# How many instances of VE Pro are too many?



## rhye (Sep 20, 2017)

I am halfway designing my template in Logic X using VEpro6 in a single computer (2017 i7 iMac ram64gb) and I am using the much recommended method of a single VePro instance per instrument and ArtzId to switch articulations.
Right now I have about 120 instances of VEpro and I expect to add at least 50 more. 
So far I haven't had major problems besides random VEpro crashes but I am wondering if maybe I am pushing the limit in terms of CPU efficiency. 
How many instances of VE Pro are too many? should I continue adding more? Any suggestions?


----------



## Brendon Williams (Sep 20, 2017)

VE Pro is still new to me, but I read in the manual that performance is best with as few instances as possible. So it's best to put as many instruments within each instance as you can to minimize the total number of instances. I experimented a little with and felt like I noticed a performance improvement when I made the changes in order to do so.

That said, it seems that it really is possible to get by with quite a few instances! It seems that you're on the higher end, but I've never tried anywhere close to that many, so I really can't say.


----------



## Prockamanisc (Sep 20, 2017)

rhye said:


> Right now I have about 120 instances of VEpro and I expect to add at least 50 more.


I'm just...so....proud...


----------



## stonzthro (Sep 20, 2017)

Ignore the negative response - use as many as you need. 

I've had templates that easily use that many. I've opted for a more modular approach these days, but VEP is quite robust! I haven't come across any issues with the number of instances.


----------



## JohnG (Sep 20, 2017)

I am not an expert but I recently hired a guy who is. Right or wrong, his recommendation was to use fewer instances in my template, with more stuff crammed on to each, bussing as necessary.

However, if others are using over 100 instances, maybe the latest, leaner versions of VE Pro are handling whatever you throw at them. It's an AMAZING program.


----------



## Mihkel Zilmer (Sep 20, 2017)

I did some testing around when VEP 6 first came out. 

I made two versions of my VEP project for one of my slave computers.
One with 8 instances (approx. 100 instruments per instance) and one with 32 instances (approx 25 instruments per instance). I saw improved performance with fewer instances. It's hard to put it into numbers, but in practice it allowed me to drop my buffer size by a notch. 

But I think there are more variables than just the number of instances. Ideal performance is a balancing act. Depends on your libraries, number of mic positions active, your hardware, etc.. For example you could build a huge instance, lots of very demanding instruments, and then during playback you might push the CPU cores assigned to this instance too far.


----------



## Peter Schwartz (Sep 20, 2017)

Here's a case where you can safely ignore what the VEPro manual says about minimizing the number of instances. Real-world application using multiple instances proves my point. If this weren't the case I wouldn't recommend it.

Purely from a management point of view, I wonder if there aren't some places where you can consolidate certain sounds into a single instance. For example...

Let's say you have separate instances for marimba, xylophone, vibes, glock, and orchestra bells. You could (likely) consolidate those sounds into a single VEPro instance and assign them to different MIDI channels. Then, use the Combinatrix =16= Script to switch between the different articulations on one track. The idea here is that you create a "mallet station" representing the palette of instruments that a single percussionist might play. You could create similar "percussion station" Instances for other kinds of percussion, i.e., cymbals + gong, a collection of gran cassas from different libraries, and so on.

And if you save these Instances on their own, you can easily add multiples of the Instances to a VEPro project if you need more than one percussionist for a particular track. And taking this approach doesn't duplicate the amount of RAM either.

Again, this suggestion is more about managing related sounds (finding similar sounds in one place), as opposed to having individual instances for them. But then again, if you're not having any problem in this regard then "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". 

ARTzID, ARTz•ID, SkiSwitcher, Ski Switcher


----------



## A.G (Sep 21, 2017)

rhye said:


> How many instances of VE Pro are too many? should I continue adding more? Any suggestions?



The Golden Key is called *DAW Multi Timbral* Instruments. Some DAWs are limited to a fixed number of Software Instruments such as: Logic, Pro Tools etc. To ignore that limitation (for large Orchestral Templates), you have to use Multi Timbral Instruments which are addressed to a single VEPro Instance.

