When we were doing our orchestral shootout last summer, I made one using nothing but Dimension Pro. Man, was that confusing, keeping track of which was which with sixteen instances of the same synth on screen!

When I mix, I really like to be able to see velocity envelopes for each MIDI track.  Kontakt lets me do this as long as each instrument is on a separate MIDI channel.  Ditto for Dimension Pro and most multi-channel soft synths.

The problem is drums.  If I use a single instance of a drum kit (e.g., an Abbey Road 60s kit), then I cannot have separate volume envelopes for kick, snare, hat, toms, tambourine, cymbals, etc.  For some songs this doesn't matter much, but other times I really want to be able to turn up or down some of the drum subsets (e.g., toms) without affecting the others. 

For a drum subset to have its own volume envelope, it needs its own track and its own MIDI channel, correct?  And than means Kontakt (or Dimension Pro) needs to have a separate drum kit instance for each drum subset/track.

So then the decision is whether to include all the drum kit copies within a single instance of Kontakt, or give each one its own instance.

The latter option might use more memory/cpu, but I'm guessing it's negligible compared to the cost of duplicating all those drum kit instances.

Some other pros and cons:

all kits in a single Kontakt instance:
- PRO: easier to PURGE all unused samples (to save memory and load time)
- PRO: lets you save all kits as a single "multi" (for reuse in a future song)

each kit in its own Kontakt instance:
- PRO: lets you apply Sonar FX to individual drum types
- PRO: if you double click the MIDI icon, you immediately see the correct kit

Also, the second method requires more tracks (one audio for each Kontakt instance), which increased the clutter, unless you either:

a) hide the audio tracks once you are done assigning effects to them.

or

b) use simple instrument tracks rather than the midi/audio pairs

Are simple instrument tracks recommended in this scenario?

where are you right clicking?  if you want automation on output #2, then you need to be trying to write automation on THAT output, not on the first one.

Thanks gents..

I am quite syre I have setup it coorrectly... see pics..

the scond audio out of kontakt does not provide the ability to automate the vst channel 2.

That looks OK to me. The only option is to send automation to your one and only instance of Kontakt, as it should be. Tracks 1-4 are all routed to the same instance of Kontakt, and any automation you place on any of them will all be routed to the same place: that one Kontakt instance. The sampler itself will split them up internally based on which MIDI channel they came in on.

Bear in mind that automation on the audio track is limited to your basic audio automation parameters, namely volume/mute and pan, and is a separate issue from MIDI automation.

folders of course!

Hi Tripecac.
 
The main reason why using multiple instances of Kontakt in a DAW is recommended, is that the CPU load is distributed more evenly through the CPU cores.
About the memory cost:
With 12 GB of RAM, I wouldn't worry too much. But.
Each instance of Kontakt (3.5) eats up around 30 MB of RAM.
So 20 instances for 20 instruments is definitely not an option.
But as bitflipper said if you separate the instruments into sections,
you can make it with 5 or 6 sections. Each in its folder.
This should be easily manageable.
About the CPU cost:
On a core2 Duo E6750 3 instances of Kontakt cause a CPU load of between 2 & 3%
I suppose this wouldn't even tickle an I7.
For the automatic tracks naming and the individual drum sounds outputs assigning, you can find a detailed description in this page.

Best.
Sylvain.

OK. This is what I want to do simply in SONAR X1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J12IibKInP0

Maybe I am too sleepy, but I cannot figure how to do it this easily. Surely if Protools does, Sonar does.

Thoughts, helps or tutorials very much appreciated.

Tim
.

Thank you Glyn. 

A topic near and dear to my heart these days.

The approach I am currently fine-tuning:
 
I have eleven instances of Kontakt, each has 20 outputs, 16 for instruments, 4 for auxes. Each is associated with a track folder for which I have built a track folder template. I don't think more than a couple of these have all 16 slots loaded, and the eleventh one starts out with just a couple of pianos, I reserve it for all the stuff I discover I need along the way. The rest have between 12 and 14 instruments loaded.

