And that's why I am a very happy man to use Vegas Pro for the task it's made for: Video Editing

There's little audio FX I use on Vegas Pro's timeline other than some basic native VP audio FX. Third party VST (2 or 3) are processed in Sound Forge Pro or RX Adv, and also a lot of processing is done in SpectraLayers Pro - then rendered/exported and the render/export used on VP's timeline.

I've been doing it this way for years and one of the main reasons is that if there's an iZotope FX - let's say from RX7 - used on VP's timeline and there's a need for whatever reason to go back to that project later on and RX7 has been uninstalled replaced by a later RX version, then Vegas Pro will on loading that old project create a warning stating that an (mostly unknown) audio FX is missing. Why? Because most if not all iZotope products aren't forward compatible with later versions.

Of course, this is my workflow and won't suit everybody (or anybody else for that matter)

BTW, using a separate audio editor for audio processing/mixing is not unusual - think Avid Pro Tools that is widely used in the TV/film industry.

Hopefully VEGAS will go from where it was in 20 which was 2 steps forward, 1 steps back for audio (VST 3 support finally) to pure progress in VP 21.

I also do audio processing within VEGAS (mainly through iZotope VSTs) and need it to work reliably.

>use Vegas Pro for the task it's made for: Video Editing

Weird to think that Vegas started out life as an audio editing tool.

There's so much I want to say regarding this conversation, but I cannot... soon some information is going to be revealed that is going to make a lot of you happy. VEGAS Creative Software has grown, that's about all I can say... but it's the details of how it has grown that are really going to make a lot of folks happy.

Hopefully VEGAS will go from where it was in 20 which was 2 steps forward, 1 steps back for audio (VST 3 support finally) to pure progress in VP 21.

I also do audio processing within VEGAS (mainly through iZotope VSTs) and need it to work reliably.

I felt the last two updates to 19 had us as beta testers for 20. I probably wouldn't jump on an update to 20 if it was offered right now :-)

The last 2 updates to 19 fixed an HEVC bug that was causing crashes for many people and fixed the bug that prevented the program from opening if you were connected to the internet or had your calendar set past a certain date, both of which also affected 20 and were patched out of 20 as well, so I'm not sure what you're getting at there.

I use the last build of both versions myself (stayed on 19.550 for a while but eventually updated as issues with subsequent builds were addressed).20.411 fixes some of the issues with 403 on the audio side.

Yeah, but still the VST 2 / 3 audio support make it buggy and unusable as h*ll, since build 4.0.x

Crashes, freezes, shutdowns, stuttering, ghosting, etc... it's all common when you are using it as a serious audio engineer.

@Petersson
And that's why I am a very happy man to use Vegas Pro for the task it's made for: Video Editing

Cool that you are happy.

I was also happy with the audio-editing until version 20 / build 4.x

Build 370 is rock solid (besides the known bugs where I compiled workarounds for).

By the way, did you know Vegas was initially created as a pure, 100% DAW?

I am a rock solid user since version 3, it did fit on a single floppy (or a small USB-stick, can't remember).

And it's okay that Vegas is "video only" know, but than (then?) they shouldn't support audio at all, because it's not usable when combined with some factory standard VST and automation workflow / rendering streets.

My frustration is not about the devs of Vegas, but because it introduced so many audio-related bugs since buil d4.x (and the whole purpose of the upgrade was squashing those damn bugs in the first place).

The last 2 updates to 19 fixed an HEVC bug that was causing crashes for many people and fixed the bug that prevented the program from opening if you were connected to the internet or had your calendar set past a certain date, both of which also affected 20 and were patched out of 20 as well, so I'm not sure what you're getting at there.

I referring to 643 and 648 of Vegas 19 (not patch 651) - 550 was relatively stable... for me, these two were not*.

Moot point now, since 411 of V20 is the most stable I've ever used...

However, my point was, I probably hold off on an update to 20 offered this close to August, I don't want to be beta for version 21. I think many of us suffered through the changes to HVEC in late 19 and early 20.

*Note: I'm editing GoPro media, so that's certainly a variable in any stability issues.