The other condition is a compatible Logic Multi Timbral Articulation switching system which uses a single Logic MIDI FX plugin per 16 Channels: - AG Toolkit is unique in this regard.

AUDIOGROCERY is on a deadline to release a brand new VEPro Instance optimization system compatible with all DAWs, Cubase & AG Maps. Stay tuned...


----------



## Peter Schwartz (Sep 21, 2017)

(With apologies to rhye)...

Ivan, does it ever occur to you how downright distasteful (if not downright schmucky) it is to answer a post in the form of a thinly veiled advertisement? For vaporware no less?! In a thread about VEPro instances with respect to ARTz•ID?! I'm mystified (though not surprised) as to how clueless you are to the concepts of respect, manners, and sharing useful information for the sheer joy of doing so without a hidden agenda.


----------



## rhye (Sep 21, 2017)

Back on topic: Thanks everyone for your suggestions! It's interesting to see so many different approaches.

Peter, thanks for your suggestion and the fantastic support you have been. 
I have tried to follow your advice of grouping similar instrument groups. However, the number of VE pro instances is still very large in the template (about 140) due to the number instruments I have that are difficult to combine with others.

For example: the Bernard Herrmann library has unusual combinations like Trombones and Timpani, or Clarinet and trumpet recorded together, all which have to live in their own instances; or percussion instruments (like 5 different key switching Glocks from different libraries) that need to live in a single VE pro instance by themselves if I am using ArtzId.

Thankfully, VE pro has the option to disable instruments, which is why I am able to have all of this in my template without running out of ram; however, the cpu is under a lot of stress: (VEPro %127, Logic 98%) without even having a single note in the Logic session and I am afraid that it is simply because of the large number of VE pro instances. 
Any other advice?


----------



## Peter Schwartz (Sep 21, 2017)

Hi Rhye, you're very welcome. 

_Any other advice?_

Yes, possibly. But first...

In your first post you expressed concern about CPU usage, and in your second post you related some numbers. But the one thing you haven't mentioned so far is how your system is actually behaving when you're in production on a track. So it's hard to say if you have a problem right now or if you're looking at a problem waiting to happen. The numbers themselves aren't necessarily an accurate indicator.

To that effect, how does your system run right now? Also, are you hosting VEPro on your main computer, or on a slave computer?


----------



## rhye (Sep 21, 2017)

You are right Peter. I have not been composing on it yet since I have been so focused on the template making (I am 90% done). I am amazed about how long it has been taking me! Mainly since I have been auditioning each sound and pre mixing everything. I have not even started adding reverbs or any other processing. I just want to make sure that the setup is going to be smooth before I start a big project coming up.

I am running everything on a new 2017 top of the line iMac (64gb ram) with no slaves. 
My concern is the load on the computer with the Kontakt instruments disabled is still pretty significant. The ArtzId and SS scripts do not seem to be the culprit and I have been careful to use the cc cloners only when absolutely necessary. Everything seems to point to the number of VE Pro instances.


----------



## Peter Schwartz (Sep 22, 2017)

Cool. In that case I'd like to suggest creating a piece of music and seeing how your system performs as-is. Try writing something that's somewhat busy, maybe some kind of typical action movie cue or trailer music playing ostinato strings, brass, and percussion. See what happens.

I have several suggestions in mind for how you can minimize the number of Instances, but first let's see if there's even a problem.

For now, a few things to keep in mind...

As mentioned, a large number of Instances shouldn't be a problem. But yes, the plugins hosted within them will consume CPU. So on one hand, it might seem paradoxical to suggest that having lots of Instances isn't detrimental, but then, what do you do with them? You fill them with plugins!

The alternative is to pack fewer Instances with more plugins, but if you're bent on having all of those libraries available all at once, the CPU-sucking nature of plugins remains the issue, not the number of Instances. And when you work like that (packing individual Instances with loads of plugins), the only way to effectively engineer those sounds is to create multiple outputs and have them show up on auxes. For me that's an absolutely horrible way to work. It's far better and more intuitive to be able to record the MIDI and engineer the audio for an instrument sound (solo or otherwise) on one track.

