• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Topic: Vienna Insts - question for users

  1. #1

    Vienna Insts - question for users

    Just a question of horsepower needs. I'm pretty sure I'd like to nab the Instruments version of the Woodwinds I and II. I'm just wondering how much computer/s to throw at just these, or what is feasable. Is it possible if I built a new super machine for this, could it run universal modes (or something similiarly comprehensive) on most or all of the woods? Or does it simply take more resources (RAM) than one PC can give atm?

    Pic, Fl 1, Cl, Ob, Bassoon, maybe Eb Cl and Bass Cl, plus a couple of section patches? Or does this work more along the lines of dedicating a full PC to each one or maybe only 2?

    No doubt you probably know what I'm asking. I've read that the V.I. is even more efficient than GS3 regarding memory usage, which has lead me to wonder if one good/excellent PC could load so much. Advice, or brief education would be appreciated - thnx!


  2. #2

    Re: Vienna Insts - question for users

    Hi Mike...

    I have 5 PC slaves and plan on using 1 of them for the woodwinds. Without having tested woods only, I would say you could have 6-8+ instruments on one PC depending on how much you fill up each instance. I dont know about universal mode as I'm trying to make my own matrices instead (universal mode has some performance patches I seldomely use). I hope to atleast kram the following on to my woods PC

    Flute 1
    Oboe French
    Bassoon Contra

    and that should be no problem at all I reckon. I have posted a test on the VSL forum which i'll post a summary of here. Should give you a good idea of what to expect:

    test Originally posted here: http://vsl.co.at/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7652&iframe=true

    Its a 2gb machine, starting with a little over 1500mb free when I started loading instances. After the four had been loaded, 800MB remained. The four were Violins, Celli, Violas and Basses

    Each STRINGS instance had the following articulations loaded:

    Short staccato
    Short Detache
    Long Detache
    Legato normal
    Legato Portamento

    I then loaded Oboe, Flute and ClarinetB to fill up the remaining ram

    Each wind had loaded

    Short Portato
    Medium Portarto
    Long Portato
    Legato Normal

    I had about 137MB left after this loaining up these 7 instances.

    Bare in mind also that the legatos have both p and f layers loaded, and that each of the other articulations have 2 versions of each note loaded. Personaly I find it pretty impressive.

  3. #3

    Re: Vienna Insts - question for users

    Thanks for sharing your test. It seems that VI is very RAM friendly.

    Somebody give me 7000 euros and four brand new computers!


    Passion for Sound

  4. #4

    Re: Vienna Insts - question for users

    I've done a few tests and if I "lose" some of the legato instruments I can fit many more instruments into the RAM. At the moment I really don't have enough RAM to fit a whole string section on one PC. However, if I load only the samples that I used to use in the Giga Pro-Edition I actually use much less RAM than before. This is the problem; so many new choices of articulation. I think that ultimately I will come to some sort of "writing" compromise and then (if I need to) tweak the programming on an instrument by instrument basis. Obviously this is more time consuming, but as VI saves a huge amount of programming time anyway I'm not too worried. Of course I could buy another PC or two, but I can't be bothered....!


  5. #5

    Re: Vienna Insts - question for users

    Thanks so much Christian, that's what I was wondering about. I believe I read some of your first impressions on the other forum V. and I. found it pretty informative.

    I'm still using 1st Edition, with the GS3 updates and what not, and with other libs of course. I'm not sure if I want to go with Vienna Insts for every aspect of the setup yet, but those woods are just wicked good, and I already know I cannot live without them. They must be mine .

    Out of curiosity, are you using soundcards/digital routing, or something like FX-Tele/Giga-Teleport? I'm not clear yet on how I'll integrate the new instruments into existing convolution setups. I'm running 3 slaves and the main. Adding this fourth was sorta my "re-think things" point for other reasons, but the V.I. device is a standalone deal right?

    I'm not sure which way to go, sorta looking for some examples. If I'm not mistaken you were holding out for MIR, I recently got IR-1 (since I'm not happy with the GP impulses - tho overall I like GPulse's sound/placement abilities better than IR1). I'm trying to figure out a way of getting a live multi-bus, multi-convolution thing going for the routing of all instrument groups. I've tried lots of things, but my solutions don't cover incorporating the V.I.

    Appreciate the test specs, that really was informative.

  6. #6

    Re: Vienna Insts - question for users

    Yeah - still have no solution for verb yet. I really hope MIR will come soon and will prove a viable purchase for my setup. I'm still not using VI yet as I have a few tunes I need done first using my old templates, and even when they are done i'm likely to wait for the rest of the collections before really doing my final setup. At that time I hope VSL have made an announcement on MIR so I know what to do. If MIR is far away I'll have to think of a solution - if MIR is close (say Q2) I think i'll wait.

    My setup is with soundcards. Each soundcard roted back to my main DAW. I tried GigaFX (or whatever its called) but experienced massive dropouts with a template of my size - and very little support of the FxMax forum. But I know of quite a few who are using it, and with success.

Go Back to forum


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts