Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

VE PRO 7 on a single Machine and its Benefits

Ben said:
Yes, yes it does ;)
Some DAWs have already good multi-core code so no big improvements there, but others have not.
But imo more important then the performance improvements is the workflow improvement.
Click to expand...
Definitely! I think VEP is great. I just think a lot of people new to VEP who plan on running it on the same machine focus on the CPU angle, (even I did when I first bought version 5). ;)
 
jcrosby said:
Short version; VEP doesn't magically enhance CPU use via some kind of amazing multi-core CPU algorithm, it simply adds more buffering time which can be achieved in most instances by simply raising your DAWs buffer.
Click to expand...
In Logic, it most certainly does. It spreads out the core distribution, which is a huge benefit.
 
If you're still looking at this, Guy Rowland has a series of tutorials on setting up and building a template with VEP7 and Cubase 10.5.
I'll add, if you re using Synchron instruments with or without VEP, VSL recommends using SSD's to run them on, and in Cubase to load them as Rack Instruments.
In Cubase, disable "ASIO GUARD". They have never worked well together.
Do not mix players.
Again , the Rowland tuts gave me some good ideas for this. Good luck!!
g.c.
 
Jeremy Spencer said:
In Logic, it most certainly does. It spreads out the core distribution, which is a huge benefit.
Click to expand...
Core distribution hasn't been an issue for me in Logic in years. Logic distributes my tracks evenly across cores with no issues. Do you have multithreading set to Playback Tracks only?

Live mode still is what it is, but even a super heavy VEP instance can cause live mode to choke. (Happened to me on a brief in December. It was the same instance every time, and always resulted in me having to disable instruments inside that instance before I could record additional MIDI if two or more tracks from that same instance were already playing back MIDI).
 
g.c. said:
If you're still looking at this, Guy Rowland has a series of tutorials on setting up and building a template with VEP7 and Cubase 10.5.
I'll add, if you re using Synchron instruments with or without VEP, VSL recommends using SSD's to run them on, and in Cubase to load them as Rack Instruments.
In Cubase, disable "ASIO GUARD". They have never worked well together.
Do not mix players.
Again , the Rowland tuts gave me some good ideas for this. Good luck!!
g.c.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I knew about ASIO guard and using the rack from my research and the VSL manual. Guy's videos didn't come up during a search. I will look for them.
 
Ok, back to this:
Is there a huge difference in performance between connecting a Master and a Slave PC thru the internet Router vs connecting the 2 PCs directly with an Ethernet Cable? I am asking using VE PRO7. I am connected to the same Router and wanted to test. On the Slave which is an i7 5820k even with only one single instance of Diva it crackles. VE PRO CPU Performance meter is like up to 70% while on Taskbar is only 13% (i know why that is like that) but is this poor low performance due to being connected thru a Router and not directly? The reason i am asking is, if it can not handle even one Diva than there is no point of investing over 1k into that. One Diva chokes it, what will happen with 20-30 tracks of BBC SO PRO?
 
BasariStudios said:
Ok, back to this:
Is there a huge difference in performance between connecting a Master and a Slave PC thru the internet Router vs connecting the 2 PCs directly with an Ethernet Cable? I am asking using VE PRO7. I am connected to the same Router and wanted to test. On the Slave which is an i7 5820k even with only one single instance of Diva it crackles. VE PRO CPU Performance meter is like up to 70% while on Taskbar is only 13% (i know why that is like that) but is this poor low performance due to being connected thru a Router and not directly? The reason i am asking is, if it can not handle even one Diva than there is no point of investing over 1k into that. One Diva chokes it, what will happen with 20-30 tracks of BBC SO PRO?
Click to expand...
That’s weird. Try connecting straight across and see if there’s a difference (but there shouldn’t be). I remember running Diva on my old slave without issue, it was an i7 2700k.
 
Jeremy Spencer said:
That’s weird. Try connecting straight across and see if there’s a difference (but there shouldn’t be). I remember running Diva on my old slave without issue, it was an i7 2700k.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I did connect directly and then i opened like 6 Divas with the heaviest Patch and it worked like a charm plus remember, the slave PC is not even clean or set for Audio, its all bloatware on Win7 not even 10, i was just testing. My question is this. My Mobo on my master 10900k has regular Ethernet port plus it came with a 10GB Ethernet Card which is installed, i guess i am better off using that one. The Slave also has 2 Ethernet Ports, 1 Intel and 1 Realtek. I ordered some CAT 8 Cables too.
 
g.c. said:
If you're still looking at this, Guy Rowland has a series of tutorials on setting up and building a template with VEP7 and Cubase 10.5.
I'll add, if you re using Synchron instruments with or without VEP, VSL recommends using SSD's to run them on, and in Cubase to load them as Rack Instruments.
In Cubase, disable "ASIO GUARD". They have never worked well together.
Do not mix players.
Again , the Rowland tuts gave me some good ideas for this. Good luck!!
g.c.
Click to expand...
Thanks, i actually watched all 3 of them. I always use SSDs but i do
not understand why use racks only, what difference could that make.
 
For anyone that is interested...
it is very easy to setup a test with cubase running at 64 buffers and using VEP (so the effective buffer is 192)
And then test with similar instruments at 192 only all natively in cubase.
Also try it at 128 / 384

Anyway - @jcrosby is kinda right in that the performance delta isn't that great when you take this into account - but in some instances it can still be a help / can still improve performance appreciably.

But also @Ben is very correct when he outlines that the improvements to workflow are useful to loads of us here especially when using similar instruments across many cues / doing more orchestral stuff. I find less use for when there's loads of hybrid/synth things, where the management of the tracks/plugs etc etc is just easier all done in nuendo.
 
BOY! does VE PRO 7 make a difference, Local and Slave.
I am running Local on i9 10900k and slave on i7 5820k.
Just the Local more than doubled the amount of tracks,
VSTs and VSTis i can use. Ran a 50 Tracks song on Local
VE PRO while Cubase CPU Performance was not even
5%, 1 Buffer on VE PRO. If i ran that only in Cubase it
would cross 50% CPU. So 50 Tracks on Local VE PRO
and Cubase still free for another 50 Tracks...nevermind
the other 50 Tracks and 32GB RAM coming from Slave
without any problems at all, 2 Buffers.

Thanks Everyone!
 
Ben said:
Yes, yes it does ;)
Click to expand...
Ben, help Please!

Thanks in Advance, i am trying to better understand the Setting to my Advantage.
I read the Manual too but a little Confused. I am on an i9 10900k, 10 Cores and
20 Logical Processors/Threads, if that is correct. Originally i had it Set Up at 10 Threads
per Instance, running 2 Instances only but nothing left for Cubase, i am using Cubase
on the same Machine. I am confused between Threads and Cores, my VE PRO shows
20 Threads which means it shows the Logical Processor and not the Physical Cores.
I do not have any performance Problems yet but i need to open some Threads for Cubase.

What would be the best Standard Setting for 2 Instances and Cubase on this Machine?

On my slave Machine i am on i7 5820k which is 6 Cores and 12 Logical Processors,
in there i run only 1 Instance of VE PRO 7 and i have it set at 12 Threads which is ok
because there is nothing else running on that PC and its amazing.

Thanks
 
BasariStudios said:
Ben, help Please!

Thanks in Advance, i am trying to better understand the Setting to my Advantage.
I read the Manual too but a little Confused. I am on an i9 10900k, 10 Cores and
20 Logical Processors/Threads, if that is correct. Originally i had it Set Up at 10 Threads
per Instance, running 2 Instances only but nothing left for Cubase, i am using Cubase
on the same Machine. I am confused between Threads and Cores, my VE PRO shows
20 Threads which means it shows the Logical Processor and not the Physical Cores.
I do not have any performance Problems yet but i need to open some Threads for Cubase.

What would be the best Standard Setting for 2 Instances and Cubase on this Machine?

On my slave Machine i am on i7 5820k which is 6 Cores and 12 Logical Processors,
in there i run only 1 Instance of VE PRO 7 and i have it set at 12 Threads which is ok
because there is nothing else running on that PC and its amazing.

Thanks
Click to expand...
I just answered this question on our forum as well. In short: this should work just fine, if you run heavy plugins in your DAW you might want to lower the thread count to 8-9 per instance.

Some technical background: If you assign threads to an instance the hardware threads are still available to the system. The OS manages the threads in a pool and assigns different tasks to the next best available thread. Still, if there are too many software threads running on the same hardware threads (your cores + hyperthreading cores) the OS has to switch between the different sw-threads continously to guarantee a certain minimal response time. Switching between these tasks/sw-threads consumes some CPU-time, which is not a big problem if there aren't too many task-context-switches.

You can imagine it like cooking burger for a big party. Sure, overall it would be faster to first finish all the ingredients and then combine all burgers at once, but try this and the people will start a revolution and find another cook ;)
Therefore you would do a batch of a few at once and start the next batch as soon as the current one is completely finished, even if overall it will take more time. (burger-parts = tasks running on same thread, finished burger = processing output, burger-batch-size = thread-count, cook = your OS, party guests = your devices, storage, monitor, and of course the user itself)
 
With regards to Montreal's VM1 app, I've just come across this (randomly whilst looking for something else), and its sparked my interest, but I have some questions:

1) Does it have to be run from an iPad? Can it all be run from Windows (Windows 10 in my case) ?

2) Has anyone managed to get the VM1 Helper app to run from an IOS emulator running on an Android SMART TV box? As is the case with my Liine Lemur setup (ie. I run Liine Lemur on 2 Android Smart TV devices connected to 2 separate touchscreens, and would like to incorporate VM1 in to one of the screens displays).

3) With 12 Windows Servers each running VEP7, does the VM1 GUI become messy and difficult to navigate with so many instances ? 9 of our Windows servers has between 192GB and 256GB RAM running an average of VEP7 14 instances with between 12 and 48 channels of 16 Kontakt (or other plugins). 2 more servers run VEP7 with between 20 and 40 channels of VSL's Synchron Player, and then 1 other VEP7 server loaded with 42 instances of between 10 and 20 Kontakt plugins. I currently use MRemoteNG to effectively manage each server remotely (plus a MacPro for additional VEP7 plugins when needed), and that works fine, but I wonder if VM1 can actualy improve workflow efficiency?

4) Is it possible to control Kontakt and Synhron Player instrument controls (faders, knobs, menus) from within VM1?


I'm guessing the takeup on VM1 has been slow, given that the rate of development and now feature deployment seems to have been fairly slow, but hopefully someone here has had a chance to tinker with it.
 
jpb007.uk said:
With regards to Montreal's VM1 app, I've just come across this (randomly whilst looking for something else), and its sparked my interest, but I have some questions:

1) Does it have to be run from an iPad? Can it all be run from Windows (Windows 10 in my case) ?

2) Has anyone managed to get the VM1 Helper app to run from an IOS emulator running on an Android SMART TV box? As is the case with my Liine Lemur setup (ie. I run Liine Lemur on 2 Android Smart TV devices connected to 2 separate touchscreens, and would like to incorporate VM1 in to one of the screens displays).

3) With 12 Windows Servers each running VEP7, does the VM1 GUI become messy and difficult to navigate with so many instances ? 9 of our Windows servers has between 192GB and 256GB RAM running an average of VEP7 14 instances with between 12 and 48 channels of 16 Kontakt (or other plugins). 2 more servers run VEP7 with between 20 and 40 channels of VSL's Synchron Player, and then 1 other VEP7 server loaded with 42 instances of between 10 and 20 Kontakt plugins. I currently use MRemoteNG to effectively manage each server remotely (plus a MacPro for additional VEP7 plugins when needed), and that works fine, but I wonder if VM1 can actualy improve workflow efficiency?

4) Is it possible to control Kontakt and Synhron Player instrument controls (faders, knobs, menus) from within VM1?


I'm guessing the takeup on VM1 has been slow, given that the rate of development and now feature deployment seems to have been fairly slow, but hopefully someone here has had a chance to tinker with it.
Click to expand...
VM1 is really cool, I was fortunate enough to be a part of the Beta testing for VM1 v2 (which was just released).

1) No, you don't need to run it from iPad. You can simply load it on your main machine and it connects to any VEPro servers from there. You can run the iOS version as well, and it also connects to any of the VEPro servers. For example, you can have the iPad running VM1, which you can then use to control/view your servers. There was an issue with connecting to a local server on mac Catalina, but I'm hoping it was recently ironed out.

2) You don't need to run the Helper app any more from what I understand. Not sure how your scenario would work, but I would just load VM1 on your main rig, and then extend the VM1 window onto one of your additional screens.

3) Like 12 actual separate machines? Yikes! Regardless, the new app has a cool dropdown "tree" menu option that shows all of your connected servers. You can then open each one individually and open each instance/channel from there. It's pretty slick.

4) No. You can load available VI's/FX from within the app, but can't go into the actual plugin to make adjustments.

There's some quirks, such as you cannot solo a channel from within the app unless you are in stack mode. There's a still a few things that need to be ironed out, but overall, it's a really cool app for anyone running VEPro templates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom