NEO in Kontakt - Different Workflow Practice Options


As a newbie, I am interested to know how people set Neo up in (workflow) practice - and the benefits of different practices. From what I have seen so far, the world is your oyster, in that you could have:

  • One instance of Kontakt or multiple instances . . . with
  • One instance of a .nki (i.e., Strings A, Strings B etc.) or several instances on the go . . . with
  • Each instance of an .nki set to a different articulation . . . or
  • Use keyswitches . . . etc., etc.

I understand that multiple instances of Kontakt is far less memory efficient, but I am interested to know whether there are other pros/cons to different practices?



  • I use Logic Pro with Neo and I tend to have one instance of Kontakt per patch and then have articulation sets for each patch -- so I can have a track with Strings A and then in the piano roll just choose which articulation I want on a per-note basis. It's more limited in terms of mixing (it would be much more complicated to set up per-articulation reverbs for short vs long notes) but it's substantially faster for writing and legibility. I use all my Spitfire libraries like this, and plenty from other developers as well.

  • Thanks Alex. I am a LPX user too for reference and am just getting my head around articulations (I have looked at the Spitfire LPX articulation videos and that approach seems sensible). So, just to be clear in my head, you would not have a multi rack in Kontakt: Rather, a single instance of Kontakt per track (in effect), with just one .nki loaded (e.g., Strings A)? Assuming then that you have the articulation set loaded, other plug-ins, bus assignments etc., so save as a patch for reuse/easy load?

  • Oops, I think I may have misinterpreted, in that you may well be referring to a patch in the Spitfire sense (e.g., Strings A). If my overall interpretation is correct, how many instances of Kontakt do you typically end up with?

    Does anyone use multi-racks with different patches (e.g., Strings A, Strings B) and use UACC for example - and or any other approaches?

  • Hi @AIE

    Pro's to Multi-Timbralling (loading multiple instances within one Kontakt Plugin):

    • Lower CPU use
    • Memory saved where you are loading the same instrument patch
    • More memory efficient workflow


    • Difficult to orchestrate tracks in Logic/ export the score
    • Signal chain can get messy!
    • More difficult to navigate instruments

  • Hi @Angus

    Many thanks. I have routed in this way in my experiments, but the video answered a key question I had re using LPX summing stacks with Kontakt (which I use quite a lot elsewhere). Noting your cons, what do you generally tend to do?

  • @AIE score wise, I would copy the MIDI over to an empty template where you would then be able to export the XML into Dorico or Sibelius.

    Signal Chain wise- this is why it is important to build your own template. Then you know where everything is and is routed to. I would use the Summing stack feature (cmd + shift + D) to group tracks together and make sure both the names on the Main Window and Mixer match.