Dedicated VST Hosts

[civictiger]

Hey guys

Does anyone know of Dedicated VST Hosts, such as Cantabile..
Basically it holds your VST's (like a DAW such as Cubase would), and you can also midi trigger them to change pre-sets, so to change from FM-8 to Massive via a MIDI trigger, for example.. which ofcourse is VERY, VERY useful. (much like Guitar Rig can do)

However, this isnt completely 'hands free'.. or 'foot free'

Does anyone know of a VST Host that can make this change not by MIDI trigger but rather make it change itself either in time (seconds) or in bars related to a click/tempo..
Or even if you can do this process in Cantabile itself..
I know there is such a thing called a MIDI clock, or MIDI beat clock, but im unsure wether that just keeps the synths in time with eachother, or can also trigger even at certain times too?

Any info would be so grateful as I really would love to know!


Pendulum do this live, they have a Hardware VST Host which changes their sounds for them, hands free.. I basically would like to know how to do this via software please??

[Dood]

Bands using this method will be running some sort of sequencer, be it actually a DAW or similar that syncs to a click track (for the musicians to play along in time with) - most DAW software can output the necessary MIDI channel / CC controller information to external devices at a given point in the track - for example, I could use it to change patches on my GMajor 2 at any given moment in a song - maybe even adjust my wah pedal for me - I've also heard of bands using a sequencer to load and run lighting programs as well for shows, so that everything runs perfectly in time!

As for a hardware VST host - I trying to remember the name of two such pieces of hardware. Jordan Rudess used to use a big 2u rack unit that could load many VSTs all at the same time. Sadly, for the average musician, it was very expensive. The other unit I recall was far cheaper, but maybe didn't have the MIDI message controls on it that would make it useful in this situation.

[edit] Ahhh wait, found it! - It's Receptor, by MUSE - found this old review [url="http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_muse_research_receptor/"]http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_muse_research_receptor/[/url] hopefully the hardware is still available!

[civictiger]

Thanks dood, that was an interesting reply!

So I'm presuming, that an external click track would inout into the unit and send midi signals to trigger events, if I'm correct in saying this?

As for the muse receptor, pendulum use this. Infact, they have 7 of them on at all times live (one each+vocals).. Would this trigger the vst changes internally or would it again need an external device to do such thing?

The only problem tho is its price, I would need a cheaper, software version of this for now atleast!

The program I have on trial atm can load as many vst's as I want, and in diffrrent racks, and have set-lists too for different songs which is all useful, and I can trigger it to goto the 'next' or previous patch in a click, which I could trigger.. The main pronblem I have with this is it just isn't hands free, or foot free.. And in some parts of our songs we need a vst to turn on for 2 bars and back off again for a while (for overdubs) which would be unreliable for me to do myself.. Do you know if this could be sequenced like you mentioned? And do you know how?

[Dood]

[quote name='civictiger' post='1061295' date='Dec 17 2010, 08:39 AM']Thanks dood, that was an interesting reply!

So I'm presuming, that an external click track would inout into the unit and send midi signals to trigger events, if I'm correct in saying this?

As for the muse receptor, pendulum use this. Infact, they have 7 of them on at all times live (one each+vocals).. Would this trigger the vst changes internally or would it again need an external device to do such thing?

The only problem tho is its price, I would need a cheaper, software version of this for now atleast!

The program I have on trial atm can load as many vst's as I want, and in diffrrent racks, and have set-lists too for different songs which is all useful, and I can trigger it to goto the 'next' or previous patch in a click, which I could trigger.. The main pronblem I have with this is it just isn't hands free, or foot free.. And in some parts of our songs we need a vst to turn on for 2 bars and back off again for a while (for overdubs) which would be unreliable for me to do myself.. Do you know if this could be sequenced like you mentioned? And do you know how?[/quote]

Hi!
I think in most cases including the receptor, you will need an external sequencer of some sort to trigger patch changes or control CC messages to the host.

Ok, so what program are you using at the moment? As long as your program can receive and can be controlled by MIDI implementation, then yes you can either control it via a sequencer or possible via a external MIDI controller like a footboard. It depends on the level of implementation that your software contains - but as an example, I have some free looping software that I can controll just by using a USB>MIDI interface and plugging in my Roland FC200 straight in to my laptop.

As for sequencers, most DAW software is capable of outputting MIDI data along with audio and say, a click track. I use REAPER and think it is brilliant. But other DAWs such as cubase could also present an external device with patch change messages and CC updates etc etc.

I have seen bands go out on tour with just a PC or Mac running sequencing / Virtual Instrument support AND backing tracks.. however, when it goes down... you're stuffed unless you have a back up!

Do I know how? Well yes and no - I know the basics, but it would take a lil bit of playing to figure it out totally. It's not actually that difficult, but takes time to get your tempo track together for the song with all the messages in the right place at the right time. You could liken it to sequencing a drum track in a DAW. You have the individual notes, but the CC messages also control velocity, effects, pitch bend, after touch etc etc etc. Those same CC messages can be sent externally to control say, effect delay time in a VST, WAH pedal control and as you have mentioned, turn individual pedals on and off.

[markstuk]

Has anyone tried running VST's in virtual machines (VMWare etc)? This might address some of the resource hogging issues....

Cheers


Mark

[quote name='dood' post='1062364' date='Dec 18 2010, 12:20 PM']Hi!
I think in most cases including the receptor, you will need an external sequencer of some sort to trigger patch changes or control CC messages to the host.

Ok, so what program are you using at the moment? As long as your program can receive and can be controlled by MIDI implementation, then yes you can either control it via a sequencer or possible via a external MIDI controller like a footboard. It depends on the level of implementation that your software contains - but as an example, I have some free looping software that I can controll just by using a USB>MIDI interface and plugging in my Roland FC200 straight in to my laptop.

As for sequencers, most DAW software is capable of outputting MIDI data along with audio and say, a click track. I use REAPER and think it is brilliant. But other DAWs such as cubase could also present an external device with patch change messages and CC updates etc etc.

I have seen bands go out on tour with just a PC or Mac running sequencing / Virtual Instrument support AND backing tracks.. however, when it goes down... you're stuffed unless you have a back up!

Do I know how? Well yes and no - I know the basics, but it would take a lil bit of playing to figure it out totally. It's not actually that difficult, but takes time to get your tempo track together for the song with all the messages in the right place at the right time. You could liken it to sequencing a drum track in a DAW. You have the individual notes, but the CC messages also control velocity, effects, pitch bend, after touch etc etc etc. Those same CC messages can be sent externally to control say, effect delay time in a VST, WAH pedal control and as you have mentioned, turn individual pedals on and off.[/quote]

[Dood]

Hmmm, well the main problem is that running virtual machines in VMWARE is that the VM Host requires resources of it's own to run - the host alone requires more resources (ie Memory) than most VSTs - so I think you're gains in performance will be made negligible by the requirements of the VM Host and whatever OS is running within it. Especially if you start running mulitple VMs on one host.

I would expect for flawless performance it'd be worth investing in a seriously powerful server host. (which is fine if you have deep pockets) - I can't see too many bands taking racks of hosts to gigs with them either to be honest. On the flipside though, you could keep backup copies of the VMs on another host, so that if one goes down the backup could be brought online with minimal fuss.

I'm used to running multiple ESX hosts with a minimum of 8 processors and 64Gb RAM and tons of disc space in huge corporate environments so I'm familiar with performance issues within VMs.

[markstuk]

Me too.. In my other life we build Erlang systems, but was wondering whether VST performance issues were down to poor implementation thus sandboxing them in a VM might make them better behaved..

Something like this maybe? :-)

[url="http://www.itpro.co.uk/628381/boston-quattro-2296-t-review?CMP=NLC-Newsletters&uid=d485b50b09d96bf2ef8c7a742559833b"]http://www.itpro.co.uk/628381/boston-quatt...f8c7a742559833b[/url]

[Dood]

I do agree that most 'virtual' performance issues are down to poor implementation and any sandboxing 'pre roll-out' is a very good idea. If I had a pound for ever project I had handed to me with a poor design implementation... doh!

Thing is - and something I would need to test for myself - is how VSTs perform between VM machines. For example if a software VST Host residing on one VM Machine 'communicated' with a DAW on another, how they would behave. Infact, if both the VST Host and DAW were residing on the same VM Machine, how they behave in comparison to running directly on normal hardware. I've certainly have used products that the manufacturers suggested NOT running in a VM environment due to a performance hit. I would like to know how VMware is geared to handle multimedia processing - again, I think most of it will be down to the performance of the hardware host - and I think that this will then be outside of financial viability for most users. If I had a really powerful machine to run VMWare environments on it - the chances are, it's already capable of running VSTs without a problem and thus negates the need to sandbox.

Much like the projects I had worked on, most of the design problems were down to not having intimate knowledge of the environment that the product was to reside on - and maybe this is a problem too for those with performance issues in using VSTs? (e.g using hacked software - 32 Vs 64bit / memory allocation, multi threading etc etc etc)

I'm about to go cross-eyed thinking about this now.. time for a cuppa!

[civictiger]

[quote name='dood' post='1062364' date='Dec 18 2010, 12:20 PM']Hi!
I think in most cases including the receptor, you will need an external sequencer of some sort to trigger patch changes or control CC messages to the host.

Ok, so what program are you using at the moment? As long as your program can receive and can be controlled by MIDI implementation, then yes you can either control it via a sequencer or possible via a external MIDI controller like a footboard. It depends on the level of implementation that your software contains - but as an example, I have some free looping software that I can controll just by using a USB>MIDI interface and plugging in my Roland FC200 straight in to my laptop.

As for sequencers, most DAW software is capable of outputting MIDI data along with audio and say, a click track. I use REAPER and think it is brilliant. But other DAWs such as cubase could also present an external device with patch change messages and CC updates etc etc.

I have seen bands go out on tour with just a PC or Mac running sequencing / Virtual Instrument support AND backing tracks.. however, when it goes down... you're stuffed unless you have a back up!

Do I know how? Well yes and no - I know the basics, but it would take a lil bit of playing to figure it out totally. It's not actually that difficult, but takes time to get your tempo track together for the song with all the messages in the right place at the right time. You could liken it to sequencing a drum track in a DAW. You have the individual notes, but the CC messages also control velocity, effects, pitch bend, after touch etc etc etc. Those same CC messages can be sent externally to control say, effect delay time in a VST, WAH pedal control and as you have mentioned, turn individual pedals on and off.[/quote]

At the moment I am using a VST host called Cantabile, for experimenting with what I need to do.
I do have Cubase.

However, Cubase is SO slow with my PC, it takes about a second from a midi keyboard for the osudn to come out, where as Cantabile is instant.. because it is used just as a VST host (dedicated) so it doesnt need any other processes going on or any need to do anything else.
Cubase coming to think of it though would be much more suitable, especially since we can use automation.. I think we would be turing the pedals on/off through automation (or even just the volumes if that) and then use pitch bending and filters with automation.. Contabile is great I just think Cubase would be better for this reason.. I just have no idea where to start with it compared to Contabile!


Also, Dood, you mentioned CC messages, what do you mean by these? are they just midi signals that trigger stuff? but obviously cant be heard.

[Dood]

[quote name='civictiger' post='1062694' date='Dec 18 2010, 05:54 PM']At the moment I am using a VST host called Cantabile, for experimenting with what I need to do.
I do have Cubase.

However, Cubase is SO slow with my PC, it takes about a second from a midi keyboard for the osudn to come out, where as Cantabile is instant.. because it is used just as a VST host (dedicated) so it doesnt need any other processes going on or any need to do anything else.
Cubase coming to think of it though would be much more suitable, especially since we can use automation.. I think we would be turing the pedals on/off through automation (or even just the volumes if that) and then use pitch bending and filters with automation.. Contabile is great I just think Cubase would be better for this reason.. I just have no idea where to start with it compared to Contabile!


