Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

196,172 users have contributed to 43,014 threads and 258,395 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 0 new thread(s), 7 new post(s) and 169 new user(s).

  1. Home
  2. Software
  3. Vienna Instruments Pro
  4. VEP still crashes Logic, when presented with too many (~22) unconnected instances.

  • VEP still crashes Logic, when presented with too many (~22) unconnected instances.

    Y
    Y

    I would just like to report that VEP 4.0.6150 will still crash Logic when presented with too many unconnected instances. Here's a recreate:

    - Software versions -

    OS: OSX SL 10.6.4

    Logic: 9.1.1 (32bit)

    VEP: 4.0.6150

    --------------------------

    1) Create a new blank Logic project

    2) Boot up VEP 32 bit server on a slave Mac (over gigabit LAN)

    3) Add an instance of the VEP AU plugin into the Logic project

    4) Hit "connect" to display the list of available VEP instances in the VEP AU (in Logic)

    5) Start adding VE instances to VEP 32 bit server on the slave Mac, name them "instance1, instance2, instance3 etc..."

    ...

    x) by the time you've added around 22 instances Logic will crash. (On a previous build of VEP I found the magic number to be >24instances).

    This works every time, without fail, and other users have reported the same issue. It would seem that this is a (simple?) bug in the "available instances" list building part of the AU plugin. If, as you add each instance to teh VEP Server, you connect it off to a new VEP AU Plugin instance, you can exceed 22 instances (I'm guessing this is because, when connected, an instance is not displayed on the list of available instances in the AU plugin).

    Hopefully this can be fixed in a future build.

    Cheers,

    Will
  • M
    M

    Dear Will,

    thanks for reporting. Please send your crashreport to our support: .

    Best regards,

    Maya
  • M
    M

    Just out of curiosity, do you really need 352 midi channels?
  • W
    W

    I can't speak for Will, but the reason I bought VE Pro is PRECISELY because I need that many MIDI channels, and the promise of simplifying my setup was why I took the bait.  My scoring template consists of about 350 instruments too, spread out over 3 computers.  For the last 2 years I've run standalone versions of Kontakt, PLAY & Vienna Insts. on these machines, all in real time, while controlling them from Logic.  It works perfectly but managing it could be more efficient, and offline bounces are out of the question - hence my interest in VE Pro.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the whole idea behind VE Pro to allow us to fully utilize these large, multi-computer setups?  I don't mean this to sound at all combative, by the way - just asking ;-)  I know a lot of fellow film composers who are in the same boat, trying to get large templates put together in an optimal way...

    Unfortunately the AU spec dictates a lot of instances because of its 16-channel limit - maybe someday there will be a way around that ;-)

    On another note, thanks to you developers for listening and being active on this forum.  Your obvious dedication to this product was one of the reasons I decided to give it a shot!
  • J
    J
    last edited
    last edited

    @yt020490_13791 said:

    x) by the time you've added around 22 instances Logic will crash

    Will,

    I really don't mean to sound like a jerk here, and as a ProTools user, I am fortunate to be able to use multi-port instances of the rtas host plug (as do VST3 users), HOWEVER

    <jerk alert> 

    Why on earth do you need 22 instances of VE Pro on a single slave?

    I typically use 1, maximum 2 instances per slave.

    OK, with logic you are limited to 16 midi channels per instance (where with the multi-port, we can have hundreds), but still -- how many instruments/midi channels do you really need to actively use in a composition? What are you trying to accomplish with hundreds of midi channels?

    Like many others using VSL, I do large symphonic work. I use the power of the VSL matrix, but never go overboard. BUT I do use keyswitching. It is very possible (actually desirable) to load one "instrument" into a VI. OK, that's one midi channel per instrument. Can you not do a large ensemble with 40-50 midi channels? And that is the outside number. I usually can do it with half that.

    I never quite understand the need to build the template from hell and have it always on. At least for my work, I am ALWAYS custom building my sample palate to suit the music. It's ok if we take a minute or 3 to load new sounds. It really is! But then I am loading exactly what I need. My machine resources remain available and I can do productive work. I can't imagine what would happen if I tried loading the entire world "just in case" and have to drag it all around all the time. 

    I guess we have fundamental differences in how we approach our work.

    I can simply state that by only loading what I need, my machines can always perform as requested.

    </jerk>

    Best,

    J
  • D
    D

     Actually I totally understand why composers have 900+ MIDI tracks in their templates. I used to have a few hunded in mine, before Vienna Instruments was released (look at some of Jay's only demos). If a lot of your samples come from one of the less forward thinking companies, then there is often not really any possibility to use less tracks. Even the guys who have their orchestral samples replaced by live musicians have a great deal of tracks. For example, assuming that you have a traditional sized orchestra, at a conservative estimate you need at least:

    1. 10 tracks for strings
    2. 12 for woods
    3. 13 for brass

    Already only using sustain, short stacc, long stacc, pizz, trem, trills you need 60 MIDI tracks for stings, 48 for woods and 39 for brass. That's already 147, and we have no harp/percussion/ethnic, voices etc. We also have very few articulations. I hope that you can see how the track count can build up.

    Having said that, I would never want to work that way again, but foe some people it is a necessity, and as an orchestrator I would hate to receive a MIDI file from one of my own projects, because it would be a nightmare to deal with. Much simpler to see what each articulation is.

