Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)VA
Posts
0
Comments
9
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • So I recently reinstalled Linux on my machine but hadn't bothered to reinstall Analog Lab, so I just did that now to confirm it still works. It was really easy.

    From their website I got the installer, and ran Analog Lab V Setup.exe with Wine. I went through the setup wizard just like you would on Windows, and then manually moved the vst file from the Wine directories into my normal vst location (~/.vst). After this, I generated the .so file with yabridge. This is also a really simple process. If you are using yabridge for the first time, you need to tell it where your plugins are:

    $ yabridgectl add path/to/vst

    After that, generate the .so files:

    $ yabridgectl sync

    Once this is done, your DAW of choice should be able to find and open the plugin. For me, Analog Lab V opened without issue and prompted me for my account info. Here's Analog Lab V on my machine:

    Edit: I forgot to mention my copy is legit and it activated no problem.

  • Are you familiar with yabridge? It can take a windows vst (.DLL) and create a Linux counterpart (.so) that daws can scan and open normally.

    https://github.com/robbert-vdh/yabridge

    In my experience, it works pretty much perfectly about 80% of the time, and the remaining 20% are buggy but useable, or rarely completely broken. I don't have Arturia's V Collection, but I have Analog Lab 5 and that runs without bugs. If they are built with similar technology, then you might expect V Collection to work as well.

  • Yabridge is the way to go. I used to use LinVST in the past but with very mixed results. With yabridge, ~90% of my plugins work perfectly, including Native Instruments plugins which have always been my favourites.

  • This is really bugging me. The article claims the fungus is an edible mushroom, but Pestalotiopsis (the spores on the right) is an endophytic, microscopic ascomycete. Not a mushroom and certainly not edible. So why is there a picture of Pluteus on the left? I can only imagine the author googled "Pestalotiopsis mushroom" and grabbed the first picture that came up.