In my stresstest I've tried to simulate a typical orchestral score situation: melody, harmony, bass instruments.
The universal mode is not much more CPU hungry than a simple single note patch, it's only a question of Ram management.
If you want to use a lot of different universal mode instruments on one computer you defenitely have to use our RAM management options earlier.

Also it is important to keep an eye on the polyphony. If you use a lot of velocity crossfaded, layer stacked instruments, with release samples you will run out of polyphony with less instances performing.

But the good thing of the Vienna Instruments is, that you can switch Velocity crossfade On/Off and Release Samples On/Off on the fly.
That means if you have a very polyphony extensive part in your piece, many instruments performing at the same time, you can switch Release samples and crossfade off exactly at this part (because of the dense instrumentation you won't need this features there), and switch it On again, when the selected instruments needs it.

In summary: our goal is to offer a system, where you can perform with a classical sized orchestra on one computer.

best
Herb

Ok. Well I'm the kind of guy who likes to have the entire orchestra sitting infront of me, just waiting to do whatever I tell them. In other words I would imagine myself having as many universal mode instruments as possible loaded at once.

With 6, 2gb P5 3ghz computers - how many universal mode instruments do you think I would be able to have?

Maybe 30 different instruments/instances, maybe some more. I'll check it out tomorrow, I don't know the exact sample amount datas of the individual instruments in universal mode at the moment.

best
Herb

@Christian Marcussen said:

With an amazing G5 you cant be too empovrished [[:D]]

My amazing G5 is the reason I'm impoverished [:P]

Hey I volunteer to stress test the VSI on a quad G5! Well I haven't seen anyone here mention the mac side yet, so why not eh! Please [[:D]]

Yeah I know what you mean [[:D]]

I'm have the same problem but inversed. I would love to switch to a few G5's but I cant afford it, becuase SC empoverished me [[:D]]

please whatever you do, make it completely multi-threaded!!! rack mounted XEON processors could prove most amazing.

Any word on how percussion will be handled?

Dear Herb

Before I purchase the SC upgrade, Could you please answer these 3 Questions for me: Just so one can prepare Hard Drives Etc....

1. If the new Interface can support a vast amount of Articulation per Instrument.
Then can we load up 64 tracks, say in Exs, but this time Instead of just one instrument per track, its 64 tracks of multiples. Or will the memory exaust itself?
And one will have to manage aditional memory.

2. Currently in scoring we're using single Instruments ex: stac 1 stac 2 etc. And not using the alternate tool or the repetition tool. Because its not fast enough or its just more to content with in regard to chasing notes ect. Question :
Will the new interface be fast enough to handle stac 1 stac 2 in extremly fast passages in Score? Or will one have to say; load 2 complete solo violin matrix articulations in more than one instrument to ofset or set up ahead of quick passages?

3. If you owned the new SC , will you ever need to use the pro edition or open samples anymore? Or will the SC completely replace? And can be used alike as well.


Thanks !

Hi RK.

Here's what I'd say.

1. You can have 1 MIDI Track to 1 VI VST, which means (theroretically) you can support up to 64 VIs in Cubase SX3, other VST hosts will differ.

Each VI can have multiple articulations and multiple instruments depending how you set up the patches.

You are only limited by RAM and CPU (which is apparently 1%-1.5% per VI on a 3.6GHZ P4 PC)

2. Not quite sure why the ALT tool isn't fast enough for your fast passages, the REP tool is a pain at the moment but the new VI makes REPs much easier to do (or so the videos intimate). I'd guess anything too fast wouldn't sound realistic anyway as there's only so quickly a real player can play.

3. This depends upon your needs. If you think that the VI will do everything you want then get rid of the Pro ED samples. However any sound mangling of individual samples you need to do is not possible with the VI so you may want to keep the PRO ED samples afterall.

Best


Tim

Hi Timkiel

Actually, the present way of dealing with fast passages is working fine, infact its stunning what one can do with the present set up. Its the limitation of instruments
thats the drawback. And the rep tool is apparently the pain,in regards to limitations, again. I get the feel that one should keep present set ups, just in case. and add on the upgrade for more technological break throughs. Guess will have to order a couple more glyphs to daisy chain.


