This is totally me having a "what are the kids doing these days?" moment, so you'll have to forgive me Anyway, in 2009-2010 or so, when VCV was still quite the new thing, the ratio of CV-only users to VCV users was still quite high, and it was considered prudent to keep separate downloads for your VCV and CV banks if you could. That is to say, rather than configure a VCV bank to support VCV and CV simultaneously, it was considered preferable to have an entirely separate download for the CV bank with its own samples and oto.ini file. The reason was that with VCV banks often being a few gigabytes in size, and with variable download speeds around the world, it was a common complaint among CV-only users that they didn't want to have to download the whole VCV bank just to access the CV. However...2009-2010 was when download speeds and hard disk space were a lot tighter than they are now, and moreover Ritsu Kire hadn't come out yet to popularize multipitch/powerscale to the degree it's at now, so nowadays you see large-size VBs on the regular. Plus, looking at analytics, CV-only seems to be far less in demand than it was back then (when there was often a severe prejudice against VCV on principle), so while I would certainly balk at the idea of cutting CV support entirely, I'm wondering if it's still worth keeping the separate actual CV around, or whether I should just integrate it with the VCV download for organizational purposes (i.e. have a single VCV library but have it support VCV, CVVC, CV, or whatever the user chooses to use at that time). I'm just curious what the general stance on this is, since it's not really a big deal for me to do one of these things, but there are quite a few advantages to keep a more organized download setup.