KVR Audio

flugel45 · Post by **flugel45** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 7:59 am

Well, I'm getting in on this!

But why isn't this offer a sticky on page one? Being buried in one page of a (so far) 46 page thread is doing the plug and the developer(s) an injustice. I knew about the plug, but only found out about the "pseudo group buy" in another forum.

Unless the plan is to keep the offer to a select few people (and I don't know why you'd do that), a sticky up front is really the best idea.

By the way, thanks for this, and good luck!

JD

Doug1 · Post by **Doug1** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 8:19 am

did i hear correctly that there will be a compressor coming out by David soon.

LiteOn · Post by **LiteOn** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 9:02 am

Hi David,

maybe naive: why not asking AMD people for recommendations?

cheers,
LiteOn

RPH · Post by **RPH** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 1:29 pm

downloaded the demo version, and have a few comments.

-when selecting the demoversion in my sequencer, i have to do the choice for demo 2 times ( that startup screen ).
-don't set the quality on the demoversion on 6 ...it almost crashes my sequencer on load ( a lot of CPU spikes ). Samples get played slow ( like pitchshifting down )
Quality 6 = CPU spikes --) peak 100%
Quality 5 = CPU spikes --) peak 89%

-plz set the quality on the demo to 1, and let ppl who download it set it themselfs

-reaction is slow with moving a freq band ( example : LPF, moving the cutoff from right to left and back ), guess because of heavy calculations ?

tested on a AMD 2100+

dbmcclain · Post by **dbmcclain** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 10:56 pm

The default of highest possible Quality level was request specifically by our Mastering Engineer customers. But, I could modify the 3-band to use the lowest setting by default.

-------------------
On the progress front... just a bit more cleanup work to do and we will have version 2.00.

This version is considerably faster, and if you have a HyperThreading P4 or a super AMD, or dual-core processors, then you can take direct advantage of them.

Paradoxically, using OpenMP for the parallelism in execution, simultaneously drops your CPU meter in your VST host, while considerably upping it in the System Monitor of Windows...

That seems odd, until you realize some basic truths... The normal time grain for Windows is 10 ms time slices. If we allowed ourselves to be subjected to that granularity, then you would have dropouts galore... 10 ms = 960 samples at 96 kHz.

So instead of killing the horses after each lap around the track, OpenMP keeps the idle threads alive with spinning, so that they can respond in a jiff to new buffer loads of audio samples. Much faster than 10 ms.

It takes consderable time to start up and shut down threads. And so OpenMP leaves them running for as long as possible before shutting them down.... which it will do after having no work for them after some long time. (Long in computer terms)...

The result is amazing! QL 5 no dropouts, and very light loading of the VST host. I have a few more tests to run on it.

But those CPU meters from the Window OS, are peaking pretty steadily at 65% utilization on both processors... no way we have that much work going on. It is simply a reflection that OpenMP is not allowing its threads in the stable to call Sleep(). That keeps them ripe and ready to roll...

If your system overheats at extended periods at this level of loading, then you will have to forego the MPU version of the code and just be satisfied with the single threaded version. That shows loadings of around 20% on my P4 with all 3 filters running at QL 5. Not too bad!

Cheers,

- DM

dbmcclain · Post by **dbmcclain** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:05 pm

err... I should have said about 12-15% on my system in single-thread mode, not 20%.

- DM

Mr. Tingle · Post by **Mr. Tingle** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 10:05 am

may I make a request for the 3 band not to have lots of options on the drop down filter list that can't be used.

maybe you could have a button somewhere that reveals all the extra options for the 10-band version?

Baniev · Post by **Baniev** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 1:10 pm

dbmcclain wrote:So what say, everyone? Wanna try out the new GUI on PLParEQ4? (You really can't do it justice with only one band...)

(it isn't available on the web page, yet... just want to see what your reaction is... if positive, then I'll make it available. But! It will break the old presets...)

If a sound sounds bad no eq will make it sound great.

fabi · Post by **fabi** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 1:39 pm

Baniev wrote:
dbmcclain wrote:So what say, everyone? Wanna try out the new GUI on PLParEQ4? (You really can't do it justice with only one band...)

(it isn't available on the web page, yet... just want to see what your reaction is... if positive, then I'll make it available. But! It will break the old presets...)
If a sound sounds bad no eq will make it sound great.

yes. let's abolish all eq's in the world. thank you for your wisdumb...

JamminFool · Post by **JamminFool** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:53 pm

Baniev wrote: If a sound sounds bad no eq will make it sound great.

try making good sounds.

bmanic · Post by **bmanic** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 3:02 pm

Baniev wrote: If a sound sounds bad no eq will make it sound great.

Edit: same dude that started the FL studio sound quality thread.. what a mess.

- bManic

jens · Post by **jens** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 3:02 pm

Baniev wrote: If a sound sounds bad no eq will make it sound great.

thanks for this highly valuable and strictly on topic information...

fritzman · Post by **fritzman** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 3:31 pm

If it sounds good this superb eq can make it sound even better!

Best wishes, FRitz

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 3:32 pm

dbmcclain wrote:about openMP and programming wizardy

you're wiping the tables of the general state of audio DSP coding.

You should be a consultant of some kind on efficient coding and pushing the DSP envelope. The optimizer for hire.

jmh · Post by **jmh** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 4:17 pm

"But wait... there is one more thing we could try... call The Optimizer!"

10-Band PLParEQ is Here!