@fritzflotow said:

Also a question, that maybe current owners could answere: Does col legno have round robbins? How many?

Col Legno has 8 round robins

Hi Everyone,  Perhaps my questions have already been answered, but I'm in a rush and don't have time to check.

Two Questions:

1)  Has it been established when the Early Bird Offer ends?  I've been on the road with no chance to do the download til now.

2)  Is there any more concensous on a ball park length of time for the DS download?  I have a 6 core MacP with 32 gigs RAM.  I've got to schedule the download accordingly, as time is still tight.

Thanks much.  Can't wait to use DS!      Cheers,     Tom

Not sure when it ends, but you only have to make the purchase before it ends, not the download.

It took me about 12 hours to download, but it's likely faster now that the rush is over.

Hi,  I went ahead and bought DS.  It took me 19 hours to download it.  It all went pretty smoothly.

@fritzflotow said:

I have been waiting for (and expecting) this. Congrats!

Con sordino, flautando and all the other stuff missing in 2014? 😊

Can some people who have used D/S now comment on real-world RAM/CPU usage and requirements?

I have a Sandybridge 920 16GB RAM and an SSD boot drive, 3 separate 7200 SATA II drives. Had no problems running Chamber Strings and EWQLO.

Really want D/S but kinda freaked out that D/S will require a new machine. Not talking about super complex scores.

Comments? Does it -really- need a lot more resources?

TIA,

---JC

Suntower,

It honestly depends on your workflow. If you are accustomed to loading EVERYTHING Chamber Strings has to offer, be advised,

some in these forums report Dimension Violins alone wants 10 to 13 gbs of RAM but that's only if you load EVERYTHING.

If you only load that which you'll use, you may not notice much or any RAM increase, when compared to Chamber Violins.

Like many, I have installed DV on its own SSD. I use a separate SSD for time stretching and that function is still slow in DV.

I haven't tried loading DV from traditional HD's, but it loads quickly from SSD's.

@Suntower said:

Can some people who have used D/S now comment on real-world RAM/CPU usage and requirements?

I have a Sandybridge 920 16GB RAM and an SSD boot drive, 3 separate 7200 SATA II drives. Had no problems running Chamber Strings and EWQLO.

Really want D/S but kinda freaked out that D/S will require a new machine. Not talking about super complex scores.

Comments? Does it -really- need a lot more resources?

TIA,

---JC

I've had no CPU or RAM problems, but I've found that trying to run Dimension Violins from a regular HD is pretty much useless. Unless you have enough room on your SSD, I wouldn't even bother trying.

DG

Dimension Strings are not basically different from any other VSL instruments in usage and RAM/CPU requirements, though they have the unique qualities of the Dimension recording technique.  However, they are essentially like a bundle of instruments, even though it is only "Violins" or "Violas" etc.  So you are basically looking at loading 8 instruments, for violins only. And the others will have their respective numbers.  So if you have other VSL instruments, you can estimate what that means in relation to your own system. 

I have a fairly small system  with 24gb of RAM  that works very well with them, though of course, it is always better to have more RAM and the fastest processor.  But the nice thing is, if you run into problems with maxing out your CPU you can always simply split your final mix into segments, and freeze tracks separately.  The single largest MIDI creation ever done - Rite of Spring performed by Jay Bacal - could not have been done otherwise, at least with current technology.  So I adopted a long time ago the approach of not trying to do everything "perfectly" but staying just a little behind (rather than ahead!)  in demands upon the system, so that it is far cheaper and easier to use.  The great thing about VSL products is that they allow you to do this.  You don't have to have the most powerful system conceivable to run any of the instruments or libraries. 

Thanks DG and William.

More freaked out than ever. Please understand that this is not a gripe @ VSL... clearly -every- lib maker is heading in the same direction requiring  HUMUNGOUS systems. To a non-orchestral mockup user a 24GB system or dual processor system -would- be considered -big-... even these days. OTOH, to my friends who do video editing? That's -nothing-.