This close to release of 21, it's unlikely 20 will get anymore updates unless it is an emergency patch to fix some severe widespread issue.

Cant wait for VP21, for them to add another useless cloud features, and have nothing done in terms of performance at all - as always, and asking for it 500$+. Hype is real 🙃

Cant wait for VP21, for them to add another useless cloud features, and have nothing done in terms of performance at all - as always, and asking for it 500$+. Hype is real 🙃

How can you know? Do you have access to VP21 by now?

Just wondering about your prejudice. :)

I predict they'll keep developing features that were worked on in 20. Thinks like smart masks, VST support, etc. that improved but clearly weren't in a final state. I've noticed for a few years that development is essentially rolling and the version numbers seem kind of arbitrary without hard lines delineating one from the next. At least the price has dropped a lot in the past few years making upgrading much less of a decision than it used to be (just do it).

@Kloverton when was the last time anyone paid $500+ to upgrade Vegas? Even Vegas Post?

How can you know? Do you have access to VP21 by now?

They don't know, just making up excuses to whine about.

How can you know? Do you have access to VP21 by now?

They don't know, just making up excuses to whine about.

Yeah bro, for 6 years I've been here, all you do every year is dropping "Insides" that everything will change in new version and they are working on it. Nothing changed. Same performance in VP 16 and 20. Stop that nonobjective bs. By adding new features, it only gets slower and buggier. All the progress they made so far, is breaking VP couple of builds ago, without it even launching. Their marketing department definitely progressed during these years, sticking 8K logos on their website, which it cant even handle, loading 1 frame in preview for 8 seconds on 18 Core processor and RTX 4090. You can argue with me as much as you want, but that's a fact, and many people DO support my complaints about the performance and stability of Vegas. I knew dozens of people personally, who used these software and loved it, and wanted to keep using it, but now all of them are using anything, but Vegas, and there is only one reason why the dropped it - PERFORMANCE. They didn't need these stock video library built in and other features, they just wanted to cut the video, apply sound and colour and done, but it can't even do these at these point with high end cameras without a slideshow in preview set to draft.

@Kloverton when was the last time anyone paid $500+ to upgrade Vegas? Even Vegas Post?

If I was upgrading every year, I could've called it a scam, cause they are still selling same product with couple bells and whistles added, while in its core, the software still works as badly, as 6+ years ago in terms of performance.

6+ years ago we didn't have GPU decoding, RAW support with GPU acceleration, VST3 support, half the VST2 plugins didn't work, dynamic RAM preview was causing massive issues with crashing that have since been fixed, HEVC media was causing huge issues with crashing that have since been fixed, everyone was having to go into internal settings and disable so4compoundplug.dll because it was causing big stability problems that have since been fixed...if you made any changes to the timeline while VEGAS was playing, half the time it would crash, which rarely happens these days.

VEGAS has a long way to go as far as performance and stability go, and in a couple ways has taken a step or two back (like the recent audio issues, which I can assure you are being worked on heavily behind the scenes), but to say it's exactly the same as 6+ years ago is ridiculous.

There should be an announcement coming soon straight from the top of the VEGAS world that will bring lots of good news as far as the performance and stability thing go... announcements that are going to take time to finish, but a lot less time than it otherwise would have if what is going to be announced didn't happen.

Yeah bro, for 6 years I've been here, all you do every year is dropping "Insides" that everything will change in new version and they are working on it. Nothing changed.

First: I am not your brother.

Second: nobody has dropped insides really.

Same performance in VP 16 and 20. Stop that nonobjective bs. By adding new features, it only gets slower and buggier. All the progress they made so far, is breaking VP couple of builds ago, without it even launching. Their marketing department definitely progressed during these years, sticking 8K logos on their website, which it cant even handle, loading 1 frame in preview for 8 seconds on 18 Core processor and RTX 4090.

I am working with Vegas Pro since version 4. Time has changed. We have not any more SD videos, some of us do not have HD videos any more, some of us work with UHD, some with All-I, some with H.264, some with H.265, some even with raw. To address all changes was a must. Or are you still editing SD footage?

And - I am a user here only, even as moderator. Marketing decisions are not done by me.

