OT: JUCE!

[mr_es335]

Good day,

Well the day has finally arrived...and this posting is to shed some light on the serious downsides of JUCE.

Two of the primary plug-in developers that I currently use namely, Valhalla and Overloud, both use JUCE for their plug-in development.

So, go to the "'net" and ask the question, "JUCE and VST2" and see what you get. The results are not great and possibly explain why I am experiencing certain issues that I with the software developed under this "platform". It would appear that due to Steinberg's deprecation of VST2, JUCE - at least for the time being, is placing VST2's "in a wrapper" of some sort. Whatever this wrapper is, this wrapper-usage is producing some some rather negative results in the interim.

Now, using the plugin "as is" does not appear to produce any apparent irregularities...but use "Scenes" - and sadly, "...all hell breaks loose!" For example, no preset name updates, plug-in stalls,and so on. As noted in a previous posting, talking with the developers gets you absolutely nowhere. "Passing the buck..." sadly comes to mind here.

As to why such situations are occurring I am sadly - unable to adequately explain. Not being "a real programmer" prohibits me from ascertaining the specifics. All that I can say is that prior to JUCE - all is OK...post JUCE - and "mayhem!!"

So, for us SAC/SAW users, I guess finding out what "platform" the developers are using may be wise. Some are quick to take your money, but post purchase, it can really "suck!"

PS: From what I have been able to ascertain as well, VST3 appears to mostly applicable to VSTi's and automation capabilities - but again, I may be completely "out to lunch" here.

Update: 08/30/23!!
As the result of an interesting and somewhat lengthy conversation today...I am abandoning "JUCE" - unless it the grape juice that comes in a bottle!

[Angie]

Two of the primary plug-in developers that I currently use namely, Valhalla and Overloud, both use JUCE for their plug-in development.

How were you able to find this information?

I think it would be helpful to know what each company is using before deciding to purchase a plugin.

[mr_es335]

Angie,

I will endeavour to answer your question,...

Q: How were you able to find this information?
A: Navigate to https://juce.com/
• Bottom of page, see "Companies Using JUCE"
• Valhalla DSP IS listed, but NOT Overloud.

In those situations where the specific company is NOT listed, then contacting that developer and asking them if they use JUCE and if so...

1) To what extent do they employ JUCE?
2) What version of JUCE are they employing?
• This is what I had to do with Overloud.

Mirax also employs JUCE v7 - and as such, vstPlayer is exhibiting the very same anomalies as with Valhalla and TH-U!
• "Bummer, man!" That is over $400.00 down the drain!

You stated, "I think it would be helpful to know what each company is using before deciding to purchase a plugin." ... and you are absolutely correct here!!
• As a point-of-interest, I have yet to see SAW listed as a potential DAW for many of the plug-in offerings! Why is this?

Interestingly, JUCE 5 did not appear to exhibit any of the anomalies tat I am presently experiencing with v7.

Hope this helps?

[mr_es335]

Good day,

I just completed testing on fifteen [15] plug-ins, a) seven of which were "developed" with JUCE, and, b) eight that were not.

The sole objective of this test was to confirm "specific anomalies" that occur "primarily" in SAC, and in particular, via the employment of "Scenes".

The test proved conclusively that those plug-ins that DID employ JUCE displayed the very same anomalies, whilst those plug-ins that DID NOT employ JUCE functioned as expected.

And though SAW does NOT employ "scenes", I would assume that since SAC and SAW are "built" on the same core "platform" - if I may use that term, then what occurs in SAC might also occur in SAW.

Someone on the Forum asked the question, "How were you able to find this information?" The answer, by contacting the developer and ask them if they employ JUCE? ...that is, as they say, "That!"
* In my personal dialog with non-JUCE'd developers, such very often cited the phrase "in house" - and thus, the sole reason for their non-use of JUCE. I find this point both interesting and significant!

What concerns me at this present time is that JUCE may become that platform that will be employed by many of the current plug-in developers...especially with regards to VST3 development...and even "CLAP"...or..."CLever Audio Plug-in API".