Sincerely

Just a thought

The difference between a human player and samples are the speed.

The first piano sample that is fast or close to human playing is Ivory synthogy.
The first orchestral samples that are fast enough to be real are VSL.

Question: How will the new SC interface player use the stac up, down, bowing in the score?

I just now discovered (Solo violin) has "spic marc" for fast passages.
anxious to use "short stacs" in chamber strings.

Calling all herb !---- Calling all Herb !

Actually as a pianist I find that the ArtVista Virtual Grand Piano has a very "human" feel to it. Can't tell the difference to Ivory though as I don't own the latter.

PolarBear

Just heard the sweedish piano sample. It has a lot of presence, up front dry clear sound. Sounds great. It has a cut of much like a playel, but sounds alittle more tamer. I'm having to back of from using Ivory's effects. Different parts of fast passages need effects taken out. Ofcourse thats not real human acoustic, but its more effective. these piano samples seem to keep up with the new and bigger CPU's/memory as they expand. Wish one could say the same towards the sequential programs. 64 bit processing into the atmosphere.

Polar bear
this is a little question to ask. But do you know if one can load single samples in the new VSL upgrade much the same as present way. All the video shows , is using the new player. Which is of course great.

I might just buy a couple of 24 track recorders and get the whole VSL with all its glory. Just the same.

sincerely

R.K. - the Vienna Instruments is a player only software, that means you can't access the samples directly for editing purposes, however you can load a patch and play a specific sample at a specific velocty just as it is now. Loading a single sample only would mean you'd have to load the whole program and use the RAMsave function to free up the memory from the unneeded parts. I didn't read the EULA yet (is it even availible yet?) if it allows some sort of resampling for the licensee. That way you could record single samples into your sampler (most have an editor) and act with them just like you do know with others.

To sum it up - the VIs (i.e. Symphonic Cube products) are wrapped up in a player type. To edit samples or create new programs you'd need to extract them (if that is allowed).

Still I'm not sure I understood your question right as I see you mentioned 24 track recorders (for what purpose you'd think you'd need that)?

All the best,
PolarBear

Thank you for your prompt response " polar bear "

Vie geht und zer gut.

So the new player is actualy the sampler window, and one would treat it just like current loading of sampler window. Therefore one simple articulation at a time is acceptable. Of course that makes sense. But somtimes I lose my senses in the midst of.

If one downloads tracks from computer to 24 track machines, then all restraints of cpu or mamory is relinquished. And Orchestral timbral build ups will have no caps or ceiling. Then everything is possible. Correct ?

und ich wil geten sie das SC. ya

bite

@R.K. said:

If one downloads tracks from computer to 24 track machines, then all restraints of cpu or mamory is relinquished. And Orchestral timbral build ups will have no caps or ceiling. Then everything is possible. Correct ?

Yes, but there's not really that much point. Using a Freeze function (in CubaseSX or Logic) will simply render the entire track down to audio which has very little CPU overhead and even less RAM overhead.

The best approach is start LIVE (lots of RAM/CPU needed) - then use RAMSAVE in the VI to free up RAM, however its still using some RAM and CPU so use the Freeze function(in your sequencer) to free this up even further - in SX3 you can even unload the VST to free up more resource as part of the freezing process.

No need for 24 track tape machines.....

Thanks Tim

In logic , if I remember correctly, one has to install samples in computer's hard drive itself, in a certain place, to gain acces to freezing. Perhaps certain articulations only, that drain ram/cpu. I didin't persue any further , but maybe I should have. Thanks for the reminder. I see thats very important.

sincerely

There are also tools for freezing if your sequencer doesn't support it natively, afaik one is a VST called TapeRecorder or something like that.

I don't think you'd need to freeze all tracks, the CPU usage will be not so high, and it might be enough to only free the RAM with the built-in RAMsave function of the VIs. A 24 track tape recorder seems overkill to me.

Viel Spass mit den Sounds! [;)]
PolarBear

Once you use the ram save feature, aren't you stuck with what was already recorded? I only see this feature useable once you have finished the entire instruments part for the piece but if that's the case wouldn't freeze be even better? Am I missing something here?

Freezing wouldn't allow you to change dynamics later which you can do using the ram saving feature of the VI.