Having worked with Diva for a few months now I find that I am mainly using it in Divine mode, so once I move away from monophonic lines I'm having to use my DAW's Freeze functionality more than I'd like. My studio machine is the latest i7 3.4 quad-core iMac fully loaded with memory so I'm not underpowered by any standards but once I start playing polyphonic patches (especially ones with long evolving release envelopes) I run out of firepower fairly quickly with just a few instances of Diva.
I'm thinking of buying Vienna Ensemble Pro so that I can make use of 3 other dual-core upwards machines that I have at my disposal which should save me from ever having to freeze tracks. But the thought occurred to me that this multi-machine type workflow is something that U-He should bake into the product itself. I'm pretty certain most Diva customers have multiple machines at their disposal so being able to make use of multiple instances of Diva by sharing the processing load across the machines (Logic Node approach) or by hosting the Diva instances on the external machines and streaming the audio over Lan (Vienna Ensemble approach) would be incredibly useful for such a processor intensive plug as Diva.
This is my latest track (where I've used Diva extensively).
http://soundcloud.com/leftside-wobble/w ... orthcoming
Judging by the fantastic comments I've been receiving on Soundcloud, Diva has helped me produce an authentically analog sounding number, it's just a pity that I had to render much of my Diva work before attempting the final mix and arrangement, as I'm afraid my machine would have otherwise collapsed due to all the pressure on her beefy 4 cores of power!
Anybody else got any views on this?
JM
------------
http://soundcloud.com/leftside-wobble
Diva FR - Built-in functionality akin to Vienna Ensemble Pro or Logic Node
-
- KVRist
- 214 posts since 6 Jun, 2004
-
- u-he
- 30222 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
Hmmmm... first up, I don't think we can solves this ourselves. Synchronized streaming of events and audio over a network requires a lot of R&D which simply doesn't make sense for single products.
I'd reckon what you need is a solution like Vienna (which can host VST-instruments btw.) which turns any machine into a server for any sort of client on another machine.
The Logic-Node approach is fairly good because it integrates seamlessly. As Clemens has VST3 basically ready, this could also work on Windows (separation of GUI and DSP), meaning that one could host the gui part on the DAW machine while the audio is rendered on another. Thus no sluggish remote screen viewing or anything.
How's the status of Logic Nodes btw.? - Did they open it for instruments? (I was fairly frustrated because the Emagic guys back then visited me in Berlin to debug Nodes and Zebra 2.0 became the first 3rd party AU to run on them - and then they pulled the plug in instruments, what a drag)
Urs
I'd reckon what you need is a solution like Vienna (which can host VST-instruments btw.) which turns any machine into a server for any sort of client on another machine.
The Logic-Node approach is fairly good because it integrates seamlessly. As Clemens has VST3 basically ready, this could also work on Windows (separation of GUI and DSP), meaning that one could host the gui part on the DAW machine while the audio is rendered on another. Thus no sluggish remote screen viewing or anything.
How's the status of Logic Nodes btw.? - Did they open it for instruments? (I was fairly frustrated because the Emagic guys back then visited me in Berlin to debug Nodes and Zebra 2.0 became the first 3rd party AU to run on them - and then they pulled the plug in instruments, what a drag)
Urs-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 214 posts since 6 Jun, 2004
Thanks for the reply Urs.Urs wrote:Hmmmm... first up, I don't think we can solves this ourselves. Synchronized streaming of events and audio over a network requires a lot of R&D which simply doesn't make sense for single products.
I'd reckon what you need is a solution like Vienna (which can host VST-instruments btw.) which turns any machine into a server for any sort of client on another machine.
The Logic-Node approach is fairly good because it integrates seamlessly. As Clemens has VST3 basically ready, this could also work on Windows (separation of GUI and DSP), meaning that one could host the gui part on the DAW machine while the audio is rendered on another. Thus no sluggish remote screen viewing or anything.
How's the status of Logic Nodes btw.? - Did they open it for instruments? (I was fairly frustrated because the Emagic guys back then visited me in Berlin to debug Nodes and Zebra 2.0 became the first 3rd party AU to run on them - and then they pulled the plug in instruments, what a drag)
Unfortunately Logic node only works with Logic instruments/effects (but not the sample based ones) - it does this in a wonderfully seamless manner but for it to be truly useful it needs to work for 3rd party plugs too. I now use Ableton as my main DAW anyway - although a working Logic node could swing me back.
I've been demoing the Vienna solution and it's overly complicated and still introduces a far amount of latency if you want smooth playback.
The best solution I've come to till now is to use Apples built in midi over Lan functionality to communicate with the slave machines and feed the audio back to my master DAW. I run my master DAW at 256 samples (approx 8 ms latency In & Out) and the slave machines at 128 samples (approx 5ms out) that way latency compensation is easy to set up in Ableton. By using Ableton's built in external instrument plugin the whole process is relatively easy to manage (no more difficult than my existing workflow for my external analog synths in fact).
I'd still love to see a Logic node type approach perfected though. Each slave machine effectively operates as extra cores for your master machine's processing requirements and you keep the actual instrument hosting is still provided by the host machine so managing songs is far easier.
Anyway just thought I'd float the thought out there seeing as your plugs are the ones the push my powerhouse of a machine to it's limits.
Thanks again for your considerate response.
JM
------------
http://soundcloud.com/leftside-wobble
-
- KVRAF
- 1548 posts since 12 Jan, 2010 from Copenhagen
Interesting topic this. I'm actually thinking of going the multi machine route as well. But I sense that it's more beneficial to have 3 or four modestly powered machines like the next gen mid level mac minis, than one expensive powerful machine as I can't see anywhere the performance gains the big outlay for these Maxed out iMacs gets you. Even with my 2.4 Ghz iMac from 2007 I'm getting pretty okay mileage.
My theory at least for next year or so multithreading is still not mature enough, so fast yet inexpensive Duo Core mac minis might have a very fine price versus performance level.
As to how to network. perhaps plain vanilla midi sync network and an decent audio mixer for monitor, do submixdowns on each machine. The final assembly to stereo or surround in a plain vanilla DAW, Logic in my case. Here you could just fly the audio into the Daw machine over Lan. You don't need Vienna Pro for that. I'm dissapointed to hear about the latency in Vienna Pro though.
Great to hear real world examples..
note: I'm also interested in the Mac minis as a portable solution, plus I want a pivot screen for use with Numerology and with Photography.
Regards
Wade
My theory at least for next year or so multithreading is still not mature enough, so fast yet inexpensive Duo Core mac minis might have a very fine price versus performance level.
As to how to network. perhaps plain vanilla midi sync network and an decent audio mixer for monitor, do submixdowns on each machine. The final assembly to stereo or surround in a plain vanilla DAW, Logic in my case. Here you could just fly the audio into the Daw machine over Lan. You don't need Vienna Pro for that. I'm dissapointed to hear about the latency in Vienna Pro though.
Great to hear real world examples..
note: I'm also interested in the Mac minis as a portable solution, plus I want a pivot screen for use with Numerology and with Photography.
Regards
Wade
waves break, but somehow it all makes sense.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 214 posts since 6 Jun, 2004
Wade I'm with you on the Mac Mini front. A stack of Mac Mini's (i7 2.7Ghz) and Lion's Screen sharing capabilities appears to me to be a very effective way of running multiple instances of Diva in the most cost effective way possible, whilst also being relative space and energy efficient too.
At the moment I'm using two MacBook Pro's networked to my iMac and using Teleport so I can control the slave laptops via my iMac and it's a really great solution. And thanks to Diva's large interface I'm able to see what I'm doing on the slave machines without them being directly in front of me. I don't use screen sharing at the moment because the slave machines are Snow leopard and it's screen sharing capabilities aren't as good as Lions.
JM
------------
http://soundcloud.com/leftside-wobble
At the moment I'm using two MacBook Pro's networked to my iMac and using Teleport so I can control the slave laptops via my iMac and it's a really great solution. And thanks to Diva's large interface I'm able to see what I'm doing on the slave machines without them being directly in front of me. I don't use screen sharing at the moment because the slave machines are Snow leopard and it's screen sharing capabilities aren't as good as Lions.
JM
------------
http://soundcloud.com/leftside-wobble
-
- KVRAF
- 1548 posts since 12 Jan, 2010 from Copenhagen
I'm alittle doubtful the extra money for the i7 is worth it as the i7 as I understand it is optimized for multi threading which the setup with several computers basically bypasses.metrosonic wrote:Wade I'm with you on the Mac Mini front. A stack of Mac Mini's (i7 2.7Ghz) and Lion's Screen sharing capabilities appears to me to be a very effective way of running multiple instances of Diva in the most cost effective way possible, whilst also being relative space and energy efficient too.
At the moment I'm using two MacBook Pro's networked to my iMac and using Teleport so I can control the slave laptops via my iMac and it's a really great solution. And thanks to Diva's large interface I'm able to see what I'm doing on the slave machines without them being directly in front of me. I don't use screen sharing at the moment because the slave machines are Snow leopard and it's screen sharing capabilities aren't as good as Lions.
JM
------------
http://soundcloud.com/leftside-wobble
I'd of course like the i7 if it wasn't more expensive, but if I need a i7 in 4 machines then it will add 900usd $ in Denmark to the overall cost of the setup. So I figure 4 i5's at pehaps 2.7 (next gen) would be better than two and a half i7' mac minis price/performance wise. Note I'm very slow to upgrade systems so whatever setup I end up with will be used for at least 5 or even 7 years. I still have my Mac Quadra from 1992!
After that I think I'll just buy a frame drum and a pennywhislte and go on a walkabout.
Regards
Wade
waves break, but somehow it all makes sense.
-
- KVRian
- 777 posts since 13 Dec, 2011
I haven't played with any multi-machine setups yet (... no, Diva hasn't smoked the CPU's of all my machines, just didn't get around to it). Still, I have also thought of another few options to consider:
Thanks to Tobias Erichsen's rtpMIDI we can slave Windows machines to a Mac too using OS X's awesome MIDI networking protocol, while Windows' remote desktop stuff (RDP) is just fine.
Then there's Reaper/Reamote.
I'm interested as well how Diva would perform on a Receptor.
Thanks to Tobias Erichsen's rtpMIDI we can slave Windows machines to a Mac too using OS X's awesome MIDI networking protocol, while Windows' remote desktop stuff (RDP) is just fine.
Then there's Reaper/Reamote.
I'm interested as well how Diva would perform on a Receptor.