Login

Divide the Nebula Servers

Tips & tricks, working results, technical support

Re: Divide the Nebula Servers

Postby Mercado_Negro » Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:20 am

vicnestE wrote:I'm ok to pay the upgrade to support further development of the great product.

But I bought it because Giancarlo kindly explained personally to me that the sample rate conversion will be faster for duplicated nebula instances.

Any other happy local server customers with loads of libraries could share their experiences.

By the way, I use one PC only since it's powerful enough already, but server edition is so attractive.


Then forget about the server (NebulaServerWin64.exe), it takes more CPU and RAM than needed. The server is useful for two computers. Nebula3 Server already shares RAM between instances.... hmmm but, now that I think about it, are you using it because you have a 32bit DAW?
i7 3770k :: Asus P8H77-V LE :: 16Gb DDR3 @1600MHz :: Geforce GT 520 :: OCZ-Vertex 128Gb :: WD Black Series 1Tb and Green Series 1Tb :: F*******e Liquid56 :: REAPER 64bit and StudioOne 64bit (both latest versions) :: Win 10 64bit
User avatar
Mercado_Negro
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 9:30 am

Re: Divide the Nebula Servers

Postby vicnestE » Fri Nov 09, 2012 12:27 pm

My bad, I forgot at first without filling in server and port, the local client version could load libraries just like nebula pro 3.

A few lines of readme.txt for server version could solve similar problems for the most supportive users.
I got my readme from "Search" top-left on the forum and fill in the server/client ip/port too soon.

I'm using server because my project loading time is way too long. (15~25minutes under 48kHz)
Preload of instance and SRC conversions.
So I hope to fast the workflow without wait for nebula s to load.

I'm under 64bit win7 for nebula and other samples for two years.

Now it's clearer to divide the client version than server version thanks to the great tools by Zabukowski.

Thank you all for help :)
User avatar
vicnestE
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 740
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 5:11 am

Re: Divide the Nebula Servers

Postby RJHollins » Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:13 pm

richie43 wrote: And I am curious; what names and category list.......? :ugeek:


Hi Richie,

Oh ... I was speaking of the the names you used when creating additional Nebula.dll's.

I know everyones work flow is unique. I've not considered how I'd go about organizing the current massive NEB libraries [and the new ones being released]. Adding to that ... I'm still testing the 'TIMED' modifications on certain presents AND I have to get the HQ-KULT compressor set-up.

Like I said ... I'd be curious to learn how others are approaching this, and the naming strategy.
:)
i7-5820k, MSI X99A Plus, 16 GIG Ram, Noctua NH-D14, Win-7 Pro [64-bit], Reaper-64

NVC [Nebula Virtual Controllers]
RJHollins
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:53 pm

Re: Divide the Nebula Servers

Postby Vernon » Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:05 pm

vicnestE wrote:I'm using server because my project loading time is way too long. (15~25minutes under 48kHz)Preload of instance and SRC conversions.
So I hope to fast the workflow without wait for nebula s to load.


15-20 minutes is really strange...I work with an I7 on Win7@64bit and the max loading time for a ~50 Neb instances project is 3 minutes (included resampling from 96k to 44.1k that's slower than 96->48).

As already mentioned by others pro users, is highly recommended to use the Nebula3 Server plug in local mode without the running server in order to save CPU cycles. I've made a lot of tests and I can confirm that.

Vernon
Vernon
User Level III
User Level III
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 3:27 pm
Location: Torino - Italy

Re: Divide the Nebula Servers

Postby richie43 » Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:16 am

RJHollins wrote:Hi Richie,

Oh ... I was speaking of the the names you used when creating additional Nebula.dll's.

I know everyones work flow is unique. I've not considered how I'd go about organizing the current massive NEB libraries [and the new ones being released]. Adding to that ... I'm still testing the 'TIMED' modifications on certain presents AND I have to get the HQ-KULT compressor set-up.

