182,334 users have contributed to 42,219 threads and 254,757 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 3 new thread(s), 10 new post(s) and 49 new user(s).
Hi,
I'm using your Multiport Template for Logic X. The problem is that it is wired to support 1 VEPro instance w/16 midi port and 256 channels. Is there a quick way to duplicate the set and connect a second VEPro instance?
In addition, I am on Mountain Lion, and thus I cannot update to Logic 10.1, also because updating to Mavericks would cause my ProTools version to stop working. Is this template completely unusable in Logic 10.0.7?
Hello marco26,
I´m afraid it´s not easy to duplicate the set, but you can connect more VE PRO instances one by one easily.
We have decided to stick to 16 MIDI Ports.
Logic 10.1 makes all the difference in regards of reliablity, as the buffers in Logic have been increased, so there will be no MIDI drop-outs. We have not tested the Multiport Template in Logic Pro 10.0.7
Best,
Paul
use IAC 😃
use IAC 😃
Hi Cyril,
Im test driving two setups on one MAC PRO where everything is setup in:
scenario 1 = VE PRO standalone. Logic or Studio One send midi via IAC to the standalone
scenario 2 = VE PRO Server via Bidule, Logic sends midi to the bidule midi devices, Bidule midi devices are connected to VE PRO vst3 server plugin
Both setups send audio over JACK OS X "jack router"
Benefits: faster switching between cues or projects
Downside: realtime stemming no bounce/render in place
can you elaborate more on your IAC setup?
I am thinking of buying the MADIFACE XT or look into DANTE VIA to stream audio between apps.
As IAC is an internal of MAC OS it is very fast, you do not need Bidule
You use IAC to send midi to VE PRO and VE PRO send back audio to Logic
The only draw back of IAC is you cant bounce in back ground, you need to bounce in real time
I have ask to VSL how Multiport behave compared to IAC, no answer yet.
If you have a LAN you can use Network Midi, in the Audio Midi setup
As IAC is an internal of MAC OS it is very fast, you do not need Bidule
You use IAC to send midi to VE PRO and VE PRO send back audio to Logic
The only draw back of IAC is you cant bounce in back ground, you need to bounce in real time
I have ask to VSL how Multiport behave compared to IAC, no answer yet.
If you have a LAN you can use Network Midi, in the Audio Midi setup
Thats right. But if you host VE PRO inside Logic that way you are limited to 16 stereo Channels per instance and the more instances you use in a META FRAME the longer the disconnect times take.
I find when using less instances in VE PRO the connection and disconnection between host and the server is much faster.
As soon as you introduce IAC or Bidule or any external midi ports into the equation you'll loose bounce in place and bounce offline anyways. Streaming the audio via loopback like JACK OS X or RME loopback inside TOTAL MIX FX, mimicking a multiple machine setup (on a single machine) where one computer is the "layback machine" / "rape recorder" has the downside of offline operations but the benefit of faster switching between projects.
Sorry guys if thats in the wrong thread but its an intresting observation how many different workflows one can create with these tools 😉
Thats right. But if you host VE PRO inside Logic that way you are limited to 16 stereo Channels per instance and the more instances you use in a META FRAME the longer the disconnect times take.
I dont know if I have understand you !
In Logic I have one Multi for each of my VSL instrument, they are connected to 8 IAC ports (2 for string, 2 for brass, 2 for winds , 1 for percussions, one for keybords) so it is 128 midi channels, I have also audio ports where I can send EXS, K5 and Omnisphere instruments directly to MIR,
Bouncing, with MIR ; you will bounce once the total project so there is no problem to use IAC
As I have an orchestral template with all levell II articulations loaded and I do articulation changes with bank and program changes, my templte takes 4 minutes to load and is loaded once (for the moment my VSL lib is on a raid 0 of 2 x ssd loading at a bit more than 900 MB/s, I have received the hardware and it is going to be moved to a Raid of 4 x ssd)
I find when using less instances in VE PRO the connection and disconnection between host and the server is much faster.
If you are using multiple audio outputs in these instances, that's the thing slowing you down, and ultimately where a performance hit lies, not with the number of instances in themselves.
I have finally decided that for most usage, I'm going to send just one stereo out back to the DAW. I mix via automation and the mixer is VE Pro, for 99% of what I'll do. So a large-ish project for me is say 8 channels in the Cubase mixer.
If you need stems of course you can't do that, but the number of outputs is the culprit, not instances.
Sambosun,
I've been exploring options for years and none of them have ever been flawless. I'm probably going to go a similar route, even at the loss of render-in-place functionality.
I'm also considering DANTE instead of MADI interfaces. I'm still not sure whether DANTE will work with multiple Slaves into one audio destination and what limitations will exist. But I believe it will and testing will confirm once I build the audio PC. I have several reasons I want to do this, many of which are specificially for film workflow. But I'm actually finding a few side benefits to this flow that I believe make it worth the loss of bouncing down the audio.
-Sean
- Audio Machine: Pro Tools, running plugins, MIR, etc.
Have you been using MIR PRO yet ?
I recently purchased MIR 24 and the Teldex Studio. I'm in love with it. However, the template I built for my latest film was already pushing the limits of what my computer could handle. So MIR isn't really... "operational" yet. I can use it in post workand that's it. When I build the audio machine I plan to have MIR running on it.
-Sean
- Audio Machine: Pro Tools, running plugins, MIR, etc.
Have you been using MIR PRO yet ?
I recently purchased MIR 24 and the Teldex Studio. I'm in love with it. However, the template I built for my latest film was already pushing the limits of what my computer could handle. So MIR isn't really... "operational" yet. I can use it in post workand that's it. When I build the audio machine I plan to have MIR running on it.
-Sean
I am affraid that the architecture that you are thinking to use will not work with MIR PRO except if each slave has an audio interface and on your master you have a 128 ins audio interface. From what i read DANTE is limited to 64 instrument/tracks. This is probaly the limit of throuput of the Ethernet Gigabit interface.
MIR has to run on each slave and you have to mix a serie of halls
or
You need a big slave computer (like mine) with very fast ssd (or raid 0 of ssd) to handle all your VSL and other instrument in MIR PRO, if you have 5.1 mix, it uses a lot of power.
Your Master will run Cubase, Protools with the midi and the audio tracks that will be send tho the slave and if you have power left you can add K5, .... instruments that you will send to the MIR PRO computer as audio tracks
forgot to say :
MIR has to run on each slave and you have to mix a serie of halls, In a discussion we had about a year ago VSL did not recommend this, they told us they coud not garantie the result
Maybe they have inproved this since, you better check with VSL support
Can VSL chime in ?
