[LAU] LV2 synths for Ardour 3?

[Philipp Überbacher]

Excerpts from david's message of 2011-07-02 22:08:02 +0200:
> Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> > Excerpts from Leigh Dyer's message of 2011-07-02 18:55:07 +0200:
> >> On 07/03/2011 02:24 AM, rosea grammostola wrote:
> >>> They should release a LV2 version instead imho. LV2 is much better
> >>> supported on Linux then VST. LV2 is ready for it...
> >> I'm not sure that LV2 is really that much better supported -- it has 
> >> better support in open-source apps (notably Ardour 3), but Renoise 
> >> apparently has very solid native VST support.
> > 
> > How many commercial hosts are there? There are certainly more free
> > software hosts on Linux.
> > 
> >> I'd love to have an LV2 Pianoteq, but being realistic, I know that 
> >> there's a good chance that it won't happen. I'm sure it's a lot of extra 
> >> work to implement support for a new plugin format, compared to simply 
> >> porting the existing VST code to a new platform.
> > 
> > Both requires porting. I don't dare to judge how much work each case is.
> > There aren't that many native VST plugins, so I guess it's far from
> > simple.
> > 
> >> If we want to encourage more commercial developers to bring their 
> >> Windows/OS X VST plugins across to Linux, I think having good native VST 
> >> support in common hosts is going to help. I know that's not a goal some 
> >> would share, but I'm personally in favour of having as many options 
> >> available as possible.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Leigh
> > 
> > Native VST support is a bane. It will drag along the VST license
> > troubles indefinitely. In my opinion every work done for native VST is
> > work lost for LV2, and it's not like there are a lot of developers
> > around.
> > At one point native VST might have seemed attractive (VST but more
> > stable than non-native, what else is the point of it?), but this
> > must have been the time before LV2. DSSI and especially ladspa might
> > have been limited in one way or another, but LV2 is potentially superior
> > to VST and while there's certainly much that can be done, I doubt that
> > it really lacks behind in capabilities even now.
> > So in my opinion native VST should be forgotten about as fast as
> > possible.
> 
> Is LV2 available on Windows & Mac?
> 
> If not, and VST wasn't a working option on Linux, then there'd be no 
> effort by makers of commercial VSTs for Windows/Mac to make them work on 
> Linux. Why do what might be difficult custom work (porting to LV2) for a 
> very small set of customers?

The point was that to get native VSTs the windows VSTs need to be ported
too. I really don't know what's easier, someone who's done both might
know.