MAC Rtas Versus Win Vst


#1

Hello there,

I’m not a developer at all and don’t even understand fully what JUCE is about but I believe people around here have the knowledge enough to help me.

My question isn’t original but is very essential to me:
There is a small windows based vst audio plugin (a mastering one) which is the core of my work on Cubase. This vst is only used once by project on the master channel and, most of the time, is set to the same specific preset (the plugin is very simple and does only have 3 modifiers in total, that’s it).
Now, I have no choice and have to move to Mac and its Pro Tools system…
Most of the time, when there is a VST which doesn’t have an RTAS version, I only have to use “FXPansion VST to RTAS converter” which does the job…or find a different RTAS plugin that can replace seemlessly the vst I used before.
So far so good and I have been able to get 99% of my previous setup but there is that last plugin which has no equivalent and is essential to my projects.
It is a VST alright but I can’t convert it as it doesn’t exist for Mac.

So here is my question:
Is there someone around you who can tell me if there is something I can do (a wrapper that exist or anything else) or is there someone who, for money of course, can port this plugin to Mac (make it a Mac RTAS or a Mac VST that could be converted by the FXpansion converter)?
As I said, I mostly use one preset of it and the plugin is quite straight forward with only three knobs.
I don’t care about the GUI neither, I can do without it.
The only thing is that there is no way to get the official source code which is not meant to be opened or ported to Mac.
On the other hand, the plugin is not a major one (quite unknown) all and the conversion is for my own personal use only.

If you have any idea, lead, link or solution, I thank you in advance.

Please keep in mind that this is crucial to me and that is not a weird and juvenile idea I got that will disappear by tomorrow. I’m really stuck. I’m not part of a company and don’t have a lot of money. The plugin costs 49 dollars (I have a licence) and I’m willing to pay 8 time its price to get it to work on Mac (I would pay 100x its price if I could but I can’t).

Thank you for your help.


#2

Well, all I can say is “good luck with that”!

Why don’t you ask the people who wrote this plugin? It’s not possible to port it without the source code, so nobody else could do it.


#3

A question I have…
All the plugins you can convert from VST to RTAS by FXpansion have their code opened?
Isn’t it the point of a “wrapper”?

Thanks.

PS: “Why don’t you ask the people who wrote this plugin”:
Because, as always, companies don’t give a damn about an isolated person who will never generate money for them.
This is the way a company usually think: "If we do something, will it bring money? No? Not even worth listening."
So yes I did ask (more than once) but the rule just above appeared to be true as they never bother sending me an answer (not even sure they read more than the mail subject in the first place).

My problem here is that I’m screwed as this plugin is essential to me and there is no workaround:
-My mixes HAVE to be in Pro Tools format.
-The studio I’m in is MAC only.
-Boucing the projects and sending them afterwards to Cubase in order to finalize them isn’t an option as the mixes should be done with the plugin inserted.


#4

[quote=“bayl0ck”]A question I have…
All the plugins you can convert from VST to RTAS by FXpansion have their code opened?
Isn’t it the point of a “wrapper”?
[/quote]

The wrapper doesn’t open up the code. It takes calls to the VST API, and translates them to RTAS calls.

They probably don’t have a Mac. 8 times 49 dollars won’t buy the cheapest Mac, let alone pay for the time needed to learn how to port a Windows VST to OSX. It takes several months or more to get comfortable with the OSX build environment.

Sean Costello


#5

Yeah well, in the meantime I found you are wrong…
“It’s not possible to port it without the source code, so nobody else could do it.”

It turned out you don’t need to have the source code to do what I want.
That is EXACTLY what a wrapper is about.
A wrapper is something you put around something, you don’t need to mess with anything inside.
Some projects such as “wacvst” or “VFX” allow you to use a windows vst plugin on a macOSX and I’m investigating it as we speak.
And hopefully, the company will get much more than 8x49 dollars in total.
This is over simplifying the issue a little bit, isn’t it? As I do with my kid, but he is 5…
Which gives me the impression that you are not that willing to help or that your are presuming I’m a retarded of some kind.

I’m sorry to be so direct but you are not the first one telling me that it is impossible and that the source code is a must-have, defending for whatever reason a company you don’t know.
Typical but I’m still not used to it.

