Modartt user forum - Why a new name for the update?

Re: Why a new name for the update?

null@example.com (EvilDragon) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:33:06 +0000

feline1 wrote:

I use Cockos Reaper as my DAW, and it prompts me fairly painlessly when opening old projects, allowing me to remap to the new DLL if I want to)

You clever, clever man!

Re: Why a new name for the update?

null@example.com (feline1) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:28:10 +0000

On a related note about upgrading -
I let the v3.5 installer remove my old Pianoteq 3.0
(to me, it's not really a problem that it's miss - i use Cockos Reaper as my DAW, and it prompts me fairly painlessly when opening old projects, allowing me to remap to the new DLL if I want to)

However the installer probably thought it was being helpful by leaving all my old .ptq files in their folder?
The problem is, it didn't really tell me there was a nice new KIViR.ptq I could download instead. A prompt about this might be useful?

Re: Why a new name for the update?

null@example.com (chauncey) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:51:52 +0000

UPDATE: Julien is working with me directly on this. We have a workaround -- copying the new 3.5 dll to the old location and renaming it pianoteq30 seems to work. It may only affect Sonar and any VST hosts that utilize both the name and VST ID. They can't co-exist with different names and same VST ID, perhaps?

Re: Why a new name for the update?

null@example.com (chauncey) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:48:25 +0000

I originally let it uninstall 3.0 when 3.5 installed, but Sonar couldn't open a single project because the 3.0 was missing, so I reinstalled 3.0. Projects open fine, but even though I have rescanned my VST's (and it says it is the 3.5 version in the vst name and says it is pointing to the 3.5 dll), there is only one PianoTeq entry in my VST's - "PianoTeq 3.5"

However , when I click on the about for the resulting VST, it says it is 3.0.5 - the old version.

If I launch 3.5 standalone, it says 3.5 is the version.

Conclusion: You can't have both versions installed because they conflict, but if you uninstall 3.0, your old projects are hosed.

Re: Why a new name for the update?

null@example.com (chauncey) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:42:59 +0000

That's what I'm doing, but not at all happy about having to keep (and see) every plugin I've ever used since day one one in my list of available VST's.

Every developer should have ONE .dll file in the VST Plugins folder. When updates occur, this gets overwritten with a new file of the same name and Class_ID. Otherwise we're all in for sifting through hundreds of obsolete programs when we pull up our VST instruments.

It already takes me about 6 minutes to rescan my VST folders whenever I add a new one because of all this old detritus.

The only thing more annoying than this is trying to re-open a 2-year old project and having to futz with it for 20 minutes reassigning VSTi' because the original plugins are no longer installed.

Re: Why a new name for the update?

null@example.com (EvilDragon) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:14:44 +0000

You can leave both versions installed

Why a new name for the update?

null@example.com (chauncey) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:41:07 +0000

The install of the new 3.5 version recommends uninstalling v. 3.0, except that suddenly makes any and all projects created using 3 fail to load in my DAW because the 3.0 .exe and .dll are referenced by a different name and no-longer available location.

I also had v3 in my default template, which means I now need to keep V3 AND V3.5 in my growing list of crowded VST's. If this was simply loaded on top of the original with no reference to version, this would not be the case.