You can argue with me as much as you want, but that's a fact, and many people DO support my complaints about the performance and stability of Vegas. I knew dozens of people personally, who used these software and loved it, and wanted to keep using it, but now all of them are using anything, but Vegas, and there is only one reason why the dropped it - PERFORMANCE.

Performance and stability has to be improved to my opinion for sure. And I think they work on that. Upps, another "inside". You can ignore that for sure.

They didn't need these stock video library built in and other features, they just wanted to cut the video, apply sound and colour and done, but it can't even do these at these point with high end cameras without a slideshow in preview set to draft.

Some people will not need that, others love it. I have not used it a lot by myself up to now. But for specific reasons the stock library can be a great support. For example for royality free music. Now I edit a birthday video, and here it is nice to use the library for baby audio footage, or other bits and pieces. Beside that, nobody is forced to purchase that.

How did this devolve into warring camps? Stick to factual depictions of your experience which is enough. I certainly hear and respect the issues users raise using VEGAS with even the best hardware on the market.

We all see that VEGAS has performance and stability issues, but from what I can tell the cause of that is not a misallocation of programming resources to random bells and whistles- the reason we are not seeing huge lists of new features is because performance and stability improvements have been the priority for the past few releases. That's not insider information, you can read statements from the team in this forum. Look at the release history itself. What's the ratio of bug fixes to new features?

For years people have complained about the audio engine receiving zero improvements since the Sony days. In the last year VEGAS started to make changes, adding VST 3 support and working on instabilities.

VP 19/20 performs better than VP 16. You can see the render times in benchmarks in my signature. You can see fewer complaints about decoding issues with phone, DJI and drone footage that were rampant in the VP 15/16 timeframe. Is it where it needs to be (esp. on HEVC)? No.

32-bit mode got GPU support which is crucial as users move to high-bit log sources. Is performance good enough yet? I'd say no and it still makes sense to edit in 8-bit and then color and finish in high-bit mode.

How did this devolve into warring camps? Stick to factual depictions of your experience which is enough. I certainly hear and respect the issues users raise using VEGAS with even the best hardware on the market.

We all see that VEGAS has performance and stability issues, but from what I can tell the cause of that is not a misallocation of programming resources to random bells and whistles- the reason we are not seeing huge lists of new features is because performance and stability improvements have been the priority for the past few releases. That's not insider information, you can read statements from the team in this forum. Look at the release history itself. What's the ratio of bug fixes to new features?

For years people have complained about the audio engine receiving zero improvements since the Sony days. In the last year VEGAS started to make changes, adding VST 3 support and working on instabilities.

VP 19/20 performs better than VP 16. You can see the render times in benchmarks in my signature. You can see fewer complaints about decoding issues with phone, DJI and drone footage that were rampant in the VP 15/16 timeframe. Is it where it needs to be (esp. on HEVC)? No.

32-bit mode got GPU support which is crucial as users move to high-bit log sources. Is performance good enough yet? I'd say no and it still makes sense to edit in 8-bit and then color and finish in high-bit mode.

All i can see is same render speed and playback in VP 16 and VP 20. I don't need to know what they added and changed, if it doesn't work, or changed in practice. I drop 8K or 4K 120 footage, get 1 fps in 8 seconds with the highest spec PC, with 8K even not being able to render the project in that resolution at ALL, and that all that matters, it just doesnt work, and works as slowly, as before.

All i can see is same render speed and playback in VP 16 and VP 20. I don't need to know what they added and changed, if it doesn't work, or changed in practice. I drop 8K or 4K 120 footage, get 1 fps in 8 seconds with the highest spec PC, with 8K even not being able to render the project in that resolution at ALL, and that all that matters, it just doesnt work, and works as slowly, as before.

Key words. Your specific media types haven't been improved, yet (though they have some, VEGAS couldn't even do 8K 6+ years ago, couldn't even set the project settings that high).

I have rendered 8K files in VEGAS, so that must be an issue specific to your hardware/software configuration (which is interesting as I also have a 3090). I also notice you're using an older build of VEGAS 19.. is there a reason for that?