# VEPro with Logic routing...?



## Puzzlefactory (Apr 7, 2017)

Just wondering how people set up their VEPro templates?

I've got two ideas for a setup. 

One is to have a separate aux channel for every instrument in VEPro (and create a track for each aux channel in the arrange page, as they kind of behave like an instrument channel when set up that way).

The other is to create one stereo output for each "family" of instruments and then just have midi channels in Logics arrange page for the individual instruments (and do any level balancing either in VEPro or with dynamics automation). 

Was wondering which of these methods others use? Or if anyone has a different setup to what I just described?


----------



## Saxer (Apr 8, 2017)

One instance of VEPro per instrument works best in Logic.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Apr 8, 2017)

Saxer said:


> One instance of VEPro per instrument works best in Logic.



Why does that work best in your opinion? 

I thought about that but I figured the VEPro app on the slave would get a bit cluttered with multiple instances open on seperate pages and I figured it would be extra strain on the host CPU (although I imagine not much as all the plugin does is communicate with the slave).


----------



## Saxer (Apr 8, 2017)

Logic tends to get CPU spikes when sending a lot of data to one instance. But if you use separate instances it's very effective. It's quite the opposite behavior than Cubase which works better with multis.


----------



## samphony (Apr 8, 2017)

Correct. Say you have v1 and multiple articulations of it. Put it in one instance and route 2-4 stereo channels back to Logic. Use 4 channels if you want to have control over short articulation post processing in logic otherwise just route 2 channels back to Logic and be done with it. It's true if you try it with Kontakt 5 directly hosted in Logic its the same. Use Kontakt in Logic like exs24 = one track per instruments.

And to be honest if you plan to build these huge templates with all instruments on this planet then do so and put it into a folder. Build another template to with basic routings and empty tracks and use logics import function to grab instruments from that huge template and only the ones you really need.


----------



## A.G (Apr 8, 2017)

Logic is limited to 256 Software Instruments and it is not enough for serious Orchestral templates (which is the VEPro goal). The golden key is to use Multi Timbral Instrument instances or combination of Multi and Standard Instruments. For example 256*16=4096 Instruments (Max, hosted on different machines) if you use Multies.


----------



## whinecellar (Apr 8, 2017)

IME with Logic & VEP, keep it simple with routing: no aux outs from multis - just a stereo out of each. Do all your premixing in VE Pro. If you need to further treat a part separately, just bounce it in place as audio (takes mere seconds) and go to town.

As I've detailed elsewhere, my template is 1000+ tracks, almost all VE Pro multis with just stereo outs, and it runs like butter even on a MacBook Pro with 16 GB RAM thanks to a few slave machines.


----------



## samphony (Apr 8, 2017)

whinecellar said:


> IME with Logic & VEP, keep it simple with routing: no aux outs from multis - just a stereo out of each. Do all your premixing in VE Pro. If you need to further treat a part separately, just bounce it in place as audio (takes mere seconds) and go to town.
> 
> As I've detailed elsewhere, my template is 1000+ tracks, almost all VE Pro multis with just stereo outs, and it runs like butter even on a MacBook Pro with 16 GB RAM thanks to a few slave machines.



Exactly. That's what I meant!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 9, 2017)

whinecellar said:


> IME with Logic & VEP, keep it simple with routing: no aux outs from multis - just a stereo out of each. Do all your premixing in VE Pro. If you need to further treat a part separately, just bounce it in place as audio (takes mere seconds) and go to town.
> 
> As I've detailed elsewhere, my template is 1000+ tracks, almost all VE Pro multis with just stereo outs, and it runs like butter even on a MacBook Pro with 16 GB RAM thanks to a few slave machines.



Aside from the 256 Aux maximum, does Logic run more efficiently this way?

On a side note, what is more efficient (on the slave)....loading multiple instances of a VI with one instrument loaded in each (so each would have its own channel), or multiple instruments loaded within a SINGLE instance of a VI?


----------



## whinecellar (May 9, 2017)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Aside from the 256 Aux maximum, does Logic run more efficiently this way?



In my experience, yes, by a LONG shot. My whole template is essentially pre-mixed in VEP across all my slaves, so I can easily get away with just stereo multi instances of VEP. Once you start adding multiple outputs and going nuts with auxes, that's when you start making things needlessly complicated, and taking a big CPU hit.



Wolfie2112 said:


> On a side note, what is more efficient (on the slave)....loading multiple instances of a VI with one instrument loaded in each (so each would have its own channel), or multiple instruments loaded within a SINGLE instance of a VI?



You'll get different answers on this, but for me, I go multi all the way: for example, a 16-channel Kontakt multi for LASS violins A, another for B & C, then the same for violas, cellos, basses, etc., and on and on with other libraries. Otherwise you'd end up with a VEP metaframe with hundreds of individual instances - I just don't see that being at all practical.

On my big PC slave, I currently have (27) 16-channel multis (either Kontakt or PLAY). That's 432 instruments loaded from all the big libraries, but with only 27 instances listed. Just scrolling up and down the list would be a nightmare if each instrument were on its own instance!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 9, 2017)

Jim, thanks a lot for the detailed reply. That was my suspicion with the Aux channels, it would just be nice to mix right in Logic, but I can live with mixing in VEPro.

So when you say you have a 16-channel Kontakt multi loaded, it that per instance of VEPro, or do you have multiple 16-channel instances loaded inside one VEPro instance?


----------



## whinecellar (May 9, 2017)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Jim, thanks a lot for the detailed reply. That was my suspicion with the Aux channels, it would just be nice to mix right in Logic, but I can live with mixing in VEPro.



Sure thing. Really, I do all my mixing in Logic. Since everything in my template is orchestral, I took the time to pre-mix, balance, pan & EQ everything in VE Pro, which stays static. The trick is that I end up rendering everything as audio - often as I go - and *then* I start tweaking levels & doing automation if necessary, since each region ends up on its own dedicated track. Bounce-in-place and VEP work hand in hand for me; I essentially end up mixing & archiving as a project develops. By the time I'm ready to deliver, pretty much everything is already audio as opposed to MIDI. I hide the MIDI tracks as I go too, so I can go back and edit/refine later if need be.



Wolfie2112 said:


> So when you say you have a 16-channel Kontakt multi loaded, it that per instance of VEPro, or do you have multiple 16-channel instances loaded inside one VEPro instance?



Just one 16-channel multi of Kontakt or PLAY per VEP instance


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (May 10, 2017)

I was wondering about this as well. I have ARTzID and I use Composer Tools Pro also. But wondering what the best setup for all of to work together would be for VE Pro and Logic 10.3.1

Regards


----------



## garyhiebner (May 10, 2017)

whinecellar said:


> IME with Logic & VEP, keep it simple with routing: no aux outs from multis - just a stereo out of each. Do all your premixing in VE Pro. If you need to further treat a part separately, just bounce it in place as audio (takes mere seconds) and go to town.
> 
> As I've detailed elsewhere, my template is 1000+ tracks, almost all VE Pro multis with just stereo outs, and it runs like butter even on a MacBook Pro with 16 GB RAM thanks to a few slave machines.



I know you have mentioned it before here whinecellar, but what is your setup?

How many slaves are you running, and what are their specs? I've also got a Macbook with SSD and 16GB as my master, and then a Slave PC. But interested to hear how many instruments you're running in Logic. Or are they all hosted on the Slave with VEPro? Im running instruments between the two. Some in VEPro in Logic on my Mac, and then some more on the slave with VEPro. But it gets a bit messy. But interested to hear your setup.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 10, 2017)

For me, my slave PC runs the EW Hollywood orchestra only, 1 instance in VE Pro per instrument with 5-16 articulations in each, addressed by 1 track in Logic Pro, triggered by the SkiSwitcher 3. In VE Pro 6 on my iMac I run Kontakt orchestral stuff only, 1 instance in VE Pro per instrument with 5-16 articulations in each or only 1 if it is a keyswitch patch, which most of them are, addressed by 1 track in Logic Pro, triggered by the SkiSwitcher 3. Instrument tracks of the same family are nested in folders. No auxes, except for hosting reverbs. No Event Inputs. No bloody Multiport layer.
All the rest is directly in Logic Pro.

I am not the workflow police so I am not going to tell anyone they must work this way. But my computers are relatively modestly powered and yet I have yet to see anyone's Logic Pro-VE Pro rig work more smoothly than mine. Also, I have helped a bunch of other composers set up their templates this way here in LA and some over Skype, some of whom are here, and almost all of them like it and stick with it.


----------



## whinecellar (May 10, 2017)

garyhiebner said:


> I know you have mentioned it before here whinecellar, but what is your setup?



Main Mac = MacBook Pro 2014 Retina w/16 GB RAM
(4) SSDs in an OWC TB chassis (2 project drives, 2 samples)
(2) UA Apollos, Philips 40" 4k monitor all via TB
Running OSX 10.11.3, Logic X 10.3.1
VE Pro (32 bit) running EastWest Play for older perc libraries
VE Pro (64 bit) running (9) 16-channel Kontakt multis (144 instruments)
...mostly perc libraries, a bunch of misc. guitars & ethnic instruments

Slave 1 - www.studiocat.com turnkey VE Pro PC slave (4.16 GHz quad i7, 64 GB RAM, 4 sample SSDs)
VE Pro running (28) 16-channel multis (Kontakt, PLAY) - 448 insts total, all demanding libraries; uses about 40 GB RAM fully loaded

Slave 2 - 2009 iMac Core2Duo, 16 GB RAM
VEP running 4 x 16ch older Kontakt libraries (64 insts total)

Slave 3 - 2012 Mac Mini quad i7, 16 GB RAM
VEP running 11 x 16ch Kontakt multis (176 insts total)

Slave 4 - 2010 MacBook Pro 2.28 Core2Duo
VEP running 8 x 16ch older Kontakt libraries (128 insts total)

So, that's 976 instruments loaded across all 5 machines, all in VE Pro 16-channel instances. I also run another ~100 EXS instruments in Logic, and then any project-specific stuff like Omnisphere, Nexus, other VIs, etc. As for processing, my template contains 8-12 effects buses: mostly reverb options (Lex PCM Random Hall, 2C B2, Slate VerbSuite Bricasti, NI RC48, some custom Space Designer stuff), and of course tons of EQ, compression as needed, etc.

All runs flawlessly!


----------



## ontracktuts (May 10, 2017)

That is awesome. Thanks for the share.

And what's the reason using a Macbook as your main machine instead of an iMac or Mac Pro? Portability when needed?


----------



## whinecellar (May 10, 2017)

ontracktuts said:


> That is awesome. Thanks for the share.
> 
> And what's the reason using a Macbook as your main machine instead of an iMac or Mac Pro? Portability when needed?



