cherryaudio Robert wrote: ↑Fri May 19, 2023 8:59 pm
Absolutely understood. I don't want to conflate "feature" with the need to update to a major version. Minor version updates also generally get new features. I'm simply trying to be clear that we have not abandoned VM or left it to module developers. That I cannot announce a "VM 3.0" does not mean the platform is dying/dead, or that features cannot be considered in the meantime. And just because the dev team is busy does not mean this thread or VM itself is being ignored. Apologies if I caused any confusion, I had a few threads and some recent messages in mind when I was writing up that reply, but this is the thread I wanted to address the most.
Whilst we're getting all chatty about CA supporting VM, I did a trawl back and the above post is, I beieve, the last time CA interacted on this thread, which was Fri May 19, 2023. From a personal perspective, I can get exactly what I want out of VM and any niggles are probably quite personal to my way of working and/or preferences for layout, etc.
I really don't expect CA to reply regularly, or even provide detail on their product pipeline; however, I do feel that VM has been very much left to third party Devs to provide the continuing "interest". Sadly (and very much IMO), I've felt that a lot of what's been popping up is very much a rehash of what I have already. Now, it may be that it's difficult to do something really innovative and when some people do it's taken them a lot of development time that they would like to see repaid; however, CA themselves could be adding to the body of work with some quality (and innovative) modules. That alone would show some focus, never mind the now semi-mythical VM 3.0.
To throw my opinions about with wild abandon even further, whilst it's immensely useful (and potentially cathartic) to list wished-for improvements, it's ultimatey going to disappoint (IMO, of course). CA have both company and market momentum based on issuing products that satisfy a very certain type of customer itch. They are praised and rewarded for doing that, so expecting them to do otherwise is a form of madness. I'd love to be wrong, and I would admit so of course, and that amazing update could roll out really soon. We're already bought in and using it and new customers are presented with a very good product, although now it's one that sits alongside a large number of emulations that are a lot more tempting for most.
We live in a world that increasingly likes "preset machines" and instant gratification. CA have spotted that and have pulled presets out of the main issue and now charge separatately; there are also third party preset sellers. I'd imagine the vast majority of users are simply selecting presets and maybe tweaking the filter a bit. A modular is a few levels up from that and does require a bit more investment in learning. I believe the market loves nice sounding preset machines and is willing to pay for them. There are still users out there who love to dig into an emulation of an old synth and they may even have owned the original decades ago. I can get lost in finding those sounds that I heard in my youth listening to Tangerine Dream and Klaus Schulze in the late 70's onwards and, for me, that includes mining what VM can do as well.
I've wobbled on enough... My point...? Use what we have and enjoy it. In the same way as hardware is limited, embrace the niggles and shortfalls and continue to work around them. Keep a list of wishes (bugs should go to support), but don't expect CA to react, allow them the space to do what they do and if that sweeps across VM we'll get the benefit. If they don't, we always have a choice to dump our sunk costs (mine are high) and try another pasture to see if it's really that much greener. Personally, I'd love to see how they could improve VM, but I won't get annoyed with them if they focus elsewhere.
As always, other opinons are allowed to coexist