I hope that some will find this information to be of some practicable use?

PS: I did create a video of the entire testing process which I could make available for those that are interested. So, let me know!!

[operationwhat]

If I may so...
Have you ever used Chaner XLUTOP for hosting plugins that have issues?

[mr_es335]

operationwhat,

Okay! A few things....

1) To answer the first part of your question, "Have you ever used XLUTOP's 'Chainer' for hosting plugins?" ...answer, "Yes!"
2) ...and the second, "...to host problematic plug-ins?" ...answer "No!"
* This...to me... would be akin to placing a band-aide over an infectious wound!!
3) At present "Chainer" is only being provided in 32-bit!!
4) I have tried other such hosts, and discovered that I really did NOT have a need for such.
* I discovered that my plug-in requirements are minimal, an ampsim, a chorus, and a reverb...but all plug-ins must be top quality - to function properly within the top-quality hosting applications!

Regardless, operationwhat, thanks for the suggestion! Appreciated!

[operationwhat]

Dear,

the reason I used xlutop was to use plugins that don't work with SAC or in SAC....
And it helped me use all the plugins that you would not dare to use inside SAC.
Also u can make it 64bit...just use a JBridge.
The same way I use NeuralDSP plugins inside SAC and McDSP TapeHead

[mr_es335]

operationwhat,

I am well familiar with "bridgers" and, as with plug-in hosts, I see no need for the use of such.

In all honesty...at least according to me...if a plug-in developer cannot make a plug-in that "works"...then I personally have no interest whatsoever in such plug-ins.

Take the company "FabFilter" as an example. Though they had heard of SAC, they had not tried SAC...but did so...and were very pleased with what they saw.
* This being said, profits are driven by need, and MAC's still take precedence over PC's for plug-in development.

Also, maybe in a studio environment, employing what I would refer to as "buggy plug-ins", may be appropriate, but for live usage...I treat such plug-in deployment as a complete-and-utter, "No...No!"
* Such has GOT to work natively...or not at all!!

I do hope that this makes sense?

PS: I ask that attention is always paid to "emphasis" - to ensure that what I AM saying is being understood properly and in the proper context [...at least...I do hope so!!]

[cgrafx]

So one of the things that should be considered, Juce is an open source library. Meaning it could be patched to fix the issue in SAC/SAW.

That would be the most useful approach with the added benefit that it would potentially fix all of the plug-ins utilizing the library.

Perhaps it would be useful to reach out to the Juce development community and see if its possible to find somebody that would be interested in fixing the bug.

[mr_es335]

Philip,

You stated, "Juce is an open source library. Meaning it could be patched to fix the issue in SAC/SAW..." ..."True"...but only at the behest or interest of the original developer. Thus, if the original developer has no interest in pursuing the matter, the no further steps would be taken!

The following is typical of that which I have received for those whom i have reached out to...six in all...

"Juce is VERY MUCH an industry standard at this point. My guess is that most plugin developers are using it. SAC, on the other hand, is a product that I've only heard of one customer using, that is you. If the SAC developer is insisting that the issue is not his, but is rather a Juce issue, I would ask why Juce plugins successfully run in Pro Tools, Logic, Live, Cubase, FL Studio, Studio One, Bitwig, Reaper, Reason, Garage Band, etc. In general, I would suggest moving on to a modern DAW that is being actively developed. A lot of Windows users that work 'closer to the metal' are very happy with Reaper, which is a $60 investment, and is free to try out."[Emphasis mine]

Of the six, only one had ever heard of SAC...or SAW for that matter. All six said that I should consider Reaper as an alternative! Very disappointing indeed

That would be the most useful approach with the added benefit that it would potentially fix all of the plug-ins utilizing the library.

You then stated, "Perhaps it would be useful to reach out to the Juce development community and see if its possible to find somebody that would be interested in fixing the bug." Good suggestion...thanks for this. I will contact two of the developers whom I have worked closely with and ask them if this might be a possible solution to the "problem". I will keep you posted as to what their response is.