Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

183,798 users have contributed to 42,323 threads and 255,174 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 7 new thread(s), 22 new post(s) and 45 new user(s).

  1. Home
  2. Sample Libraries
  3. Vienna Instruments Libraries
  4. VE 3?
  • cmC
    VSL Team
    cmC

    again: yes

    my long winded reply was just because you wrote *VI* (= Vienna Instruments) and the network capability will be only available for VE (= Vienna Ensemble)

    basically you will be able to do everything with VE3 as you can do now with VE2 - just across network.

    christian

    and remember: only a CRAY can run an endless loop in just three seconds.
  • A
    A
    ...it means I will have to load 40 instances of VE, which seems to be heavier on sys resources then VI.
    I just assumed/hoped that the VSL client plugin loaded on an instrument channel will be ultra-light and transparent,
    since it only needs to stream samples from a remote VE3 server. I guess I'll understand how it works, when it's released.
  • T
    T
    Abel, you can send midi over 16 channels into each instance of VE, so if you had 40 tracks you would need 3 instances of VE on your host DAW. 40 instances of VE would give you access to 640 instances of VI - which is rather a lot....

    Best

    Tim
  • D
    D
    [quote=timkiel]Abel, you can send midi over 16 channels into each instance of VE, so if you had 40 tracks you would need 3 instances of VE on your host DAW. 40 instances of VE would give you access to 640 instances of VI - which is rather a lot.... Yes, 3 instances of VE are much less CPU hungry than 40 instances of VI, in my experience.
    DG
  • A
    A
    all true, but then I will have to work with 80 tracks (40 midi + 40 VE outputs) instead of just 40 (instrument tracks combining midi and audio).
  • D
    D

    You can always hide the VSTi outputs so you don't have to see them. There are very good reasons not to use Instrument tracks for complicated orchestral work, so I never use them.

    FWIW even 80 tracks is nothing. before Vienna Instruments I always had at least 150 MIDI tracks in the template. [;)]

    DG
  • S
    S
    last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    Yes, 3 instances of VE are much less CPU hungry than 40 instances of VI, in my experience.

    DG

     

    In my experience, this really depends on the OS, the particular machine configuration and the DAW. As I brought up in another recent thread, Logic 8 acting as a host for a set of VI matrices consumes about 1/3rd as much processing power as the same configuration of matrices instantiated in VE - - when run on my G5 under OS X.4.11

  • V
    V

    cm, the thing I'm interested in is where will I interact with my VIs, on the screen of my main DAW computer, or on the screen of my slave computer (which would be networked with VE3 as I understand)?

    In a perfect world I would be able to have my VE instances opened up on instrument tracks in ProTools and insert the VI instances in them, but it only being a graphical representation of controlling the slave computer, ie. the VE instance would actually not be loaded on my main DAW, but rather on the slave so as to save having 2 screens/computers to look at and control. This would be a kind of remote desktop for controlling the slave, but would of course only work with VE over a proper netwrok and setup.

    Possible? 
  • A
    A
    last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    There are very good reasons not to use Instrument tracks for complicated orchestral work, so I never use them.

    can you explain that?
  • T
    T

    vagnuv

    - That's not the way it works at the moment.  You only setup the connections and routing from the main DAW, each slave is managed on it's own screen.  So in Windows you'd use Remote Desktop or VNC, in OSX you'd use Apple Remote Desktop, Screen Sharing (Leopard only) or VNC or have a KVM or multiple screens.

    Of course in a perfect world it would be nice to control everything within your main DAW and have the VE send out remote instructions to select instruments etc to the slaves.  In a near perfect world it would also be nice to at least be able to control and automate power panning in either mode (local or remote).
  • D
    D
    last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    There are very good reasons not to use Instrument tracks for complicated orchestral work, so I never use them.

    can you explain that?

    Well two things that would affect me regularly are:

    1. You can't send MIDI from an Instrument track to more than one VSTi.
    2. When doing divisi I like to have two VSTi routed to the same VSTi Output

    The second one of these can be solved by using a Group track, but I have enough of those already in the template.

    DG
  • A
    A
    good point.
    still, I switched from VE back to VIs -- same sample set, lighter on the system.