Of course! Sorry, I’m just tired! I’ve not needed to check on how much RAM I’ve been using for so long I just forgot about looking in the Task Manager!
I think one of the main uses for the new feature to disable instruments (or is it tracks?) is for avoiding excessive save and load times for large templates. The idea is that you disable most everything in the template so it loads quickly and then you enable specific instances as you need them (and incrementally increasing the load time in the process).
Disable Track and Render in Place are amazing features. I shall certainly use Disable Tracks if I run out of RAM as this Template grows. I think the true answer is to just build more computers and just keep adding more Juice via VE Pro 5 but if Money is limited, Disabling Tracks and using Racks (I believe) is the way to go!
Loving Cubase more and more, everyday I use it!
Hi all, i just discovered that if Track Instrument is used, there is no MIDI Send function.
This may be useful if you wish to send the same MIDI note sequence to another instrument. Useful when working with EWQL C-F-S Instruments.
hope this helps too…
I vaguely recall reading in the manual that there was a midi insert effect which you could place on the instrument track to achieve this. I can’t check right now as the day job is looming but you may like to check the midi plugins reference.
Hi robw, thanks for your input on this. I re-looked into this again and couldnt find this function in the Insert MIDI Effects. They all seem to just modify MIDI data but not send to specific instruments like the “MIDI Sends” on regular MIDI tracks.
hmm… i did a search and found that unfortunately, it seems that this function has not been implemented in VST Instrument Tracks yet… 
“Yes, but note– as Vic pointed out midi sends are not (yet!) implemented on VST Instrument tracks.” - quote
There was another topic on this here and the quote was from a Mod…
Cheers and have a good day at work. 
It would appear my memory isn’t quite what it used to be. Apologies for the wrong path.
I found another post about the same topic with a nice explanation of the MIDI Track setup:
I learned something today - awesome!
Thanks for everyone’s input on this! The talk on routing with VE Pro 5 and Cubase is interesting. I just need to buy VE Pro 5 when the Piggy Jar is stocked back up after it burst at Christmas!
I’m going to have a play today and mess around with the MIDI Track set up through the link you have just posted!
It would be nice if the set of midi plug-ins included some for midi routing like we had in the old days of midi cables. I’d like to see: midi in, midi out, & midi merge plus the ability to “wire” them together in various combinations.
+1 raino!!! 
that would be coolness… i’m so with you on that too
Does anyone know if this method of using one instance per instrument instead of using multi-out instances works for East West Play ? My orchestral template using Symphonic Orchestra is getting close to overloading Cubase and I’m wondering if this method may give me more cpu headroom.
Thanks
Ron
Does East/West Play have a CPU meter of its own? Is it’s meter peaking?
If so then yes you should be able to increase the number of East West instances and split the load across threads/cores. You can either do this with single instruments per instance or multiple instruments per instance - just more instances means more flexibility for Cubase multi-core support to spread it out.
How effective this will be will depend a lot on how the plugin and Cubase work but worth a try as it doesn’t take long to do.
Another consideration that favors Instrument tracks relates to ASIO Guard. Actually, this relates specifically to loading a single instrument per instance of your sampler as opposed to multiple instruments.
If you arm or monitor a single midi track that points to a channel within a multi instrument, the entire VSTi instance will be taken out of ASIO Guard and asked to run at low latency. So, if you’re running several CPU intensive instruments in an instance of Kontakt this can put a pretty heavy load on a system at low buffer sizes.
Very good point!
It seems like there are two separate issues being discussed/compared here.
1.) Rack instruments vs. track instruments
2.) Multiple instruments in one VI instance vs. one instrument per VI instance
If I’m not mistaken, you can use either option from ‘1’ and either option from ‘2’ in any combination. I’m pretty sure I have set up VIs in an instrument track and still routed other MIDI tracks to that VI. If I’m confused, please correct me.
The pros/cons for the options in ‘2’ seem pretty clear (>1 instrument / VI: more memory efficient; only 1 instrument / VI: better CPU load balancing and avoiding excessive load while monitoring/record-enabled) but I’m still not 100% clear on the pros/cons of the rack instruments vs. track instruments thing.
One thing that was implied earlier (that I think is true, but not 100% sure) is that instrument tracks can be disabled and the VI will be unloaded and its memory freed up. Disabling the instrument from within the rack seems to stop any CPU use, but the memory is still held.
That difference seems like kind of an odd design to me, but I tested it as thoughroughly as I could and that’s what I saw. If that’s not the case, and rack instruments can in fact be ‘unloaded’, I’d be interested to hear how to do that. If not that seems like a big advantage of intrument tracks compared to racks.
Are there any clear advantages of using the rack method? It seems like some people are talking about it like that’s the only way to have multiple MIDI tracks / VI, but from what I’ve gathered that’s not the case.
ok, i’ll jump in and give it a try 
the difference between racks and tracks is mainly intended for the way cubase interacts with the plugin.
Going the “rack” way is a method to use the functionality of the plugin as much as possible.
The main reason to go for a rack is the fact that you use the multitimbral capabilities of the plugin with as less as possible hassle on the main workflow window of cubase. An example: You create a rack, it has its midi track attached, and with very few clicks you create up to f.e. 64 tracks (Halion 5 or Kontakt) in aninstance. Very quick and easy workflow.
The main drawback with this method is imho that it is challenging for cubase to deal with it on a multicore environment. Most of the times the software needs huge amounts of resources if one single plugin is doing its things on f.e. 16 or more midi tracks. Often the plugin is also capable of doing its own core handlling, and that will interfere with cubase. So core handling is something to be carefull for.
That being said, it is for a lot of people a way of working (i.e. workflow)to design sub-templates in the gui of a plugin. So they rely on the rack. Nothing wrong with that. It’s about how you want to do thing, and cubase will allow you to doit.
The instrument track thing is much more closer to the cubase environment, and in fact is the way i think most of the new functions in cubase are designed for. Recently they made it possible to do the multitimbral approach with instrument tracks, but overall, that is not the way cubase wants you to go if you are going to build a template.
Building a template (version 8) is imho mostly based on 1 on 1 relationships between a miditrack and a plugin.
There are several reasons for doing that.
- cubase can do the core handling on its own on every condition
- instrument tracks allow you to make track presets, these are very handy things where you combine a midi track with mixer settings and efx and even midi inserts. (and indeed you can save and do the same thing with a rack in one CPR)
- a track can also be enabled and disabled (main reason i think to go for that kind of a workflow in v8 i think)
Resources aren’t important anymore with that approach. You can have, like lots of us do, a monster PC, but when talking about templates, unless you have a real monster, there are limits to be encountered very quickly imho. Not the case with tracks.
So, when building a template, a track imho is the obvious way to go. Racks are for those guys who want to see a GUI in front of them to make logical choices/combinations. In terms of resources to spare they are not the way to go.
So when building templates, you are far better of with a track approach.
–) choose a sound, finetune it with the mixer and fx and make a preset of it. It is 1 on 1, and can be used every time and everywhere. The real power of that approach can be achieved when you are going to use the render in place functionality. Render it, and disable the instrument track. Resources needed drop down to zero.
–) with that kind of a workflow, you do not need a monster computer anymore and you will still be able to make a very very complex song. And hey, probably you discover the fact that you can do totally different things with the same sound/sequence once it is rendered to audio.
But choices have to be made by what you want to achieve. So the choice between racks and tracks is the same as having a shot of wodka or gin. The result can be the same, but it’s about how easy you can swallow it.
But in terms of template building, imho cubase is more designed for the track approach since it is more closely attached to the way the DAW is designed, and the rack is a more 3th party friendly approach, but hey, SB has the same approach with f.e halion that offers up to 64 channels in a rack.
And to give it a nice ending: just look at the specs.
Tracks are unlimited in cubase.
Racks are not.
Maybe that says something too about what is what…
Kind regards,
R.
Thank you. I notice in your signature that you use VE Pro 5 with C Pro 8. How do Cubase’s Rack and Track Instruments work with VEPro? Are they separate things or do they work together? I’m very intrigued by VEPro and is on my list of things to buy.
I have been making 2 templates. One with Racks and one with Tracks, mainly to see what works best for me. I love the Instrument Track approach more. For a few reasons. I can disable and Enable which ever track I want, when I want, and its very quick (and does indeed stop using RAM - it didn’t take long to use 16gb of RAM -bugger, I need more! A lot more haha!) to do so. Its also a lot simpler to automate each Instrument Track (for me). The main things that are a pain are the loading times of Projects (much faster when using Racks) and the Saving time of Projects. Am I right in thinking VEPro solves this problem as its essentially like Rewire, or an external rack that you connect to Cubase? Sorry If I have this wrong, and thanks for the advice. Its amazing all this stuff actually works really haha!
Jono
And as an add on: the VEP thing.
VEP is something you need in specific conditions. VEP is not cheap and is indeed very efficient in terms of resources.
You want to have VEP on the following conditions:
- you want to have a massive amount of vst’s active all the time, f.e. in live conditions where you need to switch between tracks very quick.
- you are a pro musician that has the budget that is needed and a massive amount of vsti’s that need to be active all the time at one click. Examples: film composing, pro studio stuff, and things like that.
Having VEP is not enough.
VEP is very efficient, even on a single machine, but it is intended for multiple computers on a LAN (gigabit) environment. Vienna makes vst’s also, and they are way beyond everything most of the CB users will ever need. They go, as they are expected to be going, very very deep in terms of articulations and expressions.That exceeds most of the common users needs. And they are very expensive too. You are not talking in terms of hundreds of dollars/euros, but in terms of a factor of it, if you want the real deal.
So Vienna is a good choice, but think twice if you really need it.
But it is indeed rock solid and very efficient.
kind regards,
R.
Again, Thank you. I am considering doing a Masters Degree in Film Composing which is why I have an interest in VEPro and using it with Cubase. It sounds immense and well worth the Money. I shall continue my path of finding out what kind of template works for me and hopefully this thread will help anyone else wondering what the differences between Tracks and Rack Instruments are!
Jono
Again, Thank you. I am considering doing a Masters Degree in Film Composing which is why I have an interest in VEPro and using it with Cubase. It sounds immense and well worth the Money. I shall continue my path of finding out what kind of template works for me and hopefully this thread will help anyone else wondering what the differences between Tracks and Rack Instruments are!
Jono