Interesting setup. I have a couple of questions Jerome, if you have another generous moment.

First of all, how do you sync the digital signals from the mac mini's? I assume without some sort of clocking, you would have jitter and drifting.

Second, since you are just outputting a stereo pair from each machine, what amount of submixing is going on? just panning or are you running verbs/eq on the mac mini level?

Thanks for the great info!

@Another User said:

By the way, "one track equals one instrument" is the only way to fly.

I agree!!! It's makes much more "musical" sense!

Jerome

@Another User said:

Also, how much of that 2GB are you able to access? On a 2GB XP machine you can access just under 1.75GB of samples, which of course is really great. But they're bigger than Mac Minis - although you can stick cheap interfaces on them and get more than two outputs.

For now, I was able to load up to 1.4GB. I think you can go up to 1.6, but I did not need that much memory yet.

As a general thought, the "slave" concept can work with any computer, Windows or Mac.

However, the idea here was 1/ to get rid of Windows (sorry, we're Mac-biased), 2/ to save space (looots of space), and 3/ to save energy (a Mac Mini consumes only 80W!) - and to do all this at the best cost/power ratio.

Jerome

@Another User said:

Second, since you are just outputting a stereo pair from each machine, what amount of submixing is going on? just panning or are you running verbs/eq on the mac mini level?

As I mentionned in my previous posts, you get one stereo input per Mac Mini into your sequencer. This is why we had to organize the samples by instruments rather than by VI collections.

As a side note, you could probably run verbs/eqs at the Mac Mini level, but I would argue against that. I really think the goal is to dedicate 100% of their power to the VI, to make sure you will never have any performance issue.

Jerome

Quick tip: if you're ever in a situation where you want bounces with fewer files, submix.

[6]

The subtext of my previous post was to wonder whether you wouldn't be better off running XP on those Mac Minis.

@Nick Batzdorf said:

Quick tip: if you're ever in a situation where you want bounces with fewer files, submix.

[6]

The subtext of my previous post was to wonder whether you wouldn't be better off running XP on those Mac Minis.

Within the Logic environment, it's very easy to create aux tracks to bounce only 5 stereo stems (woodwinds, brass, strings, keys, perc, for example).

You can run Windows XP on the Mac Minis, but

1/ I am not sure that the digital I/O will work
2/ You're running Windows XP [6]

But if the digital I/O work and you like Windows, then you should be good to go [:)] Although I don't think you will really get better performances doing so.

Jerome

@Jerome said:

[quote=Nick Batzdorf]Quick tip: if you're ever in a situation where you want bounces with fewer files, submix.

[6]

The subtext of my previous post was to wonder whether you wouldn't be better off running XP on those Mac Minis.

Within the Logic environment, it's very easy to create aux tracks to bounce only 5 stereo stems (woodwinds, brass, strings, keys, perc, for example).

You can run Windows XP on the Mac Minis, but

1/ I am not sure that the digital I/O will work
2/ You're running Windows XP [6]
---------------------------------------
I'll just add to that:
Plus
1. you have to buy the licenses. OSX comes on the macs already.
2. You're running Windows XP [6] [6] [6] [6] [6]

Thanks Jerome. I'm actually somewhat familiar with Logic, and no, I don't particularly like XP. But at this stage the Vienna Instruments player is a little farther along on Windows than it is on PowerPC Macs in my experience (with the exception of memory access, but that's not a factor with a machine that only holds 2GB).

I haven't tried it on an Intel Mac, though, which is why I'm wondering rather than shrieking. [:)] Didn't I read somewhere that the digital I/O can work if you install a generic driver?

Jerome:

No doubt I missed something here, but I can't seem to find where you mention what software you are using to run the VI instruments on the Mac Mini slaves - or if are you using a standalone version of VI on each Mini. I understand the part about routing the output of each Mini into an aux in Logic. (I think one could also treat each Mini as an "External Instrument.") Forgive me if I missed this bit...

Thanks in advance.

We're using Plogue Bidule as a host.

Jerome

Jerome:

Thanks - - that's what I thought. Now all I have to do is learn how to use Plogue Bidule for this purpose...

