Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

182,201 users have contributed to 42,210 threads and 254,708 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 3 new thread(s), 29 new post(s) and 51 new user(s).

  1. Home
  2. Sample Libraries
  3. Vienna Instruments Libraries
  4. VE 3?

  • VE 3?

    S
    S
    Is there a projected release date?
  • M
    M

    *bump*

    Who else here checks the website everyday for the announcement?
  • PaulP
    VSL Team
    PaulP

    Hi,

    it´s great to see your excitement!

    We are working on it and VE 3 will be released when it has passed all tests we can possibly think of [:)]

    Thanks for your patience, it will be rewarded!

    Best,

    Paul 

    Paul Kopf Product Manager VSL
  • A
    A
    do you know if VE3's audio over LAN engine is going to be implemented for VI,
    so that we could run VE3 on a slave machine and still be able to work on the host computer
    with "one instrument = one track" paradigm?

    IOW could local VI3 be a client to a remote VE3 server?
  • cmC
    VSL Team
    cmC

    the short answer: yes / yes

     

    the long ones:

    we recently asked to add a library installer also to the VE (2/3) to avoid the need for installing VI additionally just for installing libraries ... however you _can_ install and run both but i'd recommend to keep both applications up to date simultaneously to avoid version conflicts.

     

    we need to be carefull with the wording (*we* includes VSL team) ... there is no VI3 and VI is not capable to be run across a network at all - it runs as stand-alone or plugin.

    we also discussed lately about meaning of the words *host*, *guest* and *client* and agreed to better use *master* and *slave* instead.

    reason is that VE itself is a host (for VIs), but can be used as *client* or *guest* within a host (a hosting audio application)

     

    so you can run a VE3 server (the Vienna Ensemble Service) on any computer, also on the local one (the sequencer, the hosting audio application) - now this VE3 server works as *slave* for a second computer which is running another audio application (functions as *master*)

     

    just because beeing curious we did that already between a macPro and a proBook ... both running logic (having inserted a VE3 *master*) accessing a VE3 server on the other computer (VE3 service as *slave*) simultaneously ...

     

    christian

    and remember: only a CRAY can run an endless loop in just three seconds.
  • S
    S
    My biggest hurdle with VI is that, as I am using one computer right now, every time I switch songs in Logic I have to wait eight to ten minutes for the instruments to reload and that kills my workflow. With VE3 and the master/slave I should be able to switch songs in one computer without affecting the other computer. Is that correct? Thanks
  • A
    A
    last edited
    last edited

    @cm said:

    the short answer: yes / yes

     

    the long ones:

    (...)

    we need to be carefull with the wording (*we* includes VSL team) ... there is no VI3 and VI is not capable to be run across a network at all - it runs as stand-alone or plugin.


    ok, now I'm puzzled... are you familiar with "instrument tracks" in Cubase/Nuendo? these tracks combine both midi data and an audio output of a vst instrument -- very neat. VI with its single timbral approach is a perfect companion to this. OTOH VE being multi-timbral needs to be loaded into the vst instrument rack and its audio channels are separate from midi.
    Will it be possible to access a remote (over LAN) VE server through instrument tracks with a VSL client? How?
  • cmC
    VSL Team
    cmC

    again: yes

    my long winded reply was just because you wrote *VI* (= Vienna Instruments) and the network capability will be only available for VE (= Vienna Ensemble)

    basically you will be able to do everything with VE3 as you can do now with VE2 - just across network.

    christian

    and remember: only a CRAY can run an endless loop in just three seconds.
  • A
    A
    ...it means I will have to load 40 instances of VE, which seems to be heavier on sys resources then VI.
    I just assumed/hoped that the VSL client plugin loaded on an instrument channel will be ultra-light and transparent,
    since it only needs to stream samples from a remote VE3 server. I guess I'll understand how it works, when it's released.
  • T
    T
    Abel, you can send midi over 16 channels into each instance of VE, so if you had 40 tracks you would need 3 instances of VE on your host DAW. 40 instances of VE would give you access to 640 instances of VI - which is rather a lot....

    Best

    Tim
  • D
    D
    [quote=timkiel]Abel, you can send midi over 16 channels into each instance of VE, so if you had 40 tracks you would need 3 instances of VE on your host DAW. 40 instances of VE would give you access to 640 instances of VI - which is rather a lot.... Yes, 3 instances of VE are much less CPU hungry than 40 instances of VI, in my experience.
    DG
  • A
    A
    all true, but then I will have to work with 80 tracks (40 midi + 40 VE outputs) instead of just 40 (instrument tracks combining midi and audio).
  • D
    D

    You can always hide the VSTi outputs so you don't have to see them. There are very good reasons not to use Instrument tracks for complicated orchestral work, so I never use them.

    FWIW even 80 tracks is nothing. before Vienna Instruments I always had at least 150 MIDI tracks in the template. [;)]

    DG
  • S
    S
    last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    Yes, 3 instances of VE are much less CPU hungry than 40 instances of VI, in my experience.

    DG

     

    In my experience, this really depends on the OS, the particular machine configuration and the DAW. As I brought up in another recent thread, Logic 8 acting as a host for a set of VI matrices consumes about 1/3rd as much processing power as the same configuration of matrices instantiated in VE - - when run on my G5 under OS X.4.11

  • V
    V

    cm, the thing I'm interested in is where will I interact with my VIs, on the screen of my main DAW computer, or on the screen of my slave computer (which would be networked with VE3 as I understand)?

    In a perfect world I would be able to have my VE instances opened up on instrument tracks in ProTools and insert the VI instances in them, but it only being a graphical representation of controlling the slave computer, ie. the VE instance would actually not be loaded on my main DAW, but rather on the slave so as to save having 2 screens/computers to look at and control. This would be a kind of remote desktop for controlling the slave, but would of course only work with VE over a proper netwrok and setup.

    Possible? 
  • A
    A
    last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    There are very good reasons not to use Instrument tracks for complicated orchestral work, so I never use them.

    can you explain that?
  • T
    T

    vagnuv

    - That's not the way it works at the moment.  You only setup the connections and routing from the main DAW, each slave is managed on it's own screen.  So in Windows you'd use Remote Desktop or VNC, in OSX you'd use Apple Remote Desktop, Screen Sharing (Leopard only) or VNC or have a KVM or multiple screens.

    Of course in a perfect world it would be nice to control everything within your main DAW and have the VE send out remote instructions to select instruments etc to the slaves.  In a near perfect world it would also be nice to at least be able to control and automate power panning in either mode (local or remote).
  • D
    D
    last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    There are very good reasons not to use Instrument tracks for complicated orchestral work, so I never use them.

    can you explain that?

    Well two things that would affect me regularly are:

    1. You can't send MIDI from an Instrument track to more than one VSTi.
    2. When doing divisi I like to have two VSTi routed to the same VSTi Output

    The second one of these can be solved by using a Group track, but I have enough of those already in the template.

    DG
  • A
    A
    good point.
    still, I switched from VE back to VIs -- same sample set, lighter on the system.