# Is this slave setup possible?



## NameOfBand (Jul 13, 2017)

Hi all,

I've been thinking about this idea for quite some time. I have a 2016 MacBook Pro basically maxed out. It's a great computer, but what it's lacking the most is RAM! I got the MBP to be portable, so I'd like to build a portable slave. I looked up a case but I can't remember what the name of it was - I'd be happy to be reminded of cases suitable for portable slaves.
Anyhow, I'd like to store some libraries on the super fast PCIe SSD on the MBP, and have the (PC) slave stream samples from there. I'd also like the PC to use the MBP screen. Is this possible?

// NoB


----------



## MatFluor (Jul 13, 2017)

Did I understand that correctly?

You want:
- Use the Macbook as a slave
- Use the PC slave as master/DAW
- Use the Macbook screen as the DAW screen?

And if I interpret correctly, you want a portable slave, but a stationary DAW? Or is the PC portable as well (it wouldn't make much sense otherwise)?

Have you looked into VEP? It seems you really like to work with the macbook, so why not "outsourcing" all the work to the PC stationary, and only take some small "sketching" libraries on the Macbook for portable sketching?

To answer you questions:
- You can do that, yes.
- Using the Macbook as Screen? it's a bit unusual, but Remote Desktop or Teamviewer and the like can help. IT won't be the same as working directly on the PC, but it's a tradeoff.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 14, 2017)

Thanks for the reply! Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I want to use the MBP as a master, and the PC as a slave, both portable. I wonder if the PC will be able to stream libraries from the fast MBP PCIe SSD, and if the MBP will be able to work as a screen for the PC. Or, if there's a good portable screen alternative for the PC. Did I make myself clear now?

// NoB


----------



## OLB (Jul 14, 2017)

Perhaps using the Intel NUC skull canyon as a slave? Goes up to 32gb of ram but perhaps with some dfd kontakt tweaking and running your samples of the speedy internal m.2 drives (optional thunderbolt drives possibility as well), you can come quite far. Super portable though!


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 14, 2017)

OLB said:


> Perhaps using the Intel NUC skull canyon as a slave? Goes up to 32gb of ram but perhaps with some dfd kontakt tweaking and running your samples of the speedy internal m.2 drives (optional thunderbolt drives possibility as well), you can come quite far. Super portable though!


Thanks for the tip, but I'd want a slave with 128 GB RAM.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 16, 2017)

Would love to hear a bit more on what people think about this! Is it doable? Would you recommend having another small screen?

//NoB


----------



## OLB (Jul 16, 2017)

You can definitely use remote desktop apps for this, I like Cord f.e. 

A portable 128gb ram slave is hard to find i think but let us know if you find one. Perhaps a 1U rack mount pc? Otherwise a "new" MacPro loaded with 128gb spring to mind. Slips nicely in a backpack together with you mbp.


----------



## X-Bassist (Jul 16, 2017)

I'm looking at having a mac pro slave with 128GB ram as well. The newer mac pros are about the only thing small that will hold 128gb, you can get it with 12 cores and 1TB SSD that would be smoking (vepro likes multicores), but a 6 or 8 core would work great as well (and probably run cooler/quieter). Now that newer versions are on the horizon (2018) people are starting to sell used version for cheaper ($1500-$4000) on ebay but many do not go beyond 64GB. You can pick up a 16GB version and swap out the RAM to 3rd party 128GB for an extra $1079.
https://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/Mac-Pro-Memory#1866-memory

But Mac Sales also has some refurbished 6 cores preloaded with 128 for $3700.
https://eshop.macsales.com/item/Apple/13I35S4128GB/

Or 10 core with 128gb for $4700.
https://eshop.macsales.com/item/Apple/13I30S4128GB/

Personally I might wait a little longer as prices may plummet once apple announces the new mac pro (possibly in the fall). Word is they plan to go with something that is modular with many more swappable parts, which is great, but could make it a bit larger. I'd prefer the smaller size, especially if can get one used that is fully loaded for under $2 or $3k, which could be very possible a year from now.