Nick:

Might I suggest an article in a future issue of your magazine, Virtual Instruments (to which I am a subscriber) with a step by step description of how to use Plogue Bidule as a host for virtual instrument plug-ins. This would be enormously helpful to those dunderheads like myself who are suffering from severe tech overload....

We need to do more about slave machine set-ups in general, I agree.

And you're not a dunderhead, you're asking the same questions we all are.

Second to the article request.

Nick, I'd love to see a piece that starts with one Mac Mini as a slave, a simple ethernet MIDI hookup and a straight-forward use of the Mini's audio out. Then explain what's needed for multiple analog I/O's. Next, tell us what's needed for a single stereo digital I/O, and then onto multiple digital feeds.

For most, the financial reality is an incremental building of a farm. It'd be great if an article could unfold the path before us.

And while I'm requesting, I'd love to read an article called "Anatomy of a Lost Voice: Why Your Instruments Stop Playing." It would be a step-by-step way to diagnose the loss of polyphony, so you'd know what you need to upgrade, or if a second computer is the only answer.

Well has anybody got any experiences to report on the xeon machines?

Miklos.

I found Plogue Bidule to be actually very easy to use - much more than the Logic Environment for example.

Basicailly, you "drag" elements from a panel, in which you can find Audio Units, mixers, audio/midi ins and outs, etc.

For example, for a simple VI setup you would have :

1 - One "Midi Over Lan Port In", which you connect to...
2 - One "Vienna Instrument" AU (or VST), which you connect to...
3 - One Audio Out.

And you're done [:)]

Jerome

Hi everybody

I'm new to the forums, and also new to all the hardware and software you discuss - please bear with my stupidity.

Jerome, how would you get the sound of a guitar or a microphone into the soundcard you use, the RME - HDSP MADI?
My company wants to set up a computer (Mac Pro) and one or more Mac Minis to host VI, but we want to be able to record guitar, bass and vocals as well (nothing more than stereo input needed), on the same computer. Would you be able to connect a mixer to the MADI card, to lead the record data into the computer, or is the MADI mainly for master/slave internal composing?
How do you lead the sound out of the computer?
Does anyone here mix their music in 5.1? What speaker setup and sound card/external mixer do you use to get the sound out in the mixing room?
Is GigaStudio needed for a master/slave setup, or can you run such a setup directly through Logic? Would GigaStudio increase the performance in any way? (if we go for ProTools I guess we have to go with GigaSampler anyway because then we'd have to buy the GS version of VI as PT doesn't support the EXS format)

Thanks in advance.

EDIT: I saw now that you use Logic, so I guess that you don't need GS for the master/slave setup.

/simon

Hi Simon,

Maya asked me lately to give you some information about a possible hardware setup for your company.

I´ve just read in the forum that you are thinking about getting one of the RME MADI Cards. This card is mainly used if you have a big digital console like the Sony Oxford/DMX-R100 or one of the Soundtracks consoles (DPC II, DS 3, DS 00) featuring a MADI input. Or if you are using it together with the correlating RME interfaces e.g. the ADI648.

The main reason why someone would buy the MADI card is that you have 64 inputs and 64 outputs from your computer simultaneously. This is needed when you record many sources at the same time live, e.g. a whole band or an orchestra.
Because the RME ADI 648 is a ADAT to MADI converter and I have a Sony DMX R-100 it was the right decision for me, as I used the 8 ADAT inputs on the ADI 648 to sum-up all outputs from my Giga machines and the bus and direct outs of the sony, which are also ADAT in my case.

The next problem is that the MAC Pro don´t have any PCI or PCI-X slots but only PCI-express now, so at the moment you can´t put the RME cards into this machine. RME said that they will release a HDSP MADI card with PCI-express socket in summer 2006. But till now nothing was announced.

The only PCI-express audio cards on the market right now are the Apogee Symphony and the Motu PCI-424. They both have their strength.

So the best way would be, if you send some short answers to the questions below, so that I can figure out the best system for your needs.

