SOT: Launcing Multiple Instances of SAW|SAC

[Pedro V]

Philip G,

I'll describe it to you and show it working when I can.

Remember that I am also going to create a DJ system, that was the reason, the seed of all these good comments.

Thank you for your consistency.

See you soon.

Excuse my English.

[Dave Labrecque]

I would only add to the discussion that -- IIRC -- Bob intentionally made SAWStudio capable of simultaneous instances. I'll leave it to Bob and others to decide when that might be desireable.

@Philip -- hey, wouldn't SAW's SMPTE/MTC in/out capabilities allow some semblance of syncing of two instances?

[cgrafx]

I would only add to the discussion that -- IIRC -- Bob intentionally made SAWStudio capable of simultaneous instances. I'll leave it to Bob and others to decide when that might be desireable.

@Philip -- hey, wouldn't SAW's SMPTE/MTC in/out capabilities allow some semblance of syncing of two instances?

Bob didn't have to do anything specific to make SAW Studio or SAC capable of simultaneous instances, it's pretty much the default behavior for all windows applications. There is literally a configuration setting in every single application that has to be set to explicitly limit this functionality and nobody (or almost nobody ever limits their apps). see here for the steps you have to take to limit this https://www.addictivetips.com/window...on-windows-10/

It's actually quite frustrating as it's really easy to launch multiple instances of pretty much any application particularly when there is a delay in the launch. You hit the icon to launch the app, but it doesn't appear to have launched so you hit it again and then suddenly you now have two instances opening.

As for SMPTE/MTC sync between two instances... I imagine it's possible, but you would have to have two SMTPE Interfaces (either real or virtual).

Again, I'm still waiting for somebody to explain what they are doing with the two instances of SAW running on the SAME system where you have limited resources and all kinds of potential for unintended conflicts that would make this the best option.

It's great that you can do it if you had to, but I'm not getting the use case that would make this a goto solution (maybe thats a limitation in my head).

[Pedro V]

Philip G,

One reason is not having more than one computer to play and be able to mix like a normal DJ would from multiple Denon DJ or Piooner DJ controllers/players. Same or in different ways.

There may be another computer as a backup.

For example, you could run several instances of SawStudio with different configurations, controls via MIDI of other devices such as lights, smoke, playlists, etc.

I have already described a very basic setup idea.

Regarding SMPTE/MTC synchronization between two instances, it is logical that it should work. What doesn't seem so logical to me is how I could synchronize the instances like they do with DVS for vinyls. I think it is a question of 1/4 frames in the world of video, from the video track.

This should be in the DJ Setup post.

Excuse my English.

[cgrafx]

Philip G,

One reason is not having more than one computer to play and be able to mix like a normal DJ would from multiple Denon DJ or Piooner DJ controllers/players. Same or in different ways.

There may be another computer as a backup.

For example, you could run several instances of SawStudio with different configurations, controls via MIDI of other devices such as lights, smoke, playlists, etc.

I have already described a very basic setup idea.

Regarding SMPTE/MTC synchronization between two instances, it is logical that it should work. What doesn't seem so logical to me is how I could synchronize the instances like they do with DVS for vinyls. I think it is a question of 1/4 frames in the world of video, from the video track.

This should be in the DJ Setup post.

Excuse my English.

Pedro, Its a very ambitious plan and I hope that it works for you. However, keep in mind you are trying to re-invent the wheel with a square peg.

SAW Studio is NOT designed to work as a DJ platform. There are already a ton of purpose built hardware and software tools to do exactly what you are trying to accomplish without the headaches of manipulating a tool that was not built for that purpose in order to manipulate it to do what you want.

By the time you are done with this what I expect is you will find it cost a lot of time, money and effort that could have been spent using tools that are way more effective and already made to do what your attempting.

Please don't take this as I don't think you should try, as you will learn a lot about both the software and hardware along the way.

I wish you the best of luck on your journey

[mr_es335]

Pedro V,

I thought that I would ask the question, "Is it safe to run multiple instances of Windows 7 applications?"

Though I never received a direct response to my query, the results were interesting none-the-less!

Regardless, "With wise council, plans succeed!"

Bob is one...Philip is two...obtain one-or-two more...hopefully outside of this Forum!

