Arturia Pigments 3 is out!

[sQeetz]

M1 Mac now. Everything’s a breeze.

I don't f**king give a shit

[WasteLand]

My studio system runs an i7 8700K 6 Core 12 Thread that turbos at 4.7GHz.

Mine is i5-9600k, 6 cores, running at 4.3GHz, and turbos to 4.6.
It never runs out of steam, except with your patch, LOL!

Yes I use that patch as an extreme example. I programmed it on my 8700K and never even bothered looking at the CPU meter since it's rarely an issue but then I moved the patch to this system and it melted down in five seconds playing just one note.

You can bring the CPU demand down on that patch by lowering the Partials from 512.

I just did a quick test side by side with DUNE 3 on a similar patch that only used one VA Layer with 2 Oscs and Pigments used about three times as much CPU. The results are similar when using the WT Oscs as well. Pigments is not the most demanding synth in my arsenal but it can be hungry.

i have built a new studio desktop, some parts of the old one, must be still transfered, but i took your patch, to test, if Pigments 3 indeed performs better. and indeed, much better, i pushed your patch further, and sound changed also... set also granular on, 256 grains, not max size + max density... perhaps it will work, at 1024 samples, and when i have the 'old' GPU installed, i have temporary GPU installed, a very old one..

so, Pigments 3 i can work with, some MPE patches from scratches it suddenly didn't play well, didn't test that yet. but i assume it will work great.

So Pigments has been evolving since 2018, not standing still like your hardware is. And many reports here indicate that the new synthesis tools in Pigments 3 are heavy CPU hitters. I really don't doubt that, based on what I have seen.

The last version definitely was a step up in terms of juice required. I actually don't use it much for that reason. My CPU is an i7 6700k @4ghz which was actually quite good when I first got it but it's showing its age now. I mean it's still fine for the most part, but I'm finding I have to print to wav more often these days. Tbh I should probably shop around for a new CPU.

indeed i come from, or it still -for short period- my studio desktop, from an i7-6700K @4.4Ghz, it is indeed still quite good, mainly because single core performance hasn't evolved that much (if you compare it to a q6700 don't what a q9450 does, that runs at 3ghz, and more cache i assume), it has doubled, well the q6700 was 2008, and i7-6700K was 2015/16 (?) well, 7 or 8 years.

the system i have now has a much better single core performance, but it hasn't doubled yet, mainly cores are the thing nowadays... so... but 30-32% faster is still nice per core (it is always called single thread rating, which is strange, because well, multiple threads can use one core..., and also; the single thread rating does its work on one core, so it can boost itself... something to consider when you buy, so the percentages i wrote, are of course a little dependent on which program you use to calculate it, or it calculates it for you... but it is based at a stable base clock of 4.5, i could go 4.6, but i didn't won the silicon lotery, and different programs give different results; if its stable or not...).

in cores; 3 x times the cores... real cores..

Zen 2 (and 1) wasn't on par in single core performance, with intel. with ZEN 3 it is on par again, but the new gen is already around the corner of intel.. so i see a new race...

in a way i built a system again, before a new race... well...

and if mention ZEN 3, i have now indeed an AMD my first real AMD CPU... and all the goodies that 2021 gives... (except a new videocard, well my does its work still very well, for what i want, even for video-editing, videocards are still extremely expensive)..

this is pigments 3 thread, but indeed, the canvas, as i like to call it now, is also important.

so invested more than i wanted in the beginning, but a ryzen 9 5900x seemed to me the best choice, for years to come. (and of course fast memory, 3600mhz, CL isn't the fastest, so... but still... and 2 NVME drives, next to the drives that i will take out of my old studio desktop, with all the data. a 500Gb boot drive is also recommended in my case, if you have a lot....)

back to Pigments 3, this wasn't the only plugin that was acting up, more and more i found that i had to limit myself, didn't really mind, but still, i experiment a lot now, but want also more complex experiments (as if they aren't complex the ones i have made now, so better, more stuff....).

i bought a lot, so buying is now ended.. if you have stuff that eats your CPU for breakfast, the next step is not more software, but a new canvas.

and indeed plugins are demanding more and more.

and still, even a threadripper, you can kill with unison, polyphony (well, the newest perhaps are better, but they are mainly multi-core monsters, so single core isn't a priority... but that will change).

so there will always limitations. but i have reduced them.

and when i close down my studio for a week, to transfer all, and do the tedious job of reinstalling all software.... i will go full on Pigments 3.... and the other ones, that played up. and enough cores, to use them side by side....

[WasteLand]

My studio system runs an i7 8700K 6 Core 12 Thread that turbos at 4.7GHz.

Mine is i5-9600k, 6 cores, running at 4.3GHz, and turbos to 4.6.
It never runs out of steam, except with your patch, LOL!

Yes I use that patch as an extreme example. I programmed it on my 8700K and never even bothered looking at the CPU meter since it's rarely an issue but then I moved the patch to this system and it melted down in five seconds playing just one note.

You can bring the CPU demand down on that patch by lowering the Partials from 512.

I just did a quick test side by side with DUNE 3 on a similar patch that only used one VA Layer with 2 Oscs and Pigments used about three times as much CPU. The results are similar when using the WT Oscs as well. Pigments is not the most demanding synth in my arsenal but it can be hungry.

i have built a new studio desktop, some parts of the old one, must be still transfered, but i took your patch, to test, if Pigments 3 indeed performs better. and indeed, much better, i pushed your patch further, and sound changed also... set also granular on, 256 grains, not max size + max density... perhaps it will work, at 1024 samples, and when i have the 'old' GPU installed, i have temporary GPU installed, a very old one..

so, Pigments 3 i can work with, some MPE patches from scratches it suddenly didn't play well, didn't test that yet. but i assume it will work great.

So Pigments has been evolving since 2018, not standing still like your hardware is. And many reports here indicate that the new synthesis tools in Pigments 3 are heavy CPU hitters. I really don't doubt that, based on what I have seen.

The last version definitely was a step up in terms of juice required. I actually don't use it much for that reason. My CPU is an i7 6700k @4ghz which was actually quite good when I first got it but it's showing its age now. I mean it's still fine for the most part, but I'm finding I have to print to wav more often these days. Tbh I should probably shop around for a new CPU.

indeed i come from, or it still -for short period- my studio desktop, from an i7-6700K @4.4Ghz, it is indeed still quite good, mainly because single core performance hasn't evolved that much (if you compare it to a q6700 don't what a q9450 does, that runs at 3ghz, and more cache i assume), it has doubled, well the q6700 was 2008, and i7-6700K was 2015/16 (?) well, 7 or 8 years.

the system i have now has a much better single core performance, but it hasn't doubled yet, mainly cores are the thing nowadays... so... but 30-32% faster is still nice per core (it is always called single thread rating, which is strange, because well, multiple threads can use one core..., and also; the single thread rating does its work on one core, so it can boost itself... something to consider when you buy, so the percentages i wrote, are of course a little dependent on which program you use to calculate it, or it calculates it for you... but it is based at a stable base clock of 4.5, i could go 4.6, but i didn't won the silicon lotery, and different programs give different results; if its stable or not...).

in cores; 3 x times the cores... real cores..

Zen 2 (and 1) wasn't on par in single core performance, with intel. with ZEN 3 it is on par again, but the new gen is already around the corner of intel.. so i see a new race...

in a way i built a system again, before a new race... well...

and if i mention ZEN 3, i have now indeed an AMD my first real AMD CPU... and all the goodies that 2021 gives... (except a new videocard, well my does its work still very well, for what i want, even for video-editing, videocards are still extremely expensive)..

this is pigments 3 thread, but indeed, the canvas, as i like to call it now, is also important.

so invested more than i wanted in the beginning, but a ryzen 9 5900x seemed to me the best choice, for years to come. (and of course fast memory, 3600mhz, CL isn't the fastest, so... but still... and 2 NVME drives, next to the drives that i will take out of my old studio desktop, with all the data. a 500Gb boot drive is also recommended in my case, if you have a lot.... EDIT: and installing all Artruria stuff i have, i have most... will be no problem anymore....)

back to Pigments 3, this wasn't the only plugin that was acting up, more and more i found that i had to limit myself, didn't really mind, but still, i experiment a lot now, but want also more complex experiments (as if they aren't complex the ones i have made now, so better, more stuff....).

i bought a lot, so buying is now ended.. if you have stuff that eats your CPU for breakfast, the next step is not more software, but a new canvas.

and indeed plugins are demanding more and more.

and still, even a threadripper, you can kill with unison, polyphony (well, the newest perhaps are better, but they are mainly multi-core monsters, so single core isn't a priority... but that will change).

so there will be always limitations. but i have reduced them, reduced quite a lot.

and when i close down my studio for a week, to transfer all, and do the tedious job of reinstalling all software.... i will go full on Pigments 3.... and the other ones, that played up. and enough cores, to use them side by side....

[Fleer]

M1 Mac now. Everything’s a breeze.

I don't f**king give a ****

Corrected that for ya

[sQeetz]

Corrected that for ya

I don't f*. ........ thanks!

[Arashi]

I just tried the demo and I am pleasantly surprised. I had read people complaining about CPU , but it's not really an issue.

Depends on the patch, and how you play it. A patch with a high voice count and long release will slaughter your CPU if you play a bunch of different notes in rapid succession.

[LeVzi]

I just tried the demo and I am pleasantly surprised. I had read people complaining about CPU , but it's not really an issue.

Depends on the patch, and how you play it. A patch with a high voice count and long release will slaughter your CPU if you play a bunch of different notes in rapid succession.

Well you can say that about pretty much any synth ,some will kill your CPU with multiple voices and polyphony , but others won't.

Sometimes you gotta heat your motherboard to get a great sound.

I am upgrading my system in the next few years, so im sure it will be very useable then. (Bar the whole windows 11 debarcle)

[chk071]

TBH, I stopped caring if a plugin is demanding. When I get crackles, I will freeze the track. If I want to modify the sound, I unfreeze it, and freeze it again when I'm done. It doesn't really bother me. If you have hardware, you need to bounce all the time, and can't even change the sound if you want to.

[WatchTheGuitar]

If you have hardware, you need to bounce all the time, and can't even change the sound if you want to.

Good point, the bouncing bothered me a lot more when I only had soft synths, but you just get on with it and live with it when you have hardware synths.

[muki]

anybody noticed, that the new version (v3.1.0.1552, dated july2021)
takes a lot longer (ages) than the older ones (about 10 times...) to load ?

[LeVzi]

The freeze function in Cubase is really handy, being able to freeze and unload, and unfreeze if needed.

[zzz00m]

anybody noticed, that the new version (v3.1.0.1552, dated july2021)
takes a lot longer (ages) than the older ones (about 10 times...) to load ?

It takes Pigments v3.1.0.1552 about 10 secs to load here. How much time are you looking at?

[muki]

It takes Pigments v3.1.0.1552 about 10 secs to load here. How much time are you looking at?

11 sec

used to be 6 or 5 or less in earlier versions...

[zzz00m]

It takes Pigments v3.1.0.1552 about 10 secs to load here. How much time are you looking at?

11 sec

used to be 6 or 5 or less in earlier versions...

I think you may be right. I never noticed it on the older versions, but have sensed a bit of a lag upon startup with the latest.

I watched Pigments start using Task Manager and Resource Monitor, and it seems to be a memory hog. Almost 700MB of commit memory.

But very minimal CPU or disk use at startup.

[Teksonik]

anybody noticed, that the new version (v3.1.0.1552, dated july2021)
takes a lot longer (ages) than the older ones (about 10 times...) to load ?

We were discussing this issue in the Arturia SQ80 thread earlier today.

Pigments runs the "ArturiaSoftwareCenterAgent.exe" whenever it's loaded. I assume to do a copy protection handshake.

Arturia 090521-1.png

I just timed it on this system and Pigments took 24 seconds to load. To be fair this is my internet system which is an older i5 so not very fast but does have an SSD and wired 400Mbps connection.But I even noticed on my i7 studio system yesterday that Pigments takes a long time to open.

I never owned a Pigments version before 3 so can't say if it's better or worse now.