    DG
  • W
    W
    last edited
    last edited

    @jeremyroberts said:

    I guess we have fundamental differences in how we approach our work.

    Bingo.   If you don't mind stopping in the heat of the moment to look for/load sounds, more power to you.   Personally, being borderline ADD, that would drive me nuts & completely kill the idea before having a chance to capture it.   Not that it matters, but I know I'm not alone - lots of composers (I'd be willing to bet most) like to have all their main tools available at all times.  I suppose one person's "template from Hell" is another's playground 😉

    For another insight into "why the large template" - using a lot of various libraries is a contributing factor.  In my "trailer park" template, I have pretty much everything loaded from EWQLSO Platinum, Symphobia, various Vienna libraries, as well as a large custom orch library of my own.  Even with everything condensed into keyswitches & VSL matrices, that's still a lot of tracks - but I use elements from all of these in the bigger cues I write.  I'm not sure how to get around that at this point, but I LOVE having it all there & available!

    I've been waiting for the day when I'd no longer be slowed down by the technical aspects of what we do. Like most of us, I've spent weeks of my life building & tweaking my template over the years.  While I consider it "streamlined" it's still 300+ tracks but it's very well organized & easy to navigate thanks to Logic's folders, key commands & screensets.  Most important, it contains everything I'm likely to use in a typical cue so I can work at breakneck speed.  And since I've got it all spread out across machines, there's plenty of resources available if I REALLY want to go nuts 😉

    I totally respect what you're saying Jeremy... I guess I'm just arguing in favor of "hey, we've got the power, so let's use it."  As usual, just my $.02, and likely not worth even that much 😉

    Take care & much respect,
  • Y
    Y

    I guess all the composers chiming in on this thread spoke on my behalf... Composers like templates :D and it would be nice if VEP didn't crash Logic ~22 instances. Maya, I will email a crash report for you to analyse.
  • J
    J

    I agree with Jeremy on this issue, as it is important for us as musicians to always sound fresh, and a template only hinders this.  As film composeres, we are first film makers, musicians we are second, so presentation of a cue should always come before convenience and your "original" sound, even though this...unique template you feel you must customize is already 90% + samples being used by other composers, no matter what EQ etc. you place on it.  Take a look at Jeremy Soule... classic case of a template using composer--every single game he has written for has the same exact mix and samples throughout.  Listen to A.R. Rahman or Danny Elfman: these guys are both digital composers who continually emphasize the necessity to create new unique scores, and you can't create a completely new score from your previous if you are using the same palette and mix setup.  I feel they are both so successful because of their focus on continually changing their sound. Sure these guys might make a template here and there, but it is designed specifically for the project, its not a template that is just used for EVERYTHING...it's counter productive and a big waste of time and space and only results in constant filtering of tracks in the mixer and the arrange window... isn't it easier just to make an instrument track in Logic?  I mean in DP it's just a pain in the ass because they haven't conjoined AUX and MIDI into one yet (and the bundles window is just a nightmare) but when you use Logic, you should focus on simplicity... use what is needed when it's needed because loading things in that program is about as easy as it gets.

    [[  If you want a huge orchestra template use Cubase 6... you can load your 350+ midi tracks into two instances of VE Pro, not to mention significant advantages in midi CC editing with multiple lanes and indiviual control of CC and pitch bend on every single midi note entered.. ]]

    When beginning a project you should look at a film and understand what you need after taking a moment to think about the necessary instrumentation, then you don't wind up trying out all of your 350 + midi tracks to see which one works.. geez, that could take hours per measure!  Besides, you know you just love making templates, as it can be fun and inspiring, thats why you're willing to spend weeks on it... so why don't you just take a moment to enjoy making the smaller necessary templates more often... it's less fatiguing and I can assure you it will add up to less time.  Try this approach and ask the average listeners which things they are impressed more by, the works you did with the template and wrote to a movie with already mixed instruments, or the more pre-concieved method of planning before attack and writing your honest reaction to the film with the sounds you feel are necessary before thinking so "symphonically" about what you must write before you think aurally.  I know this because I won an eastwest film scoring contest thinking this way, and I know the disadvantages of thinking about template composing.  You can build your template as you write, then when it's all said and done you can use that template to write another piece with if a similar sound is desired and make the needed adjustments when you come to them.  Sorry if I sound like an A hole, and I hope this is helpful advice.
  • D
    D
    last edited
    last edited

    @justinraymiller said:

    I agree with Jeremy on this issue, as it is important for us as musicians to always sound fresh, and a template only hinders this. 

     

    Firstly not all composers are film composers. Secondly my template deals with orchestra. That doesn't change. An orchestra is an orchestra and has been for many years. It's the music that should be new, not the template.

    DG
  • W
    W
    last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    my template deals with orchestra. That doesn't change. An orchestra is an orchestra and has been for many years. It's the music that should be new, not the template.

    Agreed - and it seems to me some are missing that point.  I doubt many of us with large templates are using them for anything OTHER than orchestral elements.  Speaking for myself, all 300 instruments in my template are orchestral only - and it would be a colossal waste of time to have to call up tracks as I go when I can just have my template auto-loaded & ready to work first thing in the morning.  Not to mention my entire orchestra is generally pre-mixed & ready to print... having to do that per-project would be foolish.   Maybe it doesn't work for everybody, and that's fine - but I see ZERO disadvantages to having a well-crafted orchestral template ready to go when you know you're going to use those elements all the time.

    To each their own of course...