vst 2 vs vst 3

this might have already been touched on but it looks like vst 3 is more efficient in many ways. is it ever not good to use vst 3?

  On 1/4/2022 at 2:39 AM, yekker said:

 is it ever not good to use vst 3?

afaik in 2022 no! there were some problems with daw compatibility a century ago

"In 2013, Steinberg stated that it would no longer maintain the software developer’s kit (SDK) for the VST2 plug-in format, but the SDK would still be available as a subset of the VST3 SDK. Then in May 2018, Steinberg announced that starting in October, the subset will be eliminated."

https://www.sweetwater.com/insync/vst-2-4-vs-vst-3-0-who-cares-you-do/ (not the most recent article but quite thorough)

FWIW, I've switched to VST3 a while ago and haven't looked back. I've used them with Live 10/11, Reaper 5/6 and Architect on both OSX and Win10. Not a single issue in sight. I want my sessions to be futureproof.

Note that Setinberg no longer delivers licence agreement for VST2 to new developers.

Now, I'm very curious to see if this new format will take off https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=574861

I'll be laughing when everyone's dumped their VST2 plugins for VST3. You can hear the difference on any good pair of professional monitors. VST2 has warmth, depth and presence. VST3 is cold and lifeless.

  On 1/4/2022 at 10:17 PM, user said:

I'll be laughing when everyone's dumped their VST2 plugins for VST3. You can hear the difference on any good pair of professional monitors. VST2 has warmth, depth and presence. VST3 is cold and lifeless.

yeah vst3 is just too digital; you can hear the stepped processing 

Lolz. Ok, thanks guys.

The only plugins that sound good are vintage SAW Studio plugins, everything else is cold and lifeless.