DSP Robotics Support

I did an A/B comparison of an osm file exported as a VSTi dll with the osm converted with FS and exported to VSTi. Everything is working, the one notable difference is the dll size, the FS export has ~1 additional MB than the SM export.


The only thing that bugs me is that Hermann Seibs VST host reports the FS export as "exports VST SDK <= 2.3 main function". Wasn't FS supposed to generate VST 2.4 compatible plugins? or did I overlook something?

somewhere on the SM forum this is allready been spoken about and has to do with some setting in flowestone, search on that forum and you also see the answer of Malc

The additional file size probably comes from Ruby - for plugins with Ruby, the interpreter and definitions of the FlowStone Ruby objects and methods will need to be 'wrapped' into the .dll.

trogluddite wrote:The additional file size probably comes from Ruby - for plugins with Ruby, the interpreter and definitions of the FlowStone Ruby objects and methods will need to be 'wrapped' into the .dll.

This, plus all the new primitives. Remember that old primitives never get deleted, so that old Mono Multiply is still in the .dll.

I am surprised it is only 1Mb additional for all that.

The additional filesize is no problem. Its good to have the ruby runtime integrated into the plugin DLL.

But is it really VST 2.4?

Read this about the vst 2.4, it is there and working as CoreStyler also confirmed.

http://synthmaker.co.uk/forum/viewtopic ... =90#p89888

I was confused that VSThost reported an exported plugin as a VST 2.3 plugin. But after a more thorough look it indeed seems to be VST 2.4 compliant.

rlr wrote:I was confused that VSThost reported an exported plugin as a VST 2.3 plugin. But after a more thorough look it indeed seems to be VST 2.4 compliant.

you can inspect with this utility for better info
vst_scanner