Like I said ... I'd be curious to learn how others are approaching this, and the naming strategy.
:)



Hi RJ :P

It would be silly of me to tell you all of the names I use for my Nebula instances, I have so many now that I have adapted to making them with the Nebula Set-ups. I have some that are foe only one library that I use often, like the PCS, Genini,R2R, Tape booster&Tube Booster,etc. I have some that are specific to function, like Consoles, Tapes, Preamps, Verbs. There is no right or wrong ways to go about it, that's a cool thing about it. You can make as many as you need and specify them in any and as many ways that are helpful to your work. And remember, the less each instance is scanning, the faster they load. I have found the time it takes to set this up is more than worth it, especially after the first time loading a project with 20-30 instances and it DOESN'T take minutes!
The Sounds of the Hear and Now
http://soundyaudio.com/
richie43
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 4847
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:47 pm
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: Divide the Nebula Servers

Postby vicnestE » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:50 am

Vernon wrote:
vicnestE wrote:I'm using server because my project loading time is way too long. (15~25minutes under 48kHz)Preload of instance and SRC conversions.
So I hope to fast the workflow without wait for nebula s to load.


15-20 minutes is really strange...I work with an I7 on Win7@64bit and the max loading time for a ~50 Neb instances project is 3 minutes (included resampling from 96k to 44.1k that's slower than 96->48).

As already mentioned by others pro users, is highly recommended to use the Nebula3 Server plug in local mode without the running server in order to save CPU cycles. I've made a lot of tests and I can confirm that.

Vernon

Because the boot time for 8681 programs is very long. About 25seconds.

So I need to divide the client with tools.
User avatar
vicnestE
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 740
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 5:11 am

Re: Divide the Nebula Servers

Postby richie43 » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:54 am

Use the Nebula Setups tools! Have you tried it yet?
The Sounds of the Hear and Now
http://soundyaudio.com/
richie43
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 4847
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:47 pm
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: Divide the Nebula Servers

Postby RJHollins » Sat Nov 10, 2012 8:46 am

Hi Richie,

Hey, thanks for the reply and info. I definitely understand the uniqueness of organizing ones libraries, but I still appreciate hearing about the possibilities you mention.

Honestly, having been only a few months in my new mastering room, I am finally getting a proper listen to the massive collection of libraries purchased. Some 'favorites' are surfacing, but I've still not given them all a detailed study. In fact, last night I fired up the NICE-EQ from CDS, having read a discussion on the hardware. This IS a very 'Nice' eq :o On top of that, I checked out the Pre-amp alone. Now AlexB updates the Pres, and his latest Millennium is very very nice !! Different than the SS CDS version. It's early to say, but I may have found a go to pre-amp for some works.

But no doubt, specialized NEBs will need to happen for me, as my template chain loading time needs to be trimmed.

Sincerely.
i7-5820k, MSI X99A Plus, 16 GIG Ram, Noctua NH-D14, Win-7 Pro [64-bit], Reaper-64

NVC [Nebula Virtual Controllers]
RJHollins
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:53 pm

Re: Divide the Nebula Servers

Postby vicnestE » Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:14 pm

richie43 wrote:Use the Nebula Setups tools! Have you tried it yet?


Yeah, the rom method from Nebula Setups Tools is kind of super speed up.

I was replying his question though.

Am I under the false impression that my mixdown is faster with nebula server??
User avatar
vicnestE
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 740
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 5:11 am

Re: Divide the Nebula Servers

Postby richie43 » Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:20 pm

vicnestE wrote:Yeah, the rom method from Nebula Setups Tools is kind of super speed up.

I was replying his question though.

Am I under the false impression that my mixdown is faster with nebula server??


As has been said on this thread in many different ways, yes, I think you are under a false impression regarding using the server dll if you are not using it in a true server/client relationship with more than one computer.
And now it is my turn to ask a question; what do you mean by "the rom method"?
The Sounds of the Hear and Now
http://soundyaudio.com/
richie43
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 4847
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:47 pm
Location: Minnesota, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Working with Nebula

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests