I’m not sure where you got this idea that ‘most VSTis are mono-timbral’. Wow. A partial list of my stuff:
VE Pro, Kontakt, Omnisphere, Halion, about 10 EW Play instruments including EWQLSO, Battery, Stylus, Trilian, etc etc–getting the picture?
I think you might be mainly talking to hobbyists or specific genre producers, such as electronica or dance producers-and even there, things like Reason are multi-timbral. I think the only instruments I use that aren’t multi-timbral are in Komplete 6 (Massive, Reaktor, B4, etc.)
I will say one thing-anecdotal evidence has suggested to me that multiple core distribution works more efficiently with one instance (say, of Kontakt) per sound, which forces cores to cycle-but that’s another kettle of fish.
Are you serious? Calling Reason, a standalone program with no VST support whatsoever, a multitimbral plugin, goes to show how informed you are on the matter. I find it a little sad that those are the only plugins you’re aware of, assuming you’re an experienced producer. But regardless, those plugins are only a drop in the sea.
And there are no “hobbyist” VST plugins. Freeware/shareware plugins, like commercial plugins, are used by everyone; from amateurs to producers of the highest caliber; and there are some amazing VST gems out there.
So please… before trying to lecture me, get your facts straight.
I will say one thing-anecdotal evidence has suggested to me that multiple core distribution works more efficiently with one instance (say, of Kontakt) per sound, which forces cores to cycle-but that’s another kettle of fish.
Kontakt has multi-core support within the plugin itself, so it cycles cores regardless of cubase multi-core handling.
Sadly, the fact that SB has its reasons when it changes CB doesn’t carry as much weight as it ideally would, because some of the changes are so mystifying that the reasons are hard to fathom.
But, I agree it looks like the introduction of instrument tracks did make sense.
Agreed. Listening to their users is not something SB do often. And it’s this reason alone why some of the biggest new features since v3 to v6, media/sound/loop bay and instr. tracks, are still nowhere near as good as they could be. Both of these features have the potential to be amazing IMO, but neither is anywhere near finished.
But, I agree it looks like the introduction of instrument tracks did make sense. >
They may not be for every occasion and/or everyone, but it can be a great tool, and one I love and use daily. Hence the reason I try to point out it’s advantages, even to those hell bent on avoiding new features
I know, I’ve used it. But by that definition, cubase is also a multitimbral program. As are most other music production packages out there.
You didn’t address my point that many, many pro level VSTi’s are multitimbral, in contrast to your blanket statement.
What exactly do you consider many? 5? 10? 20?
There are literally thousands of VST instruments available today. How many of them are multitimbral? Very few.
I did not presume to lecture you. I simply disagreed with you. You seem like an angry person. Have the last word, and we’ll be done with it.
Yes, I’m afraid stupidity sometimes angers me. And by stupidity I mean this discussion (not you). Your whole argument is predicated on the assumption that we differ in opinion, while failing to realize what I offered was not opinion but fact. A well known fact. And something easily checked on popular sites like K-V-R, which offer listings of practically all VST plugins available ATM.
So you’ll have to excuse me if I don’t waste my time gathering proof of something as banal and well known. I’ve had the good fortune to try out most of the plugins made in the last 12+ years, so I’m pretty sure I know what I’m talking about. But if you need evidence, you’re free to check kvr and count the plugins yourself.
Kontakt’s memory server , while helpful in some ways, is better subsumed by Ve Pro’s better distribution and handling in my experience of both.
I’ll have to take your word on this, as I’ve never used VE pro, but basic logic dictates there should be no valid reason to use 1 kontakt plugin per part, unless you’re trying to get around the ram limit of x86 OS. You might wanna contact NI support (or SB support if the problem is on their end). I’ve never had any problems with kontakt’s cpu/ram usage, but then again, I’ve never used more than 2 instances (32 parts) at once.
So you’re saying that, by responding to messages directed at me, I’m responsible for derailing this thread?
Besides my original point, that vst rack is usually only essential for multitimbral plugins, the rest of my posts in this thread have been replies.
So I’m sorry if this somehow makes me the bad guy here. I’ve switched my vote to +1, and sincerely hope you get this feature regardless of my opinion of it. What else exactly would you want me to do?
Do you seriously believe my posts had an effect on steinberg’s official response to the matter? Or is it perhaps just easier to make me the scapegoat for the lack of it?
To official Steinberg staff, if you’re reading this: This is a valid feature request that should be seriously considered.
I don’t begrudge ANYBODY the way they use Cubase, and I’m open to knew ideas, but I never use instrument tracks,and always use the Rack. I browsed the thread and noticed a number of the reasons why this is so, and there’s even a couple good ones not mentioned I’ve forgotten. From what I gather, instrument tracks are a nice way to search out a particular sound, without the steps of creating a MIDI track, assigning it, and opening the VSTi. But in all honesty, that’s not how I work
From what I gather, instrument tracks are a nice way to search out a particular sound, without the steps of creating a MIDI track, assigning it, and opening the VSTi. But in all honesty, that’s not how I work