It's currently set-up to output through a second Audio Interface. What I was wondering, as I haven't got time to run comprehensive tests, - could you run say 12 channels of midi out of a single port of, for example, an Unitor 8, select the output port in the VI standalone, as usual, but have each midi channel go to a different matrix.

Therefore you could run 12 additional Logic tracks through a standalone VI to gain extra RAM until the single app limit issue is sorted out.

I would agree that a Quad G5 with 16GB probably won't increase the maximum RAM available for sample but would provide a greater number of voices.

Julian

So if you run in standalone only one instance is possible? With K2 you make a copy of the icon and then can launch another instance (with some guys running 3 instances with 64 midi ch's each.) Midi-wise you access with IAC so there are no hardware issues (this is with Digital performer.)

Sounds like you were right about using more than 4 gigs of ram Nick.

I don't quite follow your MIDI question, Julian, but you do know about IAC MIDI, right? Inter-application communication - you can route MIDI from any program to any other program. It's built into Audio MIDI Setup.

What I meant is that, as far as I can gather, the standalone version has a single "omni" setting for it's midi. It respondes equally regardless of which midi channel you send on. If it was multitimbral you could allocate say the first matrix slot to be channel 1 the second to be channel 2, etc. Therfore the stanalone could play back quite sophisticated orchestrations.

These orchestrations could also be created within a host such as Logic then combined to a single midi file which could then be routed to the standalone allowing playback without the DAW.

dpcon,

You were right you can open another instance by copying and re-naming the app. I tried this and routed 1 unitor port to instance 1 and a second port to instance 2. They both could be played individually or together. I guess this further increases the maximum RAM for samples though I'm not sure how stable it would be and as I guess the configuration would not be supported it could at any time disappear with an OS or Vienna Instrument software upgrade.

Julian

julian,

I should get my string package tomorow so I'll have a better idea about the interface. I don't understand why you can't use IAC on each instance unless for some reason your sequencer isn't seeing the VI's.

Hopefully Paul or someone will chime in here.

edit: just re-read your post. The present version is designed for a single midi channel for each instance. The idea being to have numerous instances open. The current tests are showing over 20 instances running on different systems. I don't know what advantage having mixed choirs (winds and strings) on the same ch., or instance would be. Rather, having say Violins, Muted Violins and Chamber Violins on the same midi ch., or instance would be the way to go since it would reduce midi tracks exponentially.

Dave,

i don't have any problem getting midi to Vienna Instruments. With Logic its not necessary as it's a plug-in and the standalone instances i was alos referrong to accept any ports from my various midi devices. What I was commenting on was that a standalone instance of a Vienna Instrument is, as far as I am aware, an omni device - i.e. it cannot be set to play one matrix off midi channel 1 and another off midi channel 2, etc. all midi notes play regardless of channel.

Christian is aware of this thread and maybe it is something that could be addressed in future software enhancements.

However the basic operation within Logic as an AU is excellent (except for the troublesome installation procedure and the, I hope only temporary, extended load times.

Julian

Julian,

Yes I understand. My point is that the interface is designed that way: single midi channel where you keyswitch between various instruments and articulations. So if you want a matrix on it's own channel you open another instance and load it.

Glad things are running for you. I will go through the joy of installation tomorrow.

best,

DC

Ah yes but if you want a String Quartet you can't do this on the standalone without opening renamed instances which isn't supported. However if the standalone was multitimbral rather than omni it could do this.

Julian

In another recent post, Paul said that even when used as a plug-in, the AU version uses its own memory space, apart from the host sequencer, and that all subsequent instantiations will also use that same memory space (as used by the first instantiation). In other words, it is not behaving as most other AU plugs in this regard. I think maybe the instantion of it is just a link to an AU -- sort of running like a standalone plug.

Paul -- can you confirm/refute this again? Thanks.

This is interesting.

Julian, can you confirm in Activity Monitor that you're really loading 5.4GB?

BTW, Very good article I just came across on RAM usage in G5's in Virtual Instruments Magazine. In fact several excellent articles on different things in there. Uncanny the way something I'm currently needing information on is in the latest issue.

Yes activity monitor confirms load of 5.4 GB. With Logic running as well it leaves 67MB free of a total of 6.5GB.

Julian

dpcon, today you are one of the least outrageous people I've ever met.

Thanks Julian, that's good news. So the plot thickens (and if the double-load works well in the real world, that means you want 8GB or more in your G5).

Hi are any of the chaps from VSL reading? Can they comment on this memory load? Also is it likely to be a logic only thing or will the approach work equally well in Cubase SX3 (MAC)?

Also is there any way of having two different versions of the plugin as a VST? For example I believe on a PC that if you rename a VST dll you can cohost them and in theory each would have access to 2GB memory (as per the WindowsXP app limit).

If it is possible to fill a Quad G4's 16GB and really only need 1 machine for a pretty heavy duty composiiton then I may well jump onto the MAC bandwagon now.....

Best

Tim

Yes, of course we are reading. [:)]

We are researching and testing and making sure that everything really works fine, before we can make our comments.

I´m sure you understand.

Thanks for your patience and enthusiasm.

Best, Paul

@Paul said:

Yes, of course we are reading. [[:)]]

We are researching and testing and making sure that everything really works fine, before we can make our comments.

I´m sure you understand.

Thanks for your patience and enthusiasm.

Best, Paul

sure we understand, Paul!!!

once the possibilities are clear, would you please consider making a step-by-step guide available for users on the VSL site?

thanks! [[:)]]

Nigel

Hi Paul - thanks I know you guys are always there... in the dark, listening, watching....

[:)]

@timkiel said:

will the approach work equally well in Cubase SX3 (MAC)?

Don't forget you'll need a wrapper to operate the VIs with Cubase on a Mac - AU only!

[:(] [*-)] [:@]

Argh! I'd not realised. Have we had any official comment on a MAC VST version as in a definte yay or nay?

I believe it's looking like a "nay" (check the recent "VI on Protools" thread) but I may just stamp my feet and holler a while longer. Want to join me?

[:D]