C-Wave
Senior Member
Yes, so a VSL VEPro license in a elicenser dongle connected to each computer running VEPro Server.
VEPro 7 now available!
- Thread starter Ben
- Start date
OP
OP
Ben
VSL
No, but this would be a nice feature. But the thing is: what happens when there is an error in the text? This is a little harder to code.
Dewdman42
Senior Member
An importer that can read JSON or something would be extremely beneficial to many people I think. I can copy and paste with a vi editor way faster then any GUI table control.
Barring that, it would be nice if there was a way to somehow save little snippets of assignments that can be loaded into an instance...so that I could save an automation preset for some instrument and easily add it to any instance template I'm setting up...or add a few saved ones like that easily. Havint to do it manually every time you create a new instance from scratch...is....manual labor.
Barring that, it would be nice if there was a way to somehow save little snippets of assignments that can be loaded into an instance...so that I could save an automation preset for some instrument and easily add it to any instance template I'm setting up...or add a few saved ones like that easily. Havint to do it manually every time you create a new instance from scratch...is....manual labor.
OP
OP
Ben
VSL
Just save the instance, click on the new instance button in the instance list and load the saved instance.
Guy Rowland
Senior Member
Yes, I guess you could save a template instance effectively, and just reload it from the recent file list. I'm not sure it would save me all that much time though in truth.
I'll confess that idea makes my blood turn cold - the thought of finicky copying and pasting text, renaming, making sure I don't have typos in very long character strings... urgh. I can't believe that would ever be quicker than the current drag and drop method.
I'm slightly staggered that you seem casually dismissive of this new wonder-feature as still being too slow, that is massively quicker for me than the old method. I can now do an entire 16 channels in a minute or so, previously it would take 10. What is holding you up?
I'll confess that idea makes my blood turn cold - the thought of finicky copying and pasting text, renaming, making sure I don't have typos in very long character strings... urgh. I can't believe that would ever be quicker than the current drag and drop method.
I'm slightly staggered that you seem casually dismissive of this new wonder-feature as still being too slow, that is massively quicker for me than the old method. I can now do an entire 16 channels in a minute or so, previously it would take 10. What is holding you up?
24dBFS
Member
Hi Ben, Hi Guy - thanks for chiming in!
Like I said, I love the drag & drop and I think of course this is a great improvement hence I am using it now BUT dealing with huge templates or preparing metaframes for lets say particular library with all the articulations etc. could be much faster when using Sublime or anything similar. I do custom work for my clients and all the stuff I need (articulation names, names of the ports...) is organized in excel anyways so having a way to do it "the old scripting way" would save me few hours that I could use for writing music (don't we all
) but of course I understand how messy it might turn if used without caution. I imagine internally it is an XML file that is created anyway and having the access might be useful for some users.
Also adjusting a template for the use with different systems (desktop in the studio vs. a laptop rig on the road) that might use different MIDI ports would be easier to tweak this way IMO but, as a developer myself, I can also totally understand that Vienna folks might be against it due to the possible errors on the user side that would mean more work for the support team on the Vienna's side. Might be a nice option though (still hoping)
Cheers!
Like I said, I love the drag & drop and I think of course this is a great improvement hence I am using it now BUT dealing with huge templates or preparing metaframes for lets say particular library with all the articulations etc. could be much faster when using Sublime or anything similar. I do custom work for my clients and all the stuff I need (articulation names, names of the ports...) is organized in excel anyways so having a way to do it "the old scripting way" would save me few hours that I could use for writing music (don't we all
) but of course I understand how messy it might turn if used without caution. I imagine internally it is an XML file that is created anyway and having the access might be useful for some users. Also adjusting a template for the use with different systems (desktop in the studio vs. a laptop rig on the road) that might use different MIDI ports would be easier to tweak this way IMO but, as a developer myself, I can also totally understand that Vienna folks might be against it due to the possible errors on the user side that would mean more work for the support team on the Vienna's side. Might be a nice option though
(still hoping) Cheers!
OP
OP
Ben
VSL
@24dBFS Post your idea in the VSL Forum! They will then consider it and give you feedback. Maybe you have luck and it will make its way to the wish-list
I would also like to see an automation mapping export to a json or xml file, that can be imported. That would allow for customization (export your Excel tables to the xml / json file via VB, import into VEP).
Would be a great imrovement imo, but I can imaging that a stable implementation of such feature is a little nightmare.
I would also like to see an automation mapping export to a json or xml file, that can be imported. That would allow for customization (export your Excel tables to the xml / json file via VB, import into VEP).
Would be a great imrovement imo, but I can imaging that a stable implementation of such feature is a little nightmare.
jonathanwright
Senior Member
It seems many on here are using VEPro 7 on a single machine, and taking advantage of the disabled instance features.
I have to ask though, what are the benefits of this approach in Cubase, when it already has disabled tracks functionality? Is it stability? CPU usage? Is it worth the trade off of the additional routing required?
