Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

184,988 users have contributed to 42,372 threads and 255,397 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 1 new thread(s), 6 new post(s) and 78 new user(s).

  • Logic Pro and D.A.P

    I'm in the process of designing my new studio, and want to gear all of the orchestral sampling around VI as to move away from Gigastudio and PC's in general. Logic Pro offers Distributed Audio Processing whereas you just hook up G5's on a network and supposedly Logic will take care of the rest. I'd just like to know if anyone is doing this already and how it's working for them? Does the price of purchasing several more G5's justify the performance increase? Also, PC's have trouble with using more than 3GB of memory (with the fix).. how much can VI handle through Logic under OSX? Is it worth throwing 8 or 16GB of ram into my core machine?

    Thanks in advance.

    - Kyle J.

  • welcome audiocure, please note that logic takes care of distributed audio _processing_ - at least this is what the current version does. as example logic does not allow exs-instances (sample streaming) on the remote machine, for such a setup you would need a seperate copy of logic running on the second G5.

    IMO it is 100% worth to have 8 GB RAM on the core machine using 4 x 2 GB to leave you with the option to expand to 16 GB if it makes sense later (with leopard?)
    christian

    and remember: only a CRAY can run an endless loop in just three seconds.
  • okay, well that clears things up a bit. I wasn't sure if Macs made better use of extended memory or not. I just saw the other day Apple offering Xserve with 32GB of memory! I'd love to see that beast in action.
    As far as the Logic D.A.P., I guess the idea is that I'll have enough local RAM and distributed processing power to handle large amounts of samples at once so as to eliminate the need for the whole hardware sampler setup altogether (I've always opted for simplicity when I can). I assume that D.A.P. would be very benificial for intesive or large amounts of plugins and effects for audio processing, but would it help the overall performance of running multiple instances Vienna Instruments, or is its functionality more dependant upon RAM?

  • ahead: currently OS X makes better use of available RAM than XP under the same preconditions, although i still don't find it very intuitive how one could max out memory usage on a say 8GB G5 (see the other threads about memory usage)

    DAP is currently only available for plugins (everything what profits from expanding CPU power) and looking at the principle in detail makes it clear why any kind of sample streaming will be more complicated.
    an audio-track on machine A needs some processing, so you send the audiostream (via gigabit-network) to a slave and tell a remote application to do something with the incoming data and send it back - finished, easy.

    when it comes to sampling one needs to have a plugin loaded (be it exs or a vienna instruments player) which needs to know a patch to be loaded, receiving midi-data, stream the samples from a harddrive and send audio back (obviously it would make minor sense to stream the samples also across network and so eat up bandwidth, add latency, ect).
    such a procedure would be much more sophisticated because the core application would need to know many details from the slave and eg. hinge itself deeply into the filesystem and memory management of the remote machine.
    i don't say it would be impossible, but currently it is not designed that way.

    but of course you could have an additional copy of logic running on the second machine, load instruments there and access it from the core machine, even route the resulting audio back and access such a *headless slave* via apple remote desktop.
    christian

    and remember: only a CRAY can run an endless loop in just three seconds.