More thoughts...

Logic's Scripters consume CPU just like any other plugin, including other MIDI FX as well as audio engineering plugins. There's no "free lunch" whenever you add any kind of plugin, but the amount of CPU the Scripters use is minuscule compared to the bigger picture of instrument plugin CPU usage. The only potential exception concerns the Cloner script, but it sounds to me like you're well aware of the recommended setup for those. (And make sure to use the Kontakt version for Kontakt instruments).

More more thoughts...

_Every system is different._ You may well be able to get away hosting all of that stuff on one computer, whereas someone else might not. You may also find that you can compose for a while without any problems, but as soon as you engage a sound from a certain library (let's call it "Library Z"), all of a sudden your system grinds to a halt. That's because Library Z's demands on your system are just too great. To continue with the example, even if you turned off all of your other tracks (or outright deleted them), that one patch from Library Z might remain as a deal killer.

Finally, for now...

I'd like to strongly suggest not approaching your system from a position of fear. All the hard work you're putting into building this template is to make orchestrating your music a convenient, if not joyful experience. So go on, start writing some music with it. If it turns out that your system can't handle all the samples, myself and others can suggest alternative ideas and methods for how to accomplish your ultimate template goals.


----------



## garyhiebner (Sep 22, 2017)

A.G said:


> The Golden Key is called *DAW Multi Timbral* Instruments. Some DAWs are limited to a fixed number of Software Instruments such as: Logic, Pro Tools etc. To ignore that limitation (for large Orchestral Templates), you have to use Multi Timbral Instruments which are addressed to a single VEPro Instance.
> 
> The other condition is a compatible Logic Multi Timbral Articulation switching system which uses a single Logic MIDI FX plugin per 16 Channels: - AG Toolkit is unique in this regard.
> 
> AUDIOGROCERY is on a deadline to release a brand new VEPro Instance optimization system compatible with all DAWs, Cubase & AG Maps. Stay tuned...



Wow! AudioGrocery for other DAWs. That will be great. Will it be a different product or an upgraded version that works in all DAWs. I would love an alternative to Cubase's Expression Maps. I personally find them a bit clunky compared to articulation switching systems with Logic's Scripter.


----------



## procreative (Sep 22, 2017)

I remember asking this with VSL a while back when considering their Multiport solution for Logic. Thing is its a balancing act, if you use less VEP instances but need individual control over levels/processing, then you need to use Multitimbral versions with extra Audio outputs from VEP. So while you save on VEP instances you place extra load on streaming back from VEP.

Then there is the received wisdom that Logic uses cores better with the load spread which is the opposite to many other DAWs.

Then if like me you are using ArtzID, you cannot use individual MidiFX scripts on Multitimbral or Midi Tracks in Logic. So to retain individual control you need more VEP instances. However 170 sounds a lot given say a Violin section with all its articulations could be just 1 instance.


----------



## mc_deli (Sep 22, 2017)

Interesting stuff here. I have been thinking about rebuilding my Logic orchestral template with more VEP instances and without multis.

Couple of things I am reminded if:
-no freeze option with multi instruments is an inconvenience
-saving e.g.folders of tracks fully set up with routing, scripters etc. as patches is really useful


----------



## stonzthro (Sep 22, 2017)

Keep in mind you can set up VEP to power on and off instrument instances (such as Kontakt) via a remote CC message. So you can set up a TouchOSC button to send a Mute (M) keystroke AND a CC that will disengage the instrument within VEP, thus freeing up your CPU. You send the Mute signal so you are aware which tracks are not loaded. Pretty slick.


----------



## Peter Schwartz (Sep 22, 2017)

Great stuff @stonzthro !

Another idea to add on the pile... (I was going to get to this in case @rhye starting having problems, but here goes...)

You've done a lot of hard work creating individual Instances. That's great. What you can do now is turn *off* decoupling for your VEPro plugins (this is _key_) and save each individual instrument as a channel strip setting (CSS). What you'll end up saving for each instrument is not only the entire ARTz•ID configuration (Scripters & Smart Controls) but also the plugin and all the data about the Instance it's connected to! So, check this out...

Launch VEPro. Don't load a metaframe or any instances. Then in Logic, start with a totally blank project. Now load one of your CSS's. Because you save it with decoupled off, all the data about the Instance was saved with the CSS; so now when you load that CSS, it will _force the creation_ of that entire Instance in VEPro!

So now you have a situation where you can populate your project with just the instruments you want on an as-needed basis directly from Logic. To put it another way, instead of pre-loading a template that might end up being terrifically bloated for the style of composition or cue you're writing, just load up the instruments (in the form of CSS's) as you need them. The result will be a wonderfully minimized VEPro setup, one that you'll never be at a loss for adding additional Instances to by way of loading additional CSS's.


----------



## EgM (Sep 24, 2017)

For what it's worth, I've had single instances per instrument in VEP since early VEP5 with no issues at all. 180 to 220 instances. Sierra Mac master to Windows 8.1 Slave, 32Gb ram, all SSD.


----------



## nas (Sep 24, 2017)

I have a similar set up to *EgM'*s as well. I will also add that I may have several articulations loaded per instrument in a single instance and then use articulation switching software to select the various articulations in that instance.


----------



## EgM (Sep 24, 2017)

nas said:


> I have a similar set up to *EgM'*s as well. I will also add that I may have several articulations loaded per instrument in a single instance and then use articulation switching software to select the various articulations in that instance.



Yes, exactly the same here.


----------



## Sami (Nov 11, 2017)

@Peter Schwartz 
It seems a common statement in other threads that VEPro runs best on fast "lean" quad-cores with high frequency and not that well on higher-threaded machines. Do you have any experience what the situation is with the Logic approach with massive amounts of instances? Also, does anyone have suggestions how to set (a) multithreading in VEPro and (b) multithreading in Kontakt for that?
How do you guys solve the 254 track limit problem? I recently migrated from Cubase (whose interface and bloat I cannot longer stand) and I was used to having a 650-track template. Right now with ARTzID (which is fantastic by the way) and single-tracks things are easier to figure out in my brain but tougher to manage because of the track limitation.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Nov 14, 2017)

Sami said:


> @Peter Schwartz
> 
> How do you guys solve the 254 track limit problem?



Are you referring to Aux tracks? I don't use those, just fill up one instance of Kontakt per instance of VEPro and send it all back as a stereo channel.....works like a charm. You could easily rebuild your 650 track template.


----------



## Sami (Nov 14, 2017)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Are you referring to Aux tracks? I don't use those, just fill up one instance of Kontakt per instance of VEPro and send it all back as a stereo channel.....works like a charm. You could easily rebuild your 650 track template.



So you're mixing inside VEPro? Also, how do you articulation switch with that concept? You can't address more than one MIDI port per instance of VEPro from Logic, or can you?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Nov 14, 2017)

You can add up to 16 Midi channels (and Logic tracks) for an instance. For example, I'll have up to 16 instruments loaded into an instance of Kontakt (could even be several different libraries)....all within a single instance of VEPro. In Logic, I just choose that instance of VEPro as the software instrument, along with 16 tracks that I have corresponding to their respective Midi channels. I mix it all in VEPro, but also keep each group (in Logic) in their own Summing Stack. Works like a charm, and there's really no limit.


----------



## Sami (Nov 14, 2017)

can you send automation to each track individually?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Nov 14, 2017)

From VEPro? I'm not sure. I add automation, etc, to the Logic tracks though....just like a regular instrument track.


----------



## Sami (Nov 14, 2017)

is it possible to address several instances of kontakt in one vepro instance? Thanks for your time, by the way!


----------



## nas (Nov 14, 2017)

Sami said:


> is it possible to address several instances of kontakt in one vepro instance? Thanks for your time, by the way!



Yes


----------



## Sami (Nov 14, 2017)

how is that possible? I thought that -without the multiport template- you can only output to one port, since the current AU specification only supports one port per instance


----------



## samphony (Nov 15, 2017)

Sami said:


> how is that possible? I thought that -without the multiport template- you can only output to one port, since the current AU specification only supports one port per instance


Keep your fingers crossed that vsl will finalize the AU v3 VEP Version Plugin before end of the year so you’ll be able to access multiple midi ports per instance. 

If this will be more beneficial over the current approach regarding logic VEP templates has to be seen.


----------



## Heinigoldstein (Nov 15, 2017)

Peter Schwartz said:


> Great stuff @stonzthro !
> 
> Another idea to add on the pile... (I was going to get to this in case @rhye starting having problems, but here goes...)
> 
> ...




I started doing this some weeks ago and it works very well for me. No more scrolling thru dozens of deactivated VEPro instances (I wish there would be something like a hide button in VEPro for deactivated instances). 
It even works with track stacks, so you can load a whole section of instruments pretty fast. The only downside here is, that you sometimes loose track names when you load the track stack. I couldn´t figure out why yet.


----------



## nas (Nov 15, 2017)

Sami said:


> how is that possible? I thought that -without the multiport template- you can only output to one port, since the current AU specification only supports one port per instance



I use an articulation switcher (*Audio Grocery*:http://www.audiogrocery.com/a.g_toolkit_pro.htm). This allows me to load multiple instances of Kontakt in one VEPro instance, each with its own MIDI channel. I can then switch various articulations as well as address the various CC's of each Kontakt instance)


----------



## InLight-Tone (Nov 15, 2017)

That first instance is the one that leads to all the rest...


----------



## Peter Schwartz (Nov 20, 2017)

Hi Sami,

Thanks for pinging me. The bottom line for me is that I've never run into a problem running large numbers of instances in VEPro, whether hosted in my main computer (Mac dual 4 core Xeon, 2.4GHz) or my PC slave setup.

As for multi-threading, in Logic I've got it set to "automatic". In VEPro I believe I've got it set to 2 threads per instance, and multi-threading for Kontakt is off on both machines.

Regarding solving the 254 track limitation (which really means 254 software instrument channels), I've never run into an issue because I've never used nearly that many. I'm not one of those composers who needs to have every conceivable sample loaded up in advance. I've got a core template that uses something like 90 Instances between the two machines, and if I need something else, I just load it up on an as-needed basis. For me, everything seems more manageable by working this way.

The other thing is that I rarely use multi-track/multi-part instruments these days. With my lil' articulation-switching systems I've reduced every multi-timbral instrument down to one track. For me, that's the key to working effectively. 

But these are just my personal preferences. There's no right or wrong way to approach this stuff.

I'm glad you like ARTzID  and I hope you've been using it to let you address multi-timbral articulations on one track to help reduce your track count.

Cheers!




Sami said:


> @Peter Schwartz
> It seems a common statement in other threads that VEPro runs best on fast "lean" quad-cores with high frequency and not that well on higher-threaded machines. Do you have any experience what the situation is with the Logic approach with massive amounts of instances? Also, does anyone have suggestions how to set (a) multithreading in VEPro and (b) multithreading in Kontakt for that?
> How do you guys solve the 254 track limit problem? I recently migrated from Cubase (whose interface and bloat I cannot longer stand) and I was used to having a 650-track template. Right now with ARTzID (which is fantastic by the way) and single-tracks things are easier to figure out in my brain but tougher to manage because of the track limitation.


----------



## Sami (Nov 30, 2017)

@Peter Schwartz
Thank you Peter!
Itˋs just something about having 254 instances of vepro that feels...weird...
Hoping they will implement AU3 support sometime soon so we can use ports like normal people. Logic sometimes makes it hard to love it but I canˋt use any other daw, just thinking about Cubase gives me the shivers despite of its technical superiority. Itˋs like loving a person despite (or because?) of their imperfections. There’s a lesson here I think.
Btw, any more of your fantastic training videos coming up? I've missed a good Ski video...


----------



## Carlos Lopez-Real (Apr 16, 2019)

rhye said:


> You are right Peter. I have not been composing on it yet since I have been so focused on the template making (I am 90% done). I am amazed about how long it has been taking me! Mainly since I have been auditioning each sound and pre mixing everything. I have not even started adding reverbs or any other processing. I just want to make sure that the setup is going to be smooth before I start a big project coming up.
> 
> I am running everything on a new 2017 top of the line iMac (64gb ram) with no slaves.
> My concern is the load on the computer with the Kontakt instruments disabled is still pretty significant. The ArtzId and SS scripts do not seem to be the culprit and I have been careful to use the cc cloners only when absolutely necessary. Everything seems to point to the number of VE Pro instances.



Hi @rhye, I'm reading this thread with interest, even though it's a year and a half ago, as I've been building a new template in a way which sounds very similar to yours - one machine, lots of VEP instances, ArtzID etc. How did it all work out for you in the end - did you resolve the issues which you were coming up against here?


----------



## rhye (Apr 19, 2019)

Hi Carlos, sorry for the delay. 
My template has been running reasonably well and Artzid is definitely recommended for most scenarios. Peter's support is awesome. That being said, I have moved to using mainly Logics default articulation system for a number of reasons.
Regarding VE pro: Yes, it is fine to have many instances. I try to keep my template under 120.
Good luck!


----------



## Carlos Lopez-Real (Apr 19, 2019)

rhye said:


> Hi Carlos, sorry for the delay.
> My template has been running reasonably well and Artzid is definitely recommended for most scenarios. Peter's support is awesome. That being said, I have moved to using mainly Logics default articulation system for a number of reasons.
> Regarding VE pro: Yes, it is fine to have many instances. I try to keep my template under 120.
> Good luck!



Hi @rhye, thanks for the response. I'd be interested to know what the 'number of reasons' might be for your having moved to Logic's articulation system. If you have time to elaborate, I'd be very curious. Also interesting to note that you're trying to keep your VEP template to under 120 instances. I remember earlier in the thread you'd originally been looking at upwards of 150 or so I think. Did you find a way of consolidating some of the instruments together into single instances in the way Peter had suggested?

One area that I've not yet tackled is how to integrate the expansion packs of mics from my Spitfire orchestral instruments - I upgraded to these a while back when they were very discounted, but I've not yet integrated them into my template. I'm figuring I may need to have 'mirror' instances for these expansion packs - frustratingly, Spitfire provided the new mics in totally separate patches, instead of putting all of the original & new mics into once single patch. Not sure if this is something you're dealing with too?

Thanks!


----------



## wst3 (Apr 20, 2019)

I'm on Windows, and use Sonar, Studio One, and DP (a whole 'nother conversation) on my DAW to talk to VEPro server on a second machine. Or rather I'm in the midst of setting that up.

Prior to adding the second machine I was still hosting Kontakt (and Vienna Instrument Pro) in VEPro on the DAW. I've played around with various arrangements of varying numbers of instruments per Kontakt instance, and varying numbers of Kontakt instances per VEPro instance. On *MY* single machine the optimal configuration was loading up Kontakt, and limiting the number of Kontakt instances per VEPro instance.

I believe that the libraries I use had as much to do with that configuration as my choice of CPU, Mobo, and memory (which is limited to 32GB on this Mobo.)

So far, and I'm really only getting started, it appears that I can have more instances of Kontakt in a single instance of VEPro on the secondary machine. That is causing some "excitement" when it comes to routing instruments in the different hosts.

When (if?) I ever get this sorted out I will report my results.


----------



## AMC (Sep 11, 2022)

rhye said:


> I am halfway designing my template in Logic X using VEpro6 in a single computer (2017 i7 iMac ram64gb) and I am using the much recommended method of a single VePro instance per instrument and ArtzId to switch articulations.
> Right now I have about 120 instances of VEpro and I expect to add at least 50 more.
> So far I haven't had major problems besides random VEpro crashes but I am wondering if maybe I am pushing the limit in terms of CPU efficiency.
> How many instances of VE Pro are too many? should I continue adding more? Any suggestions?


I have found using too many instances can cause crackling/spluttering. So I consolidated instrumental groups to use fewer instances and only use VEP for the libraries I use regularly. Any extras I load directly into the DAW which takes seconds. I still control articulations directly from the DAW.


----------

