michaelv

No, I don't mean multitimbral, and I actually wrote that. I can see we are not communicating entirely successfully, but thank you for taking the time.I appreciate it's dependent on individual experience and not an absolute. I've been running a 32 GB RAM 2012 iMac successfully with not many cpu issues until the last couple of years or so, when my demands became far greater. Kontakt multitimbral is not the way to go. Obviously, part of what you wrote made sense, but ;m not a multitimbral guy anymore. It's a case of newer technology with large RAM and its interaction with cpu. Maybe Logic will have to catch up with the M chips then. No two situations are the same of course, but a general approach can be agreed upon. I broadly had no issues with multi-out Kontakts. I love the Logic load only when asked idea. It's great. But it only works when one first launches a song. If I'm not mistaken, when you load something, then decide not to use it, Logic cannot purge it, but Kontakt can, if it's a Kontakt instrument, of course. So, between them both it's very powerful stuff. Anyway, I think I have my answer. I will have to start again and use the multi-out/multi channel approach to exceed 1000 instrument tracks, until such a time that Logic blows that ceiling off. Once again, thanks for your time.

Thank you. But, as I think I pointed out, using the multi-out approach is the only way to circumvent the 1000 software instrument track limitation. Or is there something I'm not aware of? As for cpu, that's not going to be the case with the new M2 chip ( and beyond) Apple technology. Is it? I took a look at the link. I don't think this applies to,eg: a Mac Studio and the upcoming even more powerful Macs. This was an M1 MacBook Air with only 16 BG RAM and a 512GB system drive! In fact, I'm pretty certain the last Intel i9 iMacs, with 128 GB RAM would be quite OK with large amounts of multi-out Kontakts. Just my thoughts, of course.

Thank you, des99. Thus far, you are the only person who has actually grasped this precisely. I thought I was clear, but evidently not. The Paul Thomson videos are very transparent, I thought; as was my description. The idea that anyone would use 1000 tracks simultaneously is ridiculous and obviously not the purpose of such a large template. The point is: I fear I will have to start all over, using the multi output route. Instead of going with over 40 years of experience and gut-instinct, I went with the advice of certain people who simply have no idea, or perhaps a misunderstanding about the balance of cpu when considering the pros and cons of single instances vs. multi outs. My mistake. The new Macs are a completely different species of computer when it comes to cpu utilisation. I'm certain, using the multi- outs method, I will now have, in principle, up to 16000 tracks at my disposal, rather than 1000 with the single instance option. As I said, I certainly won't need anywhere near 16000 tracks. Ever. And let's not forget Logic will not load any unused samples. In this way one can conserve RAM very efficiently and construct enormous templates in the process. My original question is: do I have an option to somehow override the present single instance limitation, or will I have to start all over, and build the Kontakt side of this using the multi out approach, which will then exceed the 1000 track cap? Or have I just answered my own question, lol?! Sorry if I wasn't clear. Thanks for the contributions.

Right, I've spent the last few weeks researching into creating a new orchestral/hybrid template, that I hoped would be relatively future-proof. It's not intended for full use on my present iMac, but for a new computer, with a lot of RAM etc. Right now mine is ten years old with 32GB RAM.I thought I'd researched the task well, but today I hit the sobering reality of not being able to exceed 1000 software instrument tracks. It's something I'd not even thought about before. Yep, stupid or what?! I'm basing my template on Spitfire's Paul Thomson's, where he claims in the YouTube headline his is over 1000 tracks. Having now looked into it, I believe I've identified my mistake. I used to work with Kontakt, using multi-instrument / multi outs, which would give me at least 16 loaded instruments per software instrument track. However, for this new template, I decided to work with single instances, because many were recommending it in some forums. My mistake. I now realise that, if I'd have stuck with the multi-instrument approach, I could have (in principle) around 16000 instruments available. Not that I'd want quite that many! However, following Paul Thomson's approach I certainly would require over 1000 instruments.Additionally, I will be using many, many more library companies than just Spitfire, which, by definition will increase the numerical options for the same instruments. I just want a template that will pretty much do anything I want and will be ready to go at the drop of a beat. Hat. So, now I face the depressing and daunting task of starting all over again, and exchanging those single instances of Kontakt (with one instrument per track) to the multi approach, which would yield 16 instrument per software instrument track. Multi-instrument, but not multi-timbral, btw; I don't do that anymore. I hope this is clear! I'll also use other hosts, like VSL Synchron,Play, Spitfire, and some other soft synths, but that is a minor thing compared to the sheer quantity of Kontakt libraries I have. Can anyone kindly confirm that what I've just written is correct and makes sense, please? Or is there another way of exceeding the 1000 limit without having to start all over again, which is, frankly, soul-destroying, as I've spent many weeks doing all this, including the research. For anyone interested here is the link to part one of Paul Thomson's video on his new template. It's very clear and pretty simple, except I didn't factor in the 1000 track limit. Part 1: Part 2: Many thanks for any opinions and sorry for the long post!

I just came across this, having been suffering from the same problem, after updating from an ealier version of LPX. Frankly, it's ridiculous. For someone like myself ( working in film and TV ) I always need to start earlier than 1.1.1.1, in order to sync to picture , and to insert sync bleeps. So, we are now in the amateur position that Logic will allow us to do this, but at a price. So I have to sacrifice my practice that I've done for years, because "Logic" decides it's going to impose itself on my methodology. I hope this bug will be rectified soon. Bleeding edge, indeed. Where are my plasters ? I don't see this as technological progress,when something that has been in place and working fine for years is removed or corrupted.

This might sound like overkill, but I have signed an NDA on this project. It's so big that that even trying to get into the company's offices is like trying to infiltrate the FBI. I cannot show anyone outside of this assignment anything to do with this production . The cue title alone on this particular Logic song would give the game away. Sorry. Unless there's a way to blank out the name…. Multiple tracks to same channel strips I have numerous Kontakt multis, their midi channels variously assigned to different Kontakt outputs , then sent to different channels in the channel Channel Mixer, and some share the same channel. If that's what you mean, then, yes, it's the case . Hope that was clear! However,this song is not different to the many previous ones from the same project. It's from the same template, and they exported with no problem at all. This has suddenly happened and I'm scratching my head.. Many thanks for taking the time to help.

That's a negative to all your questions, David. This issue is happening on other songs I've opened and tested. As I said , I have a work around, but it's tedious. I ave also trashed the preferences and repaired permissions, in Recovery Mode. I tied importing the song into a a blank Logic song, but it crashed repeatedly. I got as far as about 70% importation. When I tried exporting those tracks, it offered to save a mere 9 tracks out of about 50. In all other respects, Logic is running fine. I think I will remove Logic over the weekend and reinstall, if I can't resolve this today. Thanks for the time.

I have been working on a project for the past three months, which requires me to work from home ,then export all my tracks as audio files and take them into another studio. This is because my collaborator's DAW of choice is now Nuendo. So far, this has proved to be a very successful approach to our workflow, until today. As an example , I have a cue with 96 tracks. When I came to use export all tracks as audio files, the usual window came up, defaulting the destination to the bounces folder in the Logic song. However, this time, instead of the expected and correct number of tracks to be saved ( 96 ) , the total was 25 ! I tried this with a few other recent Logic songs and the same thing happened. None of us can figure it out. I had to manually, and individually, bounce each track separately, which was very time-consuming. A clue, though….. I tried exporting the tracks one at a time. So, the first one was, say, piccolo rips. It did that fine . The second track was Alto flute runs, but when I came to export, Logic seemed to think it was still the piccolo rips! This implies that the reason why I'm experiencing reduced export files is because Logic is thinking that many of the tracks are actually duplicates, so it's stopping them from being exported. That's the only explanation I have. However, I don't have the answer to the reason for this. I'm running the latest version of Logic. Has anyone clue as to why this has suddenly started to happen and how it can be fixed please? I'm thinking I might just trash the Logic app and reinstall. Many thanks for any help.

Problem solved, thanks to Mr. pkm, from the Soundsonline tutorial he kindly posted. Paul: you were great, Sir. Thank you.

Total nightmare. I have followed the instructions of "flickerflix" exactly as described. Triple, quadruple, quintuple ( and beyond ) checked, and cross-checked with other You Tube tutorials dealing with the same thing, and the same approach. Result: TOTAL FAILURE. As far as I can see, I duplicated the instructions, to the letter ( and number). I spent all day on this, because my templates are enormous: in excess of 350 tracks, sometimes, and require quick identification. So, I took this seriously. Apple decides to not bother with its customers needs, and simply decide to ( characteristically ) change architecture, without any consideration at all for the poor, idiot professionals, who keeps them in business. Pre Pro X was so easy, to deal with icons compared to this joke. We are not coders, Apple. Why don't you employ your coders to make it simple to customise your customers' working environments?! I love many of the new features in X. Stuff like being able to change the size of ,say, the EXS interface, so that aging, half-blind users, like myself , have an easier life when dealing with nano-characters. But this icon thing. I'm furious, and exasperated. I can normally solve most problems, but this has completely beaten me, despite mainly clear instructions from the OP. So, this is what I get, after having spent hours and hours entering and editing code, which I resent doing: Looks weird, right? I thought so. So, If I then press the little word, CHOOSE, in the bottom right of that image, Logic simply crashes. Please, please, please, can someone explain what I am doing wrong?! I'm completely convinced that I followed the instructions EXACTLY. I fundamentally rely on icons for efficiency. If anyone is masochistic enough to want to take at look at my plist file for errors, please PM me! Thanks to the OP, but this does not work for me. I'm really, really frustrated, so sorry if i sound harsh and frazzled.