VE Pro: Value in a Single-Computer Setup?

Dorico
1

Always on the lookout for ways to improve my Dorico workflow (even as clean socks lie all around me unsorted…), I’ve become curious about Vienna Ensemble Pro. More specifically: what’s the “threshold of value” to a user not using a computer network and not using any VSL libraries?

I’d love to hear from those of you with experience using VE Pro where you would “draw the line” between it being worth the purchase or not.

Some “threshold” considerations, I imagine (but please amend/correct me if I’m wrong!):

  • number and size of VST libraries
  • Project-related workflow (i.e., opening one or occasionally two at a time vs. generally working with multiple)
  • third-party FX (any bearing on these?)
  • other considerations/advantages? (Ex: I recall @FredGUnn saying in a post that VE Pro has obviated his use of Expression Maps, is that correct?)
2

Not exactly. With SWAM I was initially trying to set all the parameters with expression maps, when it’s easier just to set everything up in VEPro and save the instance or save the presets in the instrument. At a minimum, you still need an expression map in Dorico to have the dynamics play back correctly, and obviously can get much more complicated than that.

I have all my typical libraries already loaded in my standard VEPro project, and just leave it open in the background all the time. Depending on what libraries you use, this may take a substantial amount of RAM. Opening or switching projects in Dorico then just takes seconds though as all the libraries are already loaded, so Dorico just has to connect to them.

VEPro also integrates with MIR if you have it too, so I use that for reverb, panning, and “spacial mixing” as well, rather than doing any of that in Dorico.

5 Likes
3

First and foremost: If you are planning on large instances with full orchestral libraries, whichever machine VEP resides on needs to be beefy. If your current box is big enough, networking isn’t really relevant. It really all depends on your workflow.

E.g., if you are switching projects (or applications) that use the same VEP instance, loading is much, much quicker.

If you have a workflow like a pipeline (like I do, Dorico → Logic (or Studio One) then having the same templates (expression maps matching, articulation sets) makes the second stage sooo much easier: MIDI export, MIDI import and then just assign tracks to the instance(s). It literally took me 10 minutes to go from Dorico to Studio One before I was knee deep in tweaking expression (CC11 and Mod CC1).

You mileage may vary, but, VEP (Server) isn’t really that expensive (relatively) and it comes with Epic Orchestra.

my $.02

2 Likes
4

“MIR”? (molto ignoranto)

5

MIR

Incredible piece of software.

4 Likes
6

It’s their impulse response reverb, with different rooms available, placements, levels, etc…

2 Likes
7

Your $0.02 are worth a lot, @derAbgang, thanks!

Let me clarify my own particular workflow a bit more.

I am probably a rather low-powered user:

  • Mac Studio M1 Max (64GB RAM)
  • I simply work in Dorico (no piping to a separate DAW, at least not at this time)
  • I generally only open one project at a time, occasionally two
  • I most frequently work on smaller-ensemble scores, from 1–18 players (some doublings within players)
  • I generally use just NP for playback, sometimes adding 1–3 single-instrument third-party VSTs (which do not have NPPEs)
  • Sometimes I lower all of NP’s reverb and substitute in a third-party FX such as Valhalla Room

So for $0.02 more, do you think it’s worth (currently) €195?

8

Not really for you just yet.

Although when you do expand, note that VEP let’s you load up VSTs using multiple MIDI ports, so, when the number of VSTs in your Dorico project becomes prohibitive (slowness creeping in), off-loading those to VEP would allow you to consolidate the number of VSTs in your Dorico project. As an example, my large orchestral template uses 6 VEP instances (woodwinds, brass, percussion, chordophones, choir and strings), each using multiple ports (F. Horns port 1, Trumpets port 2 etc. in my Brass instance). This allows me to to only load 6 VSTs into Dorico instead of the, I don’t know off hand, perhaps 30 instances residing in VEP.

Another bonus with VEP (Server): You can “Decouple” the VEP VST from the server, so,saving Dorico projects is incredibly fast and project size (on disk) is much smaller. You just need to be careful to save your server instances because Dorico won’t maintain the VST settings in the project.

1 Like
9

I used to do nearly all my orchestral arrangements in VE Pro. With the advent of NP Performance Engine, this is no longer necessary and I tend to use it for larger arrangements where there is no NP involvement (although it’s not actually incompatible with NotePerformer). Performance and loading times do tend to be improved but it’s not a hard and fast rule.

Certainly if you want to work in a DAW as well as Dorico, it could be a huge time saver as @derAbgang has said as you can use the same template for both. I don’t for the most part.

The Epic Orchestra is fairly worthless as it’s mainly a marketing ploy to get you to invest in full versions of the taster libraries on show but there are one or two worthwhile things like the Appassionata Strings. If the price worries you, it’s frequently on sale at around €50 off. There’s no particular advantage in using VSL libraries compared to other vendors in VEP that I’m aware of.

1 Like
10

I bought VEPro when it went on sale sometime last year - and I figure it will again (so perhaps wait for black friday or holidays to see what happens). I think it’s worth it, but I wouldn’t say it’s a mindblowing game changer for working in Dorico. But it’s been nice to have for a couple reasons.

  1. I personally only have one machine which I use it on, for the primary reason of being able to create consistent templates across different projects (sort of how NPPE runs in the background, but with different VSTs – so you could always have commonly-used VSTs pre-loaded which will be available when switching projects). Not only will this allow you to keep Dorico project file sizes down, but they can be faster to load. Helpful if for any reason you might be switching often.

  2. Another benefit can be if you also use a DAW for finessing your mockups – it can make the transition as well as roundtrip sync easier. Not only will you have the same instruments loaded, but you can create expression maps that use midi channel switching per technique, rather than keyswitches, and you simply load all your articulations this way on individual midi channels in VEP. One advantage here is that you can create a common and universal midi channel numbering for common articulations (e.g., legato always on ch2, staccato on ch3, pizzicato on ch5). Then you create similar expression maps in your DAW. Requires some upfront setup time but once done, the transisition is fast and easy (whereas importing a mockup into a DAW having used keyswitches in Dorico can be a big headache of cleanup and reconnecting everything).

  3. Finally, one fantastic use case for VEP is the ability to add “switches” and expression maps to instruments which have articulations separated out onto different patches (which don’t have any keyswitches or change methods built-in). I found out about this from trying to use some of the Spitfire LABS and Originals instruments. For example I have the Originals Cimbalom, lovely instrument but they separated sustains, dampened, and tremolo/rolls onto different patches (program switching does not work here), so you can’t simply switch these using a normal mapping setup.
    For such instruments it’s tricky to use in Dorico because you would have to load every patch as a separate VST, and then use the separated independent voice method for simply switching articulations. In VEP you would simply load every patch into one “multi” instrument, and use midi channels as switch assignments which you would then add to your expression maps, allowing you to use a single staff, single voice, and add techniques as usual. Voila!
    FYI you can learn more about how that works from this video here (they are using Logic in their example but it would function the same in Dorico using expression maps).

3 Likes
11

yes, this was just about the first use I found for VEP as well as, for instance, VSL sometimes separates mutes into different instruments which is obviously not the case in reality. VEP can certainly make it easier to use Dorico in the way you can a DAW (although, where possible, I like to keep things as simple as possible which means a lot in NPPE at present)

2 Likes
12

IMO, VE Pro is an absolute must if you are doing composition with the number of players of standard orchestral ensembles in Dorico (outside of NotePerformer).

