ACE a cpu-killer?

[Cyforce]

This night i started to take a deeper look at the ACE and also build a soundset for it, but the cpu-usage looks in my eyes very strange.
With quality accurancy and melodies which playes 4 notes at one(longer releases/delay) i get dropouts. On the first view no strange, but the cpu-eater #1 n.i. massive with quality high and up to 6 notes at one time with complex patches eat maximal 50% of my cpu.. That makes me really wondering...
And cpu-kill with only 4 notes?

Used on ICore7 4x 2,66Ghz, with TC Konnekt 6(and no small buffer - 1024 samples)

So, is this normal or is my ACE damaged?

[Echo Voodoo]

Note: ACE is very demanding on CPU. You will only be able to enjoy it with a modern, fast computer. You will certainly learn to appreciate the freeze function of your daw of choice. Don't say we havn't warned you

It's not just your copy. At the highest quality settings and using multiple voices, it uses a lot of cpu.

[Cyforce]

I USE A MODERN FAST COMPUTER

[VSTJuNkiE]

Urs said right on the ACE page before you buy it that can be a cpu monster on high settings. So why are you surprised

[Spitfire31]

I USE A MODERN FAST COMPUTER

Why are you yelling? As Echo Voodoo pointed out, the disclaimer is right there on the download page. You pay for superior quality with high CPU drain. Urs explained in another thread that ACE is already highly optimized.

If your computer isn't up to it, use a lower quality setting or freeze/render as you need.

/Joachim

[bmrzycki]

Please read the Manual. The first page of it describes exactly why it uses quite a bit of CPU for a supposedly simple 4-note patch:

Most digital synths handle audio signals and modulation signals differently. Audio signals are normally evaluated at a sample rate between 44100 and 96000 Hertz, while modulation signals have to make do with 1000 Hz or even less (often called the "control rate" of the synthesizer). ACE is very different in this respect. While the oscillators feature more than 500 times oversampling, all signals - including modulation - run at least twice as fast as the host application's sample rate. And this is only the lowest of ACE's quality settings! ACE does not differentiate between audio signals and modulation/control signals at all. Any Cable Everywhere - you can plug any of the 24 signal outputs into any of the 30+ signal inputs and expect it to work just like a vintage modular hardware synth. The sky is NOT the limit - all modulation can work beyond the limits of human hearing. For instance, the LFOs (Low Frequency Oscillators) can be set above 20 kHz, and still modulate e.g. the pulse width of an oscillator. This gives you a sonic freedom previously reserved for expensive analogue hardware. Either or both LFOs can be used as audio oscillators in their own right (e.g. for crystal-clear FM sounds). Conversely, the VCOs can be used as alternative LFOs, i.e. they can be set as low as 0.00 (zero) Hz.

[ghettosynth]

...

[Artemiy Pavlov]

This was a deal-breaker for me, at least for now. I tries to make a simple supersaw patch, and with unison set to 4 or so voices, my patch was duophonic. So this means just 8 oscillators at the same time, and I didn't even have anything else there, not even filters. On the other hand, MASSIVE on my machine generates 16 voice polyphony while using all it's power, so that means 48 oscillators at the same time. Quite a big difference... Given that the Uhbik effects feel so light, I think Urs can definitely improve ACE processor consumption.

[goldenanalog]

This was a deal-breaker for me, at least for now. I tries to make a simple supersaw patch, and with unison set to 4 or so voices, my patch was duophonic. So this means just 8 oscillators at the same time, and I didn't even have anything else there, not even filters. On the other hand, MASSIVE on my machine generates 16 voice polyphony while using all it's power, so that means 48 oscillators at the same time. Quite a big difference... Given that the Uhbik effects feel so light, I think Urs can definitely improve ACE processor consumption.

This, in a nutshell, is the reason why I pushed for 'precision' poly settings early on.

I wanted to be able to select 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 etc. total notes @ runtime...even if it meant restarting the ap....because I noticed that ACE *precisely* uses the same amout of CPU resources if the quality/poly selections are set exactly the same from session to session; ie, with 'fixed' poly/quality settings, ACE's CPU load stays the same every time that I run it.

WOW's TimewARP does this, which is another outstanding 'analog' emulation; it's implementation of polyphony (read: high degree of polyphonic selectability) quite frankly makes the difference between being used/not used at times....

But Urs goes his own way. Despite his presence here (which I appreciate), I really get the feeling that he doesn't care too much about what I, or anybody else, thinks about ACE's 'CPU-resource-load' implementation. Oh, well, I have lots of other vsti's....

Having expressed my feelings (with NO intent of offense): ACE *IS* a really fantastic vsti; but I've since fallen in love with Admiralquality's Poly-Ana, which sounds extremely 'analog' to me, and doesn't kill my quad CPU the way ACE does.

-goldenanalog

[koalaboy]

edit: nvm

[xh3rv]

Just to offer an alternate strategy for getting more 'unison' out of ACE - just use more of the oscillators on the patch ( there are 5 counting the sub-oscillator ... I think it's tough to use all 5, but 3 or 4 is usually pretty plausible ) and do it sort of more manually. This also can make it natural to use something other than detuning to spread the oscillators a bit, IMO. Something like 6-8 oscillator polyphony then only requires a stack count of 2.

[ariston]

I'm wondering if this is just me, but I can hear an obvious difference in sound quality between, say, Poly-Ana and ACE (I'm not even mentioning Massive here). I'm talking about brilliant, non-aliased highs, deep lows, smooth sound, depth and so on (don't get me wrong, I think Poly-Ana sounds good, too).
I know this might be getting into the subjective area, but to me, the high cpu consumption (which is manageable, just bounce your tracks like in the good ol' days) is a trade-off for the superior sound. I don't WANT Urs to castrate this wonderful instrument just to be able to run 10 instances.
If, of course, he can optimize cpu consumption a little, I'd be just as happy as the next guy. But it's not a concern for me at all. It doesn't impede my work in any way, and, oddly enough, I'm even thankful for its limitations, because I often just record ACE straight to audio, which is how I started out recording (overdubbing using two tape recorders). It's good discipline, providing you can actually play, of course.

The only VA I've heard so far that's comparable in terms of sound quality is Synth Squad (and it's a cpu-"killer" as well.

@ghettosynth: I'm sure you're right in what you're saying, but I have yet to hear a Reaktor ensemble that's up there with ACE quality-wise. Can you point one out?

[goldenanalog]

I'm wondering if this is just me, but I can hear an obvious difference in sound quality between, say, Poly-Ana and ACE (I'm not even mentioning Massive here). I'm talking about brilliant, non-aliased highs, deep lows, smooth sound, depth and so on (don't get me wrong, I think Poly-Ana sounds good, too).

Poly-Ana sounds great!

It's a product that really does sound better then the demo mp3's would suggest.

I know this might be getting into the subjective area, but to me, the high cpu consumption (which is manageable, just bounce your tracks like in the good ol' days) is a trade-off for the superior sound. I don't WANT Urs to castrate this wonderful instrument just to be able to run 10 instances.
If, of course, he can optimize cpu consumption a little, I'd be just as happy as the next guy. But it's not a concern for me at all. It doesn't impede my work in any way, and, oddly enough, I'm even thankful for its limitations, because I often just record ACE straight to audio, which is how I started out recording (overdubbing using two tape recorders). It's good discipline, providing you can actually play, of course.

ACE's CPU consumption is *clearly* a problem; that's why this thread exists. As you mentioned, there are work-arounds using ACE as it exists in it's present form; but because of the way I work: I ended up (partially) giving up on ACE. That's OK, no big deal; I'm lucky enough to have *plenty* of other vsti's to work with.

Thank God for that.

The only VA I've heard so far that's comparable in terms of sound quality is Synth Squad (and it's a cpu-"killer" as well.

@ghettosynth: I'm sure you're right in what you're saying, but I have yet to hear a Reaktor ensemble that's up there with ACE quality-wise. Can you point one out?

IMO, WOW's TimewARP 2600 is competitive w/ACE. To be fair, if TW's 2.6K didn't have highly-selectable polyphony, it would be FAR less useable to me.

I completely agree with you about Reaktor; but please check this out:

http://heavensonearth.com/

Ernest is amazing; a true genius, really.

-goldenanalog

[ariston]

Poly-Ana sounds great!

It's a product that really does sound better then the demo mp3's would suggest.

I know, I tried the demo and compared it directly to ACE. They're surely not light years apart, but since I had ACE already.... and the difference was audible to me.

Although I would concede that I might have been blinded (deafened?) by Poly-Ana's wondrous UI.

IMO, WOW's TimewARP 2600 is fully competitive w/ACE. I agree about Reaktor; but check this out:

http://heavensonearth.com/

Ernest is amazing.

Thanks for the tip, will check those out. Although that site you pointed me to could well become a time-killer of the highest degree!

[Cyforce]

Yes i read this with high cpu-usage, but that the ace eat soooo much cpu... That was for the first look strange from my view. So i was a litte bit confused about that.