You're welcome! The main reasons for the MBP as main machine:

1. I've been working on a massive project for over a year, while at the same time doing a bunch of tour dates - so yeah, portability 

2. It's the only machine I have that can drive a big 4K display, which is an upgrade I've been wanting for years. I already had the laptop for the last few years, and I wasn't about to drop $6000 on a trash can just to drive a big display - especially given logic X' terrible GUI performance even on the fastest machines. That one issue aside, this laptop is ridiculously powerful. I still can't believe I run what I do all from that machine!!!


----------



## gsilbers (May 10, 2017)

whinecellar said:


> Main Mac = MacBook Pro 2014 Retina w/16 GB RAM
> (4) SSDs in an OWC TB chassis (2 project drives, 2 samples)
> (2) UA Apollos, Philips 40" 4k monitor all via TB
> Running OSX 10.11.3, Logic X 10.3.1
> ...




so hows the transfer speed between the drives and ethernet with thunderbolt? 
seems you can playback a lot of stuff at the same time.


----------



## whinecellar (May 10, 2017)

gsilbers said:


> so hows the transfer speed between the drives and ethernet with thunderbolt?
> seems you can playback a lot of stuff at the same time.



Well, Thunderbolt is essentially the PCIe protocol, so it's blazing fast - certainly not a bottleneck. And since recent MacBook Pros don't have ethernet, I use an Anker USB 3.0 > ethernet adapter and it's perfect. In fact, that little $15 adapter is the gateway to all my VEP slaves... kinda crazy!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 11, 2017)

Thanks for sharing all this great info. I too run my studio from a MacBook Pro (2013), and it's definitely an underestimated machine. Colleagues have actually thought I was kidding until they see it in action. I have my ethernet connected to one of the two T-bolt connections ($30 adaptor), and it's a solid connection. Now that I've seen your setup, I'm looking into a big 4K display!


----------



## MPortmann (Dec 30, 2017)

whinecellar said:


> Main Mac = MacBook Pro 2014 Retina w/16 GB RAM
> (4) SSDs in an OWC TB chassis (2 project drives, 2 samples)
> (2) UA Apollos, Philips 40" 4k monitor all via TB
> Running OSX 10.11.3, Logic X 10.3.1
> ...



Thanks for sharing your setup. I’m researching and putting together portable rig. Your post is helpful. Do you use any additional hubs or TB docks? Trying to figure out how to route all the Ethernet slaves to one MBP. Is your TB connection flimsy like mine. If mine is touched oh so slightly it disconnects. Appreciate any input you can offer, Thank you!


----------



## whinecellar (Dec 30, 2017)

MPortmann said:


> Thanks for sharing your setup. I’m researching and putting together portable rig. Your post is helpful. Do you use any additional hubs or TB docks? Trying to figure out how to route all the Ethernet slaves to one MBP. Is your TB connection flimsy like mine. If mine is touched oh so slightly it disconnects. Appreciate any input you can offer, Thank you!



Sure thing! No TB hubs/docks - each port is daisy chained to its respective stuff: 2 UA Apollos and a 4K display on one, and a 4-bay SSD bay on the other. I do have a ton of USB ports though via a pair of hubs - one of which has a USB 3.0 > Ethernet adapter to talk to the VE Pro network. It all works flawlessly. I got some good quality TB cables from OWC when I set all up, and I never touch it other than when I hit the road/come home, so it’s been great!


----------



## Jwmusic (Feb 28, 2018)

Hi Whinecellar, would you mind sharing what you use to switch articulations? I'm rebuilding my orchestral template and really like the sound of what you've described. Have previously used VEPRo Outputs to Logic Auxes. It's a very messy way of doing things that doesn't suit Logic at all. I think I understand the structure you're describing, just wondering how you trigger the different articulations in your V1 multi for example, from the single V1 track in Logic?


----------



## whinecellar (Feb 28, 2018)

Jwmusic said:


> Hi Whinecellar, would you mind sharing what you use to switch articulations? I'm rebuilding my orchestral template and really like the sound of what you've described. Have previously used VEPRo Outputs to Logic Auxes. It's a very messy way of doing things that doesn't suit Logic at all. I think I understand the structure you're describing, just wondering how you trigger the different articulations in your V1 multi for example, from the single V1 track in Logic?



Well, it depends on the library and how I have the respective multi set up, but for the most part I use custom TouchOSC layouts I designed for each library, or actual hardware keys that my aging brain happens to remember 

I recently mapped a Behringer X-Touch Compact to be a custom controller for my most-used libraries (Spitfire, CSS) - and I'm loving that. I also remapped several libraries to respond to the same controllers, so for example, CC1, 2, and 11 are on the first 3 faders, and they control the same things in all my libraries now. And the bottom row of 9 buttons all trigger the same articulations, which covers most of my needs.

Hope that helps!


----------



## Jwmusic (Feb 28, 2018)

That's great, it does help and thanks for replying so quickly. I have composer tools pro on an ipad which I keep meaning to set up properly. I think that might be a good start. Just have to get my head around it!


----------



## Dewdman42 (Mar 2, 2018)

Thanks for this discussion. New VEP user here, with Logic. Trying to figure out the best strategy to setup templates. I don't own a zillion orch libraries yet, so my case may be more simple then others, but I want to set it up right to expand into the future.

One thing about Logic is that multi-timbral handling can be a PITA. AUX channels have different latency then the instrument channels during offline bouncing, for example. Offline bouncing can often only be done by region, etc. AUX channels can't use the track freeze feature which is very handy. So I am leaning towards this mode of one "mixable instrument" per VEP instance in order to avoid any AUX channels coming back from VEP into logic. I'm assuming that's the only way to avoid the multi-out AUX channels, right? 

Is there some other operating mode I'm not aware of where less instances can be used to group different instruments together on VEP, that brings the audio into LPX without AUX channels? Whinecellar says he is just mixing everything over on VEP to reduce the number of instances, but its not clear to me how he's mixing stuff. its one thing to mix all the articulations from one instrument, its another thing to premix the entire string section, for example, which I'd rather not do. I want to mix in logic.

Of course this seems like it will lead to a lot of VEP instances... I don't have nearly as many libraries as many of you do, but I can easily see needing a few hundred in order to represent each "mixable instrument" that is available on my soon to be VEP server. In terms of Logic's 256 inst limit, that will quickly become a limitation in terms of setting up a template to work with all available libraries.

So does it come down to simply: if I want more than 256 "mixable instruments" available in a LPX template, I'm going to have to group them together into multis on VEP? 

What can be done in VEP to manage a long list of instances better so that its not difficult to find each one you want when working on a project?




Ashermusic said:


> For me, my slave PC runs the EW Hollywood orchestra only, 1 instance in VE Pro per instrument with 5-16 articulations in each, addressed by 1 track in Logic Pro, triggered by the SkiSwitcher 3. In VE Pro 6 on my iMac I run Kontakt orchestral stuff only, 1 instance in VE Pro per instrument with 5-16 articulations in each or only 1 if it is a keyswitch patch, which most of them are, addressed by 1 track in Logic Pro, triggered by the SkiSwitcher 3. Instrument tracks of the same family are nested in folders. No auxes, except for hosting reverbs. No Event Inputs. No bloody Multiport layer.
> All the rest is directly in Logic Pro.
> 
> I am not the workflow police so I am not going to tell anyone they must work this way. But my computers are relatively modestly powered and yet I have yet to see anyone's Logic Pro-VE Pro rig work more smoothly than mine. Also, I have helped a bunch of other composers set up their templates this way here in LA and some over Skype, some of whom are here, and almost all of them like it and stick with it.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Mar 4, 2018)

whinecellar said:


> IME with Logic & VEP, keep it simple with routing: no aux outs from multis - just a stereo out of each. Do all your premixing in VE Pro. If you need to further treat a part separately, just bounce it in place as audio (takes mere seconds) and go to town.
> 
> As I've detailed elsewhere, my template is 1000+ tracks, almost all VE Pro multis with just stereo outs, and it runs like butter even on a MacBook Pro with 16 GB RAM thanks to a few slave machines.



Where did you detail elsewhere?


----------



## Dewdman42 (Mar 4, 2018)

So one question, using the approach suggested by whinecellar, how to manage the midi tracks in LPX, particularly in such a way that it might be possible to do offline bouncing? WineCellar can you tell us some more info about how you setup your LPX project with the various VEP instances you have described earlier in this thread?


----------



## whinecellar (Mar 4, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> So one question, using the approach suggested by whinecellar, how to manage the midi tracks in LPX, particularly in such a way that it might be possible to do offline bouncing? WineCellar can you tell us some more info about how you setup your LPX project with the various VEP instances you have described earlier in this thread?



Just real quick (plate is overflowing at the moment!) - all I do is have a 16-channel multitimbral instance of the VEP plugin in Logic, which connects to the appropriate VEP instance on whatever slave. Since each of the 16 sub channels is tied to that plugin, offline bounces are no problem. My template is almost all VEP multis; the rest are custom EXS instruments and whatever specific VIs are needed for a particular cue (Omnisphere, Zebra, etc.). Hope that helps. I promise I'll get a video tour of my template done at some point sooner than later!


----------



## Dewdman42 (Mar 4, 2018)

I'm actually wondering what kind of LPX tracks you use for midi regions...when all 16 channels will be submixed in VEP and returned to LPX as a stereo pair?


----------



## Dewdman42 (Mar 4, 2018)

In addition to the above, another question I have is whether you maintain a ginormous LPX template that has pre-created tracks to all of your 1000 instruments that are online...so that you can instantly audition any one of them...or do you create tracks on demand, perhaps using an LPX patch, to connect to the instances you specifically want to work with as you build up a project?


----------



## whinecellar (Mar 4, 2018)

@Dewdman42 - forgive me if I'm telling you what you already know - when you create a 16-channel multitimbral instrument, you will see 16 tracks, each of which look like a discrete channel strip, but they all address the same plugin; that's why when you move one of their faders, they all move the same. However, they're each on their own MIDI channel. So when you record a part on, say, channel 4, that MIDI region can be bounced in place by itself regardless of whatever's happening on other channels of that multi. Obviously if you just want to bounce that specific part, you'd solo it first.

And yes, my template is about 750 active tracks, all talking to my VEP network across 5 machines. I hate stopping the creative process to load samples, so everything is ready to go for my entire orchestra, with all options/instruments I'd possibly want from all libraries. It would drive me nuts to create tracks on demand


----------



## Dewdman42 (Mar 4, 2018)

Right gotcha. So the multi-timbral setup that is created by the New Tracks wizard actually creates 16 fader objects inside the environment, all of them pointing to the same underlying inst channel (one of the 254 that are available). Then it creates 16 tracks that are assigned to those 16 faders. Each fader has a different midi channel.. I wasn't sure if you were using that mode or a multi-instrument from the env. Submixing to stereo in VEP does not support using the AUX track region approach to handling multi-timbral that I can figure out. Which is unfortunate since that mode of multi-timbral handling is much cleaner in certain ways, but it depends on using multi-out aux channels.

Do you get this weird problem: If you create, say a 7 channel multi-timbral setup. You get the 7 tracks, but the last track is the one that is associated with the instrument mixer channel, for some silly reason that leads to some inconsistent behavior. The icon on the mixer will never match what you want it to be, it will always match whatever is configured for the 7th track. The name of the track in the inspector on the other hand will match what you edit in the mixer strip (which probably is not what you want) meanwhile the track header itself can be overrided with something meaningful.

Look at the following screen shot. 






Note that I am unable to set the icon of the submix to something that makes sense, it will be whatever the icon is for the 7th track. If you change either one, the is changed also. Note that the track inspector for track 7 shows the name of the mixer channel strip for the submix and NOT the name on track 7 header. We aren't doing it here, but if we did use a multi-out plugin here on the instrument track, then the first mixer channel will be playing the first pair of audio 1/2, but the labels will match the last multi-timbral track always as above and if you select the mixer channel, the last track header is selected also... I find it very confusing actually. Which is why I like to use the AUX track approach normally for multi-timbral midi tracks...but that does end up requiring all the AUX channels, which when I get a slave will mean a lot more streaming channels...which probably isn't wise...

I don't know if you've come across that or dealt with it in some way, the labeling and icon issue or how to associate that mixer channel with say the first midi track rather then the last one, or at least have labels and icons independent of the midi tracks.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Mar 5, 2018)

One workaround I have found for the above is to create one extra multi-timbral track then I need, which can't be done for 16 channels directly with the new tracks wizard. But you can just select the last track and duplicate it. Then change the midi channel to "All" I guess but it doesn't really matter. But anyway, its just a dummy track that will not have any regions on it and should not ever be selected for record while working, but can be labeled and icon'd properly and the mixer strip will then possess these label attributes rather then those of channel 16. I don't know if you or anyone has a better work around this LPX bug, I haven't been able to find one. 

I'm looking forward to building a slave machine so that I can have some always-on orch templates with everything ready to audition as you have whinecellar!


----------



## Dewdman42 (Mar 5, 2018)

I want to also comment about the one-instance-per-instrument approach. I messed around with that a while, I was mainly interested for the ability to freeze tracks. And its true, that does provide that option which is very convenient to quickly freeze some tracks. In the end, I feel I would need to bounce them all to audio tracks sooner or later anyway, so I'm not totally sure I care about track freezing. 

It seems to me that most of the people attempting that approach are doing so in order to use skiswitcher's stuff which is not multi-timbral (currently). I ended up writing my own articulation id handling scripts for Kirk Hunter, which are multi-timbral, so I don't have that problem. I will probably do the same for EWSO and anything else I purchase in the future.

I do feel that having several hundred instances is much more difficult to manage, versus having 10 or 20 instances, one for each collection of instruments that makes sense. I am also not even slightly convinced that hundreds of VEP instances will perform as well as a few dozen. But I am still testing out 4 basic scenarios and looking for performance comparisons. 


Single-instance-per-instance
Multi-timbral, multi-out instance, separate sends per instrument to LPX AUX's, aux track for midi regions
Multi-timbral, multi-out instance, separate sends per instrument to LPX AUX's, new track wizard tracks
Multi-timbral, multi-out instance, submix in VEP to avoid AUX returns, new track wizard tracks.

It hasn't always been consistent, sometimes I am noticing that VEP starts to take a chunk of CPU power if you try to mix stuff there versus just streaming to the AUX's. On the other hand, streaming a lot of channels from a slave will impact network performance. That includes for the single-instrument-per-instance approach. Anyway, just throwing that out there.


----------



## shsCT (Mar 30, 2018)

whinecellar said:


> As I've detailed elsewhere, my template is 1000+ tracks, almost all VE Pro multis with just stereo outs, and it runs like butter even on a MacBook Pro with 16 GB RAM thanks to a few slave machines.



Hey Jim,

I've seen you discuss this in multiple threads - very impressive.

One question that I'm not sure has been asked of you yet about your setup - but I'd love to know the answer - in this 1000+ tracks template, how many tracks can you use _simultaneously_ with your rig? I think you mentioned somewhere that you froze/bounced as you worked - as opposed to having the whole cue firing away midi regions for all of your various tracks employed in a cue. 

I've built some fairly ridiculously large templates that would launch, load, and be "online" - but the complexity and sheer "mass" of resources used in having that many routings seemed to hamper the template's success at depth; I could use anything available, but only up to a certain point - and too early in the cue's development - before I hit core issues.

Just wondering how many midi tracks playing into these Kontakt instances in real time (at the same time) you have going reliably.


----------



## whinecellar (Mar 30, 2018)

shsCT said:


> Hey Jim,
> 
> I've seen you discuss this in multiple threads - very impressive.
> 
> ...



Well, the whole idea is that spreading the load among a handful of slave machines makes it a realtime viability. I haven't used the track freeze option since it was first made available in the early 2000's. I do "bounce in place" quite a bit as I tend to commit things to audio, but that's generally more about being able to process those regions as separate audio tracks; it's not really about realtime resources.

Now, obviously if I went absolutely nuts and had regions on hundreds of tracks at once, I might run into some trouble - but since I've put a lot of thought and planning into how my resources are allocated, I rarely have trouble playing large cues in realtime. Wish I could give you some specifics, but in general, I'm always amazed at the amount of firepower I have at my disposal in realtime!

Cheers,

Jim


----------



## shsCT (Mar 30, 2018)

Thanks Jim for the clarification. Very helpful. Over here we’re not really strangers to the whole distributed resource concept - going back to a dozen Gigastudios in the machine room back in the day and more recently as many as six beefy VEP slaves for rigs similar to yours. Still, your performance experience seems particularly impressive. Thanks for sharing your expertise with the community!

I’d really like to mimic your setup over here and see if we get comparable performance. So If I may, can I bug you for a few more bits of experience/knowledge?

- In your current 2018 version of all of this (I’m assuming Logic 10.4.1 and VEP6), where are you at with multiprocessor assignment inside your Kontakt settings page? I know you’re doing the defined number of cores in Logic itself (we’ve got ours setting Logic to six cores) and each VEP instance is set to 2 threads. But how many cores are you assigning to Kontakt itself - or do you currently have Kontakt multiprocessor option set to off? In the past, heavily scripted Kontakt programs (like big Spitfire patches) seemed to play much better here with the multiprocessor setting set to “4 cores.”

- what are you currently using for kontakt pre-load buffers settings? I’m assuming you’re on all ssds like we are - but we still find that Kontakt has a few bugs that prevent us from using ultra-low streaming buffers - our happy balance seems most stable at 48k.

- We’re at 256 main buffer in Logic and our VEP instances set to “1 buffer” which seems to be the best balance between latency and horsepower. Where are you currently at in your rig with these?

Many many thanks again!


----------



## whinecellar (Mar 31, 2018)

@shsCT - you're most welcome. Here's my current setup:

1. Logic 10.4.0, VE Pro 5.4.16181, various versions of OSX on my 4 Macs, Win 10 Pro on my PC slave
2. Multiprocessor support *OFF* in Kontakt plugin mode; preload buffer = 12.00 kb (all SSDs)
3. Logic buffer *256*, processing threads *AUTOMATIC*, buffer range *MEDIUM*, playback & live tracks, 64-bit summing
4. VE Pro Server default thread count per instance: *1 Thread* (host machine), *2 Threads* (slaves), 2 audio in/out ports on all
5. VE Pro plugins in Logic, Latency = *2 buffers
*
I think that's all the pertinent stuff... let me know if I missed anything!

Cheers,

Jim


----------



## Ashermusic (Apr 1, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> One workaround I have found for the above is to create one extra multi-timbral track then I need, which can't be done for 16 channels directly with the new tracks wizard. But you can just select the last track and duplicate it. Then change the midi channel to "All" I guess but it doesn't really matter. But anyway, its just a dummy track that will not have any regions on it and should not ever be selected for record while working, but can be labeled and icon'd properly and the mixer strip will then possess these label attributes rather then those of channel 16. I don't know if you or anyone has a better work around this LPX bug, I haven't been able to find one.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 1, 2018)

I’m not understanding your point Asher? Perhaps you didn’t understand the bug I am pointing out?


----------



## Ashermusic (Apr 1, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> I’m not understanding your point Asher? Perhaps you didn’t understand the bug I am pointing out?


I am just showing you that if you create a new software instrument and change the MIDI channel from All to 1,creating more MIDI channels up to 16 is as simple as hitting a key command


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 1, 2018)

I’m well aware of how to do what you are pointing out but that is not the problem I spoke of


----------



## Ashermusic (Apr 1, 2018)

Then I misunderstood because all I read was creating new MIDI channels by duplicating,which is inefficient and unnecessary. But I read it glancingly.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 1, 2018)

That was a workaround for the bug. If you already have 16 tracks created for the multi inst channel, then there is no next channel to create. I’m on my iPhone at the moment so I don’t want to re explain the bug I outlined it above and there is another thread dedicated to it on the logic forum also. There isn’t really a very good work around at this point.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 1, 2018)

Here's a link to another forum thread where this "bug" is explained a little better then it was here: https://www.logicprohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=136575&p=700028#p699998

The workaround I was trying to suggest above is to create a dummy track and if you already have 16 midi tracks, then the only way I know to create a 17th is to duplicate and set the channel. cheers. Its not a very good work around either, I wish the bug didn't exist to begin with or that there was some tricky way to get around it through the environment, but I haven't figure out one yet.


----------



## habado (Apr 12, 2018)

how do i set up a 2nd slave using my router? I use my mac as main daw and have direct ethernet with 1 slave but to hook up a 2nd using router i cant figure out how to connect


----------



## ptram (Oct 13, 2018)

I've read this very interesting thread, and several others dealing with the use of VEPRO with Logic. I have tried to avoid the use of multi-timbral Instruments in Logic for decades, but I understand that this is no longer possibile when switching to VEPRO.

So, please, let me know if I've understood the things correctly, and my strategy can lead to success or disaster.

1) While the VEPRO6 user manual says that VEPRO should be used with as few instances as possible, Logic users say that the opposite is true: less instruments per instance, and more instances is the better solution.

2) Having to deal with some hundreds instruments, I'll try to find a compromise: not too many instruments or instances, nor too few. As allowed by Logic without workarounds, I'll go for 15 (or 16) instruments per VEPRO instance, and as many instances as needed (I think I will need a little more than 32 of them).