Also, Dood, you mentioned CC messages, what do you mean by these? are they just midi signals that trigger stuff? but obviously cant be heard.[/quote]

I dropped Cubase and went with Reaper instead, because it is a much 'lighter' program AND you can run the whole DAW from a USB stick!! - which is great for those on the move! Cubase just did my head in - I'd spend all the time I should have been getting good ideas down, trying to get the DAW configured.. Where as Reaper is great for getting great results, fast.

Yes, CC messages are 'control messages', for example the changing of the volume in real time of an effect. Or indeed the switching on and off of a single effect with a patch. When you push the modulation wheel back and forth on a MIDI keyboard, it is changing the CC value between 0-128 depending on the wheel's position. This movement is interpreted by the device which is assigned to that controller, which then can adjust a parameter or parameters on that device.

[Dood]

[quote name='civictiger' post='1062694' date='Dec 18 2010, 05:54 PM']However, Cubase is SO slow with my PC, it takes about a second from a midi keyboard for the osudn to come out, ...[/quote]

That sounds more like a huge latency problem - either with your Cubase configuration OR with your soundcard / hardware not Cubase as a program. What are you using as your device to output the audio you hear (which is delayed?)

[civictiger]

ahh right, CC messages now make sence!

well I wasnt actually using any MIDI device and getting latency.. I was using an on screen keyboard that is built in to one of my synths.
I dont have any ASIO drivers, though.. so im gonna be getting them for now, which will help a lot lol.

also, dood, obviously as im aiming for a band format, how will we make sure that all the synths for all the band members are in time? we cant all just press play individually, it would have to be solid.. I know there is a thing called a MIDI clock which acts like a click track that can keep synths in time together but I dont know how that would press play on the transport area in Cubase with the automation laid down.

[Dood]

[quote name='civictiger' post='1063563' date='Dec 19 2010, 02:44 PM']ahh right, CC messages now make sence![/quote]

Cool

[quote name='civictiger' post='1063563' date='Dec 19 2010, 02:44 PM']well I wasnt actually using any MIDI device and getting latency.. I was using an on screen keyboard that is built in to one of my synths.
I dont have any ASIO drivers, though.. so im gonna be getting them for now, which will help a lot lol.[/quote]
Ahh doesn't matter, it's still the hardware (and driver's) ability to receive, process and output a sound. Again, what card are you using?

- Yes I would very strongly advise using an ASIO/ASIO2 driver for it. IF the card you are using doesn't have a proprietry ASIO driver, then try ASIO4ALL - an open source project which covers most sound cards inclusing the 'EMU' processor types.

[quote name='civictiger' post='1063563' date='Dec 19 2010, 02:44 PM']also, dood, obviously as im aiming for a band format, how will we make sure that all the synths for all the band members are in time? we cant all just press play individually, it would have to be solid.. I know there is a thing called a MIDI clock which acts like a click track that can keep synths in time together but I dont know how that would press play on the transport area in Cubase with the automation laid down.[/quote]

Yes, the MIDI clock *isn't* the tempo track for songs etc - it simply synchronises devices. The way that you'd get all your devices to change at the same time is simple - you just need to make sure they are connected to your master sequencer and slave from it. The Sequencer can be configured and programmed so that each slave device receives on a seperate MIDI channel - this means that it will only accept messages designated for it - ie, channel 10 could be a drum machine, receiving the drum midi track from a sequencer. MIDI channel 5 could be the output of an automation track from the sequencer (or DAW) to control the MIDI enabled lighting rig. Really, you can go as in depth as you like!

Going back to the likes of Guitar Rig etc - using a low latency soundcard, you could just plug your guitar straight in to a laptop and have the DAW software switch patches in time with your MIDI backing track.

To answer your question, there are a number of ways of daisy chaining devices - the most obvious is to use MIDI IN / MIDI OUT / MIDI THRU connections - though you'd have to look in to seeing what the limitations of chaining multiple devices are, as I've never tested the theory with more than two or three connections.

[civictiger]

[quote name='dood' post='1063615' date='Dec 19 2010, 03:29 PM']Cool


Ahh doesn't matter, it's still the hardware (and driver's) ability to receive, process and output a sound. Again, what card are you using?

- Yes I would very strongly advise using an ASIO/ASIO2 driver for it. IF the card you are using doesn't have a proprietry ASIO driver, then try ASIO4ALL - an open source project which covers most sound cards inclusing the 'EMU' processor types.



Yes, the MIDI clock *isn't* the tempo track for songs etc - it simply synchronises devices. The way that you'd get all your devices to change at the same time is simple - you just need to make sure they are connected to your master sequencer and slave from it. The Sequencer can be configured and programmed so that each slave device receives on a seperate MIDI channel - this means that it will only accept messages designated for it - ie, channel 10 could be a drum machine, receiving the drum midi track from a sequencer. MIDI channel 5 could be the output of an automation track from the sequencer (or DAW) to control the MIDI enabled lighting rig. Really, you can go as in depth as you like!

Going back to the likes of Guitar Rig etc - using a low latency soundcard, you could just plug your guitar straight in to a laptop and have the DAW software switch patches in time with your MIDI backing track.

To answer your question, there are a number of ways of daisy chaining devices - the most obvious is to use MIDI IN / MIDI OUT / MIDI THRU connections - though you'd have to look in to seeing what the limitations of chaining multiple devices are, as I've never tested the theory with more than two or three connections.[/quote]

I am using a builti-in soundcard atm, my PC is pretty dated! until I go to uni in July and then I am buying either a very high spec laptop or a mac pro, but I am unsure which atm, a windows will get me much better specs for the same price but a mac gives me freedom over two operating systems with boot camp.. altho I am thinking of windows atm.


so in essence, your saying we can have a master sequencer running on a PC, and then have the master PC hooked up to other PC's and control them?
and by sequencer, you do mean Cubase or another DAW, correct?

[Dood]

[quote name='civictiger' post='1064229' date='Dec 20 2010, 02:01 AM']I am using a builti-in soundcard atm, my PC is pretty dated! until I go to uni in July and then I am buying either a very high spec laptop or a mac pro, but I am unsure which atm, a windows will get me much better specs for the same price but a mac gives me freedom over two operating systems with boot camp.. altho I am thinking of windows atm.[/quote]

Ok, I've not seen an onboard card that is 'up to the job' yet - I'd definitely be looking at getting a soundcard designed for 'studio' work. (Either internal or external)


[quote name='civictiger' post='1064229' date='Dec 20 2010, 02:01 AM']so in essence, your saying we can have a master sequencer running on a PC, and then have the master PC hooked up to other PC's and control them?[/quote]

That's another way of doing it yes - the sequencer could be running on a PC with MIDI outputs - or it could be a sequencer on a workstation keyboard! The likes of Korg, Roland etc all do workstations with fully featured sequencers on them. _ Indeed, my mate was shoing me the Fantom the other day - and he plugged his electric guitar straight in to it and used the on-board amplifier modelling to record a distorty mega guitar tone... and where did he record it? well not only did the keybaord have a sequencer, it also had a multitrack recorder onboard!

You can buy standalone hardware sequencers too - if you didn't wanna lug a PC around with you. Yes, if you wanted you could have other PCs as well as keybaords, lights, effects units all controlled by the sequencer / master PC / Master keyboard.

[quote name='civictiger' post='1064229' date='Dec 20 2010, 02:01 AM']and by sequencer, you do mean Cubase or another DAW, correct?[/quote]

It's worth just making the distinction that a DAW has the ability to be a sequencer, but it isn't specifically a sequencer. There may be software out there whose primary use is sequencing only. Cubase obviously can do a whole lot more - for example running virtual instruments / record / score etc etc etc.