# Template building-separate Kontakts per instrument or one Kontakt with everything in?



## Puzzlefactory

I noticed in one of Daniel James videos that he had just one Kontakt per orchestral family and a bunch of midi channels for his template and loaded all the different separate instruments for each family in the one “container” Kontakt.

Does anyone else do this? Or does everyone use one Kontakt per instrument?

Would the CPU strain be considerably less by using one Kontakt with multiple instruments loaded inside?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

You're on Mac, correct? Following the advice of a few members here, I now fill up a Kontakt instance with 16 instruments (in an instance of VEPro), and route it back to Logic as a stereo channel. I find the load is much more efficient this way. The only downside is that I need to mix all of the levels within the Kontakt instance...but I have them all at the perfect levels now in my templates. Each of these instances of Kontakt then correspond to their own MIDI tracks in Logic, and in their own summing stack.


----------



## gsilbers

what wolf said ^^^

in logic its up to 16 channels per multi that you can do bounce in place which is a great way of "freezing tracks" or regions.. basically bouncing fast the midi to wav in one key command. very useful.

you can do orchestral families or if you are like me with a dangerous addiction to sample libraries then you can add 16 channels in kontakt loaded with just long violins from different libraries or 16 different spicc and spicc "loops" from different libraries or sub collections of libraries; low spic and hi spicc from the same library etc.
that way the stereo audio coming back has the same processing for short notes and reverbs are not long etc while the opposite for long legato notes.
but thats for trailer music where people double up on spicc or hits etc to beef up a simple part.
Iam always changing these family groups but i always do 16 channels and do bounce in place instead of that huge multi port vsl template that treats kontakt like an old skool sampler (many midi in, just stems out) and have to bounce in real time. but thats just me. everyone else seems to do that.

aso, if you are using the multiport vsl template for logic you don't use that many instances of kontakt. it can do 64 midi channels. while on the 16 channel instances per kontakt it does hit a little more the cpu but it hasn't been an issue for me and my specs (below)

fyi- i am ASSuming you are in logic. if you rein cubase then you don't have that 16 channel limitation as its a AU only thing and cubase can do vst.


----------



## Anders Bru

I used to have several instruments per Kontakt instance, and route midi tracks to it and audio tracks back out (I'm on Cubase). But I switched to a one-instrument-per-Kontakt setup a couple of months ago, and love it. It makes freezing tracks and general automation a lot easier for me. With my template I start with every track disabled besides the piano, and I simply enable tracks as I go. (I'm on a MacBook Pro, and only have 16GB of RAM and limited CPU so being able to freeze/unfreeze easily and disabling tracks has been a lifesaver).


----------



## dave_castaway

If you open task manager, you will see that each Kontakt instance, obviously uses resources.
I prefer to use 16 out kontakt instance, and route the audio channels from VEP to Cubase, dividing the instruments into sections. (i use it for woodwinds, strings, brass big sections)

In this way i can mix, automate in cubase, but....i can't disable single instrument, but only the entire section.

For single instruments like pianos, harps, synth... i use a single kontakt instance and i can disable what i don't need.


----------



## Puzzlefactory

We’ll can’t use VePro as I’m using it on my slave computer (only have one license).

I’ve decided to go a kind of half and half route (I have all my Albion strings in one Kontakt, all my Cinebrass patches on another Kontakt, all my Hz percussion in another Kontakt).

I think it’s already a little easier on my CPU and I still retain some control over the libraries in the mixer.


----------



## dave_castaway

Yeah, of course, you will have benefit about performance


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Puzzlefactory said:


> We’ll can’t use VePro as I’m using it on my slave computer (only have one license).



Is that only because you don't have additional dongles? VEPro comes with 3 licenses.


----------



## InLight-Tone

Anders Bru said:


> I used to have several instruments per Kontakt instance, and route midi tracks to it and audio tracks back out (I'm on Cubase). But I switched to a one-instrument-per-Kontakt setup a couple of months ago, and love it. It makes freezing tracks and general automation a lot easier for me. With my template I start with every track disabled besides the piano, and I simply enable tracks as I go. (I'm on a MacBook Pro, and only have 16GB of RAM and limited CPU so being able to freeze/unfreeze easily and disabling tracks has been a lifesaver).


^^^ What Anders said. I'm in Cubase and have a 1000+ track template all disabled, all single instances of Kontakt with one instrument each and of course some synths. You just enable each track as you go, and a stereo Kontakt shows up in the mixer pre-routed to groups for stems if you like. No extra midi tracks, no convoluted routing, dirt simple.


----------



## DenisT

One instrument per Kontakt instance in my case. Much more easier to manage, at least for me. So when I open my template, everything is disabled, and I enable the instruments that I need when I need them. I don't use VEP, slave computer or stuff like that. I just like things to be simple as long as it works well. And for me it works very well so far


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

I'm on the other end of the spectrum, preferring to have all of my template instruments live (loaded) so I can easily audition them without having to mess around loading them as needed. Plus, using VEPro, I only have to load a template once, and it all remains loaded between projects; a huge time saver when working on multiple cues.


----------



## TintoL

Well, In my case I used to have 5 computers including the daw. Now, I just have two computers, daw and slave, each with 124 gb of ram. I generally load each kontakt instance with all 16 channels. I have also tried it with more instances and less instruments each. I don't really see an important increase in the cpu usage. (IF USING VEP) But, it seems to be slightly better with less instances of kontakt.
Hosting in cubase all kontakt instances is a different issue. Cubase is not a stable guy, to be true.

Technically, one instance of kontakt does a good share of resources if all instruments are in the same instance. Plus, you will have less instances of kontakt. If you are using vep6 I still find that filling the kontakt instance to it's maximum is the way to go. You will end up with less instances of vep6 which do has an impact on cpu ussage. The more instances of vep 6 the worst. And I've seen it.

Plus, routing all those vep channels in cubase is an endless story.

To me, you only use a single instance of kontakt per instruments if you are planning to use the disable track feature or if you are using komplete kontrol.

Working on a massive template with a single kontakt instance per track in cubase IMHO it's crazy. Cubase already is unstable as it is. It doesn't use the cores as good as vep or kontakt and it takes too long to save. If you are hosting all in cubase, more over you should be doing what Daniel James does, because cubase is soo bad at handling large files with many instances of vst.

I am not sure how it would be with logic, but, I suspect it should be the same.

VEP and less instances of kontakt rule the game (I think).


----------



## sazema

This theme is already covered before, where we put some numbers and CPU measures for both cases.
Basically Kontakt is designed like first instance will use 180Mb or RAM, and if you put another one it will not be like 180 x 2 than barely 200Mb.

So at the end on Windows 10 within Reaper I found small difference between this two cases. Each instrument instance template uses some little amount of RAM extra, but nothing to worried about, especially if you have 32Gb or more in machine.

Also, disabling tracks is a huge plus instead of one instance with multiple instruments, so I vote for separate Kontakt instances.
It's also easy to handle template and duplicate tracks.


----------



## DenisT

sazema said:


> It's also easy to handle template and duplicate tracks.



Exactly. It's so easy to move tracks, delete instruments and add new ones directly into the project window. 

But I totally understand why the "VEP + slave computers" combo is so popular. It's really powerful. 

In the end, the best method is the one that works for you, and the one you can afford too! Not everyone can build have a massive workstation with lot of rams and slave computers. You could still write music for a blockbuster on a macbook. If you can, build different templates and keep the one you are the most comfortable with.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

DenisT said:


> In the end, the best method is the one that works for you, and the one you can afford too! Not everyone can build have a massive workstation with lot of rams and slave computers. You could still write music for a blockbuster on a macbook. If you can, build different templates and keep the one you are the most comfortable with.



You nailed it! Although I love my current workflow, I remember years ago when I basically went by the seat of my pants; just doing whatever worked best...and it all seemed to work just fine even on my old Q6600 with 4GB Ram and a Roland JV-2080.(ignorance is bliss). Now, I am totally obsessive with my workflow, template designs, latest sample libraries, etc. I now spend too much time worrying about what the consensus says will work better, etc, but it really comes down to what YOU think is best. I think I was more productive back then, too.


----------



## sazema

DenisT said:


> Exactly. It's so easy to move tracks, delete instruments and add new ones directly into the project window.
> 
> But I totally understand why the "VEP + slave computers" combo is so popular. It's really powerful.
> 
> In the end, the best method is the one that works for you, and the one you can afford too! Not everyone can build have a massive workstation with lot of rams and slave computers. You could still write music for a blockbuster on a macbook. If you can, build different templates and keep the one you are the most comfortable with.



I'm also surprised about fact that people rather ask then try by itself !??
Just make template one way and different way and see difference and decide at the end what is best for you. That's not hard.


----------



## storyteller

Depends on the instrument. I tend to keep all articulations on separate midi tracks sending to a single Kontakt instance. When I freeze, this allows single instruments (such as Violins) to have 1 audio track that could be anywhere from 2 to 16 channels (depending on the number of microphones used and output to separate tracks). Doing this allows the CPU load to be less upon audio playback rather than trying to playback, say, a 6 channel legato track, a 6 channel staccato track, and a 6 channel pizzicato track for violins alone if single NKI-per-tracks were used. The downside is you have to be ram-flexible to load a kontakt instance with up to 16 instruments loaded in it.

I never mashup instruments in a Kontakt instrument... only articulations, with the exception of "metals" or something like that in percussion. However, I tend to also have the individual nki-per-track in this case when needed too.

If all you are doing is stereo outs, then it will be less taxing to use single nki-per-track logic. When you get in the 1000 track territory and are using multiple mic positions to separate tracks, you have to quickly figure out where to be most efficient. In this case, a single kontakt instance for all articulations of an instrument tends to be the best option.


----------



## Puzzlefactory

sazema said:


> I'm also surprised about fact that people rather ask then try by itself !??
> Just make template one way and different way and see difference and decide at the end what is best for you. That's not hard.



Template building takes time (something I don’t have a lot of spare). I would rather go into it with a bit of info rather than “blind”.


----------



## sazema

Puzzlefactory said:


> Template building takes time (something I don’t have a lot of spare). I would rather go into it with a bit of info rather than “blind”.



Ok, but that's wrong. That mean, you will if we told you "use 1 instance with 16 instruments" go blindly with our idea, even if your configuration is not satisfied with that, for example.
That info about my workflow or anyone from here does not mean it will work for you, that's the catch. We have different workstations and different configurations.
About trying by yourself, I'm not talking about making template with 1000 tracks  you should try with 20-30 tracks to see first results.


----------



## Syneast

Finding the right Kontakt instance and setting up the midi channels and setting the track channels takes waaay too much time away from composing for me personally. And it's waaay to fiddly if I want to change things around or add instruments I don't use often. Or if I want to route patches to different effects. It's a nightmare.

I'm a one-instance-per-track guy. If it ever slows down my system I'd rather just freeze tracks. So far I've never had to do it though. Then again, I'm not a template guy. I change things with every track I make so I can't stick to a template.


----------



## andy_i

I use multitimbral instances of kontakt in my templates with 16 stereo outs. Each instrument in kontakt sends to a separate stereo pair and i have 16 aux channels per instance which show up as separate mixer channels where I can use my bussed fx and comp auxes, add au's, automate, etc. I can freeze each instrument individually and it uses much less ram than separate instances of kontakt for each nki


----------



## ddas

InLight-Tone said:


> ^^^ What Anders said. I'm in Cubase and have a 1000+ track template all disabled, all single instances of Kontakt with one instrument each and of course some synths. You just enable each track as you go, and a stereo Kontakt shows up in the mixer pre-routed to groups for stems if you like. No extra midi tracks, no convoluted routing, dirt simple.



Hey @InLight-Tone, I'm intrigued by this. Cubase handles 1000 instances of Kontakt without slowing down? You mention you have them all disabled. How much time does it take to enable an instrument? As in, is it instant? Is it a second? Is it a few seconds? Is it several seconds depending on the size of the instrument?

I'm not a Cubase user, so I'm wondering exactly how Cubase handles "disabled" instruments and if all the samples are loaded or not (before enabling).


----------



## RRBE Sound

I am Also on the one instrument per kontakt. 

I really find it the most easiest to work with. Everything can be changed quickly. 

Although Kontakt uses some CPU power, I have never experienced any CPU power loss. I am not using a slave, only my Mac Pro Helmet   

Last, I think it's just a case of personal taste, preference and how you started. Maybe someday I will find it better to have multiple instruments in one kontakt..


----------



## InLight-Tone

ddas said:


> Hey @InLight-Tone, I'm intrigued by this. Cubase handles 1000 instances of Kontakt without slowing down? You mention you have them all disabled. How much time does it take to enable an instrument? As in, is it instant? Is it a second? Is it a few seconds? Is it several seconds depending on the size of the instrument?
> 
> I'm not a Cubase user, so I'm wondering exactly how Cubase handles "disabled" instruments and if all the samples are loaded or not (before enabling).


Well the instrument comes back immediately you can plaay it right away, but you have to wait for the samples to fully load, so that depends on the instrument but in Cubase it's pretty quick and seamless and I'm still using platter drives but plan to go to m2 PCIe so the wait would be minimal.

In the past, the worst part about it was saving the projects and could get up to 8 seconds but they must have improved it somehow cause my save times are under 2 seconds, near instantaneous though I am using an m2 drive as where I save my projects.

To note I tried building this in Studio One, and at 600 tracks the save times went over 10 seconds so I gave up. Steinberg has some magic going on...


----------



## Ben E

One instrument per instance of Kontakt. I tried multiple instruments and it was a mixing headache for me. I've run 90+ instances of Kontakt on my 32 GB iMac. Multiple instruments in an instance of Kontakt only when they're going to the same channel -- high and low winds patches, for instance, so they're spread across the keyboard on the same track.


----------



## InLight-Tone

Ben E said:


> One instrument per instance of Kontakt. I tried multiple instruments and it was a mixing headache for me. I've run 90+ instances of Kontakt on my 32 GB iMac. Multiple instruments in an instance of Kontakt only when they're going to the same channel -- high and low winds patches, for instance, so they're spread across the keyboard on the same track.


My experience exactly. An automation headache as well...


----------



## Ben E

InLight-Tone said:


> My experience exactly. An automation headache as well...



Oh right. That too. Using Logic. I was lost.


----------



## Robert Jason

This is slightly OT, but I've found a SIGNIFICANTLY more efficient way of keeping VIs from eating up ram and performance. Simply render them in place, with or without the FXs on their track (I'm a Cubase 9.5 user). Freezing midi is not quite the same as freezing audio, I've found. Then, just turn of the VI and any plug in inserts. If you decide to change the rendered part, make your changes in the VI (turn it on), render again. Not that time consuming and, IMO a far better way of truly lessening the DSP usage. Hope this helps!!!


----------



## Tod

Syneast said:


> Finding the right Kontakt instance and setting up the midi channels and setting the track channels takes waaay too much time away from composing for me personally. And it's waaay to fiddly if I want to change things around or add instruments I don't use often. Or if I want to route patches to different effects. It's a nightmare.



Same here, when I'm working with midi, it's always with projects, and it's the projects that dictate what I decide to use. They're always different, and no template will take care of that. Plus, I don't want a bunch of Kontakt instances I don't need. 



> I'm a one-instance-per-track guy. If it ever slows down my system I'd rather just freeze tracks. So far I've never had to do it though. Then again, I'm not a template guy. I change things with every track I make so I can't stick to a template.



Well I differ here, depending on the project I will put several instruments in each instance of Kontakt. Back in the old days when computer specs were not so good, I would use up to 3 instances of Kontakt fro everything, this was with XP and I'm sure there are many here who understand that.

But now I will separate the instances depending on what they are, I'm no longer worried about computer specs. But still, I will put several instruments in each instance, depending on the project. 

For sure though, I'm not a one-instance-per-track guy, I try to use them as judiciously as I can.


----------