But the overall msg I get is that if you want to use the entire Dimensions Strings, count on RAM/CPU to be like loading 24 VI Pro instruments. And that -is- HUGE, to me. If one extrapolates that out to an entire 'Dimensions Orchestra' of brass and winds, even a single tonic chord of say a Mozart Symphony, will require enough RAM/CPU for 40+ VIs. Holy mackerel.

So... if one goes down the Dimensions path, you really -are- heading into a new 'dimension'. Instead of loading one VI with 16 violins, you're loading 16 VIs... each with separate guys.

Now, one may say that this is no big deal because one can 'mix n match' libs and 'freeze' sections, but then, I submit that it creates yet another level of 'planning' which separates one from the score.

IOW: In a perfect world, Dimensions is great because with auto-divisi and the separate 'players' you approach the ability to have a 1-1 correspondence between a score you could hand to real players... and a great mock up. That is -very- appealing. But the cost is a water-cooled network of PCs.

Or, in a world where the end product -is- the mock-up, I guess it's a moot point because you can freeze and mix n match. IOW: you can plan your product based on your resources.

Sadly, in -my- low-rent world, where I have to blend live audio, with MIDI orchestra -and- be able to add or edit tracks at any stage of production... right up to delivery. And then give real players parts. So for -me- having one stave that says '1st Violins' is MUCH easier to deal with than, say, having 5 MIDI tracks covering '1st Violins' that alternate between Dimensions or Chamber Strings or Appasionata depending on the passage. I never wanted to do that. I just want ONE string lib that does it all. Maybe D/S is a step in that ultimate direction.

Again, I'm not -complaining-... the technology is where it is and VSL is at the cutting edge. One can't complain because time machines haven't yet been invented. But still... this is far from a panacea and I think all potential users should think HARD about what D/S means. To -me- it's a clear signal from VSL that this is the direction they'll be going in from now on... and you better have the proper kit or don't bother. Fair enough, video editors deal with the same thing: If you don't have THE biggest/fastest machine on the block, don't whine about how your video won't render.

Also, I think this is -good- for the state of the art. It's seems the only way to compete with the 'orchestral construction kits' I loathe so much. Love the approach.

But still... I think it's fair to say that if I get D/S I'll also be saving for at least -2- new machines.

Finally, all ranting aside: I am very curious as to how users will decide to use D/S. IOW: will it find -occasional- use in complex passages, while Orchestral Strings and C/S will do the majority of the heavy lifting? Or will it become -the- primary lib and other libs do 'fills'... say only where there are very static backgrounds? See where I'm going? If these things are so resource intense, how -do- they fit into day to day scoring if one has to -plan- where they are used?

---JC

What kind of computer are you running D/S on?

Wow...you're machine is -pathetic-. [:D] 

I'm pleasantly surprised to hear this. Do you have an SSD to run it on or is this from a HD?

Thanks,

---JC

It was meant as a joke... hence the emoticon. My machine is similar to yours.

Until I started considering Dimension Strings, I (foolishly) thought that my days of worrying about running out of horsepower were long over.

Thanks for the info.

---JC

I've just decided to bite the bullet and add a 240Gb SSD (Intel 520) to the remaining slot in my system for DS. I have the (previous to current) full SE Bundlie plus Solo Strings, Chamber Strings and Dimension Brass. I currently run 3 Caviar Black 7,200 HDDs for system, samples and audio.

If you were me, would you a) just put DS on the SSD and leave the rest (plus other things) on my Caviar Black, b) Put Solo Strings, Chamber Strings and DB on the SSD and just leave the SE bundle on the HDD, or c) put all my VSL samples on the SSD including SE? Currently, without the SSD, only Solo Strings and DS seem to be a little slow loading, the rest is no issue. I just wondered if splitting Solo Strings/Chamber Strings from DS across drives was preferable since I layer them a lot in the same template. On the other hand, perhaps the SSD will handle it all so easily it's not an issue.

I can expand my 24Gb RAM further if the going gets tough with DS/MIR (which I love!) but happy enough for now. Other PC system specs in case of interest - Intel Core i7 970 3.20GHz, 12MB Cache, 6 Cores.

Thanks