DAAAAAAMN, vienna ensemble is epicly awesome! keep my imac?

[musicman691]

Originally Posted by Emcha_audio

That stinks.. and it makes me wonder how I was able to work with 30 or so independent VI tracks yesterday night with my i3 2500 quad core (no hyperthreading)

You were able to do so because you know what you're doing my friend. That's all it takes and not working at unreasonably low buffer values either.

[TNM]

Originally Posted by Emcha_audio

That stinks.. and it makes me wonder how I was able to work with 30 or so independent VI tracks yesterday night with my i3 2500 quad core (no hyperthreading)

as long as i work at 128 buffer and host the instruments in Pro Tools that's no problem here either.

In any case, that was with my older macs, the new imac pro changes things and is much more powerful :)

[TNM]

Originally Posted by musicman691

You were able to do so because you know what you're doing my friend. That's all it takes and not working at unreasonably low buffer values either.

Oh here we go, yet ANOTHER musicman dig at my intelligence. No matter what I do, he just won't stop it. Why even bother? Why not just let it go, FOR ONCE? I really AM going to have to talk to avid, as its you and you alone that is continuously tormenting me here and making me feel so unwelcome, for over a year now, with your constant jabs.

Yet if i respond in kind I am the one that gets called out.Well I am going to. bad luck.. So sick of your micro aggression insults. You are getting more crafty with it, but it's because I am not stupid I know exactly what you are doing.

You can dream on in your little fabricated fantasy world if you think I don't know what I am doing.. VE Pro on a macbook pro, on the same machine as pro tools, gives absolutely no benefit in running VI's as far as power/instances is concerned.

Prove otherwise or shut it! Prove it on a MAC that VE Pro provides a tangible performance improvement on the SAME computer alongside PT 2018, as far as VI instances are concerned.. But not at something ridiculous like 1024 buffer.. I'll even accept 128 buffer x 2, so 128 in pro tools, 256 in VE Pro. Which is not ridiculously low at all..If you really believe your own fantasy, I can honestly say you don't know how to use pro tools then, as pro tools VI performance is absolutely fine, and at 128 buffer beats every other DAW, including Logic, for polyphony count. You just have no idea how efficient Pro Tools itself is.. you can't seem to grasp it..

I'd rather play VI's at 128 buffer in Pro Tools, than 384 buffer in VE Pro, and have better performance at the same time.. and run one program. Duh.

Ve pro is good for a second machine, but still from most reports, real world latency for playing instruments "live" usually settles at about 512 for most people to avoid pops and clicks, which is far too high for me.. But it still has a benefit to play and record the midi on the main machine then offload it to the VE Pro Server, for sure.

or to run the 32 bit version to host older instruments without a bridge, and of course to host vst/au plugins that pro tools can't use natively.

But to run 64 bit plugins in AU VST format on the same machine instead of just running the AAX in pro tools, nope, zero performance benefit. I can prove it. So prove otherwise.

Who said I can't run 32 Vi tracks? I can run 100. More.. it depends on the VI...

It's a little 4 core macbook, not a very powerful machine, that I mainly tested VE Pro on.

Just like anything, VE Pro is also limited by the power of the machine.. I can guarantee you that Emcha could not get any better performance out of my machine like some miracle, than I can. Wanna bet on it? I'm happy to.
I'll send him my machine. Seriously. I can guarantee you, whatever instances of a Vi he can get in VE Pro, if it has an AAX version, i can match or exceed it natively in Pro Tools.

@Emcha, were you hosting the Vi's solely in VE Pro? What VI's? I don't understand what musicman's issue is, i used to use 30 Vi's when i had a dual core 3ghz imac.. it simply depends on the Vi and polyphony demanded! Heck, I used 25 Vi's on a single, yes, SINGLE core athlon 2600XP in 2005 in Cubase, at 128 buffer. It was maxed out, but yeah.

Where did he even get the idea I can't use 30 Vi's? The Vi's I tested with are ones that bring any computer to it's knees with high polyphony, like diva for example..Xils lab stuff, really hungry stuff.. I was just testing to see if VE Pro provided a real performance improvement over hosting them in PT natively but once again, it worsened performance unless i set the buffer to at *least* double what was in PT, and used no Vi's in PT, then it sort of evened out.

[TNM]

I just remembered which VI's i tested with cause i can't use them in PT at 32 or 64 buffer:

Diva demo and full version of KHS One which is very hungry also.

Hey Emcha, try a 4 note chord progression, with KHS one default patch.

If you get 30 tracks of it doing that on a i5-2500, i'll return my imac pro and get an imac with i5 inside and save 5 grand. Seriously.

PS 2018.7 has changed a lot and many VI's are now playable at 64.

[Emcha_audio]

Originally Posted by TNM

VE Pro on a macbook pro, on the same machine as pro tools, gives absolutely no benefit in running VI's as far as power/instances is concerned.

Any two sotware running concurently on the same compute will be using the same cpu and ram, so the advantages are not going to be that big. But, then again there's a few advantages.

1rst, you can save your template in PT and not have to close VEP even if you're changing sessions in PT, as long as the template is the same from session to session, you won't have to change anything in the connections to VEP. So it saves loading time as you don't have to load the VI's every time.

2nd, VEP is very good with handeling memory and VST's, therefore the impact on the cpu is lessened. I won't say the cpu, because it's a software and still uses the cpu and the more you have loaded on it, the more CPU it will be using as of Ram too. Also, a lot of the VI's out there seems to be better under their vst form than the aax (and that might simply be to coders not going deep enough in coding for aax and just porting from VST to AAX)

Now on the other hand, if you have a secondary computer that you can slave for VEP to PT. Now you would really see a difference.

[XJENSEN]

Originally Posted by TNM

Intersting about AAX with internal sequencer.. I was using sugar bytes effectrix, the AAX, as an insert effect, and it was all out of time once i had a plugin with latency before it.. But in Cubase and Logic it was perfect.. So this must be the same issue as such as what you are describing.
Are you saying it only happens when there is ADC needed?

I'm having this problem with a lot of AAX plugins lately!
E.g. SoundToys Echoboy: As soon as there's another latency-inducing plugin before it, the 'synchronised' delay timings get completely upset.
I noticed this with instruments like Boom as well.
Something very wrong there.