VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Discussion of Digital Performer use, optimization, tips and techniques on MacOS.

Moderator: James Steele

Forum rules
This forum is for most discussion related to the use and optimization of Digital Performer [MacOS] and plug-ins as well as tips and techniques. It is NOT for troubleshooting technical issues, complaints, feature requests, or "Comparative DAW 101."
Chris T
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: Unspecified

VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by Chris T »

I'm running DP 8, and VEPro 5 (I'm about to start a new project so I can't update to VEP6 yet..). I've always found this a bit of a dilemma since DP went 64 Bit:

I have a New Mac Pro, top spec, with 64GB or RAM. I have a big orchestral / hybrid template, and host most of my orchestra on external Mac Mini Slaves. However I do need to host a ton of stuff on my main Mac Pro - especially as I get new sample libraries and would like them in my general template (and my Mac Minis are maxed out).

I have a General Template VEPro 5 instance (on Main Mac Pro Host), which hosts most of my synths, Band, Guitars and other paraphernalia. However I do (randomly) host other VIs within DP itself.

Now that we are able to disable VI tracks in DP (which makes switching DP sessions easier, can anyone tell me why one would bother using VEPro 5 on the Host machine at all?

I've avoided V-Racks, since I rarely need to copy between chunks (and when I do, I simply disable/re-enable tracks so it's faster). However, I'm still a bit confused as to which is the best way as far as workflow.

I find that Audio Bundles get all confused when VE Pro is in question, and also I often find VEPro instances clearing themselves randomly (which is annoying) when connecting to DP.

Any thoughts / tips / best-practises out there?...

Thanks!
Main SYS: 12-Core New Mac Pro (Dec 2013), 64GB RAM, OS10.10, Apollo Quad Interface, 3xSSD work/sound drives in TB Enclosure, UAD Plugs, DP, VE PRO, All NI, All Spectrasonics, many libraries, VIs etc.
2nd SYS: Intel 8-Core Mac Pro (2007), 28GB RAM, OS10.7, MOTU PCI 424, 2408 interfaces (4), DP8.07, VE PRO, All NI, All Spectrasonics, many libraries, VIs etc.
2 Mac Minis (2011): Dual Quad, 16GB RAM running VE Pro, various libraries in Kontakt, G-Player, UVI.
magicd
Posts: 1461
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Contact:

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by magicd »

Excellent question.

Using VEP on satellite computers has the obvious advantage off offloading work from the primary computer. However running VEP on the same computer as DP does not diminish overall CPU load on the machine.

Now that DP is 64 bit you don't have the memory limitations of DP7 or earlier.

Because VEP runs outside DP it does not get the benefit of pre-gen rendering.

So you might actually get better performance if you run the instruments directly inside DP.

Give it a try and let us know if you see any difference.

Dave
frankf
Posts: 1132
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by frankf »

I abandoned VEP a while ago when DP went 64 bit and I'm still running a Mac Pro 3,1 at least for now. But I maxed out the RAM and am using SSDs exclusively for DP projects, VIs, Movie streaming and OS X which combination made my system very fast. I'm
a composer with fairly large templates for mock
ups and I've not had a need to return to VEP either in the box or on second computer and I've not yet got into the new optimized settings of DP9. My 2¢ of course.
Frank Ferrucci
http://www.ferruccimusic.com
Mac Pro 6,1 64gb RAM DP9.52 OSX 10.12.6 MIO 2882d & ULN2d Firewire Audio Interfaces, MOTU MTP-AV USB
labman
Posts: 1940
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: Unspecified

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by labman »

With VEP on in host, I can keep massive template online no matter what DP file I am working on. Wouldn't wanna work without it.
AMPGUI themes - Andy rocks!, 3 macs, MacPro 768GB ram, 16core OS11.7.10, DP11.31, all Waves, all SLATE, PSP, IK multimedia & Audioease plugs, all PAlliance, Softube, tons of NI VI's all air Spitfire, all Audiobro, all Berlin, EW PLAY, LLizard, MachFive3, Kontakt5, Omnisphere, RMX, LASS, all Soundtoys, Lexicon AU's, melodyne and others I know am forgetting, cause I'm old...Also mucho outboard rigs, MTPs, DTP, antelope WC, and 4 control surfaces with Raven.
dix
Posts: 2986
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by dix »

Once the hurdles in the new pre-gen scheme in DP are worked out (and I believe they may have been. I haven't spent much time yet with 9.12) I can see little reason for me to bother with VEP on the same computer.

I don't suppose hosting VIs on the same computer with VEP or Bidule technically lowers the CPU load, but I do know that it dramatically increased performance in DP on my system. Presumably by allocating resources more efficiently.
14-inch MBP M1 Max (2021), 13.6.x, 64GB RAM, UAD Quad Tb Satellite, 4 displays ::: 2009 4,1 > 5,1 MacPro 12-core 3.33 ghz , 10.14.x, 96GB RAM, GeForce GTX 770 , NewerTech eSATA/USB3 PCIe Host Adapter, UAD-2 Quad, ::: 15-inch MBP (2015) 10.14.x, 16GB RAM ::: Lynx Aurora (n) USB ::: DP (latest version), Vienna Ensemble Pro danwool.com
JSmith1234567
Posts: 746
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:48 pm
Primary DAW OS: Unspecified

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by JSmith1234567 »

I need to check into how VEP would work inside DP.

I've never tired it that way.

I like that it comes in one massive sort of "mainframe" when I do it as a simultaneous app, as I can get to all 25 instances immediately and hone in on what I need to tweak.

Saving that directly in DP, instead of separately, would definitely be a plus though.
OSX Big Sur (latest). Mac Pro Late 2013 ("trash-can"), 3.5 Ghz 6-Core Intel XeonE5, 64GB RAM. Motu DP 11.03, Vienna Pro Server, Presonus Notion, Osculator, Keyboard Maestro
JSmith1234567
Posts: 746
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:48 pm
Primary DAW OS: Unspecified

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by JSmith1234567 »

dix wrote:Once the hurdles in the new pre-gen scheme in DP are worked out (and I believe they may have been. I haven't spent much time yet with 9.12) I can see little reason for me to bother with VEP on the same computer.

I don't suppose hosting VIs on the same computer with VEP or Bidule technically lowers the CPU load, but I do know that it dramatically increased performance in DP on my system. Presumably by allocating resources more efficiently.
I'm sorry!

Do you mean that it works better when you running VE Pro separately and attach the plug-in in DP?

That is the way I have been doing it in 9.02, which has been terrifric.

9.02 with "run-in-real-time, not "pre-gen" by the way.

Thanks!
OSX Big Sur (latest). Mac Pro Late 2013 ("trash-can"), 3.5 Ghz 6-Core Intel XeonE5, 64GB RAM. Motu DP 11.03, Vienna Pro Server, Presonus Notion, Osculator, Keyboard Maestro
Chris T
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: Unspecified

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by Chris T »

Thanks for your opinions folks.

It seems to be that many don't see the point of it, since DP can host things just as well now. However those who have BIG templates still seem to like a Host metaframe - especially when switching between cues means 0 load time etc.

I am definitely finding the latter solution 'fiddly' though, hence my original question.

My other problem is this (and sorry if this is more of a VEP question than a DP one, but the solution might be in DP, hence my asking):

I've been encountering one very annoying problem which I can't seem to remedy:

I have Metaframes on both my Host computer (New Mac Pro) and also on 3 Slave Macs. I run DP8 on my Host. This happens MOSTLY on my Host computer:

When I load a "template metaframe" - i.e. a standard metaframe I've built which contains a collection of VI frames, when I then load my "General Template" in DP, often, some of my VI Frames in the Host metaframe are CLEARED OF ALL SOUNDS. VEPro seems to be getting a message from DP and clearing itself... (I usually have my VI plugin tracks Disabled in DP until I need to use them, to save juice).

