Yes, you certainly should. They're still stress testing at VSL, but the results up to now are pretty good - should be published quite soon, but I don't know how close to completion they are.

I have a PC with 2 GB RAM - with Cubase running (and IE as well as an old project loaded, because I checked it just now), there's still about 1.3 GB left which I can fill to the brim - one should leave 100 MB free, though - performance might suffer.

Regards,
d.

@Another User said:

Anyway, Vienna Instruments runs on Mac and PC alike, the only difference being that the Mac is somewhat ahead with its RAM addressing system so you can load more instruments and get a "fuller" orchestra on a single Mac than on a single PC (provided I understood that rightly).

There's no more BASIC INSTRUMENTS (with only two velocity layers of the major articulations) in VI but the sample management is pretty cool. The major asset for me though is that you're much quicker because you don't have to fiddle around so much to get what you want, and can concentrate on the music!

Cheers,

David
VSL manuals

Yes, David, that is the main point ... not having to fiddle around, so we can focus on the music. That, obviously, is why I want to be sure that scrapping the old EXS/Pro Edition setup and using VI will not be a giant mistake, or step backwards, requiring more unanticipated hardware purchases to rectify.

Looking forward to hearing from that (those?) Mac tester(s)!

- Paul

Ten days later and nary a peep from VSL?

@DG said:

No, I have no first hand knowledge; I'm going by what I have read on this site. FWIW I use one machine for Strings (Pro Edition Cube/Performance Set, Chamber Strings, Solo Strings) one for WW and some Brass (including Epic Horns, French Oboe/CA/Eb Clarinet and WW Ensembles) and the other machine for the remaining Brass, Percussion, Keys and other odds and sods. I also have a K2 machine for samples from EW/Spectrasonics and others.

I doubt that I could run my full orchestral template from 1 Mac; even if I could load enough samples I would be in danger of running out of Polyphony, never mind plug-ins (reverb etc.).

DG

DG-- we Mac uses must stick together. I'd like to know more about your setup. Maybe you've posted this info already in another thread. If so, please forgive the redundancy questions.

My curiosities:
-- your cpus, speeds, ram allotments..
-- midi and audio latency, sync reconciliation
-- audio cards, interfaces
-- surround projects?
-- networking using Airport? Yes? No? Good? Bad?
-- Wormhole or other applicaion?
-- Thoughts on X-Serve as a network solution?

It seems to me that we'll soon need new forums here since VI is not bound to Gigastudio or EXS. It seems to me that as users branch off into other platforms such as Digital Performer, Cubase, Pro Tools, etc., so will the discussion threads benefit from branching off.

Macs and their performance are discussed here...

http://community.vsl.co.at/viewtopic.php?t=7384

Julian

Thanks for that detailed post, Julian.

I, too, am using a Mac. I work pretty much the same way you described ... all on one computer, freezing and unfreezing as I go along, making full orchestral performances with Logic. I'm not using audio, though ... just VSL and other samples.

I can attest that one (now old) dual-processor G5 with 2 Gb of RAM, and two fast 250 GB disks (using FW800, not SCSI) are sufficient to get the work done.

But that's using the OLD VSL (Pro Edition). I've asked several times on this forum for someone from VSL to at comment on Mac setup and performance regarding the new VIs. If they have replied, I have not seen it (despite having topic replies enabled all over the place).

DG has been kind enough to engage in the discussion (Thanks!) ... BUT, he does not actually use a Mac! -- I wonder how our PC-using brothers and sisters would accept technical advice from Mac users saying, "this should work, but we've never actually tried a PC"?

Julian, perhaps you and I will have to be the guinea pigs and get the real info out to everyone once we've installed and used the VIs. It would be nice to hear from VSL about their experience actually building a full orchestral rendition on a Mac system (as opposed to playing a handful of parts, à la the demo videos), if any. Absent that, however, we will simply have to forge ahead on our own. (Ah, the price of being early adopters!)

- Paul

@paulhenrysmith said:

DG has been kind enough to engage in the discussion (Thanks!) ... BUT, he does not actually use a Mac! -- I wonder how our PC-using brothers and sisters would accept technical advice from Mac users saying, "this should work, but we've never actually tried a PC"?
- Paul

Who says I've never used a Mac? Who says that Ive never actually tried a Mac? Who says that many of my friends don't use Macs as well as PCs?

I'll admit that I threw out my Mac over a year ago (and sent the new G5 back), but that doesn't mean to say that I don't check out all new models that come onto the market. If you read my posts carefully, you'll see that I never tell people how they should do anything on a Mac, only general VSL (and other computer) related advice.

I don't care who gives me advice as long as I can check it out, and verify the accuracy.

So from now on I suggest that people who are Mac users and do not want me to respond to their posts include a signature that says:
a) They use a Mac
b) They have no interest in any advice, except from Mac users

FWIW the only advice that most Mac users seem to be able to give to PC users is "buy a Mac" [8-)]

DG

Wow.

I touched a nerve of some sort. As with all of us, you should take your own advice and read MY post carefully.

I don't think your reply is appropriate to my post that:

- a) publicly thanks you for your discussion here, and
- b) truthfully points out that you do not use a mac

You mis-read or misunderstood my post to say or imply that you "never" used a Mac. I didn't say that.

I will try to clarify why I refered to your non-mac-using status: Someone earlier posted about a Mac setup asking you in particular to describe yours. You didn't reply saying, truthfully, that you don't actually use a Mac. And I don't care that you don't. Your participation in this discussion is important to me.

Surely, you must be able to relate to our concerns: We use certain hw/sw and want to know what sort of experience people with similar hardware/software (hw/sw) have had before spending a lot of money on VSL. It doesn't matter what you use ... if you find a glaring lack of real information about your PARTICULAR hw/sw, you would likely be concerned, to say the least, before plunging ahead.

My goal in this thread is to get someone (anyone!) at VSL with real, actual, hands-on experience using the new Vienna Insturments on a Mac to simply comment on that with respect to the several specific questions I and others have posed here.

To that end, I shall try to remain on topic and avoid attempting to clarify other people's postings to other people.

- Paul

No nerve, just a sense of humour [:D]

DG

One thing that applies to both Mac and PC users (I guess?) and relates to the total number of instruments that could run at any one time is the mono stereo issue.

All VSL instruments are stereo. I tend to use these in Logic in 3 ways depending on the project/arrangement.

1. As default stereos.
2. As loaded stereos but stereo spread reduced as required and panned to where I need them to be.
3. Using a mono exs instrument

I would guess that where I am using a mono EXS instrument (this is in cases where use of a stereo even reduced image will not enhance that particular instruments position/ambience in the final mix) I will effectively be able to have twice the number of voices for the same CPU load - this wouldn't affect the RAM requirements but would effect the total voices that can be reproduced in real time on one computer. - Just a thought.

On the same tack I wonder if VSL would be able to provide mono versions of their files for a mono load option (Spectrasonic have done this on a number of their sample libraries) It would at a stroke increase most peoples effective RAM capacity. My view is that in a comprehensive orchestral arrangement at least half the tracks could be represented with mono samples.

When I've done my large scale orchestral recordings (real orchestras) there have been a lot of instruments and sections on mono audio tracks to keep track count under control. At no time have they suffered from lack of realism or image control.

Julian

Hi,

we are currently finishing the Audio Unit version of the Vienna Instruments, that also includes a lot of testing. As soon as we are ready and content with the Mac Audio Unit version, there will be more detailed descriptions, test results, demos, mixes, videos...

Best, Paul

Thanks VSL for going to the extent to help us find answers. I really appreciate keeping tabs with the developments. Someone else mentioned that not every company would care as much.

As a Mac user, I am really quite optimistic based on the PC results I've read. Granted, PCs are not Macs, but given the processors and the amount of RAM used in the tests, I anticipate having a very well organized and well stocked orchestra template with VI.

It seems that mastering the matrix is the key to making the most of the instances any one system will accept to load the quantity of articulations which may be needed at once.

On paper, I've already "imagined" how these 24 instances will be set up, but I won't speculate here in advance of official Mac test results.

But the 24-instance limit as well as Logic's RAM limit may *in some ways* be a blessing for those Mac users who thought swapping their G5 duals for a Quad would be the key to solving ALL issues. From what I understand, fast drives and 4GB RAM will go far to accomplish much.

Looking forward to those Mac reports!