# Should I move to 2-machine network or stay in single PC setup?



## Leandro Marcos (Oct 19, 2022)

How many of you have recently moved from a multiple computer setup to a single machine and how are you finding it?
I am currently on a single machine (a powerful PC) and I recently invested a maxed out MacBook Pro as my travel rig (and what I mean by travelling is basically going on holidays, which could be 2 or 3 times a year). 
So I said to myself: “Why having the MacBook Pro laying around waiting when I’m not travelling, when I could actually use it for more power? It would be a waste of resources not to”. 
So I am thinking of moving to a network setup with VEPRO, with the MacBook Pro as the host and the PC as the server holding the libraries (Also, to be honest, the MacBook cost me almost twice what my main studio PC cost, so I think I’m my mind I am kinda trying to justify the purchase).

But…at the same time I’m scared of over complicating my existence with this move. As the saying goes “Don’t try to fix something that is not broken” (or something like that).

Is it too much hassle the multi-computer setup? Should I go for it? Or should I stay on a single machine? 

And if I stay on a single machine, should I still use VEPro locally for better CPU core handling?

Thanks!


----------



## wickedw (Oct 19, 2022)

So obviously there is an increase in complexity when introducing vepro, and an additional node to your setup. But that additional complexity also has its perks. Let's ask the questions and see where you end up.

Vepro allows the utilisation of additional hardware meaning we can scale our workload across more ram and cpu power. More mic positions to the people! Do you have a lack of resources in your current setup which restricts you that could be solved by this?

Another perk is that loading time between projects can be severely cut. Because your libraries are hosted outside of your daw, you only have to load them once (if decoupled). Are loading times a pain for you currently? Do you move a lot between projects?

I think these are probably the big questions to ask yourself. If the answers are yes, go for it. If the answers are no, then skip it and have fun playing music instead. If it's a mix, see what weighs heavier. Also try out the demo if you're curious.

I use it because the answer to the questions I posed was yes. I curse it sometimes, I mostly praise it.


----------



## musicalweather (Oct 19, 2022)

I'm an enthusiastic VE Pro user. I use it with a three-machine set up with my MacBook Pro as the host and two PCs holding my libraries. The MacBook Pro is a 2016 with 16 GB(!) ram. The PC's were custom built and are quite powerful. They need to be since I have much of the Orchestral Tools libraries as well as ones like HOOPUS. The workflow can be a little slow; you've got to fire up two to three machines to get working, but I don't mind. And yes, using VE Pro locally _definitely_ helps to lighten the CPU load. I do that quite a bit on my Mac. If there are other questions you have, I'm happy to answer.


----------



## Grizzlymv (Oct 20, 2022)

Depend on the specs of your single machine, but I moved from a triple, then dual and now single machine. I experimented with and without VEPRO and in the end, I find the better balance in using a single machine, with VEPRO on it. Only the core orchestra is hosted in VEPRO (CSS, CSSS, CSB, CSW and orchestral percs) and the rest will be loaded as instrument tracks in Cubase for greater control and flexibility. Most are saved as Track Presets, so it's just a matter of loading it and routing it to the right group. Quite a time saver, while keeping the project light. But then again, my machine as 128 Gb of RAM so plenty of room to host everything on a single machine. Now, I could still have a dual setup with the orchestra in VEPRO on the second machine, while keeping the rest on my DAW and it would work. But it's twice the maintenance, twice the energy cost, twice the noise in the room, twice the heat, etc. those aren't strong arguments necessarily, but with the powerful DAW I have now, I saw no need / reasons to keep the second one. In the end, I guess it come down to personal preferences. 

Now, if the question is to use a single machine without VEPRO vs using VEPRO, that's different topic. And If you can have VEPRO, I'd say go for it, if only for the orchestra alone. I found out that having too many instrument tracks within the DAW end up having an impact on performances. Orchestra usually eat up a lot of instances/tracks, so by having them outside the DAW, it keeps it light. The same cue with all instruments in Cubase vs a split with VEPRO will perform much better on the latter, at least in my case. 

Not sure if this helps, but that's just my personal experience with these tools and scenarios.


----------



## Jdiggity1 (Oct 20, 2022)

There's no harm in trying it out to see if you like it, but if you're trying to decide whether to go "all in" or not, I'd recommend waiting until you actually need the second machine. And that time may never come.
If you're not struggling on the single machine as it is, then you won't benefit from introducing a second.
Speaking for myself, I use a networked VEP system only when I really need to, which is very rare these days.


----------



## Aussieyankee (Oct 22, 2022)

This is a little bit off topic, but I can’t tell how you determine which computer should serve which function within a VEP setup. This is in part because I’m not entirely clear on their terminology, the main computer is the “master” and the others are “servers”, but what do you want each one to do? Do you want the most powerful cpu to be the “master”? The one with the most RAM?


----------



## musicalweather (Oct 22, 2022)

Aussieyankee said:


> This is a little bit off topic, but I can’t tell how you determine which computer should serve which function within a VEP setup. This is in part because I’m not entirely clear on their terminology, the main computer is the “master” and the others are “servers”, but what do you want each one to do? Do you want the most powerful cpu to be the “master”? The one with the most RAM?


I don't think so. VE Pro is designed to offload the burden of virtual instruments and plugins to other more powerful machines. In my case, I have a fairly weak "host/master" - my MacBook Pro with just 16 GB ram and not a very powerful CPU. The server machines are much more powerful (PCs with 128 GB ram, much more capable CPUs). They can run the most demanding libraries (Orchestral Tools, HOOPUS) without breaking a sweat and feed the audio back into my master machine. 

