Hardware And Virtual Instruments, What most impacts the performance of virtual instruments |
Mon 30 Oct 2006, 21:39
Post
#1
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 2 Joined: 30-Oct 06 Member No.: 84,771 |
I have a 2 yr old dual processor G4 with 1.25 G RAM, no off-board audio gear. I can't provide the processor speed right now because I'm not at home. I have numerous commercial and free audio unit instruments. However, when I'm working in Digital Performer I find that I can typically only have a couple instruments playing simultaneously. I have to disable tracks such that they aren't playing or "freeze" them (you DP folks will know what I mean). Plus, I often have to twiddle with the latency/sample size or audio playback will break up.
What would have the biggest impact on the ability to play virtual instruments simultaneously - faster processor? more RAM? Should I expect to really only be able to work with one instrument at a time? I'm looking at getting a new Mac - and yes, I already anticipate problems getting universal binary versions for at least some of the instruments. However, should I go for the fastest processor, biggest RAM machine I can afford? Or what? I welcome any advice. Thanks, Seth |
|
|
Replies
Wed 1 Nov 2006, 18:53
Post
#2
|
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 479 Joined: 08-May 05 From: Portland - US Member No.: 65,373 |
I've been suffering with this for a while & it is a pain, even with Ableton's ability to freeze tracks (the time it takes to un-freeze & re-freeze is ridiculous). Generally, what I do now is just commit & record/render the track once I am happy with what I got. I can save the midi & the preset for use later if I need to come back to it. You would be amazed at how much time this actually saves. There is a real tendency these days to get real anal about things that are kind of minor (I've been as guilty as anyone of this) & all of the options offered these days can be quite counterproductive in a sense. My CPU is much happier as a result & now I tend to do whatever I can to work with what I have rather than spening an inordinate amount of time looking for the next big dollar answer to a problem that I can solve by thinking my way around it. A good portion of my favorite all time records didn't have anywhere near the ability we have these days. They just aimed for a good sound & good performance & lived with the little errors & limitations. It's time to "just say no" to the planned obsolesence type of industry we work in.
This post has been edited by mortalengines: Wed 1 Nov 2006, 18:58 |
|
|
Posts in this topic
fishbite Hardware And Virtual Instruments Mon 30 Oct 2006, 21:39
lepetitmartien RAM will help (first by helping OS X to be way mor... Tue 31 Oct 2006, 13:20
fishbite I have a dual 1.25 Ghz G4 with 1.25 GB Ram running... Wed 1 Nov 2006, 04:29
KingBarbarossa there is also a complete different option that mig... Wed 13 Dec 2006, 05:12
mortalengines Yeah the receptor sounds pretty cool but it is lim... Wed 13 Dec 2006, 06:31
Mac Daddy fishbite. "If it ain't broke, don't f... Wed 1 Nov 2006, 14:48
mancalledclay QUOTE (mortalengines @ Wed 1 Nov 2006, 17... Mon 11 Dec 2006, 16:55
lepetitmartien RAM will help (first by helping OS X to be way mor... Tue 31 Oct 2006, 13:20
fishbite I have a dual 1.25 Ghz G4 with 1.25 GB Ram running... Wed 1 Nov 2006, 04:29
KingBarbarossa there is also a complete different option that mig... Wed 13 Dec 2006, 05:12
mortalengines Yeah the receptor sounds pretty cool but it is lim... Wed 13 Dec 2006, 06:31
Mac Daddy fishbite. "If it ain't broke, don't f... Wed 1 Nov 2006, 14:48
mancalledclay QUOTE (mortalengines @ Wed 1 Nov 2006, 17... Mon 11 Dec 2006, 16:55
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members: