Which solution is better for new orchestral template ?

[Eric Bettens]

Hi,

building a new orchestral template, I'm asking my self if it is better to have 1 instance in VEP7 with

1. 64 tracks, each with a VE PRO AU3 as single instrument, OR
2. 1 multitimbral PRO AU3 with 4 port, ( 16 channel on each port) ?

Or 4 instances in VEP7, 16 channel each with

1. 64 tracks, each with a VEP as single instrument, OR
2. 4 multitimbral VEP, each with 16 channels.

Which solution do you think is better to optimise CPU and Ram?

Which solution offer the best possibilities to mix after composing ?

Thanks for reply.

Mac pro (late 2013, 3,5 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon E5; 64 Go RAM) 

[Dewdman42]

I don’t think you will see significant performance differences in these scenarios it mostly comes down to workflow. There is one main advantage to having either one single instance or one instance per instrument; which is the vepro thread setting. It’s easier to get that right with those two scenarios but if you use four instances, perhaps one per section or something like that, then it’s PERHAPS more difficult to determine what to set that vepro preference to, because you never know how the load will be across those four instances, it will vary over time depending on the musical material. But in actuality many people use scenarios like that just fine too. I think use the work flow that you find easiest in terms of organizing your screen and mixers. Myself I prefer single large instance on AU3

[Eric Bettens]

Yes,

But I go further, Let's say I'm working with the BBCSO, my principal orchestral bank.

If I want to add instruments from another bank, for example Orchestral Tools Wood Winds.

Scenario A: each orchestral tools instrument is on a separate instance ==> Pic fl on 1 instance, Fl 1 on 1 instance, Fl 2 on 1 inst ....

In this case, if in addition to my BBCSO I want to play an instrument from Orchestral Tools WW; it will only load the instrument I need, exact ?

Scenario B) all orchestral tools WW instruments are on the same instance (multi instrument in Logic Pro). As soon as I want to play on the piccolo flute track from this bank, all the other sounds will be loaded, right?

==> So more use of the Ram? But on the other hand, if I have a lot of instances, it's hard to assign the number of threads to each.

What do you think about ?

Thanks,

Regards

[Dewdman42]

I personally don’t use huge templates so I am not intimately familiar with enable/disable features of both logic pro and vepro but keep in mind that they are separate things . It should be possible to enable/disable individual vepro channels but I am not familiar with the process involved

[Paul]

Hi,

Enabling / Disabling channels can be automated with parameter automation.

Best,
Paul

[Eric Bettens]

Hi Paul, 

thanks, I tried and it is very helpful !

Best,

Eric

[civilization 3]

I think to look at what load certain things are relative to the other things and segregate that.
An instance with 1x Absynth and 1x Equator is using as much CPU as hundreds of channels of say Synchron Player, in dozens of instances ie., a pretty big orchestra (half is in MIR), according to the readout VE Pro provides. 
I think the project performs better distributing the load this way, which I have a hypothesis for I'm not very prepared to write up atm. But experience tends to agree, an instance mixing the synths with the rest had to be more managed (latency/early renders). Less true with my current setup, owing to the audio interface I'm using.

While with things more equal I'd rather have one instance and use folders for channels; up to a point, where several hundred automation lanes in one instance is kind of hard to see for me.