The "host" machine is where you run your DAW. Inside the DAW is a plugin that communicates with the VE Pro server on the other machines (or you can even have a server on the same machine as your DAW). The servers contain your virtual instruments and fx plugins. Essentially, your DAW sends midi (note information and CCs) to the instruments and fx plugins inside VE Pro, and VE Pro sends audio back to your DAW. All via ethernet. 

It is a bit hard to understand if you've never set it up (and the manual doesn't make it much easier), but once you've got it set up, it's easier to grasp the concept. Hope this helps.


----------



## pinki (Oct 23, 2022)

Stick with what you have, wait and get an M2 Mac Studio, no VEPro needed anywhere if you use track presets.


----------



## LinusW (Oct 23, 2022)

I used to have a four computer setup. iMac+PC+Mac mini+MacBook Pro. Then scrapped the PC during the pandemic and I went back to a single computer setup. 
I got the Mac Studio M1 Max and that was the best purchase for ages. I've hardly used the iMac since. 
So I originally planned a dual computer system with the Mac Studio and the iMac for legacy tools, but the issue is VEP. The VEP server does not host VST3 plugins and it won't validate all of my AU plugins neither.


----------



## rgames (Oct 23, 2022)

I guess the short answer is: it seems you have everything you need to make the decision, so.... try different configurations and see what works for you?

However, a multi-machine setup is still "better" but single-machine setups these days are almost always "good enough." Whether multi machines are necessary depends entirely on what you do.

For me, with a pretty typical large orchestral template, the switch occurred at Intel 10th gen. Those chipsets/processors made it practical to run my entire template on a single desktop machine with decent latency (6.7 ms). 12th gen did the same for laptops, though at higher latency (12 ms).

The decision to use VEPro is really independent of number of machines. If you run a large orchestral template you're very likely to be better off using it. For smaller templates, or no template at all, you're probably fine without it.


----------



## Leandro Marcos (Oct 23, 2022)

Aussieyankee said:


> This is a little bit off topic, but I can’t tell how you determine which computer should serve which function within a VEP setup. This is in part because I’m not entirely clear on their terminology, the main computer is the “master” and the others are “servers”, but what do you want each one to do? Do you want the most powerful cpu to be the “master”? The one with the most RAM?


As far as I know, the server (or “slave” machines) not only should be the one with the most RAM but also the one with the best CPU. Don’t quote me on that, though.


----------



## pinki (Oct 23, 2022)

LinusW said:


> I used to have a four computer setup. iMac+PC+Mac mini+MacBook Pro. Then scrapped the PC during the pandemic and I went back to a single computer setup.
> I got the Mac Studio M1 Max and that was the best purchase for ages. I've hardly used the iMac since.
> So I originally planned a dual computer system with the Mac Studio and the iMac for legacy tools, but the issue is VEP. The VEP server does not host VST3 plugins and it won't validate all of my AU plugins neither.


Wow that's annoying, I thought the whole pint of VEP is to host plugins...But your idea of keeping legacy plugins going on an Intel machine is great..is there anything else apart from VEP that can do the server plugin thing? Sorry OT I know...


----------



## Aussieyankee (Oct 24, 2022)

Thanks so much for your responses, it clarified a lot for me. I was wondering, not sure how to say this, do all the libraries and/or software have to be stored on the drive of the “server”? For example, if you run out of ram on the server that has the libraries on it’s drive but aren’t using all the ram on the host could you access and use the samples in the host? To put it another way, could you use the ram of both computers but keep the libraries on one computers drive, and if so which one would it be? Also, just be sure, does it have to be a direct Ethernet connection or can it go through a switch? I assume that a switch is ok as I have seen people mentioning multiple computer setups, but just wanted to make sure. Or could you direct connect via thunderbolt, wouldn’t that be faster?


----------



## Aussieyankee (Oct 24, 2022)

pinki said:


> Wow that's annoying, I thought the whole pint of VEP is to host plugins...But your idea of keeping legacy plugins going on an Intel machine is great..is there anything else apart from VEP that can do the server plugin thing? Sorry OT I know...


I have been looking into an AVB network in part to keep some older hardware working with older computer/OS, but still trying to figure out the details of how that would work so I’d be curious too.


----------



## Aussieyankee (Oct 25, 2022)

@pinki maybe audiogridder would be another option? I haven’t used it, just read a little bit a while back, and then forgot about it!


----------



## pinki (Oct 25, 2022)

Aussieyankee said:


> @pinki maybe audiogridder would be another option? I haven’t used it, just read a little bit a while back, and then forgot about it!


Wow that’s perfect, and free…will definitely check it out if I‘m forced to go M1 to keep my Intel plugins like Kore going. Thanks.


----------



## LinusW (Oct 28, 2022)

pinki said:


> Wow that's annoying, I thought the whole pint of VEP is to host plugins...But your idea of keeping legacy plugins going on an Intel machine is great..is there anything else apart from VEP that can do the server plugin thing? Sorry OT I know...


Yeah, it did a good job at Kontakt 5/6 as a VST2 but they've obviously been busy rewriting and moving to iLok than keeping up with the evolving world of plugin formats, performance and new CPUs. 
For what it's worth, I tried AudioGridder two years ago and I was not impressed - but again, it was two years ago and it may have been improved a lot. 
I was more planning to go back to my old solution with midi over ethernet and audio return through Dante.


----------



## pinki (Oct 28, 2022)

LinusW said:


> I was more planning to go back to my old solution with midi over ethernet and audio return through Dante.


Can you expand on this..I have an RME Digiface Dante doing nothing which is basically a USB3 to 48 channels of 96k dante. But wouldn’t that mean using aggregate sound drivers on the main machine, which is always a pain?


----------

