PDA

View Full Version : MIDIoverLAN or FX Teleport?


Ulfrinn
04-09-2008, 12:00 AM
I've posted several times on this forum asking for advice on a MIDI studio i plan to build soon...I've almost got all my questions answered. Only one left i know of is-

To connect 3 computers, should i have a preference between MIDIoverLAN or FX Teleport? (or any others I don't know about) Or is it simply personal preference?

I'll be using Complete Composers collection, but as soon as my experience and budget grow enough, i'll upgrade to Platinum, if that affects the answer...

A.Leung
04-09-2008, 12:16 AM
I've posted several times on this forum asking for advice on a MIDI studio i plan to build soon...I've almost got all my questions answered. Only one left i know of is-

To connect 3 computers, should i have a preference between MIDIoverLAN or FX Teleport? (or any others I don't know about) Or is it simply personal preference?

I'll be using Complete Composers collection, but as soon as my experience and budget grow enough, i'll upgrade to Platinum, if that affects the answer...

more info on your actual set-up would be needed to reply. IF all 3 are Pc's then f/x teleport will work. If you have a MAC somewhere in the mix it wont.

Ulfrinn
04-09-2008, 12:29 AM
Right now the plan is to build the 3 PC's with following specs:

(i don't ever see myself getting a mac, cuz i'm always on a tight budget, and the price difference between a mac and building myself a PC is not worth the small amount of superiority macs have in the audio world)

XP32
160GB 7200rpm HDD for OS
500GB 7200rpm HDD for library
4GB DDR2 800mhz RAM (i realize that with XP32 only 2-3 of this will actually be used)
Athlong 64x2 3.0ghz CPU
Focusrite Sapphire audio interface on DAW computer

Software:
Cubase 4
EWQL Complete Composer's Collection

I had planned to get MIDIoverLAN, but then i started seeing more and more posts of ppl saying they use FX teleport. So i guess all I'm asking is, is there any reason I should get FX teleport instead of sticking with my MIDIoverLAN plan?

A.Leung
04-09-2008, 12:41 AM
EWQL Complete Composer's Collection

I had planned to get MIDIoverLAN, but then i started seeing more and more posts of ppl saying they use FX teleport. So i guess all I'm asking is, is there any reason I should get FX teleport instead of sticking with my MIDIoverLAN plan?

Well- I'll tell ya. I've been to lots of studios that do both. The ones that use Midioverlan with litepipe seem to have fewer issues. Now there are some guys using F/X teleport flawlessy. But in my expereince MOL usually 'just works' and has fewer system issues.

I would imagine what you could do is give F/x teleport a go and see how it works for you. Download the trial version of FX Teleport 1.04

http://www.fx-max.com/fxt/setup/FXTeleportSetup.exe

Ulfrinn
04-09-2008, 12:44 AM
Sounds good! Thanks for the continued advice Allan. You've replied to every newb question thread i've posted, and i appreciate it.

A.Leung
04-09-2008, 01:26 AM
Sounds good! Thanks for the continued advice Allan. You've replied to every newb question thread i've posted, and i appreciate it.

glad to help. Let us all know how it turns out. I'm sure you will be happy to get over all the technical stuff and finally get down to just making music !

LEX
04-10-2008, 08:09 PM
Well- I'll tell ya. I've been to lots of studios that do both. The ones that use Midioverlan with litepipe seem to have fewer issues. Now there are some guys using F/X teleport flawlessy. But in my expereince MOL usually 'just works' and has fewer system issues.

I would imagine what you could do is give F/x teleport a go and see how it works for you. Download the trial version of FX Teleport 1.04

http://www.fx-max.com/fxt/setup/FXTeleportSetup.exe

MOL works great and was easy to set up.

I had some troubles with FXT until recently. It is very touchy about how the network and drivers are set up.

Since all my PCI slots on my host are filled, I use the built it Gigabit port.

I didn't have much luck with FXT and my single FXT server until I installed an updated LAN driver for the host.
Then it worked great.

I use it mostly for my Altaverb machine, with a few low CPU synths.

LEX

Ulfrinn
04-10-2008, 09:57 PM
Yea so far all signs are pointing to MIDIoverLAN. Seems simpler and more reliable. Thanks for the input guys!

Pochflyboy
04-11-2008, 07:29 AM
It is my understanding that with FXT-unlike with MIDIoverLAN-you don't need a sound card in the slave computers because the sound is routed back to the host through the LAN. Is this correct? Seems like a benefit of not having to spend an extra $150 on each slave computer to me.

-Joe Poch

paulwr
04-11-2008, 07:43 AM
It is my understanding that with FXT-unlike with MIDIoverLAN-you don't need a sound card in the slave computers because the sound is routed back to the host through the LAN. Is this correct? Seems like a benefit of not having to spend an extra $150 on each slave computer to me.

-Joe Poch

You may be saving $150, but you won't get as many instruments rolling at the same time from what I've heard. You may want to try the free download first and see what you get. I couldn't get it to work at all and didn't have a lot of time to put into it, so abandoned it. I do get fully loaded Kontakt2 (64 instrument slots) rolling with midiOverLan and lightpipe for audio on a slave in a 32 bit system with 2GB and the 3GB switch.

So check to see if the $150 savings is really a savings at all if you value getting the most instruments out of your slave at minimal latency.

-Paul

Ulfrinn
04-11-2008, 09:49 AM
Since my knowledge is still at its infancy on the subject, i'm in over my head in this argument, but i'm having trouble understanding why you would need a soundcard on the slaves anyway...Doesn't a sound card do nothing more than convert the signal to analog so you can hear it through speakers? If that's the case, why would you need it at all on any computer besides the DAW computer? Again, i'm in over my head, and expecting to be proved wrong. Just didn't make sense to me

Pietro
04-11-2008, 09:59 AM
Because, unlike FXT, MOL feeds slave machines with MIDI signals and routes it to plugins. Then, plugins play, and you need to route the audio signal back to main DAW by an audio cable.

FXT doesn't need a soundcard, it routes audio back to main DAW via LAN. Multichannel. And that's why I'm looking forward to try it some day.

- Piotr

Ulfrinn
04-11-2008, 10:26 AM
Ah. K i got it. I understood the concept of slaves playing the VSTs back to the DAW, but for some reason I never made the connection that that means it goes back to the DAW as audio, not midi just routed to a sample that would later be played by the DAW(as i originally thought).

So with that in mind...i should start looking into what makes MOL better, to see if its worth the soundcard and audio connection costs. Correct?

Dannthr
04-11-2008, 11:36 AM
My latency was doubled when I tried FXT compared to MOL.

A.Leung
04-11-2008, 11:37 AM
What makes Mol better?

See post 4, 7, 8 and 10. (edit: and now 14) But I am confused as to why you don't jut try the free trial of FXT.

Dannthr
04-11-2008, 11:46 AM
Yah, it's free.

Ulfrinn
04-11-2008, 11:54 AM
What makes Mol better?

See post 4, 7, 8 and 10. (edit: and now 14) But I am confused as to why you don't jut try the free trial of FXT.

Oh I do plan to try the FXT trial.

All i mean by looking into it, is to understand what I should be looking at when I do test it out, so when i try it I have a general idea of in what ways MOL would be better (since I assume MOL doesn't have a free trial)

paulwr
04-11-2008, 11:55 AM
Since my knowledge is still at its infancy on the subject, i'm in over my head in this argument, but i'm having trouble understanding why you would need a soundcard on the slaves anyway...Doesn't a sound card do nothing more than convert the signal to analog so you can hear it through speakers? If that's the case, why would you need it at all on any computer besides the DAW computer? Again, i'm in over my head, and expecting to be proved wrong. Just didn't make sense to me

No argument here. Just trying to help out.

The sound card function that works best is lightpipe and all digital. You are not, at the slave, trying to convert to analog. The idea is to get all the audio signals into your main DAW computer so you have control over them. So, you need to be able to shoot out digital audio from at least one lightpipe from the slave, and you need to be able to receive it at the DAW. Then you need at least two analog audio signals out of the DAW to your monitor speaker setup that may include a pre-amp or mixer to control volume.

If you are on a budget and have more than one slave, but only one lightpipe connection in the DAW for incoming, then you can take one slave's pipe to the next slave, make some adjustment to the mixer that comes with the audio card, so that the lightpipe exiting the 2nd slave carries, say, 2 stereo pairs of audio tracks for each slave to the DAW's one lightpipe 'in'.

Hope this makes sense. It may be simpler than I've made it sound. All digital audio into the DAW from computer slaves, that is optimum. The more digital audio tracks you can afford $ wise, the better if you are trying to do your work fast. It is nice to be able to commit 24 or 32 or 48 or more midi tracks in your DAW to audio tracks all at once in one pass. Meaning that you record all your slave digital audio in one pass to a lot of individual tracks so you can then do final mixing from audio tracks. It can save a half day or more sometimes.

-Paul

Ulfrinn
04-12-2008, 11:46 AM
Ah i get it now. So does anyone recommend a certain audio interface that will give me the 2 lightpipe inputs, as well as a live track input, headphone and monitor outs? (i'm sure i could find one, but just wondering is there is a certain one that is most popular)

Sounds like thats all I really need, unless using a USB2.0 connection for the keyboard controller is problematic, in which case i'd need a MIDI in as well.

Then for the slaves all I would need is a card that has lightpipe out, correct? (other than of course the LAN connections)

And also, whats the difference between lightpipe and normal optical cables? I know the difference between the data, but are the cables the same? Or am I on the completely wrong track...

(trying to get to the point where I can figure out the logic behind all this myself, so I don't need to ask on the forums about every single detail, but I know i'm not quite there yet)

Dannthr
04-12-2008, 11:58 AM
RME has light pipe interfaces that also have wordclock slaving.

Cheers

A.Leung
04-12-2008, 12:45 PM
yes and done forget your Ethernet. I'm staring at a D-Link gigabit switch DGS-1008d box now. A good box that has room to grow. Oh and routers DO NOT like heat. Keep well ventilated. Wow I found THAT out the hard way!

BertW
04-18-2008, 02:26 PM
Oh I do plan to try the FXT trial.

All i mean by looking into it, is to understand what I should be looking at when I do test it out, so when i try it I have a general idea of in what ways MOL would be better (since I assume MOL doesn't have a free trial)

MOL is free.

Hyperion
04-18-2008, 04:30 PM
FX Teleport over here.Host + 7 servers.It works great and you don't need a soundcard for the servers.The only issue is the loading time .An orchestral template with 192 midi tracks take around 9-12 minutes to load.

Cheers
Irving

Dannthr
04-18-2008, 04:54 PM
MIDIOverLAN has a free trial, but it is not free.

avidmovigoer
04-18-2008, 04:55 PM
:eek::eek:MOL is free.

Ulfrinn
04-20-2008, 09:18 AM
Yes I did see that MIDIoverLAN does have a free trial. Guess I should've looked that up before posting, since its kinda blatantly on the MIDIoverLAN website haha. But anyway, Because I unfortunately did not budget for quality soundcards on each slave, it looks like I will be going with FX teleport. I am on a tight budget, atleast for the initial build. I will be able to upgrade things in the coming months, but initially I am very tight. Thanks for all the input!

Ulfrinn

Andrew Sigler
04-20-2008, 10:56 AM
I use MOL and the only time I had anything approaching a problem was when I forgot to do SP2 on one of my machines running XP. Or maybe it was after running SP2 I had to reintroduce the computer to the system...anyway, it works like a charm.

-Andy

zircon
05-01-2008, 08:19 AM
There are a couple big advantages to FXT that people are forgetting...

1. Offline rendering. If you're like me and bounce or render all the time, offline rendering is really important and will save a lot of time.

2. Plugins save state with your project!

3. No need to run any external apps or configure anything after you've installed FXT... just use your DAW w/o worrying about other programs.

BertW
05-01-2008, 11:13 AM
Sorry, I meant MIDI Yoke is free.

zeke
05-03-2008, 03:42 PM
Gigabyte boards offer "2 Gigabit Ethernet LAN through Teaming". Has anyone ever tried this with FXT? Seems it might double the available bandwidth - and possibly allow for lower latencies.

I wonder what the processing cost is to run the teaming feature..

nexenta
03-24-2009, 05:49 AM
Hello.
I think is a big difference between MOL and FXT! Considering what it gives I will go for FXT in no time. The problem is now that I'm on MAC and FXT does not have implemented the tehnology here. I test it (FXT) on 3 networked windows systems and it worked like a charm. What they don't tell is that if you use MOL you will need additional sound cards (I hope I am wrong here!) to route the audio signal back to the daw. If you use FXT all you need is good NIC cards and that's all. FXT process the code on the slave machine and the audio is created on the master machine. MOL only route the midi signal to a slave and there the audio is processed so you'll need soundcards to route it back into the daw.. Not convenient! I think that FXT is quite an innovation. MOL is just a simple network program. I am in searching for a good audio steaming over network program for a while now. I tried the Wormhole 2 after I read about it on wome forums and on the main page.. They say that very good performances you get using this software.. I would say that is only marketing.. Very poor performances..
So I will wait for FXT to inovate the MAC world and using MOL as described above till then.
BR.