I have to ask though, what are the benefits of this approach in Cubase, when it already has disabled tracks functionality? Is it stability? CPU usage? Is it worth the trade off of the additional routing required?
24dBFS
Member
For my workflow it is much faster to change sessions without the need to constantly load samples into RAM. Once all the libraries I need are up and running in the VEP I can quickly jump between projects.
Cubase runs much stable and smoother if it only takes care of plugins and some vst synth in my case, all the orchestral stuff is loaded into VEP. The set up isn't really that complicated IMO. It is also worth mentioning that even disabled tracks in Cubase need some CPU/RAM so it is not completely as they are not there at all. The automation in VEP is so good now I can disable/enable all I need from within Cubase without even touching VEP, and I mean single tracks, tracks groups and whole instances. I was a big supporter of enable/disable tracks in Cubase as they came in ver.8 (an still am) but I came back to VEP since for me this is still much better workflow especially for TV series projects and other jobs where a lot of jumping between sessions is a must. I think it depends on how you use Cubase and what are the projects you are dealing with. You can always download the demo and give it few days test run.
Cheers!
Audio Birdi
Active Member
On my PC, VEP 7 keeps crashing and crashing and crashing when trying to open older server projects from VEP 6. No crash dumps are being created either. Even when simply creating and importing saved instances, it's crashing. Seems very buggy for an initial release. VEP 6 was a lot more stable on initial release :/. I've tried uninstalling and re-installing VEP 7 and the same things keep happening frustratingly.a
OP
OP
Ben
VSL
Take a look if there is something in one of the log-files (%appdata%\VSL\Vienna Ensemble Pro\) and send them with a description and if possible the VEP6 project directly to [email protected]
ChazC
Active Member
On large templates using VEP to host your VI's on a single machine reduces auto save times from minutes to seconds. That's the primary reason I use it.
Grizzlymv
Senior Member
For me, it also decrease significantly the CPR size, which end up with much more free HDD space and with faster saving time as @ChazC mentionned. Everything in Cubase would end up with CPR file of about 700 Mb-1gb each. Having all the orchestral libs in VEP reduced it to 240 Mb. And once I figure out how to automate the enabling/disabling of VEP (still doing it manually as I can't get my head around how to automate this properly from Cubase to VEP), then I'll probably move everything in VEP but the few synths and other libs I tweak on a per cue. And as other mentionned as well, Cubase is more stable and quicker to react that way.
OP
OP
Ben
VSL
Use the parameter automation in VEP and select disable instance. Then use the instance automation in Cubase, select the parameter from the drop-down and set the value (on/ off). So your cubase project will remember which instance to enable / disable wenn loaded.
Guy Rowland
Senior Member
Lots of excellent answers already. Here's a total of all my own reasons.
1 - CPU use. Next to Cubase, its about 50% more efficient. That equates to having a system twice as good as the one you actually have.
2 - Load / Save times. Running decoupled, autosaves are almost instant. Loading projects far quicker, much less of a chore to go between projects.
3 - Cubase Project sizes. My template is about 28mb and contains over 1,500 tracks. Given auto-generated backups and multiple cues, this rapidly adds up to hundreds of gigs in savings. Auto-backing up to the cloud in Dropbox trivial.
4 - Cubase generally runs better. On bigger projects, there's far less for it to do, and its all the happier for it.
There was until very recently a (5), because mutli-out disabled tracks didn't work properly but that was fixed in Cubase build 10.0.20.
jonathanwright
Senior Member
Michael Antrum
Only the good die young....
Guys (and Guy),
A quick question please...
When you setup a library which has a kontakt patches with individual articulations, and also a single patch with multiple articulations (like say Spitfire Chamber Strings), which do you use ?
Using expression maps, You could go either route. Libraries like Symphobia you only have key switches on each patch so you haven’t any choice in the matter.
I am wondering which one would be more economic on resources....
A quick question please...
When you setup a library which has a kontakt patches with individual articulations, and also a single patch with multiple articulations (like say Spitfire Chamber Strings), which do you use ?
Using expression maps, You could go either route. Libraries like Symphobia you only have key switches on each patch so you haven’t any choice in the matter.
I am wondering which one would be more economic on resources....
Guy Rowland
Senior Member
For me it varies from library to library Michael. Some of the modern complex patches are really quite heavy on RAM use even without any samples loaded. The earlier versions of Symphobia 1 had very simple patches, and 10 of them actually uses less RAM than the newer ones I think (but accordingly they do a lot less - they had separate patches for close and stage mics initially). For MSB I found i preferred to have longs and shorts separate, as I wanted to control them differently (key velocity for shorts, CC for longs).
Obviously there's nothing especially pertinent to VE Pro here, I don't think there's much difference hosting there as opposed to anything else really. The more midi and audio tracks you have the more there is to set up I guess.
Obviously there's nothing especially pertinent to VE Pro here, I don't think there's much difference hosting there as opposed to anything else really. The more midi and audio tracks you have the more there is to set up I guess.