It is quite irresponsible to close all the doors and destroy hopes when someone tells you that what he is looking for is very important to him.

My opinion, for what it’s worth…

Thank you anyway for your time. I mean it.


#6

[quote=“bayl0ck”]Yeah well, in the meantime I found you are wrong…
“It’s not possible to port it without the source code, so nobody else could do it.”

It turned out you don’t need to have the source code to do what I want.
That is EXACTLY what a wrapper is about.[/quote]

You’re talking about a different thing :slight_smile:
Porting means that you take a native appplication for a given platform (in your case, windows) and tranform it into a native application for another platform (in your case Mac)
A wrapper is not porting anything at all, it’s …well : wrapping. Two different concepts.

[quote=“bayl0ck”]I’m sorry to be so direct but you are not the first one telling me that it is impossible and that the source code is a must-have, defending for whatever reason a company you don’t know.
Typical but I’m still not used to it.
[/quote]

Nobody is defending the company. You need the source code to port an application, unless of course, you are fluent in reading/writting assembly code and have no plans for the next two years. That, is a FACT. Again, wrapping is another story.

[quote]This is over simplifying the issue a little bit, isn’t it? As I do with my kid, but he is 5…
Which gives me the impression that you are not that willing to help or that your are presuming I’m a retarded of some kind.
[/quote]

Chill out man ! That’s quite the opposite in fact. Some people took the time to explain to you, in a non-developper accessible language what’s possible and what’s not. You won’t find that in every forum.

P.S. : If you can explain to a 5 years old kid how to make a windows VST work under a mac environement, I’d be very interested in you edicational techniques :slight_smile:


#7

I really didn’t want to be disrespectful.
The thing is I get more attitudes than answers when I ask anything on any forum. There is some kind of relationship between knowledge and condescension, no doubt about it.
It is a leitmotiv you can find all over the web, you could make a thesis about it.
You ask a question with one flaw and you are mislead for technicalities with no hope of a valid answer. What you get instead is a lot of quotes of your own words. When you get to those impressive quotes, it’s over, don’t expect anything more, you are a dead man walking, it’s gladiator time: “Panem et circences”.

I started with the fact that I didn’t know anything about development and I think I made myself clear about the needs.
Making the point about the word “porting” after that is somehow…easy, but expected.
But hey! The day someone will say on a forum that he might have been wrong is not yet to come, is it?

PS: I managed to wrap/convert/port/transform/adapt/move (just pick one) the plugin to Mac with wacvst.
No source code, no authorization, no law broken, no 8x49 dollars, no knowledge.
It is somehow buggy but it’s a start.

Thank you.


#8

I know, but you felt kind of “hurt” by the previous answers, while, I’m trully confident those people meant to help you, and not make you feel like a retard :slight_smile:

Well, honestly it depends. I’ve got more constructive answers than attitudes, although sometimes of course, shit happens . In the end, one has no control on how people will answer , but one has control on how (s)he formulates the question. I found that being polite, humble and constructive goes a long way. Some people are condescendant, you can’t do anything about it. Some people spend their free time trying to help others for no reward. My humble opinion is ignore the first and thanks the seconds . But now, I’m myself sounding condescendant, please forgive me ! :slight_smile:

You did, but look at the audience on this forum : we are mostly developpers here. When the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail ;). More seriously a wrapper can be useful, BUT it will never replace porting the application, both in terms of performance, stability, and so on …

Making the point about porting, was just to provide you with hopefully usefull information to understand why people keep telling you “you need the source code” . I think now you understand better.

[quote]PS: I managed to wrap/convert/port/transform/adapt/move (just pick one) the plugin to Mac with wacvst.
No source code, no authorization, no law broken, no 8x49 dollars, no knowledge.
It is somehow buggy but it’s a start.
[/quote]

That’s great !! So back to Jules first answer :

However, are you really sure that you can’t find a good RTAS mastering plugin for 400$ ??? (8*49$)
Cause that’s quite surprising to be honest


#9

Thank you dinaiz, your answers are way more constructive than mine.
And you are also right.

Regarding the mastering tool and the price, let’s say this plugin is a joke and is really not good at what it is supposed to do. But accidentally, set to a certain state, it brings a unique color to the mix that no one would expect. Try any other combination and you just get mud.
I tried almost every known mastering plugins you can get (freebies, demos, licensed or borrowed ones) and not a single gave me this special color I get with mine.
Worse: even the same plugin but an earlier or later version will not bring me this color.
Go figure…

Thank you for your patience dinaiz.


#10

[quote]Regarding the mastering tool and the price, let’s say this plugin is a joke and is really not good at what it is supposed to do. But accidentally, set to a certain state, it brings a unique color to the mix that no one would expect. Try any other combination and you just get mud.
I tried almost every known mastering plugins you can get (freebies, demos, licensed or borrowed ones) and not a single gave me this special color I get with mine.
Worse: even the same plugin but an earlier or later version will not bring me this color.
Go figure…[/quote]

That’s actually extremely interesting !
If my understanding is correct, you never tweak the sounds of that plugin, you just have a setting, which you never alter which gives you the sound you’re after right ?
Because in that case, a possible solution would be to create an impulse response for that very particular setting, and put in in any convolution engine. I’m not sure that convolution can work with dynamic effects though (compressors, limiters and so on).

I’m sure someone on this forum will be able to tell if this can work … :slight_smile:


#11

I thought about convolution already as, yes, I only use one setting of the plugin.
But the plugin is not about reverb or early reflections. It produces a kind of a “tape” effect (massive harmonics and mid to low end frequencies generation).
What do you think?

Ps: I’m able to open the plugin now but I can’t get it to move the knobs or generate a sound.
basically, I have a GUI and that’s it…

It’s 8 o’clock in the morning here and I haven’t slept yet. This tells you how much commited I am!

Thanks for tour help.


#12

Blimey, you’re getting a bit worked up there, get some sleep!

Interesting to hear about wacvst, I didn’t know anyone had built something like that (and would have thought that nobody would bother - since practically all plugins are released for both mac/PC, it must be a pretty niche thing to want to do…). Anyway, a tool like that is probably the only way that you’d be able to do what you want, but at least there’s a chance it could be made to work!

[quote]PS: “Why don’t you ask the people who wrote this plugin”:
Because, as always, companies don’t give a damn about an isolated person who will never generate money for them.
This is the way a company usually think: "If we do something, will it bring money? No? Not even worth listening."
So yes I did ask (more than once) but the rule just above appeared to be true as they never bother sending me an answer (not even sure they read more than the mail subject in the first place).[/quote]

In my experience at least half the audio market runs on OSX, so any company that’s trying to sell a plugin commercially, but doesn’t bother supporting OSX must be as dumb as a bag of spanners. Maybe the reason they didn’t reply to your email is because they get 100 mails a day asking them the same question, and they got bored of answering them all.


#13

[quote=“jules”]Blimey, you’re getting a bit worked up there, get some sleep!

Interesting to hear about wacvst, I didn’t know anyone had built something like that (and would have thought that nobody would bother - since practically all plugins are released for both mac/PC, it must be a pretty niche thing to want to do…). Anyway, a tool like that is probably the only way that you’d be able to do what you want, but at least there’s a chance it could be made to work!
[/quote]

There are a huge number of plugins out there made with SynthEdit, that run on PC but not Mac. Usually these are free.

[quote]
In my experience at least half the audio market runs on OSX, so any company that’s trying to sell a plugin commercially, but doesn’t bother supporting OSX must be as dumb as a bag of spanners. [/quote]

Maybe not dumb, but low on money.

The 50+ percent OSX audio market stat always comes as a surprise to Windows users, who tend to presume that their 90% market share of the personal computer space corresponds to a 90% share of the DAW space. Meanwhile, some of us developers talk in private, and things tend to be split around 50/50, with maybe a slight lean towards OSX. I’ve had someone argue in another forum that the total number of music makers on PC is actually far higher, but that the vast majority of them use cracked software. I think that this argument was supposed to be pro-PC, but as someone who is interested in PAYING users of my plugins, the argument didn’t work very well. :mrgreen: FWIW, my free plugin is about 50/50 OSX/Win as well.

Sean Costello