The way people use orchestral libraries in DAW’s is first you set up a fully balanced template with EQ’s, compressors, gain plugins and aux buses for reverb. A good template will also use numerous group tracks, ex. you might have OT Flute 1, OT Flute 2, OT Flute 3 all going to a group track called “OT Flutes” and that as well as other similar group tracks might go to a group track for “OT Woodwinds”. You might have another woodwind library, say VSL Flute 1, VSL Flute 2 that go to a group track called “VSL Flutes” and that goes to a group track called “VSL Woodwinds”. Then the OT Woodwinds and VSL Woodwinds might have their own FX settings and level adjustments to equalize the balance and make them sound as similar as possible, and then once they sound pretty much the same, routing them to a single stem (another group track) called “Woodwinds”, then at the very top level all of the main stems “Strings” “Woodwinds” “Brass”.

All of these tracks can have their own FX plugins on them of course. Sometimes they might be up on the individual instrument tracks, other times they might be on a group track. But the idea is that you put the time and effort into balancing this and getting it sounding right.

Using Dorico by itself for this has numerous limitations. First of all, no group tracks, so you can’t set things up in the way you normally would in a DAW. Want to boost the level of all woodwinds globally with 40 different tracks? Sorry, no group tracks, so you have to manually boost the level of each one one at a time, and if you haven’t boosted it enough or boosted it too much, you have to go through them all again to adjust it.

Now that you have done all this, built a great template directly in Dorico working around the limitation of no group tracks by putting in 5 times the time/effort you would in a DAW. Now you have another piece you want to apply this template to. Sorry! You can save the endpoint config and make that a template, but you lose all your nice balance/routing/insert effects. So now you have to go through all 100+ audio channels in Dorico (assuming here that you are blending multiple libraries from different vendors together) and manually re-add all your plugins. Then you have to do that again if you want to write another piece. Insanity.

Instead of doing this crazy thing, what you do is set up VE Pro, and you use that as a mixer, hosting all your instruments in there, and just send back a single audio return to Dorico, and then don’t use the Dorico mixer at all. The VE Pro mixer is equal to that of a DAW, so if you host everything in a single VE Pro session then you can use that mixer for absolutely everything and pretend the Dorico mixer doesn’t exist. The VE Pro mixer supports group tracks and aux tracks and everything, so you can set everything up the exact same way that everybody sets up templates in a DAW. Want to apply this to another project? No problem. Just plug in the same VE Pro project (you could make it an endpoint config and template) in the other file, and all of your inserts/sends/routing, everything gets transplanted to the other Dorico project.

The single-instance VE Pro setup makes a ton of sense for single computer composers in this particular case.

The only time I would not suggest this is if you are mainly working with NotePerformer and don’t really use instruments outside of that, or if you are working with smaller ensembles mostly where this group routing is unnecessary, or you might also get by without it if you are using only libraries from a single vendor and they already sound exactly the same and are prebalanced correctly then you might also get away without it (I haven’t found any libraries where the balance is 100% perfect out of the box though). In any other case you definitely want it.

5 Likes
13

As a way of summarizing that giant block of text, think of VE Pro not just as a VST host, but as a mixer equal to those in major DAW programs, which you can use to replace the less capable mixer in Dorico, and you can also transplant the entire mixer from one project to another.

If you are in a situation where your use of the Dorico mixer is very minimal and you never really have to do anything there at all, ex. by using NotePerformer (which has its own mixer) or you just write for smaller ensembles like chamber sextet or something most of the time, then this big upgrade for the mixer won’t necessarily be important for you.

In my case, I have two full VSL woodwind libraries with all winds in pairs, then another winds library from another vendor, so that’s already 50 audio tracks just for woodwinds. For an entire orchestra it could easily be a few hundred. The Dorico mixer is really not suitable for anything much larger than chamber-size ensembles. For the number of tracks I’m working with, I need a mixer equal to that in a DAW, with folder tracks, group tracks, aux buses, etc, and the VE Pro mixer is that. If it weren’t for VE Pro, I would have to use a DAW instead of Dorico.

The necessity of this may change over time if Steinberg begins to expose more of the mixer features in Dorico (which are probably there somewhere because they exist in Cubase), with group tracks and folders being the two must have’s, and if insert effects start to get included in the endpoint configuration.