----------



## MatFluor (Jul 16, 2017)

10 core 128GB for $4700? I don't mean to start a war here - but for that money you can get a damn powerful PC (or almost 2).


----------



## garyhiebner (Jul 16, 2017)

What you could do is use 2 x PC Notebooks that can max to 64GB RAM. Then use VEPro with your Macbook and these slaves. And use MS Remote Desktop to views their screens on your Macbook. And just make sure you have gigabit network cabling between them all. You might need a gigabit switch. And I'd recommend putting static IP addresses on your PC Slaves so that you can easily access them from your Macbook through Remote Desktop with these static IP's


----------



## X-Bassist (Jul 16, 2017)

MatFluor said:


> 10 core 128GB for $4700? I don't mean to start a war here - but for that money you can get a damn powerful PC (or almost 2).



True, but I plan to use it for final cut pro video editing as well as some visual fx work, so I'll get much more use out of it. Plus it's small and quiet. I know I'm in the minority but I like the design and will get a lot of use out of all the connections (many screens, SSD's, and extras to run). If I can get all I need for under 3k (used) it will be worth it to me.


----------



## OLB (Jul 16, 2017)

MatFluor said:


> 10 core 128GB for $4700? I don't mean to start a war here - but for that money you can get a damn powerful PC (or almost 2).



Of course - but the OP is looking for a portable solution. 

Regarding having two extra 64gb notebook, a quick search showed me they cost at least 2k a piece (could be wrong). But that's still 4k and notebook components. 4700 for the nMP 10-core isn't too far out. 

I used my nMP once as a slave to a mbp and it worked great. Seamless actually, felt like one system.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 16, 2017)

Thanks for all the tips! The nMP is a quiet interesting option. But I've thought a lot about Optane. I've read it will come in DIMM form factor, and possibly lower the cost of RAM a lot compared to DDR3/4. Do you think it's worth waiting for that (will probably come in 2018 sometime), and do you think you will be able to squeeze in 128 GB Optane RAM in an Mini ITX case?


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 16, 2017)

If I'd get a Mac Pro 6,1, what CPU do you think would be best? Also, do you think it won't be supported for much longer in the future? Basically, is it a bad investment of ≈2,5 k USD, should I wait/get something else?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 17, 2017)

If you're going to shell out for a Mac pro trashcan, I doubt you'll need a slave. What type of templates do you plan on loading? What libraries? Also keep in mind that, when going portable, you'll have to bring all of the outboard peripherals too, such as external drives, audio interface, hubs, etc. And also keep in mind that it's not a good idea to use the MacBook's SSD for streaming, as it contains the OS (you should use an external SSD for any libraries).


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 17, 2017)

Wolfie2112 said:


> If you're going to shell out for a Mac pro trashcan, I doubt you'll need a slave. What type of templates do you plan on loading? What libraries? Also keep in mind that, when going portable, you'll have to bring all of the outboard peripherals too, such as external drives, audio interface, hubs, etc. And also keep in mind that it's not a good idea to use the MacBook's SSD for streaming, as it contains the OS (you should use an external SSD for any libraries).


Streaming samples from the SSD and running the OS from there works flawlessly. It's a PCIe drive, very fast. 

A 2013 Mac Pro would be able to handle a lot on it's own, but I already have a MacBook Pro, which I don't plan to sell. Using them together would give me more power than just using a Mac Pro on it's own.


----------



## OLB (Jul 17, 2017)

NameOfBand said:


> If I'd get a Mac Pro 6,1, what CPU do you think would be best? Also, do you think it won't be supported for much longer in the future? Basically, is it a bad investment of ≈25 k, should I wait/get something else?



25k? What currency?  

I don't think it's a very bad investment. Apple computers keep their value second hand. I'm sure they'll support it for a while. 

