Should I create template using Track or Rack Instruments?

[roel]

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[/quote]

I use vep for live conditions. (performing, not producing) Two people are connected with one system on a live condition and they really give a hit to the system, and it is thus a bit necessary to be sure that you are able to have a stable system. VEP is a server based system and is independent and very efficient. For example on a 1 hour 15 minutes gig i need 75 or something like that tracks to be loaded and active at all times, and what i really do not want is any any interference. Since VEP delivers audio to cubase, and thus the audio driver is not being compromised, this is ideal and has been the choice for me to go, certainly with V7 that has had quite some issues with spikes in the past. (that has been solved in 7.5.3), but still, if you look at my specs, i’m using not the most powerfull laptop on a stage. (but it is a nice unit) Laptops are weak in terms of performance, certaintly when you are having a lot of tracks active. So the Vienna server based solution is ideal for me.

The loading times: With 1000 or something like that instrument tracks (disabled) in my template with a simple 2,4 ghz i7 laptop, it takes less then 5 seconds to load a templatein V8. With Vienna, it takes several minutes to load for example 100 vsti’s. (but they are not disabled and active and that is f.e. 10 gig) With a second PC connected, i can go walking to the shop and buy something and return, before it is loaded. (let’s say several minutes )

I have to say i am busy for the moment to try to go back to cubase without VEP. Still have to see if this will be working, since the new workflow means redesigning the entire thing, and that will take some time. And i have a lot of good expectations of it. Since going the Vienna way also means that you have twice the amount of workflow and templates to deal with.

With V8 you have different ASIO2 settings. It comes a bit more close to VEP, but not all the way. But the ASIO2 is buffering things deeply in the backyard and saving a lot of resources. (and ofcourse not all the tracks are armed all the time for me)

It’s the same, more or less, i did in VEP where you can define buffer settings for each instance, but in CB it is one setting for all tracks.

What i do like with the new C8 approach is that when you have a massive amount of sounds, you can directly “print” them on to the main workflow window. So searching for a decent sound, once you have done the preparations, is reduced to very little time. In a live condition, that is not an advantage, but in a rehearsal environment that is a very good thing. So i still have to see how things go, and if there is any performance issue, ok, i drop it to a Vienna instance again. So having the choice is for me for the moment a no brainer. We’ll see.

[fretthefret]

@jono not bono

@roel

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

Jono, I do know quite a few film composers use Digital Performer and then do their final mix out in Cubase or Nuendo.
It’s still a little difficult to get every desired feature with the best personal workflow preferences in one single piece of software that suits every possible usage and task. Just another option you might want to explore.

[roel]

quite an odd conversation when you are both online.
Best wishes for you and go for it!

kind regards,
R.

[rloseven]

Just in case anyone wondered about my previous question concerning using individual instances for East West play and if it would work like Kontakt to distribute the load on all 4 cores. It did indeed work that way. I was very surprised. I had first created a project with 2 instances of Play, putting 9 woodwind instruments on one instance of Play and 7 brass instruments on the other. When I recorded something on all tracks, (a total of 16 tracks), The piece played, but my performance meter was getting up to around 50%. When I put 22 instances of Play in a project and around four different instruments to each instance, I again recorded something on each track. It played with about 33% showing on the performance meter. And many more parts were playing. This will make the difference of whether or not I can create a full orchestra piece with my modest computer.

Thanks to all that presented this idea.

Ron

[robw]

Great to hear it worked well for you.

Another happy Cubase community member thanks to all of us!

[jono_not_bono]

@fretthefret

@jono not bono

@roel

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

Jono, I do know quite a few film composers use Digital Performer and then do their final mix out in Cubase or Nuendo.
It’s still a little difficult to get every desired feature with the best personal workflow preferences in one single piece of software that suits every possible usage and task. Just another option you might want to explore.

Yeah, I’m just trying out the demo of DP8 actually. I can see how powerful it is but it’s workflow is not a touch on Cubase Pro 8 (for me). I guess its one of these things of breaking habit. Thanks for the recommendation!

[mbr]

@keyzs

Hi i dont have Vienna however, i’m using EWQLSO Kontakt Version. i believe it should be the same during set up.

initially i was also confused big time however, after banging my head around, there is a specific workflow. i’ll try to help as i too am learning as i am a very recent Cubase convert.

the difference as mentioned above is attributed to legacy compatibility as far as Instruments Racks are concerned; thats as much as i could get from everywhere i was reading from.

here’s what i did to set up EWQLSO:

1. insert a Instrument Track > right click > select Kontakt
2. load (for example) 5 instruments into Kontakt from the GUI - setup all the necessary, MIDI chs and Audio Outs (1 to 5)
3. here’s the catch, the main Kontakt St1 cannot be changed or removed so generally i ignore that. I continue to enable an additional 5 Stereo Outs from the Instrument Panel. (St2 to St6) and assign them to the previously loaded Kontakt Instruments.
4. Once done, Cubase assigns the respective Audio Tracks into the Mixer Window. The names are as follows. You can rename as you wish.
5. Next i create 5 MIDI tracks and assign them to the individual Instruments inside Kontakt.
6. Test to see if all is well. Clicking on the midi tracks and playing will sound off the instruments. Check that all corresponding meters are correctly bouncing.
7. Finally select all the 5 MIDI Tracks, 6 Kontakt Audio Tracks and the Kontakt Instrument Track (Cubase Instrument Track), do a right-click and Save as Instrument Track. Name this correctly or it will be confusing. Lets call this Strings.
8. In you next project, you may simply right-click to select Instrument from Instrument Track and select Strings. Cubase will load up 1 instance of Kontakt, all the 5 instruments, all MIDI and Audio Assignments and finally the 5 MIDI tracks.
9. If you have renamed the Kontakt Audio Outs (Cubase not Kontakt mixer) you will also see that they are now renamed in the Cubase Instrument Panel.
10. all is well

hope this helps…

why don’t you run Play ?

[Musicmind]

Hi
I have read this conversation with interest.
To me there is one big difference between track/rack instruments and that’s the possibility to save them as a preset, along with all routing and connected midi tracks.
I don’t think that is possible when you use racks or?

[keyzs]

@mbr

@keyzs

Hi i dont have Vienna however, i’m using EWQLSO Kontakt Version. i believe it should be the same during set up.

initially i was also confused big time however, after banging my head around, there is a specific workflow. i’ll try to help as i too am learning as i am a very recent Cubase convert.

the difference as mentioned above is attributed to legacy compatibility as far as Instruments Racks are concerned; thats as much as i could get from everywhere i was reading from.

here’s what i did to set up EWQLSO:

1. insert a Instrument Track > right click > select Kontakt
2. load (for example) 5 instruments into Kontakt from the GUI - setup all the necessary, MIDI chs and Audio Outs (1 to 5)
3. here’s the catch, the main Kontakt St1 cannot be changed or removed so generally i ignore that. I continue to enable an additional 5 Stereo Outs from the Instrument Panel. (St2 to St6) and assign them to the previously loaded Kontakt Instruments.
4. Once done, Cubase assigns the respective Audio Tracks into the Mixer Window. The names are as follows. You can rename as you wish.
5. Next i create 5 MIDI tracks and assign them to the individual Instruments inside Kontakt.
6. Test to see if all is well. Clicking on the midi tracks and playing will sound off the instruments. Check that all corresponding meters are correctly bouncing.
7. Finally select all the 5 MIDI Tracks, 6 Kontakt Audio Tracks and the Kontakt Instrument Track (Cubase Instrument Track), do a right-click and Save as Instrument Track. Name this correctly or it will be confusing. Lets call this Strings.
8. In you next project, you may simply right-click to select Instrument from Instrument Track and select Strings. Cubase will load up 1 instance of Kontakt, all the 5 instruments, all MIDI and Audio Assignments and finally the 5 MIDI tracks.
9. If you have renamed the Kontakt Audio Outs (Cubase not Kontakt mixer) you will also see that they are now renamed in the Cubase Instrument Panel.
10. all is well

hope this helps…

why don’t you run Play ?

Hi mbr, i was an early adopter of the EWQLSO in Kontakt… errr Kompat (i think ) now that you brought it up… it was then real nightmare due to the limitation of processing power and RAM… remember then we had to spread the load via MIDI over LAN over serveral PCs… it was still a nightmare then… but it worked… so we were quite happy…

i guess over the years, i was offered PLAY when they first ported over. That was then an EVEN BIGGER nightmare we had so much trouble even getting the thing installed and finally when it all did there was so much errors with interaction on the previous DAW i was on. From then, i have never tried PLAY ever again. Besides, have been so accustomed to the way Kontakt works, (ie, creating multi instruments, automation CC11, tail tweak…etc…) i’ve decided to stick with it. BTW, the library is perfectly flawless on Kontakt 5.31 with Cubase. Just beautiful. To date we have released an album with the library and also several other projects too.

i have recently come on to Cubase and Pro 8 is my first DAW with Steinberg. The switch was flawless and with you guys here… awesome!!!

thanks again all… Cheers!!!

[keyzs]

@Musicmind

Hi
I have read this conversation with interest.
To me there is one big difference between track/rack instruments and that’s the possibility to save them as a preset, along with all routing and connected midi tracks.
I don’t think that is possible when you use racks or?

Hi Musicmind, yup… its not possible to save the Track Templates.

just checked, highlighting from the VST Folder to the last MIDI track > right click and all i got was “Disable Track” - unlike the Track Instruments, where there are the other two options to “Load” or “Save Track Template”

Cheers!!!

[cnk]

Hello people,

I have a question about giving names to tracks on Cubase 8 pro;

1- When using Rack Instruments for Kontakt 5, I load for example 5 instruments into one Kontakt 5 instance with 5 audio outputs. This creates 5 instrument channels on mixer. I insert 5 midi channels to Cubase (it also creates a VST instruments folder with 5 audio outputs on Cubase screen). At this time I have to enter names twice for both instrument channel (kontakt’s related audio output) on mixer and for midi channel right?

2- This is also same when using Track Instrument. I load Kontakt 5 with Track Instrument, load 5 instruments with different midi and audio outputs, add 5 midi tracks to Cubase. Then I have to write for ex. GUITAR to instrument channel (kontakt’s related audio output) at mixer and to midi channel at Cubase screen?

Is this right or is there a shorter way?

Thanks,
cnk

[keyzs]

Hi cnk,

1. By using Rack Instruments, you will not be able to save the layout as a Track Template. So that said, you’ll have to repeat all the steps every time you want the same group set up.

2. By using Track Instruments, you will be able to save all tracks (MIDI and Kontakt Outputs) as a Track Template. The set up is only once… on the next and subsequent use, all you have to do is insert the instrument via Multi-Track Preset. (This is the confusing part… when saving, Cubase simply puts it as Save Track Template; however when loading multi-timbral instruments with their individual MIDI tracks you will need to look for them under Instrument Track Multi.

On a side note, when you rename the 5 outputs from Kontakt, Cubase will reflect them in the Mixer and the Instrument Panel as you have named them; otherwise they will be St1 Out, St2 Out…etc.

hope this helps…

[Elektrobolt]

If you are using an instrument that is not a multi-timbre (responds to multiple MIDI channels), then it’s almost more work to have it as a Rack instrument rather than just being part of an Instrument Track.

Though some prefers to have it all one-way (not mixing the two).

[cnk]

@keyzs

Hi cnk,

On a side note, when you rename the 5 outputs from Kontakt, Cubase will reflect them in the Mixer and the Instrument Panel as you have named them; otherwise they will be St1 Out, St2 Out…etc.

hope this helps…

Thanks for the answer keyz…I’ve 2 short questions;
1- how will I rename outputs from Kontakt?
2- where will I save track template?

[keyzs]

Hi cnk

1. When you add or enable Kontakt’s outputs they be reflected at the bottom in the Mixer Console of Cubase. The track names will reflect St.1, St. 2, St. 3… etc… Just double click on the names “St.1” and rename them.

2. After adding all the necessary tracks and stuff, select all, from the instrument down to the last associated MIDI Track. The selected tracks should reflect a darker shade of grey. On the last track, right-click and select the last option “Save as Track Template”. To see what is saved open the Media Browser.

Instruments Tracks only will be classified as Instrument Track.
Instrument with MIDI will be as classified Instrument Multi Track.

[cnk]

@keyzs

Hi cnk

1. When you add or enable Kontakt’s outputs they be reflected at the bottom in the Mixer Console of Cubase. The track names will reflect St.1, St. 2, St. 3… etc… Just double click on the names “St.1” and rename them.

2. After adding all the necessary tracks and stuff, select all, from the instrument down to the last associated MIDI Track. The selected tracks should reflect a darker shade of grey. On the last track, right-click and select the last option “Save as Track Template”. To see what is saved open the Media Browser.

Instruments Tracks only will be classified as Instrument Track.
Instrument with MIDI will be as classified Instrument Multi Track.

But I also have to rename related midi tracks again, right?

[raino]

@cnk

But I also have to rename related midi tracks again, right?

Yes, that is one of the conveniences that Instrument Tracks provide - no need to rename the audio channels.

[cnk]

@raino

@cnk

But I also have to rename related midi tracks again, right?

Yes, that is one of the conveniences that Instrument Tracks provide - no need to rename the audio channels.

So there is no way to give name to midi and audio tracks (coming with instrument track) at the same time in order to prevent writing twice, right? I always have to enter names twice if I use rack instruments or track instruments? (for ex. writing GUITAR to midi track @Cubase screen and to audio track @mixer screen?)

Thanks,
cnk

[raino]

@cnk

@raino

@cnk

But I also have to rename related midi tracks again, right?

Yes, that is one of the conveniences that Instrument Tracks provide - no need to rename the audio channels.

So there is no way to give name to midi and audio tracks (coming with instrument track) at the same time in order to prevent writing twice, right? I always have to enter names twice if I use rack instruments or track instruments? (for ex. writing GUITAR to midi track @Cubase screen and to audio track @mixer screen?)

Thanks,
cnk

If you are using an Instrument Track with a single VSTi and and only one set of audio outs then you only need to enter the name once. Whatever you name the track is what appears in the mixer. But if you have a VSTi being fed by multiple midi sources which also has more than one audio output (i.e. Kontakt with several instruments loaded and multiple audio outs) then you will need to enter the names twice once on the Midi Tracks and again on the Audio Channels.

If you think about it this makes sense. There is no way for Cubase to know your intended relationships between the midi inputs and the audio outputs - indeed multiple midi sources may be driving a single audio output. Say you have Kontakt loaded as a Rack Instrument with 3 instruments loaded into it - a violin, viola & cello. But all of these are being internally mixed inside Kontakt to go to a single stereo output. Now you send this 3 midi tracks named violin, viola & cello. There is no way for Cubase to decide which of those 3 inputs it should name the output. And most likely you wouldn’t name it any of those and instead call it strings.

Rack Instruments (and Tracks set to receive multiple midi ins) offer a lot of flexibility. But the price for that flexibility is that you have to do more basic housekeeping work (like naming things). Track Instruments using only its built-in midi is the opposite. It simplifies the housekeeping work but the price is reduced flexibility.

90% of the time I use the single Instrument Track approach because it keeps things simple and is easier to setup. But other folks take the opposite approach. Nothing wrong with either, just what works for you. If having to enter names multiple times really bugs you then do it like I do. But if you really need the additional flexibility of Rack Instruments make your peace with entering names twice 'cause that is the price of entry.

[jono_not_bono]

I don’t actually mind having to type track names multiple times. Sometimes it reminds me what the channels are when there are a seemingly endless amount of them.

I am finding that I am using Instrument Channels more than Rack. Being able to Disable Track and Render in Place is just very convenient for relieving RAM on the fly. I have just got NI Komplete 10 Ultimate and only had a brief chance to play around with the Kontrol browsing software but so far I loaded Kontrol up as an Instrument channel and it works like a Boss so I can see Instrument channels being used even more now. I didn’t try loading Kontrol as a Rack (not even sure if its possible) as I ran out of time and am now away from the Music Lab for a few days.

Ain’t Cubase grand!