Thank you for clarifying it, Paul.

Still, I hope that when the Synchron Player engine is revised (version 2.0), this is something you will consider.

This is what Paul told on another thread about the auto-trill request:

"Regarding the Synchron Player Legato: I'm afraid the internal logic won't allow to play these "auto-trills" when you hold down one note and then trigger another."

"This is not the question of adding a feature... I have been told that it is technically impossible."

Anyway, hope they can understand how important this feature is, and assuming that the Synchron Player will someday be improved, that this should be on the top list of things to implement.

I think it's what Paul Kopf once mentioned as "auto-trills": when using a legato patch, you hold down one note and then trigger and release another. With VI engine, it will perform as trill, or fast notes. With Synchron, it will stop after the second note, because the first one won't recall.

Afaik, the Synchron-ized versions are basically the VI version provided with the Synchron Stage Impulse Responses. You can turn off the reverb and use it almost like the VI version, but with Synchron Player UI. That said, in terms of realtime playability, I still find the VI version better than the Synchron-ized versions, specially when it comes to legato and performance trills. 

 

Personally, I decided to use VI's with the Vienna Instruments Pro, with the MIRx extension for Synchron Stage, and keep the Synchron Player to the new Synchron libraries that actually have multiple microphones and benefit a lot from its UI layout.

Hello, Rogier.

I never did the full math, but considering how upgrading from a solo instrument to a full pack can be done, I sense there isn't that much of a penalty of not going straight to it.

Considering that, I'd probably recommend you to get a solo instrument library, and compare it with the Special Edition version and see if you still find it lacking on any aspect.

By the way, were you using the Vienna Instruments, or the Vienna Instruments Pro player engine?

I totally agree there's room for both.

Personally, I still find the VI solo instruments a lot easier to get the proper results than the Synchron ones, specially when the articulations require a lot more agility. VSL got it right the first time.

The VI woodwinds are, imho, the best woodwinds available. Whenever I use them, people that hear the arrangement seems to focus a lot on them, and how well they fit the overall mood of the composition.

For ensembles, short notes, and most percussion patches, that's where the Synchron different microphone benefits start to show up. But even then, as mentioned before, the dry silent stage libraries can be added for extra detail, if you can find the balance between dry/wet output.

Good call, Thomas G!

I uninstalled the Pace software from both main and secondary PC, and reinstalled it.

Yes, it seems that finally the saving project time is similar as it was on eLicenser.

Thank you!

Just a quick update to this thread.

I've acquired a second iLok dongle (2nd version), and after moving all licenses from cloud to it, didn't notice any loading/saving improvements.

Anyway, I guess it's always good to have a second iLok dongle close, just in case.

There's the passive cooling cards, without fans.

Then again, most modern cards with fans have a working profile that only start working with noise when they reach high temperatures. That scenario should not be something common for a slave pc.

I'll have to disagree on that quote, Bill.

The fact that current motherboards come with HDMI/DVI/VGA output doesn't mean they are graphically capable.

They still relly on the integrated graphics card that come inside the CPU itself. Intel has it on most of their processors, but I think AMD only has integrated graphics card on the processors that end with a G (for example, Ryzen 3400G).

That said, integrated graphic cards will always get RAM from the system itself. If you have 64Gb of RAM installed, and the integrated GPU requires 2Gb, you'll have 62Gb of RAM to use to run instrument libraries.

Hello, Midimusik

I'm not sure if I could recommend regular hard drives for running libraries. The current ones seem to operate, and are optimized, to be run through SSD's, so they should benefit from that. Personally, I'm using a PCIe card Asus Hyper M.2 x16 card, that holds up to 4 PCI M.2 fast drives. Something like that could be built on a small form factor case.

Besides the system drive (a 128Gb ssd) I still have two other 500Gb ssd drives for the older libraries that doesn't require multi-mics.

If Intel is not mandatory, I would recomend you to check the AMD Ryzen platform, although it should be best first to check the cost/benefit factor. Both should handle the 128Gb RAM you're looking for (on Ryzen that's possible from 2nd Gen - the 3000 series - and more recent). The only thing you'll need to get on most Ryzen cpu's is a dedicated graphics card, though. Then again, any Geforce 710GT with 2Gb is more than enough to handle the requirements, without spending too much.

Considering the current processing power of modern cpu's, perhaps you could even get things done without needing a third pc.

Hope this info could help you out.

Hi, santamorphic,

Good call with the decouple mode, thanks. That sure speeds up the saving session times on Cubase.

Never had the need to use the decouple function before, but it's a good thing it's there. Saving the server status was actually something I already did by intuition.

That said, I still hope that the good people from VSL will take its time to optimize the save times. It's understandable that switching from a licensing procedure to other will have its ups and downs, and things will get better with the following releases.

Just in case, I ordered a second iLok dongle for the slave pc. Hope it helps with troubleshoot. I'll post here the results.
It seems like everytime Cubase 11 goes into autosave, the VEPro instances on the second PC take a lot of time on the save procedure. Almost like it's checking each Cloud license one by one.

If there could be a way for VEPro bypassing the autosave function each time Cubase needs to do it, I think I could be happy with that.

That or simply optimizing the procedure. Compared to the same operation but with the last eLicenser, I'd say it is taking 4 to 5 times longer.

Hello, everyone.

I confirm also that loading and saving times are longer since upgrading to iLok.

I'm running a main pc / slave pc system, with Cubase 11 Pro.

Everytime Cubase goes into autosave procedure, takes a lot of time for it to react again. That didn't happen using the eLicenser.

Hope you can sort this out.

Thank you, Paul.

I confirm the issue is gone, and everything is working as it should.

The upgrade to iLok shall be quite smooth now, thank you!

Hello,

I've started to migrate from eLicenser to iLok, and the first issue occured:

When opening a VEPro session, some instruments weren't doing any sound. I noticed that this issue was happening when using the Equalizer, specifically bands 1 and 8. Once this effect was removed, and reconnecting the VEPro instance, the sound was back.

Hope you can get this sorted out,

Thank you for your time

Hello, Paul.

Does that also work with a slave pc? Is there a chance to have multiple cloud instances to spread the licenses between the slave and main pc's? The only way I'm getting it to work is having one of the computers running the iLok dongle, and the other through the iLok cloud.

Hello, Marcabru.

Probably what happened is that when you installed the Fujara flute, the Synchron player version you had also got updated to the new iLok system.

Try to install again the previous Synchron player. It worked for me.

Hi there,

I'm pretty sure it will be able to handle it. I'm running Synchron Strings Pro (full version), Elite Strings, Brass, Woodwinds, and a couple of the Percussion instruments, and it's using about 8Gb of RAM, without disabling articulations. That amount can raise or lower, depending of the amount of preloaded samples you configure: if you are using fast SSD's you could try to tweak this to your liking.

Since Synchron Player was made with these libraries in mind, I'd say the use of resources is very well thought, and I guess you won't have any instrument that will demand the huge amounts from current Kontakt orchestral libraries.

Hope this info helps.

Been able to try Synchron Woodwinds for the first time this week. Took a bit of time to implement it on my template, but it was worth the wait.

Coming from the previous VI libraries, the ensemble patches sound like a great improvement.

That said, I cannot tell the same about the solo instruments so far. I dare to say that, in terms of ease of expression and playability, the old VI solo woodwinds are still better with legato articulation. Please take this with a grain of salt, and I can currently sound too much biased on my judgement due to the amount of experience with the VI, that unfortunately I couldn't replicate yet with Synchron solo woodwinds.

Beside the transition moments where it seems there's at least two instruments playing at the same time, the transition itself sounds a bit harsh.

It's still a great library, and I will definitely use it a lot, and I'm sure I'll learn to use it properly, specially when longer notes are required, but for now I guess I'll keep using the VI alternative whenever  something with a bit more movement is in order.

About the Synchron Player, could I suggest, if possible, that the keyboard performance of legato notes could be similar to how it is with the Vienna Instruments Pro - I mean the possibility of note recall whenever it's necessary to play a very short transition note while sustaining another note?

Thank you for your time

I have most of the VI standard instruments from Brass 1 and Brass 2 (through MIRx Synchron Stage Extension) and the Synchron Brass.

If you already tried any of the Synchron Strings libraries, you know there is certainly a difference in terms of depth and three dimensional immersion of the patches.

Same happens with the new Synchron Brass. I'd say the biggest selling point for me is the way the overall sound saturates when going for higher dynamics: it's completely different to have multiple mics recording this instead of recreating it through a single position.

The second selling point might be a dedicated Low Brass patch, instead of recreating it using individual instruments.

That said, IMHO, any of the individual instruments from the VI series still works beautifully combined with the Synchron library. Think I might be too familiar to how they sound and handle to let them go.

Although I never considered a bad thing the fact of using the eLicenser dongle, I wonder if it is also in discussion the possibility of Linux compatibility with the licensing management system that will replace it.

Can we dream of the chance of having dedicated slave pc units running Vienna Ensemble Pro on Linux? I know it's quite a stretch, but since there will be a migration from eLicenser to iLok (don't know much about iLok compatibility with Linux distros though), wonder if that was actually considered by the good people of VSL.

In any outcome, I'll still going to keep supporting VSL products :D

Happy man :)

Any recent news about when MIRx Synchron Stage extension will be available? And, please, don't tell me that using Teldex is close enough :)

Personally I'm quite interested on its release.

Although I don't have anything against Synchron Player, the familiarity with VI and VI Pro makes me reluctant to consider the investment of going to the Synchron-ized versions of the instruments I already own.

That said, I still enjoy a lot more the versatility of  the silent stage sampled instruments, allowing to merge nicely with whatever is required. Compared with the more recent libraries from other brands, I still found VSL "old" instruments to be more credible and, even better, not forcing the composer to a specific route because of the way the virtual instrument performs.

I'll be a happy man when MIRx Synchron Stage extension is released.