I'm thinking of upgrading my 6-core to a 10-core (3.0Ghz single core). Seems like a nice sweet spot vs 12-core (2.7GHz). 

New Mac Pros should be here somewhere in 2018 but could be end of year as well, who knows..


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 17, 2017)

OLB said:


> 25k? What currency?
> 
> I don't think it's a very bad investment. Apple computers keep their value second hand. I'm sure they'll support it for a while.
> 
> ...


Swedish Krona, Changed it! You think the 10-core is the sweet spot?


----------



## OLB (Jul 18, 2017)

NameOfBand said:


> Swedish Krona, Changed it! You think the 10-core is the sweet spot?


I think so. You want single core and multicore performance. I believe the 12-core has the multicore advantage and the 6-core the singlecore. The 10-core is inbetween and cheaper than the 12.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 19, 2017)

Currently checking out the Mac Pro idea! Any other ideas? Anyone running a mini itx slave?


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 25, 2017)

Changing my mind again, thinking if something like this would be possible? A lot of value isn't it?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/High-End-Premium-HP-DL380-G7-Server-2x-3-06Ghz-X5675-6C-256GB-4x-146GB-15K-SAS-/322591098411?hash=item4b1bed862b:g:8zkAAOSwIhxZZ5JX


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 25, 2017)

You'll buy a headache from any "refurbished" Computer.
Somebody beat that up for years then traded it in.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 25, 2017)

Or even this?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/IBM-x3850-M2-256GB-RAM-4-x-Hex-Core-2-66GHz-X7460-Rackable-Server-/322589557641?hash=item4b1bd60389:g:NbIAAOSwJq1ZZjgl


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 25, 2017)

chimuelo said:


> You'll buy a headache from any "refurbished" Computer.
> Somebody beat that up for years then traded it in.


You think so? Why is that?


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 25, 2017)

I'll get fresh drives, RAM and CPU rarely fail, is that not so?


----------



## chimuelo (Jul 25, 2017)

Why would somebody put all new parts in a PC just to sell it?
Refurbished my ass...

Just trying to warn you off of "opened box" or "refurbished" components and PCs.
Ask for dates and receipts, if they comply and don't use slogans like barely used, use your own judgement.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 25, 2017)

chimuelo said:


> Why would somebody put all new parts in a PC just to sell it?
> Refurbished my ass...
> 
> Just trying to warn you off of "opened box" or "refurbished" components and PCs.
> Ask for dates and receipts, if they comply and don't use slogans like barely used, use your own judgement.


Thanks for the tips! But even it's used, is it still a bad idea. Server CPU and RAM is sort of made to last, right?

Also, would this work well as a VEPro slave?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 26, 2017)

Those servers have probably been running 24/7 for ages. I would avoid those like the plague.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 26, 2017)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Those servers have probably been running 24/7 for ages. I would avoid those like the plague.


You think they will fail?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 26, 2017)

The thing is, they may run forever, or just die one day. What if they do? Can you get or even afford the replacement parts for a server-grade machine? This is just my opinion.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 26, 2017)

Thanks for all the help guys, but what u think about this?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-ProLiant-DL360p-G8-2-x-8-Core-E5-2680-16-Cores-2-7GHz-256GB-DDR3-3-YR-WNTY-/302381003672?hash=item46674ff398

3 years warranty! Still a bad idea?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 26, 2017)

Quite frankly, a server is not ideal for running a DAW or any type of music production. They are made for heavy database and storage, and typically run Windows Server as an OS. Plus, they are very noisy. For $1800, you have a great custom PC built, and it would be brand spankin' new.


----------



## colony nofi (Jul 26, 2017)

> Anyhow, I'd like to store some libraries on the super fast PCIe SSD on the MBP, and have the (PC) slave stream samples from there. I'd also like the PC to use the MBP screen. Is this possible?


I just read thru and saw this was not answered.

Its actually a really easy one to answer.

Yes - its possible - but you'll be wasting a LOT of computing resources which would show up as bottlenecks quite quickly.

So - how would it be done?
By having your MBP show up on your nMP (or whatever PC) as a network connected drive.

Now the bad bit.

The network connection now becomes the bottle neck.

Gigabit networking in the nMP and MBP means the absolute maximum bandwidth is 1Gb/s
This is a fraction of the read speed of the MBP drives (around 2GB/s on the conservative side!)
Note the little b and bit B.
1Gb/s = 125MB/s. 

Already I'd tell you there's no point doing it.

You're also going to be using the network in the other direction - but its ok, gigabit ethernet is bi-directional (the bandwidth isn't shared by direction).
However - you also need to tweak the networking - and I can't even begin to imagine the settings you'd want to use... since one direction you'll be streaming audio (and wanting to do it as efficiently as possible - this is from VEP to your MBP) and the other, streaming samples - which are a VERY different animal indeed. Thus, optimization of the network setup will be an interesting challenge - one I'm not sure will get you any where near the
maximum bandwidth for the sample streaming. I have not personally tried this - but I wouldn't want to be a guinea pig having just spent the $ on your setup.

This type of approach is reinventing a wheel that is already perfectly good at doing the job of a wheel . 

NOTE : In normal use - once initial bits of samples are loaded into RAM on project opening, you will be lucky to tell the difference between a 500MB/s SSD and a 2000MB/s SSD - but thats another story that relates to IOPs, and the way kontakt etc asks for data.
But just for interests sake - its worth looking at bandwidth again.
a mono 48k, 16bit signal is around 0.75Mb/s
So - 1000 of those is around 0.75Gb/s or ~ 0.1GB/s
5000 of those is around 0.5GB/s or 500MB/s - around the read bandwidth of a good SSD. Now - you'll not get quite that much in the real world - but with the right optimizations, you'll get close.

What does this tell us? There's no point using a network attached drive for getting samples off a fast drive. Thats what other connections (eSATA, thunderbolt 3, or good old Pcie, or m.2) are good for.

So - no matter WHAT your slave setup, you will have to use the drives on the slaves for the samples that are being played back by the slaves. Any samples on the MBP will need to be hosted by the MBP.

As to your slave. Just build it new. 

Also be aware that there is very little purpose at the moment going above 128GB of ram. Indeed, even with that amount, there can be issues that make it much easier just to run two slaves at 64GB (or perhaps 96GB of ram!) I won't go into the why for this right here right now - its complicated - and won't be solved in the real world overnight. Massive ram use in workstations IS being improved / becoming more efficient with some rather clever design and software / hardware combinations, but not in machines with decent bang for buck for us composers. Yet. It will one day I'm sure.

You do *not* need xeons for slaves at all. I would suggest if going the PC route to just build with the fastest i7 (or i9) you can afford - with 64GB ram. Don't bother with any graphics cards. Build as many as you need to satisfy your needs.

Be aware - a single 8 core nMP runs very beefy sessions quite nicely - and without all the headaches of maintaining slaves and their setup. The issues you might come across re running out of CPU (which happens well before you get to saturating a decent, fast, thunderbolt connected RAID array of drives) can be dealt with using freezing tracks and the like.
And if you do want more power - just add to that. Use your MBP as a slave then.  Even just with 16GB of ram, you can offload a decent amount of stuff onto it. You might be surprised.

Anyway - my advice is - DON'T overcomplicate things. Build in stages - don't go all out not knowing what you truly need.


----------



## OLB (Jul 27, 2017)

If the network speed is the bottleneck I would setup a Thunderbolt Bridge network. Have a read here: https://macperformanceguide.com/ThunderboltNetworking-SettingUp.html 

That's how I connected the VE Pro instances and it felt very fast. According to the article around 10GB/s.

I guess you can easily build a big 128Gb ram machine but you want it portable. Somewhere you have to give in.
And those servers will be LOUD I can imagine... ever been in a server room? :D


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 27, 2017)

colony nofi said:


> I just read thru and saw this was not answered.
> 
> Its actually a really easy one to answer.
> 
> ...


Thanks a lot for the replys! Would you mind telling me why it would be complicated to run a 256 GB VEPro slave machine?



colony nofi said:


> You do *not* need xeons for slaves at all. I would suggest if going the PC route to just build with the fastest i7 (or i9) you can afford - with 64GB ram. Don't bother with any graphics cards. Build as many as you need to satisfy your needs.


I know I don't need Xeons, in fact I'd prefer i7/i9 or something, but it's the cheapest option I've come across now.

Btw regarding the Connection, not sure I understood what you meant, but my idea was to Connect the MBP SSD to the nMP via Thunderbolt, and MIDI from MBP to nMP and audio back via Gigabit Ethernet.



Wolfie2112 said:


> Quite frankly, a server is not ideal for running a DAW or any type of music production. They are made for heavy database and storage, and typically run Windows Server as an OS. Plus, they are very noisy. For $1800, you have a great custom PC built, and it would be brand spankin' new.


Maybe not for running a DAW With long plugin Chains, but for a VEPro slave, I think it'd work good. JXL, and probably a lot of other high end Composers use it:

Server racks from Visiondaw and what seems to be Dell Poweredge servers.
https://www.visiondaw.com/store/pc/configurePrd.asp?idproduct=83&qty=1

There are many other Products like this from different Developers:
ADK: https://www.adkproaudio.com/adk-extreme-ws-daw
Carillon: http://www.carillonac1.com/carillon-rack-core-5.html

Btw, the question of portability have now become quite secondary...


----------



## colony nofi (Jul 27, 2017)

I don't have a heap of time... but 


NameOfBand said:


> but my idea was to Connect the MBP SSD to the nMP via Thunderbolt, and MIDI from MBP to nMP and audio back via Gigabit Ethernet.


Yes, you can use networking over thunderbolt between two computers with thunderbolt connections (so long as the OS - like OSX - supports it!) The real world performance of this is not ideal. I did mess around with this around 4 or so years ago between a MBP and a mac mini (both with thunderbolt 1) and generally got 200-250MB/s on synthetic benchmarks, but once real world came into it (ie, trying to playback samples in kontakt) the speed was extremely slow. I am not sure what the issue was - it *could* have been a poor networking implementation on apple's part which is now better. I have my MBP and nMP's here at the studio - and if I get the time in the next few days I'll try run a real world test for you. I'm on OSX 10.11 here - and this will at least give you some indication of performance. 
I don't see the reason not to just use sample storage on the devices that are hosting them - it is much simpler to maintain, thats for sure. Just my opinion of course on that part....



NameOfBand said:


> I know I don't need Xeons, in fact I'd prefer i7/i9 or something, but it's the cheapest option I've come across now.


I guess you mean the cheapest for large ram counts. 

What is the reason for wanting SO much ram? When you are using low pre-load buffers, you can fit a huge amount of stuff in a machine with 64 or 96GB of ram. Have you done tests to work out how much ram you actually need - and then how much of your machine you are able to use once its all (pre)loaded?

What do I mean? I think you will come up against other bottle necks prior to needing more than 128GB ram - unless you are running a huge amount of OT libraries (which seem to be extremely RAM heavy!) If you have say 100GB of samples pre-loaded, and then suddenly want to play back a few thousand voices at once - you might find that you don't have the CPU power needed to do this - and of course this depends on your kontakt setup / how many streams of audio you are processing there and sending back to your master machine etc etc. From the experience of many people here, it is both much cheaper and simpler just to make 2 or 3 slightly less powerful slaves than one monster one. 

