to utterly bogus talk of "stability" irks me - I'm all for 64bit etc etc but paying to have a bunch of plug-in capability removed for no good reason?

[maxon]

restart of game. no third party support UAD, VST, AU. throw all in trash and buy again AAX from beginning.

[DonaldM]

Originally Posted by remute

It's a very worrying step backwards for Pro Tools AFAIC.
And to know that Sugar Bytes, whose other products are rock-solid in all the DAWs I've used them in, have a working wrapper just sitting there being blocked by Avid due to utterly bogus talk of "stability" irks me - I'm all for 64bit etc etc but paying to have a bunch of plug-in capability removed for no good reason?

To be fair to Avid, the Sugar Bytes wrapper isn't being blocked as such. It was pulled because of licensing issues related to the AAX format. What we are hoping for is for Sugar Bytes and Avid to resolve that so the product can be released. Personally, I think it would serve Avid's interest to work out the deal with Sugar Bytes. It would be nice if someone from Avid would just address the issue and let us know the status or even if anything at all is happening.

[EGS]

Originally Posted by DonaldM

...What we are hoping for is for Sugar Bytes and Avid to resolve that so the product can be released. Personally, I think it would serve Avid's interest to work out the deal with Sugar Bytes. It would be nice if someone from Avid would just address the issue and let us know the status or even if anything at all is happening.

+1

[sunburst79]

Originally Posted by DonaldM

To be fair to Avid, the Sugar Bytes wrapper isn't being blocked as such. It was pulled because of licensing issues related to the AAX format. What we are hoping for is for Sugar Bytes and Avid to resolve that so the product can be released. Personally, I think it would serve Avid's interest to work out the deal with Sugar Bytes. It would be nice if someone from Avid would just address the issue and let us know the status or even if anything at all is happening.

I would think its in their interest to sit on this until the majority of the plugs are ported to AAX. Then release it.

What they should be doing is licensing the code from sugar bytes and then charging the stragglers that don't want to port to AAX. This way everyone gets their plugs and there's a incentive for the dev's to port. And a way out if they can't. For some reason.

[nigelpry]

Now I know, from the horse's mouth, that three of my favourite VI (impOSCcar2, M-Tron Pro and Virtual String Machine, along with the other G-Force VI) will not be ported to aax in the foreseeable future, I'd certainly like to see a wrapper allowed by Avid.

In G-Force's case, it is not head in the sand unwillingness, it is simply that they are a very small creative team, and the last two years have been pent porting their existing portfolio to 64bit versions, which will be released shortly. (I'm playing with mac betas of these at the moment!)

They have decided that it's now time to work creatively on something new. After that urge has been sated, they may revisit the aax question, but for small companies, the availability of a viable aax wrapper would be a godsend for them.

[Eric Lambert]

A wrapper is possible. Avid will not allow it. Their rationale is purely financial. You can complicate the issue with theories but they're merely pollution.

Out of curiosity, how long did Apple provide Rosetta for similar bridging? Many years, right?