MacMusic.org  |  PcMusic.org  |  440Software  |  440Forums.com  |  440Tv  |  Zicos.com  |  AudioLexic.org
Loading... visitors connected
Welcome Guest
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Hardware And Virtual Instruments, What most impacts the performance of virtual instruments
fishbite
post 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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lepetitmartien
post Tue 31 Oct 2006, 13:20
Post #2


Moderator In Chief (MIC)
Group Icon

Group: Editors
Posts: 15,189
Joined: 23-Dec 01
From: Paris - FR
Member No.: 2,758




RAM will help (first by helping OS X to be way more efficient, second by giving more room for RAM heacy plug-ins like samplers, some reverbs)

Now, any aging computer will be send out in shame when compared to new ones, but it doesn't mean it can't do its job. It all depends on how you work, if you rely heavily on virtual instruments, the more CPU you get, the better.

Note that some DSP systems like the powercore or the UAD-1 can take part of the workload off too.

But in the end, it all depends on how you work and if it's really, let's say, 100% more plug-ins, 200% more you need. Mind also that some CPU upgrades can really do marvels when you don't have the cash for a new computer and software upgrades…

Now tell us, how fast are your CPUs?


--------------------
Our Classifeds • Nos petites annoncesTerms Of Service / Conditions d'UtilisationForum Rules / Règles des ForumsMacMusic.Org & SETI@Home
BOING BUMM TSCHAK PENG! Are you musician enough to write in our Wiki?
BOING BUMM TSCHAK ZZZZZZZZZZZOING! Êtes-vous assez musicien pour écrire dans le Wiki?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fishbite
post Wed 1 Nov 2006, 04:29
Post #3


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 30-Oct 06
Member No.: 84,771




I have a dual 1.25 Ghz G4 with 1.25 GB Ram running 10.3.9 with DP 5. Virtual instruments include MOTU Symphonic, Korg Legacy Digital Edition, Native Instruments Komplete, Arturia Analog Factory plus some free ones.

Should I try to fix up this Mac, say with more ram - can go up to 2 GB? Other suggestions?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mac Daddy
post Wed 1 Nov 2006, 14:48
Post #4


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 348
Joined: 10-Feb 06
From: Hamburg - DE
Member No.: 76,633




fishbite. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". If you can afford it go for a Dual G5. If your system is "solid" why change?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mortalengines
post Wed 1 Nov 2006, 18:53
Post #5


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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mancalledclay
post Mon 11 Dec 2006, 16:55
Post #6


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 23-Nov 05
From: San Diego - US
Member No.: 72,920




QUOTE (mortalengines @ Wed 1 Nov 2006, 17:53) *
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


what mortalengines said this is the most sound advice one can give
when it comes using a computer which hits-the-wall after an instance or 3 of using
virtual instruments.
i mean if it were a guitarist...he's not going to stand there and keep playing that take over and over
til you get your drums and vocals sorted out.
record that part! get it down. render it as best as you can define it and move on!!!!!
render a few different versions of it with various filterings...whatever...record it and go.
this frees up your cpu and creates work-flow. quit banging your head cause your mule
is only a mule and not the boston philharmonic.
you'll probably make much better music (besides) once you quit worrying about how much crap
you can stack upon itself
in an effort to look fancy...perhaps hiding the fact that there is actually music under there....or NOT.

mcc>
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
KingBarbarossa
post Wed 13 Dec 2006, 05:12
Post #7


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 31-Aug 06
Member No.: 82,797




there is also a complete different option that might be worth considering: a receptor. it is like a hardware rack unit but runs all your virtual instrument. kind of a specialised computer that simply adds to your setup without putting ram or cpu load on your existing computer.

i do not have one, but when i read about the concept i really liked the idea. right now they still do not support audio units logic, but once they do this it may sound like an interesting thing for me to consider getting...
just a thought.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mortalengines
post Wed 13 Dec 2006, 06:31
Post #8


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 479
Joined: 08-May 05
From: Portland - US
Member No.: 65,373




Yeah the receptor sounds pretty cool but it is limited & I have read that it won't necessarily just play ANY VST either (don't know if it is still true but for a while it wouldn't work with Reaktor). The other answer is going with something like the Access Virus TI or Nord G2 Modular which is of a limited polyphony but will ease the DSP issues since they are only midi tracks. Again these are 1500+ dollar answers to problems that you can work around if you use your head.

www.myspace.com/mortal_engines

This post has been edited by mortalengines: Wed 13 Dec 2006, 06:32
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version - Thu 14 Nov 2024, 11:35
- © MacMusic 1997-2008