PDA

View Full Version : Is it even possible under one hood?


Paul J.
06-14-2008, 10:30 AM
Hey there,

We have purchased a Pro Mac for Audio/Video work and are packing pretty much everything EastWest has to offer. But my main issue is (surprise surprise) getting a big enough and working orchestra template from platinum xp. Is this even theoreticly possible?

Our exact setup is:

Pro Mac 2x 2.8 quad core
8gb Ram
Samples on 2x750gb 7200rpm hard drives in RAID.
Host programs on different hard drive.
Cubase Studio 4
Kontakt 3


Problems loading enough samples. Key Switches near impossible. Even by opening multiple kontakts. (One place said that should install multiple copies of Kontakt and open them like different programs. We have just opened multiple kontakts in cubase. is this an issue?)

Is the fact that cubase itself is 32bit a problem and if so will it be after play plus version of Platinum? Thought I read somewhere that shouldnt be. Then.... DFD is still a mystery to us and with the ammount of RAM we have well we thought we would'nt have too much problems. (which obviously isn't the case)

And when loaded samples show no memory problems, actually playing them (lots of them at a time ofcourse) it "maxes" out the cpu... as in actually using only 25% of our processor power but the limiter on Kontakt maxes out and seems that it doesnt use more than 1 core on each processor witch is really cool! (in opposite world...)

IF ANYONE could give us a helping hand or a point to the right direction, would be more than gratefull. We are walking in circles and bashing our heads constantly in the wall because of this. We just would love to get things up and working... and since some people SEEM to be happy with 1 cpu setups and well we have a decent setup it just makes me wonder... and then cry... and then cuddle up in a little ball and want to bash the Pro Mac with a baseball bat. But if someone could help me before getting to a sports store. I would be in eternal debt. Thank you forehand.

-Paul

johng
06-16-2008, 04:50 PM
nobody is doing a full orchestral mockup with all sections in Platinum XP on a single computer. I am using six PCs and a Mac that is similar to yours.

A.Leung
06-16-2008, 05:03 PM
same here

Jeff Hayat
06-16-2008, 05:14 PM
One place said that should install multiple copies of Kontakt and open them like different programs.

Not sure if the architecture is the same, but I tried this in Cubase on WinXP, and wound up with worse performance than mulitple instances of 1 Kontakt .dll

Cheers.

Vincent Bergbahn
06-16-2008, 05:16 PM
What can someone in the market for a Mac pro expect performance-wise? w/ EWQLSO PLAY w/QLP

Jeff Hayat
06-16-2008, 05:24 PM
What can someone in the market for a Mac pro expect performance-wise? w/ EWQLSO PLAY w/QLP

Could you make the question a bit more general?

Spinning poo machine
06-16-2008, 05:50 PM
http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/showthread.php?t=59792

"In short --- we can now run an entire high end symphony on ONE MacPro WITH high end plug in reverb. NO pops, stops, clicks or gltches - just pure composer magic."

So yes, it does appear to be possible. I know there's a huge difference between platinum and gold, but man, you guys sure are rigid about sticking with the sacred cow of using multiple computers.

To me, it just sounds like you're running into one of those dumb little problems that makes a huge difference in performance. For example, I saw in one forum on this site a guy with a Mac Pro having similar issues, but then he just changed one setting in Logic and *poof*, the computer started doing its thing. How arrogant of everyone to just assume that the Mac Pro can't handle it when people who own it are saying there's just about no limit to it.

nickysnd
06-16-2008, 06:41 PM
Here is one general question: What is good? Or, if that's not general enough, here's another one: What?

Vincent Bergbahn
06-16-2008, 11:36 PM
Sorry for the confusion. But I'm getting confused with all this back and forths about Mac Pros. I can't afford to have multiple computers to do this nor do I want to get into the computer farm thing as this just complicates things. With that said what can I expect to do with only a well set up Mac Pro.

We could frame my question the reverse way. What can't you do with only 1 mac pro and EWQLSO PLAY or QLP (not at the same time)?

I was under the impression that I would be pretty set to go with 1 mac pro.

Maybe someone with only a mac pro could chime in here??

OneThrow
06-16-2008, 11:48 PM
Here is one general question: What is good? Or, if that's not general enough, here's another one: What?

How about:

?

Can't get anymore general than that. Can you?

A.Leung
06-17-2008, 12:20 AM
Sorry for the confusion. But I'm getting confused with all this back and forths about Mac Pros. I can't afford to have multiple computers to do this nor do I want to get into the computer farm thing as this just complicates things. With that said what can I expect to do with only a well set up Mac Pro.

We could frame my question the reverse way. What can't you do with only 1 mac pro and EWQLSO PLAY or QLP (not at the same time)?

I was under the impression that I would be pretty set to go with 1 mac pro.

Maybe someone with only a mac pro could chime in here??

Well considering one of the items your wondering about is not even released yet, i.e. EWQLSO PLAY your question is rather hard to answer. I can tell you I am already dissapointed in trying to run large Multis of SD2 on a MAC 8 core. But thats just me. MAybe Im the only one with problems on such a powerful machine.

Seriously if you want to be considered a POWER USER and run really huge orchestral templates I just dont see a way around multiple computers but I hate to be a drag and not answer your question to at least to a partial extent. right now I'm at a friends house helping him score a film and he's on a MAc Pro 2.66 quad. 6 gigs of RAM. Heres what we have running at the moment:

2 instances of 8 tracks of Stlyus RMX (thats 16 tracks total)
Logic Pro 7.2.3.
5 instances of K2 Loaded up with 80 instruments from EWQLSO GOLDxp.
2 Instances of ALTIVERB
5 Space designers
About 25 tracks of Exs24 with Vienna symphony
3 cameleon 5000s
4 Zebra 2's
and 5 Ansynth 4's
And about 12 tracks of misc audio.

Now some people will say thats a lot but really, even with all those K2 instances my friend REALLY needs a farm so he can get at least 5 more instances (for a total of 80 more instruments ) that would be 80 more instruments on top of the already 80 instruments running on the MAc Pro.

PLAY is still a bit of an inigma to me. K2 and (to a lesser but similar extent) K3 are 'true/tried and tested' for many years on systems world wide. i KNOW K2/K3's limitations and abilities like the back of my hand. I KNOW how it will handle on my system and similar systems. PLAY? I just dont know. You all are about to find out. Maybe it knocks the socks off of N.I.'s engine. Who knows. Theres going to be a break in period as well. Bugs need to be ironed out. Will it be BETTER than N.I's sample engine? Who knows-maybe some day but N.I's K2 has YEARS of history backing it up and PLAY - well PLAY is just fresh off the boat. But I will say that if your REALLY in love with East Wests stuff (and C'mon! Whose not!?) ;) then you'll have to jump on the East West boat christened 'PLAY' because your East west sample library will not grow or be supported on N.I. engine any longer.

My advice: Cut to the chase. Get your Mac Pro dream machine. If your crazy about East Wests stuff great. You can hardly go wrong since most of their stuff is all tested and tweaked to death on Mac machines anyways. Buy some PLAY libraries. Keep loading them up on your MAc until your Mac chokes. Then ask yourself , well I got what I need. All my violins are in there, all my Brass, woodwinds and percussion. I can score an epic adventure. I even can sueeze in a full tenor group of choirs. I'm happy. Or the alternate , youll say , crap, I need another machine or I have to rethink the way I want to work to make this system do what I want it to do.

Only time will tell. now back to werk.

Vincent Bergbahn
06-17-2008, 12:55 AM
Thanks man....

Muziksculp
06-17-2008, 10:07 AM
EW/QL Symphonic Orch. Platinum Complete Plus, offers both 24-bit and 16-bit sample versions, that you can switch between, so you can work with 16-bit, and then switch a group of instruments (up to what your Mac Pro can handle) to the 24-bit version, render in one pass, and then do the same for a second group of 16-bit instruments, so I'm guessing the new PLAY PLUS version will make working with one Mac Pro a reality. I would recommend you increase the RAM to 16 GB whenever it's feasible.

I'm currently planning a (Two Mac Pro 8 core system) to run quite a large template of instruments from EWQLSO PLAY PLUS, and other Kontakt, and PLAY based libraries. Each Mac Pro will have 16 GB of RAM, and multiple internal and external HDs.

Questions...

Q1) As far as PLAY's ability to access as much of RAM, that is made available on a computer, (if it was running as a true 64-bit application on OSX Leopard), I'm not sure, but does this only apply to instruments that are not streaming from disc, but rather are just loaded into RAM, or does the larger RAM access, also improve the overall "streaming from disc" performance, since the RAM buffer size that is allocated for "streaming from disc" will be increased ?

Q2) Does the current version of PLAY when running as stand-alone on a dedicated computer, run as a true 64-bit application, (i.e. can access all installed RAM on a Mac ?)

Q3) In PLAY, can each instrument be set to stream from disc, or just to be loaded into RAM by the user ? so I can have a group of instruments load into RAM, and another group that is streaming from disc, at the same time, to better manage memory resources ?

Thanks.

Spinning poo machine
06-17-2008, 03:28 PM
Wait a minute, there's a HUGE difference between last year's 2.6 Ghz quad cores and the modern 2.8 Ghz (and up) 8 cores.

http://www.macworld.com/article/131538/2008/01/macprobench.html

Towards the bottom of the article, they mention that the newer Mac Pros have a slower hard drive shipped with them compared to last year's models. After a quick swap, however, the 2.8 Ghz 8 core was even faster than last year's 3.0 Ghz 8 core in yet another category. And it basically just destroyed the 2.6 Ghz 4 core model all over the place. My POINT is, for $2600 from online dealers, you can get a pretty killer deal on the 2.8 Ghz 8 cores.

Paul J.
06-19-2008, 08:37 AM
Well we we're able to load an ok ammount of sounds in to the system. However no multies not to mention Key Switches. Should I submit to the fact that multiple computers are required? Would be sad... don't even know how it works exactly and how powarful cpu's help spread the load. Anyways... the ammount of stuff people seem to be able to load in their simular setup seems so much more than we can... and just totally lost here. One issue might be that Cubase 4 is 32bit... but I read that that is not a problem when using PLAY instruments. Is this true? Or MUST the host program be 64bit aswell? Kinda lost with all the tecnobable. But Apreciate your help alot!

-Paul J.

A.Leung
06-19-2008, 09:29 AM
EW/QL Symphonic Orch. Platinum Complete Plus, offers both 24-bit and 16-bit sample versions, that you can switch between, so you can work with 16-bit, and then switch a group of instruments (up to what your Mac Pro can handle) to the 24-bit version, render in one pass, and then do the same for a second group of 16-bit instruments, so I'm guessing the new PLAY PLUS version will make working with one Mac Pro a reality. I would recommend you increase the RAM to 16 GB whenever it's feasible.

I'm currently planning a (Two Mac Pro 8 core system) to run quite a large template of instruments from EWQLSO PLAY PLUS, and other Kontakt, and PLAY based libraries. Each Mac Pro will have 16 GB of RAM, and multiple internal and external HDs.

Questions...

Q1) As far as PLAY's ability to access as much of RAM, that is made available on a computer, (if it was running as a true 64-bit application on OSX Leopard), I'm not sure, but does this only apply to instruments that are not streaming from disc, but rather are just loaded into RAM, or does the larger RAM access, also improve the overall "streaming from disc" performance, since the RAM buffer size that is allocated for "streaming from disc" will be increased ?

Q2) Does the current version of PLAY when running as stand-alone on a dedicated computer, run as a true 64-bit application, (i.e. can access all installed RAM on a Mac ?)

Q3) In PLAY, can each instrument be set to stream from disc, or just to be loaded into RAM by the user ? so I can have a group of instruments load into RAM, and another group that is streaming from disc, at the same time, to better manage memory resources ?

Thanks.

Sorry- am seriously pressed for time so can only answer one question. #3. Answer: YES, you can select (individually) which instruments to STREAM from dis and which to not.

Nanto Warrior
06-19-2008, 10:05 AM
Seriously if you want to be considered a POWER USER and run really huge orchestral templates I just dont see a way around multiple computers but I hate to be a drag and not answer your question to at least to a partial extent. right now I'm at a friends house helping him score a film and he's on a MAc Pro 2.66 quad. 6 gigs of RAM. Heres what we have running at the moment:

2 instances of 8 tracks of Stlyus RMX (thats 16 tracks total) AMAZING! :D
Logic Pro 7.2.3.
5 instances of K2 Loaded up with 80 instruments from EWQLSO GOLDxp. THATS IT! THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKIN' BOUT!!!
2 Instances of ALTIVERB
5 Space designers (Dont have a clue what that is!)
About 25 tracks of Exs24 with Vienna symphony 25 vienna patches+80 Goldxp-what more could you want?!!!!!
3 cameleon 5000s (?)
4 Zebra 2's (??!)
and 5 Ansynth 4's (Absynth 3 taxes my machine!!)
And about 12 tracks of misc audio. (Niiiiice!)

Even with all those K2 instances my friend REALLY needs a farm so he can get at least 5 more instances (for a total of 80 more instruments ) that would be 80 more instruments on top of the already 80 instruments running on the MAc Pro.

(Please tell me why on earth you'd need that many more?! Vienna and EW are second to none when used effectively! I need to post a tutorial on the Great Warrior Way of section doubling!!)


Ask yourself , well I got what I need. All my violins are in there, all my Brass, woodwinds and percussion. I can score an epic adventure. I even can sueeze in a full tenor group of choirs. I'm happy.

The end of my quest. Bada bing. Bada boom. Finitto. With a few effects and so many percussion instruments out, what more could you need? I mean take a look at what you posted above with the Stylus instances-MY GOD!

Or the alternate , youll say , crap, I need another machine or I have to rethink the way I want to work to make this system do what I want it to do.

How on earth do some people orchestrate? How are the rest of you writing? I seriously think I can help a lot of you in terms of your working methods. Is it a realism issue? All those samples simply to get a realistic sound? Sure you may not be listening to your room, or an affected acoustic thanks to bass traps, walls, and not-so-accurate monitors?

Only time will tell. now back to werk.

I am amazed that Mac Pro machines are capable of this. I'll wait for everything to depreciate. East West and Vienna have done a splendid job with sampling. It would not be possible to make samples sound THAT much more realistic so I doubt more orchestral libraries will be released-if they are, the big thing to improve is strings and portamento, but come on-the libraries on the market are good enough!

I wont be getting a farm comrades. I will be getting either a Mac Pro (VERY likely now, thanks Allen) or (less likely) an extremely powerful PC. (I strongly believe that working from an inferior machine and working your way up really forces you to be far more efficient.)

Kind Regards,
The Glorious Golden Nanto Warrior. :D (GGNW)

Spinning poo machine
06-19-2008, 03:19 PM
Well we we're able to load an ok ammount of sounds in to the system. However no multies not to mention Key Switches. Should I submit to the fact that multiple computers are required? Would be sad... don't even know how it works exactly and how powarful cpu's help spread the load. Anyways... the ammount of stuff people seem to be able to load in their simular setup seems so much more than we can... and just totally lost here. One issue might be that Cubase 4 is 32bit... but I read that that is not a problem when using PLAY instruments. Is this true? Or MUST the host program be 64bit aswell? Kinda lost with all the tecnobable. But Apreciate your help alot!

-Paul J.

No, definitely don't give up yet. I remember seeing an article mentioned here about some way around a RAM limit, although I still don't fully understand that issue myself. Supposedly, however, you are able to use up to six gigs of RAM with Cubase 4, so maybe that could help you some. http://www.alexpfeffer.net/?p=35. That's IF RAM is the issue.

I also remember seeing another page in the forums about issues like the ones you have. It should be the last post on the page, with somewhere around 9 tips. http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/showthread.php?t=11964&page=2

It could just be one dumb, minor setting that's holding you back from that machine's power. And I bet it is. I really hope you can fix it, though. Sorry that I can't give you first-hand experience right now, I don't have it. Very soon, though, I will have a setup nearly identical to yours.

I am amazed that Mac Pro machines are capable of this. I'll wait for everything to depreciate. East West and Vienna have done a splendid job with sampling. It would not be possible to make samples sound THAT much more realistic so I doubt more orchestral libraries will be released-if they are, the big thing to improve is strings and portamento, but come on-the libraries on the market are good enough!

I wont be getting a farm comrades. I will be getting either a Mac Pro (VERY likely now, thanks Allen) or (less likely) an extremely powerful PC. (I strongly believe that working from an inferior machine and working your way up really forces you to be far more efficient.)

Kind Regards,
The Glorious Golden Nanto Warrior. (GGNW)

I couldn't agree more. I had serious doubts about the Mac Pro until I read about it in another forum. And Allen's mentioning here of what the relatively outdated 2.6 Ghz 4 core can do definitely didn't hurt my conviction. Take into account that the 2.8 Ghz 8 core is faster than last year's 3.0 Ghz 8 core model (which had already MURDERED the 2.6 Ghz 4 core), and RAM is pretty much as cheap as dirt (OWC) and more efficient than last year's Mac Pro's RAM, not to mention hard drives... well, yeah, this looks like the best way to go.

Paul J.
06-21-2008, 02:22 PM
Thanks for the tips! Will have to look in to them and try them out for size. No doubt the issues are memory-related. Not being able to load enough samples etc. However if I understand completely the Play version of Platinum would give some help in to using all ram no matter what the host aplications bit support is and so on. So if nothing else more RAM in the mill and should work sweetly.... maybe :) If nothing else just master with the premium sounds and compose with non multi single mic instruments but---- well thats not the coolest thing ever... but perhaps a necessity.

-Paul J.

Spinning poo machine
06-21-2008, 04:24 PM
Hopefully, one of those tips will help you out.

I'm not so sure that RAM is the issue for you. Allan's friend was able to load a pretty decent amount of stuff on a single Mac Pro that is significantly inferior to yours, and even with a smaller amount of RAM. I know it's just Gold he was using, but still. Are you distributing the workload across enough hard drives? Four seems to be the magic number everyone says when it comes to Platinum. But as I said, hopefully one of those tips will take care of the issue.

Oh, and by the way, people are indeed running platinum on single computers, contrary to some hoopla: http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/showthread.php?t=12832. Yeah, it's an XP, and that thing was seriously souped up, but still--Platinum's possible on one computer, which was the point. But enough rambling from a noob.

Muziksculp
06-21-2008, 08:37 PM
Sorry- am seriously pressed for time so can only answer one question. #3. Answer: YES, you can select (individually) which instruments to STREAM from dis and which to not.

Thanks for answering Question#3. I'm Glad to know it's possible.