4 Likes
14

same, I’m lazy and NP + NPPE just works (for the most part) with minimal headache. So if just writing orchestral music, I honestly would just stick with NP.

VEP has been helpful for including hybrid non-orchestral libraries if that is of interest to @judddanby , but if simply writing for the orchestra already covered by NP/NPPE I can’t say the added cost and setup of VEP is really worth it, since you’re back at fighting other common issues (volumes, dynamics, timing) that NP fixes for you.

But for the once in a blue moon moment I am adding something like a cimbalom, good to have around!

1 Like
15

For jazz projects I like to load two Ample Sounds instruments (Gibson ES 335 and Upright Bass) and either a Boz Master Keys piano or Pianoteq. Still, probably simple enough to tweak with all of the NP horns and drums and save a template file…

1 Like
16

Oooh, I’ve been loving Boz Master Keys! One of my main pianos now, and yep I just simply load it as a regular VST since pianos are pretty easy anyway. Sounds fantastic!

I also occasionally use Acoustic Samples VHorns Saxes, and Sample Modeling Trumpets, both of which I have created in combined NP orchestral templates, but they are also easy enough to just add on a case-by-case basis when I want to throw in a sax or something. Less commonly I will reach for a full drum kit preferring my XLN Addictive Drums. In cases like that I actually wouldn’t reach for VEP because of the extra setup time, it would be overkill and unecessary external routing in that context.

1 Like
17

Hi @FredGUnn

Just curious; how do you deal with dynamic/changing sizes for instrument groups when using VE Pro? I’ve been working on different approaches to templates and the one thing I’m finding a bit troublesome is the process of, for example, adding percussion players to a current score without kind of blowing up my VE Pro template/preset.

I can foresee something similar happening with divisi.

18

For the VSL Synchron Brass library, they use the same keyswitch set (and same expression map) for all section sizes, so I made custom patches in the VSL Synchron player that simply adds an add-on keyswitch to allow swapping between those different section sizes within the same patch. It ends up being a fairly simple modification to the VSL official expression map to allow it to switch section sizes then - with hidden “a4” or “a6” playing techniques.

In cases where different section sizes have different articulations available, have a different keyswitch set and need a different expression map, the way I would handle it is by using voice independent playback and routing each voice to a different channel that has a different section size. Then you just have to remember something like “upstem voice 1 is one horn, upstem voice 2 is 2 horns, upstem voice 3 is 4 horns” etc.

This would also be the case when using different string libraries together, like VSL Duality Strings with VSL Elite Strings. You would load up all the sections on different channels, with their correct expression maps, and use the independent voice playback to allocate the notes. So in a regular passage, I might use upstem voice 1 with Duality Strings but then in a passage with more divisi, I might switch to upstem voice 2 with Elite Strings to avoid it getting too thick-sounding.

3 Likes
19

My VEPro template pretty much has all the instruments I anticipate needing. It’s obviously not very RAM efficient to leave all those sometimes unnecessary instruments active, but I have 128 GB on my desktop, so it’s not really an issue. Then no matter what Dorico project I open or switch between, connecting to VEPro only takes a few seconds.

3 Likes
20

Okay, thanks for the response.

I was trying to do something similar with unpitched percussion the other day, and while I thought I’d created the additional channels in VE Pro, it seems like Dorico removed the ones that weren’t in my orchestra template (Dorico template, that is). I could be wrong about this—maybe I just forgot to save it separately—but I wondered whether re-launching Dorico reverted to only the instruments needed for the score(?)

I do not have the server decoupled, mind you, so perhaps that’s why?

But what you’ve done was basically my intention, with the possible difference that I’m not necessarily making a “realistic” template—particularly wrt the number of percussion players required (e.g., if an idea needs 20 triangles, I can solve that problem later if the piece gets performed… like Sorensen giving simple percussion parts to string players, etc.).