Almost every instrument has its own discrete output. There are a handful of cases, 8Dio Adagietto strings for one, where I will route more than one instrument to a single output because I won't be using them at the same time, and it  makes it easier to mix later, for example I have all the short articulations going to the same output.
 
All of the multis are saved fully purged. With background loading, SSDs, and a reasonably fast computer I almost never get a glitch, even the first time through. And obviously, I don't use all the instruments, but even when I loaded every instrument completely I was only up to around 28 GB of memory used.

I tried a separate, 8 output instance of Kontakt for each instrument, but that crushed my computer. It also caused problems for routing MIDI. I have been experimenting with using more than 16 instruments in a single instance, but routing audio and MIDI becomes a wee bit challenging, and confusing! It would provide some savings in system resources though.
 
My biggest problem now is routing MIDI! Every developer takes a slightly different approach to managing articulations. Key switches are almost always available, but since you can't "chase" key switches I avoid them. They also make a mess out of the notation output (I use Finale).
 
For the Cinesamples Brass and Winds I use a separate MIDI track for each instrument. Their "All Articulations" patches work really well that way.
 
For the Chris Hein Horns (compact) I have one MIDI track for trumpets, one for trombones, etc. I am using MIDI channels to switch between mutes or no mute, and that's working pretty well too.
 
I have not found an acceptable solution for the 8Dio Agitato and Adagietto strings! For the Adagietto ensemble patches I use a single MIDI track, and I'm trying to use a single MIDI track with multiple channels for the individual instruments, but it is not perfect. Oddly enough, that does work for the Agitato patches. Go figure!
 
I seldom use NI libraries for drums, like Bit I much prefer Toontrack Superior, and since I have the original DFH Superior libraries as well as the Avatar kits that came with Superior 2 I'm in really good shape. I keep meaning to buy the Custom & Vintage expansion, but haven't had the need yet. I drive Superior from Jamstix, which for some reason doesn't work as well using Sonar X3e and Jamstix 3 - not sure which, or maybe both is causing problems, but I've got it working at the moment, and I just keep my fingers crossed.

If I can figure out a way to load up more than 16 instruments into a single instance of Kontakt I will post the results.

Tripecac
The disadvantage of one Kontact instance per instrument is the increased CPU and memory usage, correct?  Has anyone found out whether this is significant?  How much overhead is associated with each new instance of Kontakt?

Are there other pros and cons of using multiple instances vs a single instance?

Incorrect, there would actually be less cpu use for multiple instances of Kontakt since each instance would be processed on a different thread unlike the case when you have a single Kontakt instance. IOW multiple instances would benefit from SONAR's multi-core processing while a single instance would use only one core.

Beagle
Kontakt's outputs are extremely configurable.  I would certainly (and this is what I do myself) recommend using 1 instance of kontakt and use kontakt's outputs and buses for any routing you need.

yes, using more than one instance of kontatk will be very taxing on your system.  I can't give you details because they're going to be specific to your machine, but every instance of kontakt will tax your CPU, your RAM and your hard drive access.

Here's a totally alternate point of view.  Use one instance per track. You can layer sounds in a multi on a track if you're looking for a combo sound.  But per track you can use one instance per track of Kontakt.  Then after you've laid down your track, just freeze it.  It will take 0 CPU at that point.  Unfreeze it any time you need to work with the midi again.
 
This approach is also very flexible and fast and requires a lot less configuration.
 
Just an alternate idea.  I use it.

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]

Tripecac
The disadvantage of one Kontact instance per instrument is the increased CPU and memory usage, correct?  Has anyone found out whether this is significant?  How much overhead is associated with each new instance of Kontakt

Incorrect, there would actually be less cpu use for multiple instances of Kontakt since each instance would be processed on a different thread unlike the case when you have a single Kontakt instance. IOW multiple instances would benefit from SONAR's multi-core processing while a single instance would use only one core.

Hello Noel!
 
Always nice to see you here, and Happy New Year.

But, I am going to take a tiny exception to your post... the last time I tried this experiment multiple instances of Kontakt took up a much larger memory footprint, which was a problem.

Now I may be using Kontakt and Sonar in an atypical manner, or my data may be outdated...
 
I am running a template that includes a little over 100 Kontakt instruments. Not all of them play all the time (in fact many are mutually exclusive). The idea here is to have all my 'tools' at my disposal. And this is not a large template by any stretch of the imagination, although it is probably reaching the point where a second computer will be necessary.
 
But right now, except for loading time, it works brilliantly. And I've tried several tricks (short of purchasing VSL VEPro5) to let Kontakt run outside Sonar. (BTW, track templates really are an amazingly useful feature!!)
 
So, since you know a thing or two about Sonar, should I revisit the one instance of Kontakt per instrument model now that I am using Sonar X3e and Kontakt 5?
 
Thanks much,
 
Bill

robert_e_bone
I would myself never consider creating such a gigantic Kontakt-kitchen-sink instance of 100 loaded instruments - and even if my testing shows a single instance of 20 instruments is better than splitting those 20 across 3 instances, I would likely only create what I needed for a particular project.

Hi Bob,
 
Saw the PM, good test I think.
 
So yeah, if loading times were miniscule I think I'd love to start every project with a blank slate. But even with SSDs and a faster CPU I haven't reached the point where that is practical. Of course the whole loading time thing is multi-faceted... I find waiting for the project to load almost as annoying as waiting for libraries to load.

My compromise for now is to load my bigger libraries at the start:

• 8Dio Adagietto Violins, Violas, Cellos, Basses, and Ensembles tie up five instances of Kontakt. I do not always use the ensembles, but they do sound lovely. I just tend to think in terms of the sections, and can't get my head around working with the ensembles.
• 8Dio Agitato ties up one more instance, but it could easily tie up a second one if I decide to ditch the keyswitching.
• I have two more instances for Cinesamples Core Winds and Core Brass (one each - I LOVE the way they organize their articulations.)
• Project Sam Orchestral Essentials ties up four more instances - I do not always load this one, but I'm loading it more and more often lately as I learn to think in terms of ensembles.
• Chris Hein Horns (Compact) ties up four more instances (trumpets, trombones, winds, and low brass and winds)
• I have one instance of Kontakt for pianos, upright basses, and spare slots for oddball instruments like prepared pianos, guitars and the like.
• I have another multi and template that I can load quickly for choirs, but at the moment I'm not doing much with choirs.
• I have one instance of Kontakt for a bunch of percussion libraries, and I'm about to add a second one.

Turns out I'm using quite a bit more than I realized when I first posted, or they are just creeping in when I'm not looking.
 
So why do it this way?
 
Lets say I'm trying to write a string chart and I'm cooking along in Adagietto, but the legato sections just aren't working for me. If Agitato is already loaded it's a simple matter to switch folders and start playing. I don't have to instantiate Kontakt and then load the patches... they are already there. I find that really handy. Same applies to brass and winds - although I really need to beef up those sections.
 
And then there is the ear candy... odd percussion, tuned percussion, harps, etc. Those I do tend to load as I need them, although I have several SoundIron and 8Dio percussion libraries loaded in that percussion instance because I use them all the time. But 16 slots is not as many as it might seem.
 
So that's why I have so many instances of Kontakt, and load them up the way I do. Make sense?
 
My goal, now that I've built up my libraries to the point where is to move a lot of this (all of it?) onto slave computers so that I need only build track folders to address the various instruments via VEPro. Several folks have warned me that Sonar X3 does not play well with VEPro, so I need to carve out some time to test it.
 
Take care, and I will be looking out for your results.
 
And Noel - it you are listening - any thoughts on the best way to do what I'm doing? Thanks!