trend towards more VSTi instances
Vember Audio
start | surge | shortcircuit | FAQ | forum | shop | customer zone
*
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
2014-11-24, 23:20:56

Login with username, password and session length
SMF - Just Installed
Search:     Advanced search
7341 Posts in 1207 Topics by 455 Members Latest Member: - tofudrew Most online today: 24 - most online ever: 101 (2010-03-10, 03:30:58)
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: trend towards more VSTi instances  (Read 7799 times)
qwanta
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 134


View Profile
« on: 2007-09-06, 19:20:54 »

There seems to be a trend in DAW usage these days, towards using enormous amounts of tracks in projects - every sound has its own track and FX bin, usually one midi track per VSTi (no multitimbrality). Anytime something new is to be added to a song, a new track is simply added - no messing around with sharing outputs as the traditional hardware paradigm forced in the past (especially with samplers).
I've noticed this in watching some of Computer Music mag's 'masterclass' videos (where some artist gives tips in front of his DAW) or other tutorials at youtube, screenshots etc... and I guess we're at the point where computer's are powerful enough and/or freeze functionality works well for this, and large LCD's are cheap. Or perhaps, I'm just late noticing this..but I don't think this was a common thing just a few years ago. I've started working more in this vein myself, and I have to say it's quite liberating to keep things simple like this with only 1 midi track per mixer output as you can easily edit the sound you want/add FX/change volume etc without worrying about impacting other stuff on the same out (as there isn't any). You can add buses to process sounds together if desired too.

Anyway, why post this in the sc forum?  smiley

Well, with this method of working, you end up with many sc instances with relatively few samples in them, usually using only 1 midi channel. With sc1, what was cool was that you started with a clean slate and could add groups/samples to make the thing has complex/using as many midi channel as desired. It scaled very nicely whether just using a couple samples, or a massive number of different midi channels.

sc2 on the other hand has a hard coded structure with 16 groups, and layers for each group, up front. It seems like sc2 is this massive workhorse more suited for large multi-timbral operations, with complex routing schemes to the FX etc... It seems like just throwing a couple samples in each instance for sc2 is not what it's made for in the same way as sc1 - don't know about overhead etc... it's probably coded well so that the unused channels don't use any resources; but still would be nice to only activate them as needed (like sc1).

Anyway, just thought the sc1 system had a lot going for it, especially with this apparent trend towards spreading things over more and more tracks and VSTi instances with each instance having a more specialized role.
« Last Edit: 2007-09-06, 19:26:25 by qwanta » Logged
Dstruct
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 971


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: 2007-09-07, 11:25:36 »

it's probably coded well so that the unused channels don't use any resources; but still would be nice to only activate them as needed (like sc1).

?

have a look at the config-page in sc2 -> it's in there ...
Logged
qwanta
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 134


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: 2007-09-07, 14:31:09 »

No, I mean you get 16 parts each with 8 layers hardwired upfront. (parts are roughly what sc1 had has groups - but you could add and delete them as needed)

The config page allows you only to set the number of stereo outputs.
« Last Edit: 2007-09-07, 14:35:13 by qwanta » Logged
Dstruct
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 971


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: 2007-09-07, 17:47:32 »

until no sample is loaded or playing in these parts, no cpu is wasted there.


i just hope that we get more outputs at all. at the moment i have no use for part 9-16 as we only have 8 stereo outs. 17 stereo outs would be perfect (one for the browser-preview, 16 for the parts).
Logged
qwanta
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 134


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: 2007-09-07, 18:56:07 »

Maybe not CPU, but sc2 seems to have a larger footprint (3.4MB vs 2.3MB for RAM) but in the larger scope of things this isn't much.

What I'm curious about is why would you use 8 parts/outputs on sc2 instead of using 8 different instances? The second option is much cleaner, and gives you much more flexibility in terms of freezing.
Logged
Dstruct
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 971


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: 2007-09-07, 19:00:40 »

yeah maybe claes could lower the memory footprint a bit with such change, but i don't think he's really interested in this.

i'm actually using 2 instances. one for drums and one for other (main) sounds. i just always run out of output-channels. i don't use "freeze". i have a pre-built template with all the routings and then i just start with throwing in samples. the advantage with just one instance for all sounds rather than one instance for each sound is the single interface for me. i can open shortcircuit on a third display for example and can do all the work in there without closing opening plugin-guis all the time. bit like a hardware-workstation/device ...

another advantage is the ability to copy/move sounds between all parts. that's not possible between several instances!
Logged
qwanta
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 134


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: 2007-09-07, 20:09:10 »

Interesting, I guess we all have different ways of doing things.

EnergyXT2 has recently added a feature where you can save a midi clip including all VSTi/VST's on the track to an .xtc file. This makes it really easy share these clips between projects as you can just drag the xtc file into the sequencer and the whole thing is reconstituted, ready to go.

So I'm more in the mode of building up xtc files: hihat lines, percussion, ep riffs etc... and it makes more sense to have one sc instance per xtc file (per track).
Logged
Afro88
Newbie
*
Posts: 12


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: 2007-11-11, 12:08:57 »

I think it'd be great to see some cut down versions of SC2. For example a single stereo out, 1 channel version for reasons mentioned above. But also considering Ableton's new drum racks feature, and that Claes is working with them now, maybe a low memory single note version?
Logged
publicradio
Newbie
*
Posts: 2


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: 2012-04-16, 17:03:47 »

I would prefer to use one instance of ShortCircuit2, but I can't figure out how to use the different midi channels. When I change my MIDI receive channel, I get nothing, even if I have sounds on other channels.

I use Reaper, and I would like so send my midi from different tracks into one instance of the VSTi.
Logged
Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.15 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!