VCV Rack 2 Update

Developer Andrew Belt, creator of the popular software modular platform VCV Rack, has announced plans for VCV Rack 2.

“I think v2 will bring the greatest update to VCV Rack yet,” says Belt. “It will solve at least half of the criticisms of VCV Rack v1, so the wait will be worth it in the end.”

VCV Rack 2 will include VST2 and standalone versions for $99 ($149 regular price after release sale). Professional support of both versions will be included with your purchase of Rack.

The free version of Rack will be called Rack Community Edition or Rack CE. Source code and builds of Rack CE will be available upon each release.

Updates to the VCV Rack platform will be released to Rack CE a few weeks before the paid version, but it will essentially be the beta ‘release candidate’ version.

Rack CE will be free software (GPLv3), meaning that you have the freedom to run, study, redistribute, and distribute modified copies of the software.

The VCV Rack 2 release date is to be announced.

27 thoughts on “VCV Rack 2 Update

  1. I wonder if it’s a coincidence that this new comes out shortly after the poopstorm of people learning about the hostile developer environment, anti-competitive and hostile treatments of forks, and general terrible behaviour of the developer?

      1. Wow this really left a nasty taste in my mouth about Andrew Belt (vcv owner). I am really gonna struggle supporting v2 if he doesn’t apologise and turns things around… also to find out the VST fork was ready 2 years ago and he killed it to then make it himself it’s a big middle finger the the user base too.

    1. Came here to say this. Be it that there really isn’t any info about date or actual feature updates, I’d say it is no coincidence. This does not look like the kind of communication that a dev has remained silent for months to prepare for…

      1. i would happily pay for modules from the community, i think if they keep prices reasonable and accessible there’s no reason for any of the module developers to give them away for free.

  2. Will the developer community that invested their time to create modules and popularize the platform be compensated when they start monetizing it?

    1. They shouldn’t imo. There is an option for modules to be free or paid, it’s on the user to chose either. But keeping the whole environment alive and evolving it’s a very demanding job, that is what you’re paying for.

      1. usability of v1 is cumbersome AF. I dont expect v2 be evolvin or livening up if its designed by same person/team.

    2. take Kontakt for instance, Native Instruments creates the platform, they have a free ‘player’ version and a full version. thousands of developers create libraries costing anywhere from free to very expensive. i’m happy to pay for Kontakt and choose libraries as i need them, seems like a similar model here from VCV.

  3. VST2 in 2021. :pepehmm:
    Wider platforms support is ok, but we should push anyone upgrade to VST3. Otherwise it will be long story like Python 2/3, 64-bit apps.

  4. No AU support. M1 support was denied. As much as I love VCV Rack, version 2 seems to be more of a product from the past just optimized for the past. It would be better if it was a product for the future.

  5. I think I’ll go with the actual professional products rather than this for now until the next thing comes that is more open source (as in free speech) like VCV started out. Now that we have seen behind the curtain it is difficult to see a future for VCV as a platform.

    1. Open/closed has nothing to do with whether or not a product is professional – the entire Internet is built on open source software. VCV is licensed with GPLv3, which is compatible with what things like Apache and other open source software use.

      Belt has done a great job with VCV, but it’s also his project and he knows whether or not he has the time to dink around with other contributors. And he knows whether or not he has the time to port it to new platforms and formats.

      It’s also open, so if anybody wants to fork it and try to do better, they can. They’ll realize that its a metric fuck-ton of work to do, so that freeloaders can complain about the features you haven’t implemented.

      1. Only way for you to know what he knows is if you are him. Its cute you think he/you have done great job.

        1. And it’s ‘cute’ that you think you know better, without demonstrating that you have any knowledge whatsoever.

          1. yeah ikr, just like you. or are you admitting to actually being mr. Belt and giviving yourself compliments.

            1. Sorry to blow your tortured conspiracy theory, but as a user of VCV Rack and as a software developer, it’s obvious that VCV represents a shit-ton of work.

              If you think VCV sucks or if you think the developers an ass-hat, you got the right to your opinion. But if you want to bitch about your free stuff or spout off about conspiracy bullshit, expect people to call BS on you.

      2. Open Source software is awesome and makes up some of the greatest tech in the world. However, the strength comes not from the “free as in beer” aspect but from the “free as in speech” aspect. It simply looks to me from the outside like Andrew is killing the golden goose. Developers who don’t mind dealing with that kind of centralized control generally join corporations and become “professional” developers, making lots of money, as opposed to volunteering for something that is supposed to be a community of people who believe in what they are doing together. Both models have their core strengths that can be leveraged.

        1. So you’re saying that you don’t like the way that a guy who makes you free stuff does things?

          Cool story, bro.

          The population of the world is 7.6 billion people. If you can’t find somebody out there that wants to spend their time making you free stuff, and to do it just the way you like, that’s on you, Paul.

  6. People can do what they like within the law and I really do wish Andrew good luck with VCV. I have enjoyed mocking up a few things in it in the past and think it is important for the community to have open source tools. I was just commenting in hopes that my prediction doesn’t come true. I think the platform has some great possibilities and am simply reflecting on the recent controversy. If that continued it would be disappointing for the synth community at large. Peace.

Leave a Reply