Also - there are efficiency issues when using large amounts of ram involving the TIMING of the ram (which in a lot of cases means you need to run the RAM at a slower speed) - but that shouldn't impact things too much. (I did not notice going from 64GB to 128GB on my nMP, which uses slower ram for 128GB!) 

So - my advice would be to cost out 4 x 64GB i7 slaves. Make them as simple as possible. Fast CPU frequency (4 cores should do ok). Make one first. Test it. Work out what is and is not needed. Then add them one by one - getting up to 4 if you need that much RAM use. This way, there is less likely hood of coming up against CPU bottlenecks in one massive machine. You can make these in single rack unit boxes if you need portability.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 27, 2017)

JXL himself says, at around 7:25 in the video, you can do just fine with an inexpensive computer(s) as a slave. This is JXL you're talking about here, he has thousands of instruments pre-loaded on the slaves, you would need to spend a TON of money to buy all those libraries in the first place, I don't know why you think you need 256GB RAM. I have no idea what you do for a living, but I suspect you aren't a big budget Hollywood composer; in which case, you could probably justify a bunch of high-end slaves. Also, JXL's machines are custom built specifically for his setup and optimized for use with VEPro and Pro Tools.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 27, 2017)

Thanks guys, I was thinking about OT Berlin Orchestra, which seems to need more than 128 GB of RAM! It seemed silly to have less than 500 GB of samples that needed more than 128 GB of RAM, so I thought if I have 256, I will be able to actually fit Berlin Orchestra and something else Down the line.

As for bottlenecks, I won't stream all the samples held in RAM at once (or maybe the OT stuff), it would just be loaded and ready to rock. I'm an amatuer but Iv'e made a bit of money this summer and thought it'd be fun to mess around With this stuff. But if I go this route, you think 128 GB or 64 GB RAM would be better because you think the CPU will be the bottleneck? Might be true, but the machines i've been looking at are 2 x Xeons With 6-8 cores each @ 2,4-3.0 GHz. Should be able to do some lifting at least?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jul 28, 2017)

I think you assuming that you need to match your RAM with the size of a library, which is not the case at all. If a library is say, 50GB, you don't need 50GB of RAM. Personally, I don't load anything into RAM, as I prefer streaming (especially when using Play). As you load more instruments of course, your RAM will be utilized, but only a certain portion as the rest will be streamed. For example, I have a template right now with 125 instruments loaded (including Hollywood Strings/Brass Gold, various other EW stuff, Omnisphere, Kontakt, etc), and the usage is only around 18GB. If I wanted to load every single patch from Hollywood Strings into RAM, that's a whole other story. I know some people do this, but I never saw the point. And regarding Berlin Orchestra, even if you did manage to load every single articulation into a template, what are the odds you're actually going to need them all? probably not. You'll probably end up using a handful from each section; in which case 32GB would most likely be a realistic RAM choice (on the high side).


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 28, 2017)

Wolfie2112 said:


> I think you assuming that you need to match your RAM with the size of a library, which is not the case at all. If a library is say, 50GB, you don't need 50GB of RAM. Personally, I don't load anything into RAM, as I prefer streaming (especially when using Play). As you load more instruments of course, your RAM will be utilized, but only a certain portion as the rest will be streamed. For example, I have a template right now with 125 instruments loaded (including Hollywood Strings/Brass Gold, various other EW stuff, Omnisphere, Kontakt, etc), and the usage is only around 18GB. If I wanted to load every single patch from Hollywood Strings into RAM, that's a whole other story. I know some people do this, but I never saw the point. And regarding Berlin Orchestra, even if you did manage to load every single articulation into a template, what are the odds you're actually going to need them all? probably not. You'll probably end up using a handful from each section; in which case 32GB would most likely be a realistic RAM choice (on the high side).


Thanks for that you still try to help me out! I never thought that you needed to match the RAM With the library sample size exactly, but that there's a ratio between how much RAM you need for each GB of sample, ish, different depending on what hardware and software you use. For Berlin Orchestra, at Kontakt 3 kb buffer, it seems you need at least 128 GB RAM. Sample size of all the main libs is around 860 GB uncompressed, and compressed roughly the half of it, maybe 500 GB. So depending on how you Count (compressed or uncompressed), for these OT libs, you would need 15-30 % of the sample size in RAM to have all patches loaded. Maybe not necessary, but a luxury to be able to fly between all pacthes, no hickups when streaming samples, and no waiting to load in extra patches. If I can achive this for a relatively low price With a refurbished server, I think it would be a good deal. Ofc, I have my concerns. How long will I be able to run the software I need on this hardware (VEPro, OS etc.)? Will it be very hard to keep updated (New form factors, protocols, Technologies that won't be supported etc.)? How good will it actually work? The machines I've been looking at are like 3-5 years old, will they perform like shit? Maybe, but I hope the redundancy of CPU and RAM somewhat could make up for that.


----------



## colony nofi (Jul 30, 2017)

So I have about 2.5 - 3 GB of sample libraries. I don't load any where near ALL of them... but I usually end up with about 48GB of RAM used with my larger templates. Though I don't use any berlin. Mainly Spitfire / VSL / cinesamples and loads of other bits and pieces from different people. Orchestral Tools is one of the few co's that I don't have any libs from - so I cannot comment on the ram use.

I would really think that some experimentation on your behalf is what is needed before you go all in with a monster slave. Find out exactly what you need / how you'll use your template (ie - disabled track templates are another option that make a huge difference to ram and CPU use!). Even making one 64GB slave first to see what it can do will probably save you money in the long run.

Just my 2c.


----------



## Lawson. (Jul 30, 2017)

FYI, a full Berlin Orchestra template + both Arks is ~75GB RAM fully purged. I don't have the Brass expansions, though, but I would assume that would add on about ~10GB. Everything is on SSDs and my Kontakt buffer is the lowest possible.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 30, 2017)

Lawson. said:


> FYI, a full Berlin Orchestra template + both Arks is ~75GB RAM fully purged. I don't have the Brass expansions, though, but I would assume that would add on about ~10GB. Everything is on SSDs and my Kontakt buffer is the lowest possible.


How much RAM do you have on that machine that uses 75 GB for Berlin Orchestra fully purged? I think it just uses all that RAM because it can, and that you could load a lot into RAM and still not hit the cealing, or am I completely wrong? I think you could have an entire Berlin Template fully purged on a 16 GB machine. Btw, kontakt buffer makes no difference if you don't have any samples loaded! Btw I'm kinda curios no one else has done this thing before, sort of makes me wanna try it even more! There are old servers With 3.46 GHz CPUs, the same that was in the old Mac Pros I think. And those machines are still decent DAWs from what I understand. That and lot's of RAM, seems to be what a slave needs. And 3 years warranty.. just Wonder if I will be able to run all the software I need on that machine, and for how long I can have it before it's waaay to old!


----------



## Lawson. (Jul 30, 2017)

NameOfBand said:


> How much RAM do you have on that machine that uses 75 GB for Berlin Orchestra fully purged? I think it just uses all that RAM because it can, and that you could load a lot into RAM and still not hit the cealing, or am I completely wrong? I think you could have an entire Berlin Template fully purged on a 16 GB machine. Btw, kontakt buffer makes no difference if you don't have any samples loaded! Btw I'm kinda curios no one else has done this thing before, sort of makes me wanna try it even more! There are old servers With 3.46 GHz CPUs, the same that was in the old Mac Pros I think. And those machines are still decent DAWs from what I understand. That and lot's of RAM, seems to be what a slave needs. And 3 years warranty.. just Wonder if I will be able to run all the software I need on that machine, and for how long I can have it before it's waaay to old!



I have 128GB, and use every bit of it (in fact I need more, but 32GB sticks aren't really a thing yet). Every Kontakt instance uses RAM, regardless if the samples are purged.

Also, I'm not sure what aspect you say no one has done before? There are a decent amount of people running 128+GB RAM, as well as people using the old Mac Pros as audio slaves.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jul 30, 2017)

Lawson. said:


> I have 128GB, and use every bit of it (in fact I need more, but 32GB sticks aren't really a thing yet). Every Kontakt instance uses RAM, regardless if the samples are purged.
> 
> Also, I'm not sure what aspect you say no one has done before? There are a decent amount of people running 128+GB RAM, as well as people using the old Mac Pros as audio slaves.


How many instances of Kontakt do you have in Your template?


----------



## Lawson. (Jul 31, 2017)

NameOfBand said:


> How many instances of Kontakt do you have in Your template?



I'm not sure, actually. I have about 3300 tracks, and lets say I average 10 Kontakt patches per instance. That would be about 330 instances. That being said, I can't have all my tracks loaded at once because I "only" have 128GB RAM, so some things I don't load on default in my metatframe and have to manually load in or merge other vi-frames.


----------



## jononotbono (Aug 22, 2017)

Lawson. said:


> I "only" have 128GB RAM



Get your coat. You're a disgrace.


----------



## URL (Aug 22, 2017)

I have 64+96-32GB 2666 ghz RAM in my setup, and I need more...but RAM is very expensive at the moment.


----------



## chimuelo (Aug 22, 2017)

Lawson. said:


> I'm not sure, actually. I have about 3300 tracks, and lets say I average 10 Kontakt patches per instance. That would be about 330 instances. That being said, I can't have all my tracks loaded at once because I "only" have 128GB RAM, so some things I don't load on default in my metatframe and have to manually load in or merge other vi-frames.


This is whi I am building a Main DAW with a huge RAM footprint.
Really excited about the AMD Boards from Supermicro.
1/2TB of RAM Means 256GBs should be about right.


----------



## NameOfBand (Aug 22, 2017)

chimuelo said:


> 1/2TB of RAM Means 256GBs should be about right.


Would like to clarify What you mean with this?


----------



## NameOfBand (Oct 11, 2018)

Still hanging on to the idea that I someday when I will develop better self control and get more time to do this still will go this route and buy a server rack and go crazy:


----------



## X-Bassist (Oct 11, 2018)

NameOfBand said:


> Still hanging on to the idea that I someday when I will develop better self control and get more time to do this still will go this route and buy a server rack and go crazy:




OT templetes tend to be huge because of the scripting and complications with capsule, purging samples only lowers it so much (as mentioned above). But I thought my problem was Ram too, until I loaded a Mac Pro with 128GB of ram and realized even when I only used 40GB my issue was more CPU (and this with a newer 6 core 3.5GHz machine) than the Ram. I really don’t think 256GB on one machine is going to make a big difference from 128GB unless the CPU throughput is raised considerablly (you ARE trying to do this in real time with low latency after all  )

I also have a smaller slave with VEPro (I run everything through VE Pro, which helps a lot), but for me the answer was to make section templetes then pull tracks (and VE Pro aux tracks) into my work session to keep CPU and Ram use low. It also takes forever to save one huge template, and I would hate to take that time in every work session. 

Since Pro Tools came out with presets for 2018 (saved tracks chucks with all the settings and routing and sample hookup that can be added like you would add a new track) it’s been even easier to add tracks as I go (once setup), String A, Brass A, Woodwinds A, Percussion A (I have B and C sets of all of these too) gets loaded in about 2 minutes. A faster way to work (Just a thought). Even my templetes are split into Strings, Brass, etc, just to make them easier to work with (and save presets from quickly). I’ve only got 2500 midi tracks, but the system, even on cubase, starts to slow after loading 1500+ tracks. Computers and the DAW’s need more time to improve in order to handle these big, “instant” demands, and not leave you spending more time fixing and saving than creating music.


----------