Two final points, 1) You simply cannot afford to guess in a professional environment, and 2) Test-and-repeat as-often-as-is-necessary.

[Dave Labrecque]

As for SMPTE/MTC sync between two instances... I imagine it's possible, but you would have to have two SMTPE Interfaces (either real or virtual).

Are MTC or SMPTE devices not multi-client, typically?

Again, I'm still waiting for somebody to explain what they are doing with the two instances of SAW running on the SAME system where you have limited resources and all kinds of potential for unintended conflicts that would make this the best option.

It's great that you can do it if you had to, but I'm not getting the use case that would make this a goto solution (maybe thats a limitation in my head).

How 'bout if I needed to access two different audio interfaces in order to get all the discrete output channels I needed? The last computer I built (my current one) has an I9 mobo with a PCI slot so that I could run my ancient Digiface alongside my shiny new Apollo hardware. I doubt I'll ever need to do it (and I'm not sure how I would sync it all), but I hate the idea of sunsetting my 20-year-old Digiface.

[cgrafx]

Are MTC or SMPTE devices not multi-client, typically?



How 'bout if I needed to access two different audio interfaces in order to get all the discrete output channels I needed? The last computer I built (my current one) has an I9 mobo with a PCI slot so that I could run my ancient Digiface alongside my shiny new Apollo hardware. I doubt I'll ever need to do it (and I'm not sure how I would sync it all), but I hate the idea of sunsetting my 20-year-old Digiface.

How does running to instances of SAW at the same time help with this? The two instances of SAW don't talk to each other directly. So you'd have to create an audio bridge somewhere either virtually or externally along with syncing the two instances with SMPTE (which again requires another bridge somewhere via a virtual port or hardware connection.


The more effective solution is hopefully the ASIO drivers for the interfaces are multi client, which would allow them to both show up on a single instance of SAW or you would use something like ASIO for a ALL as an ASIO aggregator and again all of the channels would show up for a single instance of SAW.

[Dave Labrecque]

How does running to instances of SAW at the same time help with this? The two instances of SAW don't talk to each other directly. So you'd have to create an audio bridge somewhere either virtually or externally along with syncing the two instances with SMPTE (which again requires another bridge somewhere via a virtual port or hardware connection.

It helps by allowing you to access two different interfaces simultaneously. It is assumed that the two instances of SAW can talk to each other, as we've discussed (and as you seem to outline, here), using the SMPTE or MTC functionality of SAW. Not proven to work, but it should, right?

That said, I don't believe this would provide sample-accuracy. My thought till now has been to use a word clock connection between the two interfaces to achieve that.

The more effective solution is hopefully the ASIO drivers for the interfaces are multi client, which would allow them to both show up on a single instance of SAW or you would use something like ASIO for a ALL as an ASIO aggregator and again all of the channels would show up for a single instance of SAW.

So far as I know, multi-client ASIO drivers (which are rare, IIUC) allow simultaneous use of an interface by multiple DAWs, not multiple interfaces in a single DAW. And I've never heard of or seen or experienced a single DAW using more than one interface at the same time. Not with ASIO, anyway. I sure don't see how it would be possible in SAW even if the drivers did allow it; SAW forces the user to choose a single ASIO driver (if using ASIO) at a time. Maybe other DAWs allow multiple simultaneous ASIO drivers? That would be outside my wheelhouse. If so, this would be my solution.

I've considered the ASIO-4-ALL approach as an aggregator, but never got it to work, nor have I heard of any successes doing this, despite this ostensible, so-called functionality of the freeware.

It also appears that different non-ASIO drivers can be used simultaneously in a single DAW (including SAW), so maybe that would be the ticket? As a non-ASIO approach, performance would suffer, but who cares if you're just trying to playback some tracks?

[cgrafx]

It helps by allowing you to access two different interfaces simultaneously. It is assumed that the two instances of SAW can talk to each other, as we've discussed (and as you seem to outline, here), using the SMPTE or MTC functionality of SAW. Not proven to work, but it should, right?

No the point is two instances of SAW DON'T talk to each other anymore than SAW and Reaper or SAW and Pro Tools or SAW and any other DAW.