Problems with EWQLSO Gold

Locked New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

I've been struggling with the following behavior in EWQLSO Gold:

The first time I play a particular note (C3,for example) it may be silent, or may be initially silent, then "pop" and then begin playing. It may also play and the "pop" and stop playing abruptly. Similarly, upon releasing a note, I may sometimes here a "pop" and/or interruptions in the release portion of the sample.

These problems generally disappear after the initial play/release of a particular note. It's as if some initial cacheing or hash-building or something has to happen for a given sample, which is initially too expensive to do in real time?

In a related matter, as I play, if the polyphony exceeds 3 or 4 voices, similar popping and interruption may occur. I may also hear, from time to time, some rather nasty bursts of noise that sound like modulated white noise.

I (sadly) have the bare minimum system, with 256k ram, but in the case above I have about %20 RAM free...
I am running 1.3. I have tried quitting Receptor Remote Control -- seems to make no difference.

Post

The 256k RAM is fine with plug-ins that do not use large samples. EWQLSO Gold uses large samples and requires more RAM. You need at least 1 GB, but I recommend you get 2 GB.
Dan Timis
Software Developer
Muse Research, Inc.

Post

Fantastic! Now working flawlessly, thanks!

Post

OK, so now that I'm getting my teeth into this thing, I'm really happy with its performance, but I am having problems with loud pops at the beginnings of some notes. It definitely seems to happen as RAM gets full.
I have 2 gig of RAM, and the popping seems to begin once I get to about 60% used. I have upgraded to 1.4 beta. Aside from being cautious about using too much RAM, are there any other tricks I should try?

Post

Try increasing the buffer size. You could also play with the DFD settings. But, they are tricky. You have to spend a lot of time trying different combinations until you find the one that works best for you.
Dan Timis
Software Developer
Muse Research, Inc.

Post

Great! Simply increasing the buffer size to 256 has fixed the problem. Do I correctly presume that bigger buffer sizes will slightly increase the latency? (Admittedly 256 samples of delay isn't much to worry about, but 1024 is...)

Post

Yes. A bigger buffer size will increase the latency.
Dan Timis
Software Developer
Muse Research, Inc.

Locked

Return to “Muse Research and Development”