Thanks in advance as I am totally ignorant on most of this. I bought GS3 just for playing piano and a few other samples for home recording fun and mainly just to have a decent sounding piano to play on my Roland A90ex.
What is the main diff between these two products? I am intrigued by accessing more memory in GS4 and was going to go there, but didn't know if maybe GVI4 was easier to use and good 'nuf for my needs.
Also, if anyone has info on GSIF or whatever audio card is needed with these two new products. I plan to install Vista 64 with 8megs of ram and am guessing my delta audiophile 2496 may not fly in this environment. I see no hardware specs yet posted for these new iterations.
Thanks again for your expertise,
Last edited by Noel; 01-23-2008 at 01:33 AM.
Reason: email notify!
GVI is a VST virtual instrument that is useable as a plugin in your DAW. It has no memory restrictions other than the amount of RAM on your machine, which is shared with your host DAW. Each instance is a single port of 16 channels. You can open more instances of it but each instance is opened *within* your DAW software (Cubase, Sonar, etc) so the memory used is shared among your DAW and any other VST plugins you are using (reverbs, delays, etc)
GS3 or 4 is a standalone app that runs on a computer that has nothing to do with VST and it is not a plugin. Usually this is used on a dedicated computer or multiple dedicated computers that are not running anything except the GS software and soundcard(s) to get the maximum bang out of your gigastudio. I dont know about GS4 but GS3 Orchestra has 8 ports of 16 channels available to load sounds (not that you can realistically load that much without running out of memory)
I dont know what the difference of GVI 3 - GVI 4 is, that hasnt been made clear to me.
The HUGE MASSIVE difference of GS3 and GS4 is that GS3 is limited to 2gigs of ram MAX (which really sucks for orchestral emulation, thats enough ram using VSL to load a solid string section maybe) and it only supports 32 bit OS, GS4 is *supposed to* work with Vista 64 and XP 64 and it is *supposed to* support up to 128 gigs of RAM.
Keep in mind GigaStudio is a RAM based sample engine, where most of the others are disc streaming based, which means that in an ideal world *cough* that the performance on giga far surpasses the disc streaming systems and the amount of polyphony available is based on amount of RAM not how fast your processor is.
It is tricky because GS3 is a kernel level application, meaning that it works with memory at the lower levels, operating system level, and therefore slight changes in where things sit in memory (like moving a .gig sample file from one directory to a new one, or having a bad ram sector, or trying to get the absolute maximum out of your measly 2 gigs (really 1.5 gigs) of ram) can be disasterous and the coding of GS3 doesnt cover user friendly ways of dealing with these problems.
It has been a unique experience of extreme pain and pleasure for me. The release of GS4 is being advertised as the solution of solutions. And I wait with puckering sphincter in much anticipation at the release, and I have it pre-ordered from sweetwater and if it works as promised I will be beyond ecstatic
A minor correction: GigaStudio is both RAM and disk based. When you play a note, the first milliseconds are streamed immediately from RAM. The bits are then streamed from disk and when the "sample heads" from the RAM and exhausted, the "sample tails" from the disk blend in seamlessly.
You need lots of RAM to load lots of instruments (like an orchestra). But most of the notes that you hear playing are from disk. You need good disk performance for good polyphony (like a raging drum solo or a piano piece with the sustain pedal held.)
The biggest difference between GS and GVI is that GS can author gig files and make detailed changes to gigs, while GVI simply plays the gigs and is limited to minor changes. GVI4 will be more powerful than GVI3, so it might do everything necessary for many musicians.
I do have another question on this. I built my current machine 5 years ago, and I still use Win2K for GS3 and Sonar. Memory management is problematic, and so I am not able to use more than 220mb of ram, of the 2GB installed in this box. This is AFTER a dangerous to apply reg tweak to get Win2K to get all the way up to . . . 220mb! So, you can imagine the intrigue with GS4 on an 8GB Vista 64 machine, at least if we can believe the published feature set.
So, the question: I am still using a Cheetah 15K.5 for sample files, but would like to know if you believe GS4 will require that sort of spin rate. I have two 250Gb SATA 2 drives that I will operate in a raid 0 array, which offer much strong transfer rates, with slightly less access time, as in around 6-7ms. Would these fly, or must I keep data on the Cheetah drive? It's 5y old and I would like to make the jump to SATA permanently.
15k SCSIs kick royal butt, but they're loud, hot and small.
Using two large drives (non RAID) is pretty cool. You can load balance them manually (violins from A, violas from B...) That gives great poly without any RAID hardware to get in the way.
7,200 RPM drives work well, but 10k Raptors work even better. If you have the cash, Raptors are the way to go.
Thank you Jon. I looked into Raptors and decided against them as they have had some signficant failure rates versus the Seagate drives I have now, and the SATAs I bought I hope will be as solid. I have a total of 4 15K.x scsi, three over 5y old, the last one I bought just for more space about 6mo ago. I don't mind paying a premium for durability. I also know that the price to failure ratio of the Raptor vs the Cheetah favors the Raptor, but for me as I say I don't mind paying a premium for reliability in a drive.
So, probably will install XP on a 36G Cheetah, and Vista on a one or two SATA 2 7200 Seagates. Because of an issue with dual booting XP/Vista, it is critical that you hide the Vista volume when you boot XP, else troubles ensue. I have not figured out a way to make one scsi drive disappear from the OS which could solve the issue too. I think my only solution is to disable the SATA controller when I need to boot XP. Hard to believe there is no way to hide a scsi drive from the scsi BIOS, but I don't see it if there is. Physically disconnecting the drive I won't do.
The Cheetah's are really not too hot nor noisy--in THIS environment. My video card makes much more noise! I use headphones when I play so it's ok that my system is not as quiet as it could be.
Many years I play on stage with Gs2 and now Gs3 , I found only it's the best solution and the best sound impression that over soft sampler .I think kernel level application give the best response to lot of notes play simultaneous .
Memory limitation is only the problem that it will be solved with 64Bits system and Gs4.
Noel, been using GVI on a 4-gig XP64 dual-core system and it works great and I can get a bit over 3 gigs of giga samples loaded. I have a quad-core 8-gig system too that I use mostly for remote location recording but I'm waiting for GVI4 (or GS4) before pushing the envelope on that one.
As to HD's, I went with RAID10 (mirrored RAID 0) on the system used for remote recording. Gives the performance of 0 with the safety of 1. Used 4 Seagate 320gig SATA3 drives on an IntelBX2 mobo using one of the internal controllers. Put 2 plug shells on the other internal controller for the boot drive and a spare transfer drive. Have a spare boot drive with Vista64 on it but its not soup yet.