3) In Logic, instances will be called via multi-timbral Instrument tracks. Each multi-timbral Instrument track will allow the exchange of 15 (16) stereo audio channels between Logic and VEPRO. (Examples a, b)

4) Instrument tracks will only serve to create VEPRO instances. Real instrument tracks will be the 15 Auxes associated to an Instrument. Each VEPRO will therefore allow for 15 (16) instruments. (Examples a, b)

5) Each Logic Aux will send data to a MIDI channel corresponding to the same channel as an VEPRO instrument/channel. Each VEPRO instrument/channel will send audio back via a pair of audio outputs, corresponding to one of Logic's Auxes. (Example c)

6) Mixing will happen via Logic Aux tracks, that have become replacements for what usually are Instrument tracks.

Am I right in my reasoning?

Paolo

(I’m hesitant between using 15 or 16 instruments per multi-timbral Instrument, because the first one, corresponding to Out1-2 and not associated to an Aux, is a bit different from the others, based on the Auxes).

(If using Auxes, it is not needed to create multi-timbral Instruments in Logic; Auxes will be the real tracks).


----------



## novaburst (Oct 13, 2018)

Remember you can create tons of buss in VEPro in one instance each buss can be assigned to one track in your DAW, effectively with these buss you can do some great mixing inside VEPro and have that buss under one reverb or effect of your choice, all effects that are in your DAW can be found in VEPro making VEPro a very powerful mixing tool


----------



## ptram (Oct 13, 2018)

novaburst said:


> making VEPro a very powerful mixing tool


I'm evaluating if mixing in Logic or VEPRO. Since I plan to have a fix template of orchestral instruments in VEPRO, using it as a multitimbral sound expander, I would prefer to do all the changes in Logic, leaving the template untouched.

Also, I will use a different MIR room depending on the project, so I'm thinking of recalling MIR from Logic, and not from VEPRO. VEPRO will continue to give me the raw sounds, while everything else (volume control, spatial positioning, final compression and reverb) would happen in Logic.

Paolo


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Oct 13, 2018)

I'm figuring out my Logic/VEP routing too.

The only way I can figure out how to route each multitimbral instrument channel to Kontakt instruments in VEP is to assign each instrument a different midi channel (1-16). Is there a better way that I'm missing? The current way limits me to 16 instruments per VEP instance and messes up my internal system of articulation mapping & enabling/disabling system.

Also, with the multitimbral method I can't use midi fx like the arpeggiator or scripter without applying to all shared multitimbral instruments.

All in all, it's a huge headache just to get better CPU management and the ability to disable and unload instruments from RAM like Cubase.


----------



## novaburst (Oct 14, 2018)

ptram said:


> I'm evaluating if mixing in Logic or VEPRO. Since I plan to have a fix template of orchestral instruments in VEPRO, using it as a multitimbral sound expander, I would prefer to do all the changes in Logic, leaving the template untouched.
> 
> Also, I will use a different MIR room depending on the project, so I'm thinking of recalling MIR from Logic, and not from VEPRO. VEPRO will continue to give me the raw sounds, while everything else (volume control, spatial positioning, final compression and reverb) would happen in Logic.
> 
> Paolo



Yes many prefer using the DAW for mixing, an example of what I am explaining is let us say you have a common 16 tracks (lanes) you are working on inside your DAW using Kontackt or some other multitmibral inside VEPro.

So right now I have 42 instruments in one instance of VEPro divided up into many busses so I can have many instruments, plus effects from one buss assigned to one track in my DAW of 16 tracks, if your DAW is limited in tracks, or takes a big CPU hit then having this option can help big time.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 14, 2018)

There are pros and cons all the way around but in general the approach of many vep instances and no instrument multis in LPX is I think the simplest solution. Some people really prefer it. It has draw backs and limitations though. It is possible to work with instrument multi’s in LPX several different ways but it’s not straightforward and easy to setup until you wrap your head around it and even then it’s not as smooth as other daws. But, with that option you have more ability to mix things in vep if you want, or not. As you wish. It makes it easier to navigate in vep. I have personally found I like having half a dozen or ten vep instances with LPX multi’s to each one. I don’t personally like having a mixer that is 100 channels wide, so for me breaking it up into vep instances is good. But I don’t want 100 vep instances either. Ten is ok and even advantageous.

I prefer to keep mir inside vep because of the integration and I can reuse my stages with different projects.

LPX does have some channel count limitations also. Less then 256 instrument channels. So using multi’s will be essential if you want a template bigger then that. Only 256 aux channels also but i like the approach of having the template bring back sub mixes from vep without any used aux busses. Then as you actually use the template and record some midi tracks you can split off the aux channels on demand. So a final project after recording might have a 100-200 channels with actual music on them and hundreds of other unused tracks in the template. Just fork off aux channels for the ones you use in the project. LPX has plenty of aux channels for that.

But that brings it back to keeping mir in vep so that you can setup the stage in your template there for the initial vep submixes.

You can always have another instance of mir in LPX if vep is on the same machine, not if it’s on a vep slave though.

Note there are some other interesting issues related to aux channels. If you put latent plugins on aux channels it can start to add a lot of perceptible latency to the whole experience. Much more so then if those same plugins are on instrument channels.

Note also that if you do a lot of mix automation especially to plugins it’s more cumbersome to do if the mix is inside vep, but not impossible.

Anyway in my view there is no right or wrong approach, there are numerous options with pros and cons and just depends on how you like to work.


----------



## Shad0wLandsUK (Oct 14, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> There are pros and cons all the way around but in general the approach of many vep instances and no instrument multis in LPX is I think the simplest solution. Some people really prefer it. It has draw backs and limitations though. It is possible to work with instrument multi’s in LPX several different ways but it’s not straightforward and easy to setup until you wrap your head around it and even then it’s not as smooth as other daws. But, with that option you have more ability to mix things in vep if you want, or not. As you wish. It makes it easier to navigate in vep. I have personally found I like having half a dozen or ten vep instances with LPX multi’s to each one. I don’t personally like having a mixer that is 100 channels wide, so for me breaking it up into vep instances is good. But I don’t want 100 vep instances either. Ten is ok and even advantageous.
> 
> I prefer to keep mir inside vep because of the integration and I can reuse my stages with different projects.
> 
> ...


I have been using the Event Plugin for a while now, as my Sections are all in one instance of VE Pro.
I find this fine and I went back to it, because I found it easier to manage with ARTzID, OSCulator and Composer Tools Pro as a setup. There is an annoyance when saving the patches in LPX, as sometimes the tracks will rename to *Unnamed* when loading again, but that is a not a huge deal 

Hopefully one day they get AU3 and we can have proper multis, but until then...


----------



## garyhiebner (Oct 14, 2018)

Simplest solution is to use a single track in Logic connecting to a single instance in VEPro. And then use @Peter Schwartz 's Amazing ArtzID scripting tool to do the articulation/MIDI channel switching for you. So for example you have one track for your 1st Violins connecting to your 1st Violins VEPro instance. And then you can either load up a key switching patch, or load ups multiple instruments on different MIDI channels, and then the ArtzID scripting tool can be configured to easily switch between the articulations or MIDI channels, or even both. Its a very simple and clean solution. You don't have tons of tracks in your Logic project, and works like a charm. Can't say enough good thing about it. And @Peter Schwartz is a great guy!


----------



## procreative (Oct 14, 2018)

In my opinion you either use 1 Logic Track per VEP instance or use a Logic Multitimbral Track connected to a Multiport VEP instance. But the minute you start involving Auxes and Multi Output Kontakt/VEP you are ending up with something potentially clunkier.

I have tried both 1 VEP Instance/1 Logic Track and Multiport/Multitimbral. The latter is quicker to connect, but its just so less flexible as Logic has a quirky way of handling Multi Output/Multitimbral compared to other DAWs.

VEP say they are working on an AU3 true Multiport version, but you still have the conundrum of how to handle the audio - premix in VEP or run back as multi output.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 14, 2018)

we don't even know for sure if LPX 10.4 supports multiport AU3 plugins. I haven't seen any other AU3 plugin with multiple midi ports to test it with. But yes, things will be nicer when that happens. Personally I think it will be quite a while before both Apple and VSL get it together to give us that.

and correct, even when we do have that, you still have to use AUX's to bring the audio back from VEP on separate audio channels into LPX's mixer, which is limited to 256 of them. That's just the way LPX works. Even without VEP, if you use a multi-instrument in logic, the extra audio outputs have to come through LPX's mixer as aux channels. There are a lot of great reasons to use Logic, but unfortunately this is still not one of them. 

The one track per instance approach requires not much explanation, so i will leave it there.

For multi's you have several different possible approaches for how to set that up in Logic with pros and cons. There is also VSL's multiport macro workaround for another twist to the story, and the improved version I made earlier this year, which is better, but still not perfect...but some people appear to be using it and liking it, so there is that too.

Read about pros/cons of different multi approaches here: 

https://www.logicprohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=132635&hilit=multi+timbral&start=40#p697195

Read about my improved multiport template here: 

https://www.logicprohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=137085


----------



## procreative (Oct 14, 2018)

The thing I found confusing having tried the Event Input multiport approach was that the Arrange window gives you the illusion that you have independent tracks as you indeed have them. But the audio is only coming back on the first track connected via the Server plugin. Although the other channels have independent Volume/Pan, it does nothing.

I think I could have lived with the downsides as I used them to group the members of a library eg Violin, Viola, Cello, Bass of say CSS. So I planned to use the same Bussed FX for all of them and any overall balancing done in VEP.

But in the end its just so much simpler to just use 1 Track per VEP Instance. Its just a bit scary navigating a VEP server project when its hot so many Tabs and it does take longer to connect.

I did get some glitches with Event Input, but I think I might not have put an I/O on a channel somewhere as it only seemed to glitch on Tracks connected to my local VEP Server, the Slave worked just fine.

BTW, VSL seem to hint to me they were quite advanced with AU3 and were working with Apple. So that must mean Logic can work with AU3? How long it will be though is another matter!


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 14, 2018)

procreative said:


> BTW, VSL seem to hint to me they were quite advanced with AU3 and were working with Apple. So that must mean Logic can work with AU3? How long it will be though is another matter!



Good to know, hope you're right.


----------



## procreative (Oct 14, 2018)

I suppose you could use the Volume Slider on a track in Logic to control the Volume slider on that VEP port. But the effort to set it up in VEP is so lame as you need to repeat the process each time.


----------



## ptram (Oct 14, 2018)

A lot of other possible setups I hadn't thought to. However, I still prefer to have one track in Logic match one Instrument in VEP. So, I would prefer not to use solutions like the one-Logic-track-per-VEP-instance.

An updated strategy on my side can be:

1) Create as many 16-channel/instrument instances in VEP as are needed. This will be the general template use as a color palette for all your works.

2) In Logic, avoid a full, big orchestral template. Only create tracks when needed. All considered, they are only links to the real instruments (already programmed in VEP). The 256 Instruments and Auxes allowed by Logic should suffice even for the denser score.

3) When a track is needed in Logic, create an instrument (no need to be multitimbral; just use the multi-ouput VEP plugin). Create as many Auxes (minus one) as Instruments are needed from that VEP instance at that time or in the piece.

For example, if you need a Flute, create an instrument recalling the multi-output VEP "Woodwinds" instance (containing the Flute). When you need a Clarinet, create an Aux receiving one of the outputs ot that VEP instance, and assign it the MIDI Channel and the Input corresponding to the Clarinet's MIDI Channel and Output.

A bit of planning is needed, or you will have to reassing MIDI Channels and Inputs to the tracks each time your score will change configuration. For example, if you create a track for a Bassoon, and later need a Clarinet, you may have to shift the Auxes, since Logic's mixer can't be reorganized by resorting its channels.

4) Add MIR as a plugin either in Logic or VEP. In any case, don't use the MIR included in the instance, or you will not be able to see all the instruments of the score in a single place.

Paolo


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 14, 2018)

I wouldn't worry too much about seeing all the instruments of the score in one place. Once you get MIR setup and all the instruments saved as presets for MIR, then you can load them into as many different instances of MIR as needed...for example, all strings going through one MIR instance, all woodwinds through another, and even though you only see one section at a time in MIR, once its setup you really won't be mucking around with that very much...even across many projects. Dietz at VSL says that it doesn't matter sound wise, or CPU wise that they are going through separate instances of MIR.. 

You could use a single instance of VEP while creating your soundstage on one MIR soundstage, and save each instrument in MIR...so that you can recall them later as just one section per MIR instance...etc.. totally doable. 

But obviously if you use the one track per instance approach, than MIR for all practical purposes needs to be in your DAW instead of VEP. For me, this is a strong reason to not use that approach, but that's just me.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 14, 2018)

Also if you're going the MIR mixing in VEP, then you have the option to NOT bring back stuff over AUX's. In many cases it may be perfectly sufficient to just use the stereo mix from each VEP instance and combine them together in Logic, and be done. Orchestral instruments generally should not be getting a lot of extra processing to them. You might need to eq something just a tad, but generally your orchestration itself should be taking care of that. It should not be needed most often to bring back every orchestral instrument to a separate track in LPX for mixing there. Imagine if you were recording real orchestra. There are mics on each instrument just in case, but a lot of the sound is from the mics taking in the whole orchestra and the room itself. Just bring an AUX over sometimes when you need to boost an instrument that is buried in the orchestra mix...which by the way is probably an orchestration error that should be fixed rather then an engineering problem.


----------



## ptram (Oct 14, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> Also if you're going the MIR mixing in VEP, then you have the option to NOT bring back stuff over AUX's.


Another issue, in not using Auxes, but only the Inst[n] tracks automatically created by Logic for each channel when creating a multitimbral instrument, is that you can't control the individual track's volume from the Arrange or the Mixer.

I guess this should also not be a problem, since all real mixing is done inside the instrument, by controlling the Velocity and Expression; and in MIR, by finaly adjusting the levels in the final mix inside the room.

More serious can be that you can't solo or mute a single track, in Logic, if it is part of a multitimbral instrument. You can do it in VEP, but it is a serious annoyance when composing.

Paolo


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 14, 2018)

Like I said, for orchestration, once you setup your room with MIR, you should not be mucking with the mix of individual instruments too much most of the time, especially if you care about making realistic orchestrations. But yes, there are several ways to adjust the mix inside VEP if you need to. And if that's not enough in some specific case, you can fork off a couple AUX channels just for those that need special handling and just use the VEP mix most of the time. Most likely once you get a good orchestra mix you like, you will want to just use it like that over and over again without monkeying around with mixing 100 channels in LPX over and over again every time. 

If you really think about it, what's the difference between adjusting the mixer in LPX or adjusting the mixer in VEP? Either way it gets saved with your LPX project. Its just a different place to move the fader. It only becomes a bit of an issue if you're wanting to do automation on the mixer, which can still be done in VEP, its just kind of a pain compared to in the LPX mixer. Or if you're needing to do some tricky thing with one instrument or something..well then just fork off an AUX channel or two for those special cases.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 14, 2018)

as far as soloing a track...well yea that is a bit annoying.


----------



## ptram (Oct 14, 2018)

One of the main strenghts of Logic, is that you can do most of the adjustments in the Arrange window. Even assuming that you will not use the Volume sliders, soloing and muting is something you have to do a lot, while working on the piece (at least, I do, to work on an instrument in insulation, or mute some overlapping instruments).

If I'm not forgetting something, I fear the only way to use Solo and Mute commands on each instrument, right from the Arrange in Logic, is to use the Auxes. I guess I must evaluate how comfortable it is to use the same commands in the VEP window.

Or write to Apple, to ask this part of Logic to be finally fixed!

Paolo


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Oct 14, 2018)

ptram said:


> One of the main strenghts of Logic, is that you can do most of the adjustments in the Arrange window. Even assuming that you will not use the Volume sliders, soloing and muting is something you have to do a lot, while working on the piece (at least, I do, to work on an instrument in insulation, or mute some overlapping instruments).
> 
> If I'm not forgetting something, I fear the only way to use Solo and Mute commands on each instrument, right from the Arrange in Logic, is to use the Auxes. I guess I must evaluate how comfortable it is to use the same commands in the VEP window.
> 
> ...


Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious, but why not mute and solo by highlighting the region(s) and hitting ^m or ^s.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 14, 2018)

depending on how you setup the multi you might are able to solo the midi tracks instead of audio


----------



## ptram (Oct 15, 2018)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> why not mute and solo by highlighting the region(s) and hitting ^m or ^s.


Muting a single region can be used for, let me say, "more permanent" exclusions. For example, you decide to mute a particular region while working, because you have not yet decided to keep or remove it.

Doing it on all the selected regions of a track, to surrogate the missing track mute function, removes this local, partial mute, preventing the use of the function for this particular use.

Paolo


----------



## ptram (Oct 15, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> depending on how you setup the multi you might are able to solo the midi tracks instead of audio


Dewdman, are you referring to using the On/Off switch on each track, instead of the Mute button? (This is no replacement for the Solo, however). Otherwise, I can't find any setting forcing the Solo and Mute buttons behave differently (but it is obviously in front of my nose, and I can't find it… :( )

Paolo


----------



## jcrosby (Oct 15, 2018)

whinecellar said:


> If you need to further treat a part separately, just bounce it in place as audio (takes mere seconds) and go to town.



Definitely. Logic makes bouncing in place effortless. Keeping the routing as straight forward as possible also makes life a lot easier.


----------



## ptram (Oct 15, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> I wouldn't worry too much about seeing all the instruments of the score in one place. Once you get MIR setup and all the instruments saved as presets for MIR, then you can load them into as many different instances of MIR as needed


The main reason to see all the instruments in a single MIR instance, is to have a complete picture of the full orchestra/ensemble, and adjust their positioning in relation to the others.

But this also means having a crowded MIR window. So, maybe using separate MIR instances can be easier. You work on separate sections, and compare the different sections in the different instances. Less olistic, but it should not be really problematic.

Paolo


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 15, 2018)

You can also temporarily put all the instruments into one huge vep instance and work out the stage spacing. Then when it’s worked out, move the instruments into separate instances per section.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 15, 2018)

ptram said:


> Dewdman, are you referring to using the On/Off switch on each track, instead of the Mute button? (This is no replacement for the Solo, however). Otherwise, I can't find any setting forcing the Solo and Mute buttons behave differently (but it is obviously in front of my nose, and I can't find it… :( )
> 
> Paolo



You have to use midi tracks that feed environment instrument objects rather then directly to instrument channels. Then cable the instrument objects to the mixer channels in the environment. At that point you will see mute and solo buttons on the track header that will solo the midi instead of audio.

Alternatively, when you set up a Multi in LPX the typical way with multiple tracks feeding directly to the mixer channel, LPX does automagic stuff under the covers including all the track headers mute or solo the entire instrument rather then the midi of the individual track. Personally I think that is stupid but that is what LPX does. Same goes if you try to use the approach of tracks linked directly to the aux channels.


----------



## ptram (Oct 15, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> You have to use midi tracks that feed environment instrument objects rather then directly to instrument channels. Then cable the instrument objects to the mixer channels in the environment. At that point you will see mute and solo buttons on the track header that will solo the midi instead of audio.


My Environment chops are obviously rusty. I created two External MIDI Instruments, linked their outputs to the input of two channels of a Multitimbral Software Instruments (with or without removing the existing connections, when Logic asked me).

Then, the two MIDI Instruments were asked to play something. They did, and the linked Multitimbral Software Instruments did play. However, soloing one of the MIDI Instruments resulted in both MIDI Instruments (and the corresponding Multitimbral Software Instruments channels) being soloed. No way of unlinking the two Multitimbral Software Instruments channels.






Everything is much more complicated than I could expect.

Paolo


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 15, 2018)

I’m not sure exactly what you did, but it works for me here. I will try to make an example LPX project for you when I get a minute


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 15, 2018)

So looking at your photo above, it looks to me like you have some mixed and matched things in trying to set up using the environment. Please see attached Logic Project, its using VEP and Kontakt as a little test. I presume you have kontakt. You can solo either track and it will do as I described. 

_When you open the project you may need to go to the mixer pane and find that channel and open the VEP plugin to connect to VEP and create the instance there for you. Note that since this mixer channel is not associated with any tracks, you have to use the ALL tracks selector in order to see that channel in the mixer and access the VEP plugin to do the above._







Looking at your photo, you have 4 tracks, and that is a mistake first of all, so some weird automatic stuff must be happening under the covers in LPX.

What you want is two tracks, each one assigned to the environment instrument object(s) you create. You can either make multiple env instruments objects, each one with its own unique midi channel (not ALL), or you could use a single multi-instrument object with 16 midi channels available, which is what I did on the attached logic project. And those need to be cabled in the environment to the mixer channel object, which would have midi channel set to ALL.

so either like this (like my example project):






or like this with singles:






When you right click on the track header, you can reassign track and choose any environment object to assign it to rather then directly to the mixer channel. So make sure each track is assigned to either one channel of a multi-instrument, or to a single channel instrument object. 

You end up with something like this, tracks that have midi mute/solo buttons and they work as expected.






I agree, using the environment is a bit of a pain to set up compared to the default method provided by Apple, it is what it is. Apple could improve handling of multis in LPX without question. But there it is.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 15, 2018)

here is a template you can use to get started. It just has 24 multi instruments predefined in the environment and cabled to 24 channels with 24 VEP instances. Total of 384 midi tracks pre-created, assigned to each of 16 channels on each of the 24 VEP instances. You an always remove some instances and tracks if you don't need that many.


----------



## ptram (Oct 15, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> Note that since this mixer channel is not associated with any tracks, you have to use the ALL tracks selector in order to see that channel in the mixer and access the VEP plugin to do the above […]
> You can either make multiple env instruments objects, each one with its own unique midi channel (not ALL), or you could use a single multi-instrument object with 16 midi channels available


HERE IT IS!

What I was doing wrong was that I had the VEP instance represented, in Logic, by a Multitimbral Software Instrument, with a specific MIDI Channel. What I'm doing now is to have it represented by a normal Software Instrument, with the MIDI Channel set to All.

As in your example, a MIDI Multi-Instrument goes to the Software Instrument. Each MIDI Channel of the MIDI Multi-Instrument is automatically associated with the corresponding Instrument in the VEP Instance.

Notes are created in the separate tracks of the MIDI Multi-Instrument. From here, through the link offered by the Software Instrument, they go to VEP. The audio generated by the instruments in VEP go to VEP's Master Bus, from where it returns to Logic on a stereo bus (or anything linked with the Master Bus).






(Folder representing Software Instruments are only shown for clarity, but they would not be in the Arrange).



Dewdman42 said:


> But obviously if you use the one track per instance approach, than MIR for all practical purposes needs to be in your DAW instead of VEP.


Now, I will try to understand why I shouldn't use the MIR incorporated in each instance (even if it seems to work fine). Another thing to learn!

Paolo


----------



## ptram (Oct 15, 2018)

About MIR: several separate instances would be a problem when having to choose a different room. Using the plugin (either from Logic or VEP) would allow to select the room once for all instances.

Using the Multi-Instrument-to-Software-Instrument solution should force the use of MIR in VEP. It would be Ok, thinking that the same VEP template would also be used in Dorico.

Paolo


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 15, 2018)

See this thread: https://www.vsl.co.at/community/posts/t50193-MirPro-across-instances#post276665

it is not really a problem.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 15, 2018)

I haven't read through all this, but is the goal just to be able to solo instruments running in VE Pro?

First, I'd suggest putting VE Pro on a separate desktop. You can either swipe to move there or just use Control + arrow to move between desktops.

Then Command-click on Solo or Mute on the channel strip in VE Pro to toggle all the channels. Use the two together, of course.

If you're using MIR, it seems easier to run in inside Logic on a send.

Sorry if I'm missing the point. I just saw a bunch of stuff that looked more cumbersome than necessary. Cabled Multi Instruments are sort of a leftover.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 15, 2018)

MIR doesn't go on a send, its an insert effect on each channel. It optionally can send the room tone to a bus.

If you have a buzzillion instances, then soloing a channel within one instance doesn't block the other instances...so its not really very effective to solo inside VEP unless you have just one big instance, which is generally not possible in LPX.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 15, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> MIR doesn't go on a send, its an insert effect on each channel



You can use it either way. Both are perfectly legal.



Dewdman42 said:


> If you have a buzzillion instances



Then I'd suggest stems or folder stacks so you can mute each part individually.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 15, 2018)

By the way, I'm not saying your way of working is "wrong," just trying to understand why there's any issue.

There aren't usually all that many independent things going on at once, no matter how big your template is.


----------



## ptram (Oct 16, 2018)

@Dewdman42,



> (ptram: "several separate MIR instances would be a problem when having to choose a different room")
> See this thread: https://www.vsl.co.at/community/posts/t50193-MirPro-across-instances#post276665


Actually, I don't find a way to immediately choose the same room for all the instances. I could save and reload the settings, but it would be unpractical for all the instances (about 40 for the complete template, in any case a lot even for a reduced set).

So, I still feel that having one, or at least no more than two or three instances of MIR would be very desirable. Unless, as usual, I'm missing the point.

@Nick Batzdorf,



> is the goal just to be able to solo instruments running in VE Pro?


Yes, that's it. When composing I don't like to be distracted, and have to switch to the mixer, look for the channel I want to solo, solo it, and then go back to the sequencer and compose. I would prefer to just select the track I want to solo and solo it.

As far as I understand, the only ways to do it is either (a) use the MIDI Instrument (or MIDI Multi-Instrument channel) going to a Software Instrument corresponding to a VEP instance; or (b) create as many Aux channels as VEP Instruments I want to use.

For what I've understood up to now, both can do what I'm looking for, but (a) is still a bit buggy (I've found the same name scrambling bug I met twenty years ago in the Multi-Instruments), and (b) is taxing the CPU for the high-number of audio streams exchanged between VEP and Logic.

Which one should be preferred? I see there are supporters of both solutions, and then some other ones.

Paolo


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 16, 2018)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> You can use it either way. Both are perfectly legal.



Obviously you can put any fx plugin you want on a send but putting mir pro on a send defeats it’s purpose. Unless of course you want all your instruments sitting in the same position on the stage, which is unlikely.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 16, 2018)

ptram said:


> @Dewdman42,
> 
> 
> Actually, I don't find a way to immediately choose the same room for all the instances. I could save and reload the settings, but it would be unpractical for all the instances (about 40 for the complete template, in any case a lot even for a reduced set).
> ...



Well you’d have to choose the venue once for each vep instance this is true but that’s not a hard process.

There are different ways to handle the scenario, what I did was first create a giant vep instance and use mir in one place to position all the instruments, etc when I had it what I wanted, I saved the instance in vep as a file. Then I loaded it 4 times into four instances and for each one removed 3/4 of the instruments. Then I had four instances with four separate mir stages after that to do smaller tweaking on an instrument by instrument basis.

Vep also has the ability to save channel sets, which are collections of channels with their settings and plugins. Could also do it that way. Mir also has the ability to save instrument profiles so you could develop your stage positions for each venue and save them as presets per instrument there too.

I agree with you that when you’re first fooling around with different room packs you want to be able to see the whole orchestra on one stage but unfortunately LPX can simply not handle a single vep instance with a typical full orch. The main problem is all midi events have to funnel through a single instrument channel and LPX has some internal limit about how many simultaneous midi events can funnel through a channel, that prevents that from working right above some certain number which a typical full orch mock easily surpasses.

So.... if you really want to see that entire orch on one stage, then yes host mir in LPX. At that point you should consider the one track per vep instance approach as you would be able to solo each track, no complicated multi routing, and put mir on each of those instrument channels to see one stage. You can also freeze tracks that way which you can’t with multi. You also avoid some PDC headaches that might come along with plugins on aux channels. Also articulation mapping with scripter is generally easier with one instrument channel per instrument.

The downside is you run into track limits way sooner and have to wade through a buzzillion instances on vep. Plus your mix is entirely on lpx which in some ways is nice but on the other hand you have to remix each project, bla bla bla there are pros and cons.



> For what I've understood up to now, both can do what I'm looking for, but (a) is still a bit buggy (I've found the same name scrambling bug I met twenty years ago in the Multi-Instruments), and (b) is taxing the CPU for the high-number of audio streams exchanged between VEP and Logic.



What is the name scrambling bug? Maybe use single instruments rather then multiinst if that is a problem. Works the same way.



> Which one should be preferred? I see there are supporters of both solutions, and then some other ones.
> 
> Paolo



Well from my part I have no preference of one approach vs the other. Yes you will find many debates on this forum with strong proponents of one approach vs the other, but the truth is they all have pros and cons and you will have to decide which pros matter to you and which cons you can live with and probably will have to compromise some desire in one way in order to satisfy other requirements that are more important to you.

I will only say that LPX can’t really handle a large orch through a single vep instance, period. Not that I have found anyway. So the trick is deciding how you want to divide it up into separate instances, whether to use LPX instrument multi’s or not is first question. That will reduce the number of vep instances to 16 instruments per vep instance. Then there are at least three different ways to handle multi’s in LPX with numerous pros and cons to each one. And then there is the question of whether to use the vep multiport macro to further reduce the number of vep instances. You can’t get to one instance. But you can get to half a dozen or less that way, even with some really huge templates with thousands of tracks so long as you don’t try to actually use all of them simultaneously.

I’m not trying to say one way is universally better then another. Because that is not the case. Just answering your questions about what you desire to do. Ultimately you will probably have to compromise something in order to get something else and will be up to you.


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 16, 2018)

Just one more word of advice from me: with Logic Pro X the old adage about a straight line being the shortest distance between two points is particularly relevant.


----------



## ptram (Oct 16, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> So.... if you really want to see that entire orch on one stage, then yes host mir in LPX


There is another solution, that is not even mentioned in VSL's manuals: in VEP's MIR preferences, you can uncheck the "Disable AU MIR Plugins" option. At this point, you can insert MIR as a plugin to any channel in any instance of VEP. You will then be able to see all the instruments of your template in the unique MIR stage.






I've only inserted the plugin in the various channels, but not yet worked with it. I don't know if it works, or there are issues.

Using MIR as an insert in Logic would only be possible if using the Aux returns solution. The MIDI Instruments/Multi-Instruments solution would not allow to send to MIR the separate instruments from Logic.



> What is the name scrambling bug?


I can't stop Logic from adding random numbers to the name of some Multi-Instrument objects. And sometimes the name of the single channels, in the Arrange, is reset to "Untitled" or something like this.








> you will find many debates on this forum with strong proponents of one approach vs the other, but the truth is they all have pros and cons and you will have to decide which pros matter to you and which cons you can live with


It's nice to know that, whichever my choice will be, it will be the wrong one!

Thank you for your guide through this dark matter!

Paolo


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 16, 2018)

ptram said:


> There is another solution, that is not even mentioned in VSL's manuals: in VEP's MIR preferences, you can uncheck the "Disable AU MIR Plugins" option. At this point, you can insert MIR as a plugin to any channel in any instance of VEP. You will then be able to see all the instruments of your template in the unique MIR stage.



Hey thanks for pointing that out to me! I will check that out today. 



> Using MIR as an insert in Logic would only be possible if using the Aux returns solution. The MIDI Instruments/Multi-Instruments solution would not allow to send to MIR the separate instruments from Logic.



Yes, unless you use the one channel per instance approach with no LPX multi’s at all. But you have to live with a buzzillion vep instances and no mixed stems in vep and no possibility for huge templates.

See what i mean about compromises?


----------



## ptram (Oct 16, 2018)

Ashermusic said:


> with Logic Pro X the old adage about a straight line being the shortest distance between two points is particularly relevant.


Up to now, I've used software instruments in Logic as direct access (one track, one Software Instrument's channel strip). It works great. Templates are limited to 256 instruments, but you can create sub-templates with specialized instruments, to be imported when needed. You can't unload/standby Kontakt or UVI instruments, but you learn to live with it (and, also in this case, use sub-templates).

I started to explore VEP, because with Dorico it seems the only way to drive a virtual orchestra. Without it, it would be next to impossible to manage the long list of instruments. Therefore, I started to see if my old, straight approach to software instruments under Logic could be replaced by the same VEP template I have to create for Dorico.

In the end, maybe I will have two separate approaches (direct in Logic, VEP in Dorico), and just be happy with compatibility at articulation level offered by the Expression Maps and Articulation Sets in the two programs.

Paolo


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 16, 2018)

ptram said:


> There is another solution, that is not even mentioned in VSL's manuals: in VEP's MIR preferences, you can uncheck the "Disable AU MIR Plugins" option. At this point, you can insert MIR as a plugin to any channel in any instance of VEP. You will then be able to see all the instruments of your template in the unique MIR stage.



So I checked this out, thanks for mentioning it. found a thread on the VSL forum that describes the situation:

https://www.vsl.co.at/community/posts/t42986-Can-I-disable-MIR-Pro-24-from-loading-in-VEP#post258445

Basically using this approach will use the MIR Pro standalone app to host all the instruments on one stage. You have to instantiate the AU or VST version of the MIRPro plugin on each channel instead of the version that is built into VEP. The one built into VEP has extra integration features, like automatically detecting the use of VSL instruments, and automatically setting them up for MIR...which is actually pretty handy...but...I see what you mean that with this approach of using the VST/AU version of MIRPRO plugin instead of that one, then we can get a single consolidated stage... Thanks a lot for pointing that out, I will definitely try that out for a while, though I have to say I also do like the tight integration features with VEP that is provided by the built in MIR plugin. I think that "Disable AU Mir Plugin", not entirely sure what that preference does, it might just disable them all if they are already on each channel or something? Not sure.. But anyway, thanks for pointing that out.


----------



## ptram (Oct 16, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> I will definitely try that out for a while, though I have to say I also do like the tight integration features with VEP that is provided by the built in MIR plugin. I think that "Disable AU Mir Plugin", not entirely sure what that preference does


I will be very curious to hear what you find while testing it. It sounds promising.

As for the option, on my Mac it makes the MIR plugin disappear from the AU plugins menu. Probably, it is there to avoid confusion between the two possible ways of recalling MIR.

Paolo


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 16, 2018)

I see. Not sure that makes completely sense, its actually a built in version of the MIR plugin that is not desired..not AU per say..but anyway, whatever, I digress...

I messed with it a bit. I can see how it would provide a common stage. It definitely is kind of cool that way, but I immediately do miss the VEP integration. Right now when I load up VSL instruments, VEP is smart enough to guess at what it is and automatically loads the MIRPRO plugin with the correct instrument profile, etc.. With this work around, you lose that. if you're not using VSL instruments than its a moot point. But for VSL instruments, its definitely not clear which way requires more work. With the AU/VST version of the plugin you are starting with a completely blank slate for each instrument.

Once you have some templates setup, it won't matter, but then at that point i don't care so much about the singular stage either...so I'm not sure which way I would prefer, but I will try both ways in time and see how it goes.


----------



## samphony (Oct 16, 2018)

But what is wrong with region solo? One can select a track it will select the regions on the whole track or between the locators depending if cycle is turned on or off. 

This way makes it easy to solo the content on that track.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 16, 2018)

Dewdman42 said:


> Obviously you can put any fx plugin you want on a send but putting mir pro on a send defeats it’s purpose. Unless of course you want all your instruments sitting in the same position on the stage, which is unlikely.



I had a demo beta version of it several years ago, but I remember that if you use it on libraries other than VSL it wanted to go on a send/return.

Maybe I've forgotten, though.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Oct 16, 2018)

No, makes no difference what the source instrument is. Mirpro is more then just a reverb, it’s a spatialization plug-in that does panning, depth, early reflections to a specific point on an stage, even room eq, different virtual mic setups etc. It sits as insert on every inst channel and positions the instrument in the room as well as provide the ambience of the room that a typical reverb would. You can optionally send it’s wet output to a bus but each instrument needs to it it’s own processor to get the spatialization correct for it


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 16, 2018)

Well yeah, I know what it *is*, but this was ten years ago and I've forgotten the details. They were also coming out with different versions at the time, I think more than one plug-in... 

Anyway, you use it, so I'll take your word for it over my own.


----------



## NoamL (Feb 2, 2019)

Hey all,

I'm giving this a bump because I'm following the advice here but feel I must surely be doing something wrong.

Is this really the right way? A single instance of VEPro for every instance of Kontakt each holding a single instrument, as follows?

Having each instrument with a separate audio out, a separately controllable volume, and separate control with MIDI Scripter is very important to me... if this is the only way to achieve that, I'll go ahead. Just thought it was weird that this thread seems to recommend NOT loading instruments up into one Kontakt since Pro Tools can work that way just fine...


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 2, 2019)

its not clear to me what your question is...


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Feb 2, 2019)

NoamL said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I'm giving this a bump because I'm following the advice here but feel I must surely be doing something wrong.
> 
> ...



If you want complete control over each track, then this is the way to go. Until Logic supports VST3, this is the only way. In Cubase, you can actually route each instrument separately, so you can load up each instance.


----------



## Mason (Feb 3, 2019)

NoamL said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I'm giving this a bump because I'm following the advice here but feel I must surely be doing something wrong.
> 
> ...



This is why I said goodbye to Logic.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 3, 2019)

NoamL said:


> Is this really the right way? A single instance of VEPro for every instance of Kontakt each holding a single instrument, as follows?



Its not totally clear to me what your question is, but it is definitely possible to operate LogicPro without a separate instance for each instrument. I personally do not like to work that way with one instance per instrument, though I know some others do. 

There are several different ways to setup multi-timbral instruments in LPX. At the very least, the VEPro plugin can handle 16 channels...which you can send to a single instance of VEPro, and in that VEP instance you could have 16 channel strips with a different instrument on each one. 

However, yes...in that case there is no way around the fact that if you want to use Logic Scripter, you have have to funnel all 16 channels of midi through a single script. Which means the script has to be more complex in order to handle multiple channels at the same time. All doable, but more complicated in the scripting.

If you want a separate script for each separate instrument sound, then there is no other way but use a separate Vepro instance for each one.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 3, 2019)

Well not entirely true, you could also perhaps put different scripts one after the other on the midifx channel strip, where one script handles channel 1, the next script handles channel2, etc.. So in that way you could have a different distinct script for each midi channel...and they all feed into one VEP plugin instrument, which could then send to a single VEP instance handling 16 different channel strips and instruments... but I'm not sure what limitations there are in terms of maximum number of midifx on any particular channel strip in LPX.


----------



## westgate (Feb 4, 2019)

Could anybody explain me the reason to use VEPro with Logic? I’m thinking to move to Logic from Cubase. One of the reasons - people told me it’s optimized for mac very good and also I don’t want to use stupid USB keys. Great. I thought I won’t need VEPro. This was partially proved by Christian Henson youtube video, where he said he doesn’t use one and don’t see a big reason. 
I understand that with VEPro it’ll be possible to open more tracks/plugins etc. BUT, how much? Did anybody tried to compare? Does it actually worth it? Spending money on VEPro and be able to open a bit more channels? Bouncing doesn’t exist anymore? And I understand if you have a very old computer, but with new ones…
Anybody?


----------



## whinecellar (Feb 4, 2019)

westgate said:


> Could anybody explain me the reason to use VEPro with Logic?...



If nothing else, the speed of opening, closing, and saving sessions/cues based on "mega" templates. Mine is about 800 tracks - all separate VIs - and it runs on a MacBook Pro with just 16 GB RAM, thanks to a couple slaves running VEP. 

As for the routing issue, I've talked about it so many times over the years here - I wish I had saved links to the threads. For me, I've had great success NOT doing the 1 VEP instance per plugin approach, but rather, 16-channel multis, each with a different instrument on each MIDI channel. I also don't use any multi-outs, auxes, etc. - just a simple stereo out instance of each VEP plugin.

Since my template is almost entirely orchestral stuff, it's all premixed in VEP so I have no need to "mix" each part using Logic's channel faders. Tons of advantages to doing it this way, IMO...


----------



## westgate (Feb 4, 2019)

thanks


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 4, 2019)

whinecellar said:


> I've had great success NOT doing the 1 VEP instance per plugin approach, but rather, 16-channel multis, each with a different instrument on each MIDI channel.


Based on your posts, I've done the same and it works well for me. I have a template of 300+ mostly disabled tracks and loading it up takes a minute. (I timed it just now, it takes exactly 1:03). I'm using Logic and VEP on the same machine. No auxes, etc, just bounce each track in place.


----------



## NoamL (Feb 4, 2019)

I've started building out my VEP template. So far it has 86 instances of VEP and no bussing/post-processing yet, but I timed opening it up and it only took 12 seconds - for almost a hundred instruments and 30GB of samples. I'll gladly take that over the minute-plus it took me to fully load 16GB sessions on my MBP before doing the Mac-PC-VEP setup.


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Feb 5, 2019)

NoamL said:


> I've started building out my VEP template. So far it has 86 instances of VEP and no bussing/post-processing yet, but I timed opening it up and it only took 12 seconds - for almost a hundred instruments and 30GB of samples. I'll gladly take that over the minute-plus it took me to fully load 16GB sessions on my MBP before doing the Mac-PC-VEP setup.



It's definitely a time-saver. In terms of routing, I have done a hybrid of what you described and Jim described. For example, with CSS and CSB, I host each instrument in its own VEP instance - so I have an instance for V1, V2, Solo Horn, 4 Horns, etc. But when I used LASS, I created a multi for 'Violins 1' that had a Kontakt multi with 8 or 9 instruments - one articulation per MIDI channel. And still got good results with that.

The biggest problem I have with VEP 6 is the tabs get unwieldy when you have dozens of instances. But the performance gain is tremendous. You can build a fairly massive array of instruments, all purged, and switch from project to project very quickly. VEP 6 is a lot faster than VEP 5 for this - it seems the 'connect / disconnect' takes a lot less time.

PS - Not sure if you are also running VEP on your MBP, but you can host locally too and it basically shifts the CPU burden outside Logic to give you even more headroom.


----------



## whinecellar (Feb 5, 2019)

marclawsonmusic said:


> The biggest problem I have with VEP 6 is the tabs get unwieldy when you have dozens of instances. But the performance gain is tremendous...VEP 6 is a lot faster than VEP 5 for this - it seems the 'connect / disconnect' takes a lot less time...



Very interesting Marc! I'm still on 5 because I hate the interface of 6 by comparison - but you have me intrigued by the performance increase!


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Feb 5, 2019)

whinecellar said:


> Very interesting Marc! I'm still on 5 because I hate the interface of 6 by comparison - but you have me intrigued by the performance increase!



Hey Jim, this was actually one of the first things I noticed when I upgraded to version 6. In version 5, when I closed Logic (or changed to a different project), I would watch slowly as each instance would disconnect. It was like 1 instance per second, which can add up.

In version 6, the disconnect happens MUCH faster, so you can change projects with barely an interruption. However... when you shutdown the server host, it takes a moment to go through each instance and unload all of the plugins (audio engine?) at that time. 

To me, it looks like they decoupled the connect / disconnect process from the plugin load / unload. In version 5, I think both steps might have happened during disconnect. But that's just a guess on my part... 

I am still new to VEP 6, but happy with the performance improvements. I agree that the interface is more difficult to manage when you have a larger template. I liked the old 'list of instances' view.


----------



## Land of Missing Parts (Feb 11, 2019)

Dewdman42 said:


> However, yes...in that case there is no way around the fact that if you want to use Logic Scripter, you have have to funnel all 16 channels of midi through a single script. Which means the script has to be more complex in order to handle multiple channels at the same time. All doable, but more complicated in the scripting.


This discussion of scripter and VEP got me wondering about @Peter Schwartz 's ARTzID--

If you funnel 16 channels of midi, and let's say they are all Cinematic Studio Strings, through one instance of ARTzID, would that work or would the overlapping articulations cause some kind of conflict?

Currently I'm using @NoamL 's Thanos script for Logic with CSS to compensate for the legato delays, but I think there is a conflict when I use one instance of scripter for multiple instances, and so I've had to use the separate tracks mentioned in the discussion above.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 11, 2019)

You’ll have to ask peter. The script has to be coded to be smart enough to handle 16 channels individually which is doable but depends on the script


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 11, 2019)

westgate said:


> Could anybody explain me the reason to use VEPro with Logic?



In addition to what Jim said - although I work differently (I use far fewer tracks) - it uses computer resources really efficiently. If you have slave computers, it also saves you the expense and bother of having separate audio and MIDI interfaces on them.

But it's not like you can't run a large template in Logic without it. You certainly can.


----------



## Peter Schwartz (Feb 22, 2019)

Land of Missing Parts said:


> This discussion of scripter and VEP got me wondering about @Peter Schwartz 's ARTzID--
> 
> If you funnel 16 channels of midi, and let's say they are all Cinematic Studio Strings, through one instance of ARTzID, would that work or would the overlapping articulations cause some kind of conflict?



No, no conflicts. If I were asked to develop such a script, it would be quite easy to avoid any kind of conflicts.

As an aside... Generally speaking, I don't see much benefit in creating a single instance of Kontakt (or VEPro or whatever) and trying to funnel a million channel's worth of MIDI into it just for the sake of supposed "efficiency". This is true for the various Cinematic libraries and others too. Now, having said that... 

Not every instrument in a project or template needs to be individualized like that. There are plenty of situations where it makes perfect sense to combine patches/articulations into the same instance of (whatever). For example, combining Core and Decorative palettes + a bunch of individual articulations from a Spitfire string library into the same plugin or VEPro Instance makes perfect sense. By using ARTz•ID (or even Articulation Sets, if you're willing to put in the work) you can play all of those articulations on the same track from the same plugin "shell". But when it comes to combining all of the instruments of a particular family into the same shell, such as strings, woodwinds, brass, etc., I don't believe it's worth the trouble or technical nightmare that results from the exercise.


----------



## TonvaterJan (Feb 28, 2019)

Following this thread with great interest, but having one question for you:

I´m using Logic and VE PRO 6 together on one Mac Pro (12 Core, 3,46GHz, 128GB Ram).
I´ve organized my VE Pro Rig in 12 Instances with Multi-Instruments each containing 16 Channels of Audio-Instruments and 2 Buffers Latency.
All the mixing gets processed in VE Pro, so Logic only has to deal with 12 Stereo Audiostreams
and the MIDI.
Everything runs smoothly at 256 Samples Latency.

But:

I´m experiencing massive Drop-Outs, Crackle and Midi-Issues when opening and using an additional Kontakt SingleChannel Instance directly in Logic alongside the VE Pro PlugIns.

This has nothing to do with the the Latency, I tested it with Maximum Latency in Logic and got the same behaviour.
Do any of you know, what could be the issue here?
Am I forced to open every additional audio-instrument in VE Pro when using it in conjunction with Logic?

Thanks for the help...


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 28, 2019)

no you shouldn't have to open every plugin inside VEP. I have no idea about why that would cause the dropouts.


----------



## Peter Schwartz (Mar 1, 2019)

Are your samples stored on traditional HD's or SSD's?


----------



## TonvaterJan (Mar 1, 2019)

No, 2 TB off SSD here.

I´ve experienced this sort of behavior before in Ableton Live, when using some exotic Kontakt Librarys, which have a problem with Tempo Changes.
But none of these are getting used here...
Just standard Orchestral-Stuff: LASS, Spitfire, SWAM, Wallander Instruments, True Strike


----------



## TonvaterJan (Mar 5, 2019)

Hmm, bizarre, today it´s working and nothing changed...
Seemed to be a bad DAW-Karma-Day.

Thanks for confirming, that it should work...


----------



## olykos (Jun 14, 2022)

@whinecellar I was convinced that your approach was the way to go so that I don't have to worry about the mess extra aux channels in logic would create, however I realized I am not able to solo an individual track inside logic (it solos all 16).

I am fine with mixing in VePro, but I'd like to be able to solo tracks as I compose. Do you use region solo instead of track solo? Or did I miss something?


----------



## samphony (Jun 15, 2022)

olykos said:


> @whinecellar I was convinced that your approach was the way to go so that I don't have to worry about the mess extra aux channels in logic would create, however I realized I am not able to solo an individual track inside logic (it solos all 16).
> 
> I am fine with mixing in VePro, but I'd like to be able to solo tracks as I compose. Do you use region solo instead of track solo? Or did I miss something?


You can add related aux channels as tracks via secondary click onto the aux channel. Aux tracks can then serve as midi track.


----------



## whinecellar (Jun 15, 2022)

olykos said:


> @whinecellar I was convinced that your approach was the way to go so that I don't have to worry about the mess extra aux channels in logic would create, however I realized I am not able to solo an individual track inside logic (it solos all 16).
> 
> I am fine with mixing in VePro, but I'd like to be able to solo tracks as I compose. Do you use region solo instead of track solo? Or did I miss something?


Yes, I would just solo a region as needed. I’m actually moving away from
VE Pro however, in favor of a single powerful Mac - I rarely turn my slave machines on anymore. It’s rarely worth the hassle.


----------



## samphony (Jun 15, 2022)

whinecellar said:


> Yes, I would just solo a region as needed. I’m actually moving away from
> VE Pro however, I’m favor of a single powerful Mac - I rarely turn my slave machines on anymore. It’s rarely worth the hassle.


Same here. The machines got so powerful and depending on workflow and project complexity. 

The loading speed of the apple silicon machines is just so fast.


----------



## nas (Jun 16, 2022)

Even for a single powerful machine, I find having VEP in my workflow very handy. If I'm scoring a film and have a master template for the entire film loaded in VEP, it's so convenient and fast to just load different cues in logic, while having my VEP project as is. It's also a very efficient program in terns of resources. 

Love VEP


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 16, 2022)

I also ditched the slave and VEPro, I love the single machine setup. I don't even use VRPro any more to host larger sessions, as using the dynamic loading feature in Logic in virtually the same thing.


----------



## whinecellar (Jun 16, 2022)

Jeremy Spencer said:


> I also ditched the slave and VEPro, I love the single machine setup. I don't even use VRPro any more to host larger sessions, as using the dynamic loading feature in Logic in virtually the same thing.


Yep, exactly. Good times!


----------



## gsilbers (Jun 16, 2022)

I also ditched VEP. too many issues. 

And apple wants you to work differently with large templates. Apple wants you to use the turn off/on tracks. (option+click to offload ram). so ive been doing that and not fighting it anylonger :/

Project loads fast. I have everythign already there and routed with fx plugins. Can go back to any project and not have to figure out what vep template verison i was using etc. 

Thats also what Trevor Morris is doing now but with Cubase and a 256 ram mac pro. 

I have my basic stuff and for specific projects i load specific instruments and then use the basics. 

I learned that VEP being loaded with 16 channels instruments at a time was taxing my cpu. Just the channel count. 
But i also dont like working separating audio and midi where i send 256 midi tracks to VEP and it returns with 8 stereo stems or something like that and i have little control of the audio, or it just takes extra time to bounce, and i use the audio a lot for hybrid scoring/sound design. but thats just me. 

Once i get the mac studio ultra 128gb ram ill be a lot better using this method of turning off/on tracks and loading it until infinitium w every library ever


----------



## samphony (Jun 19, 2022)

Jeremy Spencer said:


> I also ditched the slave and VEPro, I love the single machine setup. I don't even use VRPro any more to host larger sessions, as using the dynamic loading feature in Logic in virtually the same thing.


I gave up on vep many moons ago. I used 3&4 issue free but since v5 it is very unstable/ unreliable for me.


----------



## novaburst (Jun 19, 2022)

One of the best contributions to VI recording and editing was when VEpro was introduced developed by VSL it became a game changer, 

Back then it was needed by many esp those who do mega orchestral training or and demos 

Today well CPUs are much more powerful and perhaps more powerful than 3 machines from say 2018

So where does that leave VEpro 

VEpro still should play a very important partner in any setup even if its small or mega large, there are a few things that VEpro does well, one it shares the burden of FX plugins, Sample Library's or can handle that burden by it self by using local or network,

Ok so you have this one big monster machine, can you imagine how stable that machine will run if you share it with another machine, truth be told on a excessive level the more a machine has to do the more its likely to become unstable, you can even say the more your DAW has to do on a excessive level the more it will likely freeze and that one has nothing to do with power or big ram.

The the philosophy of two are better than one or a three strand rope is not easily broken will always stand, sharing the burden will always work out better, and that's the option that VEpro gives users.

Not so sure about the OS these days from threads posted on forums there is certainly a mixed feeling but apps seem to favour the windows machine if that machine is up to specs in hardware and software, i would also say duplicating your C/ssd and swapping out for a new high quality one from time to time keeps machines stable.

As of today it seems software is still braking things and discourages users from using certain apps VEpro has had its fair share of rants, Cubase, Logic, Pro Tools also FX, Kontakt rants and discourage from using certain apps.

I was on another forum checking out some post not going to say what forum, but this guy flooded the thread with issues nearly every second post was this guy saying how bad the update was and how his or her machine was crashing, but no one else was saying it, nearly every one else was ok with the app and using it fine, so what's going on there.

You blink your eye then suddenly you get the message .....we no longer are supporting windows 7 or 8 or the Mac OS and you will need to update to the latest version to receive support.

OK but the latest OS is demanding this hardware or that hardware, and that's where things can fall apart, keeping your system up to specs.

I guess soon you want be able to turn your machine on with out having your internet plugged in,


----------