I know it has something to do with Decoupling (i.e. so it doesn't 'talk' to DP as far as loading sounds go). However I can't seem to SAVE my Metaframes with "Decouple" selected, thus when I load a metaframe, the Decouple seems to be always deselected.

Can you tell me a good, fool-proof solution to avoiding my VI Frames being cleared by DP ? (e.g. a "Best practice") ?


thanks!
Main SYS: 12-Core New Mac Pro (Dec 2013), 64GB RAM, OS10.10, Apollo Quad Interface, 3xSSD work/sound drives in TB Enclosure, UAD Plugs, DP, VE PRO, All NI, All Spectrasonics, many libraries, VIs etc.
2nd SYS: Intel 8-Core Mac Pro (2007), 28GB RAM, OS10.7, MOTU PCI 424, 2408 interfaces (4), DP8.07, VE PRO, All NI, All Spectrasonics, many libraries, VIs etc.
2 Mac Minis (2011): Dual Quad, 16GB RAM running VE Pro, various libraries in Kontakt, G-Player, UVI.
frankf
Posts: 1132
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: NYC
Contact:

VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by frankf »

I've already posted that I like working in one box rather than use VEP on a slave and I understand others prefer the second workflow. Still I'd like to elaborate on how I got to preferring my current approach.

I started with a sequencer and a room full of synth keyboards, EFX boxes and modules both, and stacks of samplers with hard drives to load samples and patches and I can't tell you how many feet of MIDI, power, audio, video, SCSI and other cables with physical switchers and patch bays of many types. Always problems popped up with all of these physical connections and cables, often the synths themselves. And this was in a pro studio. With the advent of VI's most of this out of the box hardware slowly disappeared and I found myself spending more time composing and less maintaining. As computers grew more powerful, as we know, the VI and FX developers started to make better and bigger software which demanded more RAM and computer power. Even if you maxed out your Mac's RAM or upgraded to a faster processor, 32bit mode host software like DP couldn't address all of it. Hence host apps like VEP were developed so when running as a DP plug on the same computer we COULD address unused RAM and make good use of it. Running on a second computer, VEP operates as a linked networked host, still as a DP plug, which uses that computer's RAM and processor to relieve DP and the Mac it's running on of some of the heavy lifting.

I used VEP on my DP Mac and it worked well even though I didn't like setting up a second host. The second Mac workflow was too complicated and brought back some of the problems I didn't like about the room full of hardware days. I was working on one computer but had to set up 2 hosts and manage an additional layer of bussing and loading, sometimes on a cue by cue basis. Again, that's just me.

Then MOTU released DP as 64 bit app which could utilize all installed free memory and there was no need for me to run VEP as second host on the same Mac, especially with DP's V-racks. I've been running DP like this for a while now with great success.

For a film composer like me, who needs to stream samples for mock ups, stream video and record audio, the introduction of 64 bit and v-racks were a huge plus for my workflow. The big hang up was access time to/from my disks, even with separate disks for audio, many VIs, and video. Probably the most immediate improvement in speed in loading DP projects, access and streaming, not to mention the smoothness of DP's operation came from the replacement of all my streaming HDs with SSDs. Even without the latest Mac Pro trash can or updated tower, I'm running smoothly with one host DAW in the box.

This said, whatever works to keep your tools as transparent as possible and to aid your creativity.



Frank Ferrucci
Frank Ferrucci
http://www.ferruccimusic.com
Mac Pro 6,1 64gb RAM DP9.52 OSX 10.12.6 MIO 2882d & ULN2d Firewire Audio Interfaces, MOTU MTP-AV USB
Chris T
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: Unspecified

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by Chris T »

Thank you Frank. Everything you say makes total sense: as a natural consequence of increased computing power, the less 'connections' we have to make to external entities (be they other computers, or even other software) the better, so hosting EVERYTHING within DP seems like the absolute way to go.

I shall probably be redesigning my template going forward and not use VEP on my Host machine at all. I guess now with DP Clippings, one can bring in Track configurations etc from other templates which would make them easy to modify.

I'm sure I should be using V-Racks, but have never really gone there (I guess since I was using VEP). Can anyone tell me what the point of using V-Racks is if you DON'T work on (say a film score) in Chunks, but rather save a new session for every new cue? (Where each new session of course comes from the same Template, which has all VI's / Audio in/outs / Revebs etc pre-routed).

thanks
Main SYS: 12-Core New Mac Pro (Dec 2013), 64GB RAM, OS10.10, Apollo Quad Interface, 3xSSD work/sound drives in TB Enclosure, UAD Plugs, DP, VE PRO, All NI, All Spectrasonics, many libraries, VIs etc.
2nd SYS: Intel 8-Core Mac Pro (2007), 28GB RAM, OS10.7, MOTU PCI 424, 2408 interfaces (4), DP8.07, VE PRO, All NI, All Spectrasonics, many libraries, VIs etc.
2 Mac Minis (2011): Dual Quad, 16GB RAM running VE Pro, various libraries in Kontakt, G-Player, UVI.
dix
Posts: 2986
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by dix »

Can anyone tell me what the point of using V-Racks is if you DON'T work on (say a film score) in Chunks...
The only possible reason I can think of is that you could Load the V-Rack into a future project easily if you ever had the need, without having to open the old project and create a Clipping. Other than that there's no reason I can see. Since V-Rack channels can't be automated it's better to keep VIs in the sequence I think.
14-inch MBP M1 Max (2021), 13.6.x, 64GB RAM, UAD Quad Tb Satellite, 4 displays ::: 2009 4,1 > 5,1 MacPro 12-core 3.33 ghz , 10.14.x, 96GB RAM, GeForce GTX 770 , NewerTech eSATA/USB3 PCIe Host Adapter, UAD-2 Quad, ::: 15-inch MBP (2015) 10.14.x, 16GB RAM ::: Lynx Aurora (n) USB ::: DP (latest version), Vienna Ensemble Pro danwool.com
frankf
Posts: 1132
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by frankf »

V-racks are Chunks and can be Loaded into other Projects for one, for any type of music. You can have, for example, all your reverbs in a v-rack and Load it into any Project or your Afro Cuban set of VIs in one, or your string quartet VIs in another, etc, etc, etc.


Frank Ferrucci
Frank Ferrucci
http://www.ferruccimusic.com
Mac Pro 6,1 64gb RAM DP9.52 OSX 10.12.6 MIO 2882d & ULN2d Firewire Audio Interfaces, MOTU MTP-AV USB
JSmith1234567
Posts: 746
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:48 pm
Primary DAW OS: Unspecified

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by JSmith1234567 »

frankf wrote:I've already posted that I like working in one box rather than use VEP on a slave and I understand others prefer the second workflow. Still I'd like to elaborate on how I got to preferring my current approach.

I started with a sequencer and a room full of synth keyboards, EFX boxes and modules both, and stacks of samplers with hard drives to load samples and patches and I can't tell you how many feet of MIDI, power, audio, video, SCSI and other cables with physical switchers and patch bays of many types. Always problems popped up with all of these physical connections and cables, often the synths themselves. And this was in a pro studio. With the advent of VI's most of this out of the box hardware slowly disappeared and I found myself spending more time composing and less maintaining. As computers grew more powerful, as we know, the VI and FX developers started to make better and bigger software which demanded more RAM and computer power. Even if you maxed out your Mac's RAM or upgraded to a faster processor, 32bit mode host software like DP couldn't address all of it. Hence host apps like VEP were developed so when running as a DP plug on the same computer we COULD address unused RAM and make good use of it. Running on a second computer, VEP operates as a linked networked host, still as a DP plug, which uses that computer's RAM and processor to relieve DP and the Mac it's running on of some of the heavy lifting.

I used VEP on my DP Mac and it worked well even though I didn't like setting up a second host. The second Mac workflow was too complicated and brought back some of the problems I didn't like about the room full of hardware days. I was working on one computer but had to set up 2 hosts and manage an additional layer of bussing and loading, sometimes on a cue by cue basis. Again, that's just me.

Then MOTU released DP as 64 bit app which could utilize all installed free memory and there was no need for me to run VEP as second host on the same Mac, especially with DP's V-racks. I've been running DP like this for a while now with great success.

For a film composer like me, who needs to stream samples for mock ups, stream video and record audio, the introduction of 64 bit and v-racks were a huge plus for my workflow. The big hang up was access time to/from my disks, even with separate disks for audio, many VIs, and video. Probably the most immediate improvement in speed in loading DP projects, access and streaming, not to mention the smoothness of DP's operation came from the replacement of all my streaming HDs with SSDs. Even without the latest Mac Pro trash can or updated tower, I'm running smoothly with one host DAW in the box.

This said, whatever works to keep your tools as transparent as possible and to aid your creativity.



Frank Ferrucci


Frank...sorry for my obtuseness (is that even a word?) but can you clarify how you are doing thins?

I re-read your posts but am still a little confused.

a) you run everything on one Mac Pro?

b) you don't use VE Pro anymore, or do you run it directly in DP instead of as a separate application running concurrently? or something else?

The only thing I run in VE Pro (as a separate application running concurrently) are like 25 instances of Kontakt, so I guess I could just run 25 instances of Kontakt right in DP?

I'm just trying too find the most CPU-efficient and time-saving way to work.

Thanks!



And also being able to run things at a low enough latency that the VI's really play without lag when I play a note.
OSX Big Sur (latest). Mac Pro Late 2013 ("trash-can"), 3.5 Ghz 6-Core Intel XeonE5, 64GB RAM. Motu DP 11.03, Vienna Pro Server, Presonus Notion, Osculator, Keyboard Maestro
User avatar
terrybritton
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 8:45 am
Primary DAW OS: Windows
Location: Elizabeth City, NC
Contact:

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by terrybritton »

dix wrote:
Can anyone tell me what the point of using V-Racks is if you DON'T work on (say a film score) in Chunks...
The only possible reason I can think of is that you could Load the V-Rack into a future project easily if you ever had the need, without having to open the old project and create a Clipping. Other than that there's no reason I can see. Since V-Rack channels can't be automated it's better to keep VIs in the sequence I think.
Wow - I never realized V-Rack channels could not be automated. That is a serious consideration to take into account. Best relegated to sample playback VSTi's where one will not be automating much? I tend to automate synth settings quite a lot.

Terry
Computer: Sweetwater CS400v7 Intel Core i7-10700K CPU @ 3.80GHz | 64Gigs RAM | Windows 11 Pro x64 |
MOTU 828 mk3 hybrid

DAWs & Live: MOTU Digital Performer 11.31 | Cantabile Performer 4
Keyboard Synths: Kawai K5000s, Korg Wavestation
Controllers: NI Komplete Kontrol S-88 Mk3 & S-49 Mk2; Maschine Mk3 & JAM;
Akai MPK249 & 225, Alesis QX49, Behringer BCF2000 & FCB1010
Rack Modules: Ensoniq ESQm, Yamaha TX81Z, Wavestation SR

Tutorials: https://youtube.com/@CreatorsMediaTools
dix
Posts: 2986
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: VEP on Host vs hosting VIs in sequencer?

Post by dix »

Well, you can automate MIDI instruments themselves in V-Racks, just not the channel - so no automating channel vol, panning, inserts etc. This can easily be remedied by bringing an instrument into the sequence via an Aux, which can be automated
14-inch MBP M1 Max (2021), 13.6.x, 64GB RAM, UAD Quad Tb Satellite, 4 displays ::: 2009 4,1 > 5,1 MacPro 12-core 3.33 ghz , 10.14.x, 96GB RAM, GeForce GTX 770 , NewerTech eSATA/USB3 PCIe Host Adapter, UAD-2 Quad, ::: 15-inch MBP (2015) 10.14.x, 16GB RAM ::: Lynx Aurora (n) USB ::: DP (latest version), Vienna Ensemble Pro danwool.com
Post Reply