Many instances versus many returns per instance

[santamorphic]

Hi - 

Has anyone found which is the best option overall when using VEPro as a server on a separate machine to your DAW?

A. Many instances (tabs) of VEPro with say just a single Kontakt plugin instance inside and just the main return to the DAW (maybe 120 VEPro instance?)?

or,

B. Fewer instances of VEPro with multiple (up to 16) Kontakt plugin instances inside each with 16 stereo returns back to the DAW?

I've been doing B for some years but hear that some people put a single instrument on each VEPro instance(???).

Thanks!

[civilization 3]

Technically the most efficient is one instance.

I don't use all those return channels, which is a bear to CPU.
I could actually do with one. I use several instances because I would be approaching the max number of automation parameters, and in Cubase all of that in one instance is unwieldy, with say 4 I can hide 3 and focus on the one.

The reason I do more than one stereo returning is I tend to mixdown a master bus with reverb separately but at the same time. I don't have a need to return 16 or whatever stems, I mix in VE Pro with automation, rarely touching even the volume of the instrument channel.

[Synetos]

I have moved to using 1 large instance, running in local host mode on a Windows 10 setup.

I setup VEP preferences for 20 midi ports (320 unique midi channels) and 32 audio channels (16 stereo returns)

Then I assign all cores except 2 I keep for the daw. So in my case, 18 cores per instance

This has allowed me to setup my favorite instruments and just call on them when I need them in my project by adding a midi track pointing to the the assocaited port/channel, rather than having 100's of midi channels and returns in a massive template.

I use one stereo return for each catagory: Drums, Piano, Strings, Winds, FX, etc. So, I might have 20 different VST pianos to select from, but they all play back on the same stereo return to Cubase.

I use XLN Audio Addictive drums hosted in VEP. I use a channel matrix plug to separate the stereo channels into dual mono and route that to a set of bus tracks. This gives me the ability to do whatever processing I want and then just return the drum master bus to cubase on one stereo channel. Works quite well.

I have also experimented with hosting FX send/return channels with VEP. It works so much better in VEP7. My need has not been as great since I run Waves SuperRack with Mercury. Although, I have demonstrated to myself that I could do everything I am doing in SuperRack, right inside VEP. Performance was very smooth in local host mode.

Anyway, my system has been humming along just fine since doing this, and my Cubase Project template is basic.

[santamorphic]

Cool. Thank you both for taking the time to share your best practices. Cheers!

[civilization 3]

You don't need to reserve threads for the DAW, btw.

[Dewdman42]

I prefer one or two large instances.  Stereo return.  I only will break off other return audio for a specific case where I NEED to bring them seperately back to my DAW, but actually I prefer to mix it all entirely in VePro whenever possible, I host MirPro there and it just all works nicely together there, plus I can reuse the same orchestral template in VePro across numerous DAW projects very easily that way.  I don't think it makes much difference either way in terms of CPU frankly.  I did a perfromance test a few months back with LogicPro and VePro, comparing one single instance vs one-instance-per-instrument.  There was only 1% difference in CPU utilization, single instance, was the better of the two but not enough to make it decisive reason to use way one or the other.  Choose the workflow that works best for you.

[Synetos]

@civilization 3 said:

You don't need to reserve threads for the DAW, btw.

Oh? I thought I did. I will take it to 20 then. Thanks

[Ashermusic]

Logic Pro X does better with more instances with less in them. Also, that  way, it is more like a score page.,

[Dewdman42]

@Ashermusic said:

Logic Pro X does better with more instances with less in them. Also, that way, it is more like a score page.,

I tested it both ways in logic and it actually performed better in terms of cpu usage with a single instance playing 90 instrument tracks vs 90 instances, one per track. But only 1% better, which basically means it performs about the same either way. It comes down to a workflow decision for which there are pros and cons both ways. One big reason for using seperate instances is because Logic Pro can only run one midifx script per instance, which can be kind of complicated if you have 90 instruments that all need their own articulation script. I should add that the comparison I did, in the single instance case I did not bring back many audio streams and I was not using a slave. That means logicpro itself was doing hardly any work, nearly all dsp was inside vepro. I should do another test with a single instance and bring back the audio on up to 50 channels and do the mixing, including mirpro and everything in logicpro’s mixer for comparison also. In the case of one instance per instrument, of course all the mixing is happening in logicpro’s mixer Asher I still don’t understand your workflow case about one staff per track. I don’t know logic’s score editor at all and I know you have literally written books about it, but don’t midi tracks all get their own score staff? Why do you need an isolated vepro instance for each score staff?

[Ashermusic]

@Ashermusic said:

Logic Pro X does better with more instances with less in them. Also, that way, it is more like a score page.,

I tested it both ways in logic and it actually performed better in terms of cpu usage with a single instance playing 90 instrument tracks vs 90 instances, one per track. But only 1% better, which basically means it performs about the same either way. It comes down to a workflow decision for which there are pros and cons both ways. One big reason for using seperate instances is because Logic Pro can only run one midifx script per instance, which can be kind of complicated if you have 90 instruments that all need their own articulation script.

CPU usage is not rthe only way to measure how Logic does with more/fewer. Back when I tested both methoids exrtensively, as did Peter Schwartz and George Leger, we all concluded that Logic was more stable and spread the load throughout the cores better with more.

That said, that was three years ago and it is possible that things under the hood in VE Pro and/or Logic Pro have changed that.

[Dewdman42]

I updated my last post while you were writing that with a couple more comments and questions. If you can recall a specific setup that performs better with the many instance approach I would definitely like to try to replicate it.

[Ashermusic]

@Dewdman42 said:

Asher I still don’t understand your workflow case about one staff per track. I don’t know logic’s score editor at all and I know you have literally written books about it, but don’t midi tracks all get their own score staff? Why do you need an isolated vepro instance for each score staff?

First of all, I have not used MIDI instruments in years and have no desire to revisit using them. But this way, each VE Pro software instrument, e.g. Violin 1, connects to a VE Pro instance with 1 instrument and all its articulations, again  e.g Violin 1.

Just like a score page. 

[Dewdman42]

I’m not talking about using the environment midi instrument. With AU3 you can have you to 127 multi timbral tracks all feeding one single vepro instance. Wouldn’t each of those tracks have a staff?

[Dewdman42]

I think what you’re really meaning to say is that it’s the articulation scripting that is easier if you have one instance per instrument track, and I agree it is easier.