• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Topic: GS3 on a separate machine

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    GS3 on a separate machine

    Hi,
    After reading tones of materials online and specially on this forum I came to the conclusion that the best way for me is to go with 2 machines, one for my Cubase and the other for GS3.

    I was just wondering what is the best way to connect the machines?
    I noticed many people on this forum referred to MiniOverLan. I don’t know if I should buy this or not.
    I don’t want to loose any quality as far as sound and latency goes. Also I probably cannot afford to buy a high end sound card to hook the two machines to it. Any thoughts on this?

    As far as the systems go, I’m planning to get a power full machine for Cubase. Maybe a 64 bit machine with 64 bit vista. And 4+ gig ram.

    But for my GS3 dedicated machine, I’m not sure what I should get? Do I need to spend a lot of money on that or can I get away with spending less.
    My phylosphy is that if I’m going to spend some money over this, $500 here or there would not make that much of a difference in the long run.

    I’d appreciate any comments regarding this. I’m planning to buy my system within this week. But still I’m a little not sure about the details. I have been doing a lot of research, but I guess you’d never know them that well, unless you try them.

    Best Regards to all who help others

  2. #2

    Re: GS3 on a separate machine

    Why GS and not GVI?

    Have you considered FX-Teleport instead of MOL?

    D

  3. #3

    Re: GS3 on a separate machine

    Quote Originally Posted by Daryl
    Why GS and not GVI?

    Have you considered FX-Teleport instead of MOL?

    D
    When I was reading about GS3 and GVI on TASCAM, GS3 had many things that GVI didn't have them, specially when it came down to mixing and editing the mics, and rooms. Also I think GS3 orchestra (the one I'm planning to get) has couple of other things with it like gigapluse and a bundle of Vienna instruments.(well a small vesion of it).
    Frankly I don't understand why people say they want to upgrade from GS3 to GVI, I was under the assumption that GS3 is more profetional and more detailed.
    AM I wrong???

    about, FX-Teleport, I read some poeple were complaining about it. But if it is faster I'll go with that,, probably I should read more about it.

    thanks,

  4. #4

    Re: GS3 on a separate machine

    Quote Originally Posted by ptcompositions
    When I was reading about GS3 and GVI on TASCAM, GS3 had many things that GVI didn't have them, specially when it came down to mixing and editing the mics, and rooms. Also I think GS3 orchestra (the one I'm planning to get) has couple of other things with it like gigapluse and a bundle of Vienna instruments.(well a small vesion of it).
    Frankly I don't understand why people say they want to upgrade from GS3 to GVI, I was under the assumption that GS3 is more profetional and more detailed.
    AM I wrong???

    about, FX-Teleport, I read some poeple were complaining about it. But if it is faster I'll go with that,, probably I should read more about it.

    thanks,
    GS 1.1GB sample loading vs GVI 2.8GB sample loading (estimated).

    GS has editing, GVI doesn't have the same degree of control.

    GS has Gigapulse, GVI doesn't (although I think that it sounds a load of cr*p, so wouldn't use it).

    FXT has nothing to do with speed. It just means that you don't need MIDI or audio hardware on the GS machine, as the MIDI is sent over the network to the GS machine and the audio returns the same way right into your DAW.

    I only mentioned GVI because GS is overkill for most people and has memory loading problems.

    D

  5. #5
    Senior Member Steve_Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA 15206 USA
    Posts
    1,425

    Re: GS3 on a separate machine

    MOL has been working very well for me for a long time.

  6. #6

    Re: GS3 on a separate machine

    Hello PTCompositions...

    I agree with where you're going on your configuration. Without question, GS3 (or any sampler for that matter) works better on its own dedicated machine. I have GS3 Orchestra and GVI and two separate machines pretty much as you describe. The Cubase DAW is a built to the hilt multiprocessor machine and the GS machine is built all around harddrive speed. I believe the crux of the issue is understanding the bottleneck in the respective applications: processor/memory vs. harddrive speed. With the DAW, it's definitely the former. My approach is to offload VSTi (instruments) from the DAW- and I use a Muse Receptor for my VST instruments, and my GIGA box for sampling.

    While it is technically possible to run everything on one machine (with GVI), I've found that once I stack in audio processing VSTs, that it's pretty easy to bring even the most well-configured DAW to a grinding halt. The key point is that processor/memory bottlenecks are very different than maximizing harddisk I/O. Here, Giga is un-matched because it runs at the kernel level.. so with two separate RAID 0 drive configurations, one pair of Raptor 10,000 RPM 150GB and another pair of 300GB 7200RPM, 16Meg cache drives, I separate sample libraries requiring the fastest access on the Raptors (such as piano libraries) and larger libraries like VSL on the larger drives. This setup has worked very well.

    As for MIDI, MOL is quite nice. But I also use a physical MIDI connection since certain GSIF cards provide extremely low-latency MIDI - such as RME HDSP series. Having both options is nice, and GS certainly can work with both simultaneously.

    The one thing I am contemplating... is possibly using something like NI Kore to build a dedicated sampler machine that functions very similarily to the Muse Receptor. The one drawback of my configuration is that I really can't run NI K2 and GS3 at the same time on the same machine. Their configuration requirements are nearly opposite; either works quite well running dedicated, but running them at the same time is not very pleasant. Something like KORE would potentially change that, and allow the "Sampler" box to be upgraded to a maxed out configuration... the one advantage of GVI is its ability to address more memory (therefore load more samples) when run thru a VST host.

    Hope this input helps.

  7. #7

    Re: GS3 on a separate machine

    thank you all for your help.

    I think I will go with FX Telepor. I read about it and asked couple of friends, it seems to work fine.

    As far as GS3/GVI goes, based on TASCAM's specs on their website, I find GS3 much more suitable for what I like to do. I only hope that I wouldn't run to too many problems.

    Regards,
    pt

Go Back to forum

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •