linvst: mo' RAM ?

Discuss running non-Linux applications and plugins on Linux, for example via wine

Moderators: MattKingUSA, khz

Post Reply
jonetsu
Established Member
Posts: 1870
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:05 am

linvst: mo' RAM ?

Post by jonetsu »

Would more RAM benefit wine/linvst ? Would it allow to load more instances of a demanding synth ? Like going from 16GB to 32GB. Or maybe from 16GB to 64GB.

ubuntuuser
Established Member
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:46 am

Re: linvst: mo' RAM ?

Post by ubuntuuser »

jonetsu wrote:Would more RAM benefit wine/linvst ? Would it allow to load more instances of a demanding synth ? Like going from 16GB to 32GB. Or maybe from 16GB to 64GB.
There is LinVst-X https://github.com/osxmidi/LinVst-X

LinVst-X runs vst plugins in a single Wine process so plugins that communicate with each other or plugins that can use shared samples between instances will be able to communicate with their other instances.

It means that plugin instances can communicate with each other (which is not possible with LinVst), for example, Voxengo GlissEQ and Fabfilter ProQ-3 instances on different tracks simultaneously displaying the track spectrums and Kontakt instances on different tracks that use the same library not having to load samples for each new instance etc.

jonetsu
Established Member
Posts: 1870
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:05 am

Re: linvst: mo' RAM ?

Post by jonetsu »

ubuntuuser wrote: There is LinVst-X https://github.com/osxmidi/LinVst-X
Wow. This is great !

Yes, I know about some plugins, that I have, to uses inter-plugin communications, Voxengo GlissEQ being one. Some Melda plugins also are using that. So far I just tossed these features aside.

I bet it could also help with those plugins that need to run a 'protection' scheme of some sort as an external process that communicates with the plugin itself through shared memory and not sockets.

About more RAM: will it help wine/linvst ? I'm somewhat considering upgrading the motherboard (getting quite old actually, works, but ...) and as part of that, getting a certain amount of RAM. Maybe more RAM than 16 GB ?

Cheers.

tavasti
Established Member
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 6:56 am
Location: Kangasala, Finland
Contact:

Re: linvst: mo' RAM ?

Post by tavasti »

jonetsu wrote:Would more RAM benefit wine/linvst ? Would it allow to load more instances of a demanding synth ? Like going from 16GB to 32GB. Or maybe from 16GB to 64GB.
If it is memory which is bottleneck, then adding it will help. But if problem is cpu usage, then most likely not.

Run 'top' in terminal when your DAW is playing, and check cpu status and Swap usage.

If CPU is the problem, you may need to 'record' some of the synths to audio track instead of playing all instances simultaneously as synths.
Linux veteran & Novice musician

Latest track: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycVrgGtrBmM
More my music https://audiu.net/users/tawaste

jonetsu
Established Member
Posts: 1870
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:05 am

Re: linvst: mo' RAM ?

Post by jonetsu »

tavasti wrote: If CPU is the problem, you may need to 'record' some of the synths to audio track instead of playing all instances simultaneously as synths.
Since quite some time I'm offloading (bouncing) some synth tracks.

Now with very capable synths such as MSoundFactory and Icarus2, the processing is quite noticeable. In the case of Icarus2, it simply will not run properly. There might be a design issue with the plugin, or perhaps some optimization to be done within its code, but that's how it is at the moment.

Just wondering if wine/linvst would make use of more RAM, for whatever reason.

ubuntuuser
Established Member
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:46 am

Re: linvst: mo' RAM ?

Post by ubuntuuser »

jonetsu wrote:
tavasti wrote: If CPU is the problem, you may need to 'record' some of the synths to audio track instead of playing all instances simultaneously as synths.
Since quite some time I'm offloading (bouncing) some synth tracks.

Now with very capable synths such as MSoundFactory and Icarus2, the processing is quite noticeable. In the case of Icarus2, it simply will not run properly. There might be a design issue with the plugin, or perhaps some optimization to be done within its code, but that's how it is at the moment.

Just wondering if wine/linvst would make use of more RAM, for whatever reason.
Well, if LinVst is used and a sampler is the plugin and the same samples are loaded for each instance, then the samples need to be loaded into memory each time for any new instances and LinVst-X probably wouldn't have that problem.

The memory use in general is not that much for each LinVst instance, something like 4MB or maybe less and I can make it smaller but I havn't seen a real need to do so.

The CPU use affects the performance, especially in something like some Kontakt libraries that also have quite a lot of effects.

Post Reply