Thanks Dan, much appreciated. 

Is VEPro MAS for Digital Performer not currently working with M1 Macs?

I can't seem to find information about this anywhere.

EDIT: Resolved the issue on my PCs. They are usually offline other than periodic updates and the recent Windows update had turned back on Firewall which was turned off. Creating rules for the ports resolved the issue.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Are there any known connection/communication issues with Digital Performer MAS and VE-Pro 7?

I just installed VE-Pro 7 on two slave PCs and upon inserting new MAS plugins in the DP session on my DAW, no server instances appear within the plugin. It is just blank, as if it's not even seeing the PC on the network.

However, if I create a AU VE-Pro instrument track, the instances appear and are able to connect.

I'm also unable to see/select server instances on previous DP project sessions that were using MAS with VE-Pro 6.

The VE-Pro 7 manual referenced firewall settings, though mine are turned off in general so don't envision that would be an issue.

My DP version is the most recent 10.1.

Hi Paul,

Can you please confirm the underlying functionality with respect to the possibility of different VEPro versions existing on the host DAW computer at the same time?

It's not clear from the previous posts on this forum, but is it a technical impossibility for v6 and v7 to exist on the host DAW at the same time?

Hypothetically, if a user is using 10 slave PCs at the same time.  Can they purchase one license for v7 and upgrade one of those slave PCs to v7, leaving the others at v6?  And then within the DAW have nine v6 and one v7 VEPro tracks that would connect to the respective slave PCs?

Or is the user restricted to have only v6 or v7 at one given time available to use within the host DAW?

Thanks, Tim

 

I just upgraded to 10.13.4 and DP 9.5.1 using templates previously working in DP 9.5 & Sierra.  VE-Pro 6 plugins appear to be loading fine; none of the errors I was receiving before are appearing.

I also just opened up a blank project and added some VE-Pro MAS instrument tracks and those appeared to load without previously seen errors either.

Somebody was escalating issues they were still having on another thread, however I'm not experiencing that issue.

https://www.vsl.co.at/community/posts/m270832findlastpost-VEP-and-DP-9-5-1-High-Sierra#post27083

That is good news.

And with all due respect to MOTU & VSL, it would be reaffirming if they would explicitly communicate this to their users as well.

It is frustrating.

I do appreciate that MOTU did listen to some feedback I had given when previously escalating as I requested a bit more front-facing public disclosure with critical problems.  Had they explicitly stated in release notes last fall that VE-Pro MAS wasn't working, I never would've wasted a day updating then having to revert back.

Their website now explicitly states this in the update/download area and I hope they continue to maintain that type of detailed transparency with future releases if major issues present themselves.

As an end-user, knowing more information up front is always better than less - especially when it has the possibility of disrupting individuals' productivity & time.

Did you try updating eLicenser?

https://www.vsl.co.at/community/posts/t19304--SOLVED--Unable-to-install-Vienna-Instruments-on-a-new-iMac#post135242

Issue was resolved, third-party plugin had incorrect settings.

Thanks but I am able to work around the issue by loading one instance and one WB patch per instance as previously mentioned.

I'm only reporting this issue as there is, seemingly, inconsistency in its application with VEPro MAS vs AU/VST - subsequenty creating further limitations by not being able to use MAS for these specific sample library patches.

If you're using Cubase, that wouldn't really have much to do with this as MAS is specific to DP.

To VSL Support,

I have followed up with both Soundsonline & MOTU about this (can provide the support ticket IDs upon request).

Soundsonline recommended followup with both MOTU and Vienna as they don't inherently support MAS with their underlying software.  MOTU recommended to follow up with Vienna as it is an issue their support believed appears to be limited to VEPro MAS.

As additional followup, when using Hollywood/Symphonic Choirs as an AU track - I am unable to load more than one instance and Hollywood/Symphonic Choir WB patch at a time.  So currently, each Hollywood/Symphonic Choir WB patch effectively needs to be loaded in individual instances.

Are you asking whether or not in can play back 700 tracks at the same time or simply setup that many tracks in a template?

I have a couple thousand tracks in my DP/VEPro orchestral template but I'm not playing back all of them.  The average piece of music I'm doing ends up using anywhere from between 60-120 of those tracks and never really seems to have any playback issues.

When trying to load EastWest Symphonic/Hollywood Choir Wordbuilder patches on a slave PC and connected via a Digital Perofmer MAS track on Mac DAW playback is not working.

However, setting up the VEPro track as AU rather than MAS seems to allow choir patches to work as expected. (Haven't yet tested with VEPro setup as VST)

 DP Version 9.5 73657

VEPro 6.0.16778

Play 6.0.2

Nevermind, was happening when WiFi was enabled while Ethernet was connected.  Disabling WiFi returned behavior to normal.

I have a pretty large orchestral template running DP 9.5 on Mac connected to two slave Windows 10 PCs running VEPro Server, as well as VEPro Server running outside DP on my Mac.  When I load up the metaframes on each Windows PC it connects to instances correctly from the template that have long been set up this way.

However, if I try to create a new instance on either Windows PC, it does not appear in the MAS track.  The only server/instances that appear are for the VEPro Server running on the Mac.

The only other potential solution I noticed might be antiquated/inapplicable by now but was for an error reported by a Cubase user on the Steinberg forums back in 2011.  It involved a configuration change under Data Execution Prevention in the System settings.

https://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=15683

 

I got the following error with my eLicenser after upgrading it to version 6.3.4.2082

Application 'LCC2' has caused the following er 
ror: DCOM connection to program 'Synsopos.exe' failed.
Error:Unspecified error

The sollution that worked for me was this:
1.Open the Control Panel
2.Select [System]
3.Select [Advanced Settings]
4.Under [Performance] select [Settings]
5.If DEP is available on your system, a DEP tab will be present in the Performance Setting dialog. Select this tab if it’s present (if it’s not present, then your system doesn’t have DEP).
6. Select [Turn on DEP for all programs and services except those I select]:
7. Add SYNSOPOS.EXE from the folder [Programfiles/elicenser/pos] or wherever you have this file.

Did you try uinstalling and reinstalling eLicenser?  And/or first running the maintenance process when eLicenser starts up?

I seem to recall having a few previous instances over the past year of errors (maybe not exact same) that were just resolved by doing either or a combination of those.

Does anybody know if this is fixed in the updated version of VEP released on 19-Dec-2017?

I just installed 9.5.1 and it still cannot load MAS. It doesn't even show up as an option even when enabled in plugins.

All of my project files/templates just show up with 'Effect Errors' for them.

Tele,

They do offer you a path to the Standard Edition...

You go to the Symphonic Cube page.....select Symphonic Cube at the bottom of the list on the left.....choose your part of the world from the pull-down menu, and you will be able to select "Buy now" under the Standard Edition very soon.

-Tim

I was a bit awestruck by how it appeared to be priced to begin with. And to be honest I think it all spawned from the fact that SOOO many people were throwing opinions out left and right that had no idea what was going on due to the discount calculator not being up and the small update that VSL ended up changing on the pricing list of the products that just had the Standard Edition Price, Extended Edition Price, then FULL Price listed.

At this point in the game I think I get the intention of the pricing and the realization that I get the massive FULL llibrary for $4500 or whatever less than a new user makes complete sense. The fact that I'm paying the bigger price to get the initial package is somewhat irrelevant, because I'm looking to just get the whole shi-bang at once.

Consider the actual logistics of the way the pricing is set up - the reason the Standard version is the pricier version as far as VIP pricing is because it allows VSL to garner a substantial income for what was obviously something that took indefinite man hours to create and like Herb said, allows the relationship between them and t he resellers to be as simple as possible, so you can still get the Standard edition elsewhere for reasonable prices.

With the upgrade to the Extended edition what they are telling YOU, as in the prior edition owners, is that they ARE honoring their commitment to give you more by allowing you to get the GARGANTUAN increase of possibilities in the Extended Library for mere pennies in comparison of someone picking up VSL today. In retrospect it HONESTLY isn't a skewed business model, because all the things for which you are getting discounts can be paid for in a more simplified fashion (aka via online) because the content comes with the discs and requires just to be unlocked.

I won't lie. I complained at first and part of me wants to now. But where I stop myself is when I realize I will be able to get the best stuff (the extended content) for WAY less than a new user, which is what I expected and want.


So two suggestions to all ye naysayers -

You can accept something that is not going to change...

OR

You can keep complaining and give yourselves more to think about when it really is not going to benefit you or anybody else in the long run...

I am very much on clark's side. The samples by nature are a LICENSED product. If you pay to license a Britney Spears recording, you can use that segment of the song you license, or if it's the whole song, at any sample rate, sample format, bit rate or what not you choose. If we use her song in a movie we can play it back at 32 kbps audio for all they care, so long as it was properly licensed.

The issue that I agree with clark about is that we ALREADY licensed these samples. The fact that we have to pay the EXACT same price as others just opening the gate of VSL is, in all honesty, ridiculous. To expect that individuals who have already licensed the new material have to RE-LICENSE the EXACT SAME material is completely against the whole concept of licensing something. To expect past users to pay to acquire the 24 bit version of the samples along with some kind of other cost to integrate their old system with the new VI is in many ways a lot more reasonable to individuals who have been using the product for some time now.

With that said, it is a mere opinion on the situation. There are definitely greater forces that surround the project than your average junior member on the VSL forums, but I still do honestly hold Herb and every one of his team members in the highest respect, and simply reserve my right to hold my own opinion as far as what direction the project is now going.

-Tim

Just....analyze this.....it's completely mind boggling and misdirecting to me and any other customer who reads it.......

If you buy the Pro Edition, for instance, at the currently discounted price AND upgrade to the Complete Symphonic Cube at the VIP price later, you’ll spend less than buying the Complete Symphonic Cube at full price.

So let's do the math.....(in $ US)

Pro Edition discounted price....
$3,894

Symphonic Cube Standard Library....
$4,620

Symphonic Cube Extended Library "GUESSTIMATED VIP PRICE"
$300-400

AND the sum is....
between $8,814 to $8,914

.....................

NOW....I don't understand how that costs a person less than paying $6,300 to just get the COMPLETE Symphonic Cube.....

I really have to say that I love what VSL has done in the past. But having woken up at 5 AM Pacific time, and seen all the information about the Symphonic Cube, I really feel somewhat down in the dumps. I remember seeing again about a month ago on VSL's site, the statement that users should not have to pay for the same samples twice.

Yet, it looks like that is essentially what we will be doing. What bothers me about it is the argument that it's "24 bit".....copyright law regarding samples is pretty clear that a sample is still the same sample whether it's 64 kbps mp3, 8 bit/44.1 khz, or 32 bit/96 khz. So the idea of being in the same boat as everyone else having to purchase something I, technically, already have to get a very relative discount on materials that I don't have seems sort of against the reason why I spent hours upon hours enjoying learning about the VSL products before purchasing them. Regardless, it may all still be speculation for all we know, it'll just take me quite a long time to come to terms with what seems like a very "new" change in the VSL mindset.....

It sort of feels like I was following the king of my country in the 1400s and was a devout Catholic, and now all of a sudden I'm being told by the king that we're switching to Muslim and I feel like I have little choice but to pay higher taxes when he tells me to. Sigh....

-Tim

Buy these libraries at fantastic prices, and still enjoy the full benefits of future upgrades.! If you buy the Pro Edition, for instance, at the currently discounted price and upgrade to the Complete Symphonic Cube at the VIP price later, you’ll spend less than buying the Complete Symphonic Cube at full price.

So if someone buys the Pro Edition now for roughly $3900....are you saying the VIP price to get the Complete Symphonic Cube has to be at most $6300 minus the $3900 discount price? This is the only thing that seems misleading to me as far as what has been discussed so far throughout the site.

-Tim[/b]