1) how many Macmini do you think you will need as slaves?
2) how many physical outputs do you think you need per Macmini (I would suggest 8 -> one ADAT pipe)
3) do you have or think about buying a Mixingdesk also? digital or analog?
4) if you don´t buy a desk, what micpreamps/di boxes do you have or buy? which outputs do they have? (analog or digital)
5) will you be mixing in surround?

as soon as i have your answers, I´ll let you know, which components will fit into your system.

Besides the Vienna Instruments come with their own integrated sample player as AU and VST plug-in on both plattforms intel and ppc, no other third party player (like Giga, EXS Halion or Kontakt) is needed.

best
Christian Kardeis

@Another User said:

Besides the Vienna Instruments come with their own integrated sample player as AU and VST plug-in on both platforms intel and ppc, no other third party player (like Giga, EXS Halion or Kontakt) is needed.

For the sake of clarity, let me add that you will of course need a host to load the AU or VST plug-in. Some are cheaper than others. We personnaly tested both Rax and Plogue Bidule, and finally went with Plogue as we found it to be more powerful and more reliable than Rax.

Jerome

@Another User said:

on the money side, you would spend at least $600 more for each Mac Mini.

Even the ProFire - overkill since it has four lightpipes - lists for $500. It's going to sell for $400 on the street.

So that's an exaggeration. And to put a fine point on it, having to deal with 8U of boxes is inconsequential if the alternative is mixing problems created by the limitation of only having two outputs.

Nonetheless, I'm personally not at all convinced that an army of Mac Minis is the ideal solution for VSL. It is for Jerome's boss, but it wouldn't be for me (although it might be for a couple of slaves). Even before the audio interface issue, I'd rather put in more RAM and get more out each machine. You can put together Windows machines that work really well and possibly network audio and MIDI between them with FX-Teleport -which I haven't tried, but it's really the way to do it if it works - for considerably less. There's some of your 8U and money spent on interfaces back right there.

Don't get me wrong - I think the Mac Mini is a clever machine for many reasons, and I'm thinking about replacing one of my Windows machines with one. And there are always other factors, for example I'd find it much easier to maintain an army of Macs than Windows machines - partly because of my limited knowledge of Windows troubleshooting and partly because Macs simply are easier to deal with when things go wrong (unless you're cm, in which case it doesn't matter). But I wouldn't personally buy several of them specifically for VSL, at least not this generation.

Nick--

the ProFire is not out yet. This is why my figure was "at least $600".

We are strongly thinking about going to ADAT in a couple of months, for the same reason you mentionned (mixing).

This actually leads me to one important question to the VSL team: are the VI recorded in stereo or in mono?

Now, the reason why we went with the "Mac Mini as VSL farm" concept is because they're the cheapest *Mac* solution in regards to performances / price. This is just a simple fact. Putting more Ram into one machine to reach the 2.5GB barrier is the obvious choice, but there was no point if this was to get performance or latency issues (as we witnessed on other setups).

I am not trying to convince you that this concept would work for you. If there is one thing I learned in the year I've been working in Los Angeles is that every composer has a different way to work, and that to different needs, different solutions apply. What is important is that your gear allow you to do what you are good at - writing music.

But please do take into account that our needs and situation are very specific. Because the goal is to never access the VI GUI, we have most of the "generic" articulations (see one of my previous posts) from the Symphonic Cube loaded at all time. This translates to about 12GB of samples loaded in memory (1.5GB per computer). Taking into consideration the 32-bit, 2.5GB, limit, this would require about 5 (pretty fast) PCs to run.

Every situation is different, so this will no apply to everyone. Some people only use some, and not all, of the VI collections. Others don't care about having everything loaded in the background. Some use it as a plug-in. Some people will need more than one stereo channel for two instruments. And some even like PCs! [[[;)]]]

I even know some composers who just don't like the VI [:)]

But this topic was about the Mac Mini as a VSL farm. Is it working? Yes, and very, very well. And, yes, there are some shortcomings, some that can be fixed, and some that can't (for now, at least). It's worth it for us, but I never said it would be worth it for everyone [[;)]]

Jerome