KVR Audio

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:20 pm

I'm dissapointed with the cpu usage.. it's bloody high compared to the previous versions so I don't understand what advantage the multicore support has given me

it's sluggish on my iMac too

anti-banausic · Post by **anti-banausic** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:39 pm

Do you have the multiprocessor option enabled in the preferences? Just because most people have been reporting better CPU usage with multi-core computers. I haven't seen any increase on my single core machine over LIVE5, either.

headquest · Post by **headquest** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:43 pm

Massive CPU improvement here using the Multicore option - in some cases as high as 50% reduction in CPU use within a set.

feyshay · Post by **feyshay** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:56 pm

original flipper wrote:HI

Yes - the 'they go well together' thing has never been 'My' way.

I figure a host should be pretty usable without the need to throw another host inside it!

Besides, it just confuses me ...

Flipper.

In an ideal world, I agree with you, Flipper. Unfortunately, if these programs worked your way, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place--about their deficiencies. I find Live's simplicity to be unmatched. And Cubase has incredible depth, but sometimes can be so copious.

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:59 pm

anti-banausic wrote:Do you have the multiprocessor option enabled in the preferences? Just because most people have been reporting better CPU usage with multi-core computers. I haven't seen any increase on my single core machine over LIVE5, either.

it was switched on by default
a simpler and a compressor and the damn thing shoots up to 15%

headquest · Post by **headquest** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:01 pm

feyshay wrote: In an ideal world, I agree with you, Flipper. Unfortunately, if these programs worked your way, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place--about their deficiencies. I find Live's simplicity to be unmatched. And Cubase has incredible depth, but sometimes can be so copious.

I think that is why I am basically moving ever closer to using seperate programs for different specialisms. So Sibelius for notation (notation in SONAR, Cubase, etc is simply rubbish by comparrison), Audition for audio (none of the sequencers come close imo), Live for putting stuff together, Reason as an instrument rack (samplers/effects)...

Programmes like Cubase and even Sonar (which I have and think very highly of) try to acheive too much in a single environment, and that is what cripples them in terms of ergonomics. The user experience with Live, Sibelius, Audition, etc is superb by comparison, because you do not get bogged down with all the feature-bloat.

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:03 pm

weird.. I'm checking some old sets and they DO use considerably less cpu

S.HUSH · Post by **S.HUSH** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:10 pm

soma wrote:
S.HUSH wrote:This will be my first wait in terms of upgrading. I'm going to see what EXT2 holds first.
I do like the new instruments/effects rack they have.
One thing that i still don't get is why they wont allow automation to be recorded to clips by messing with paramaters directly from the gui? The whole envelopes thing is time consuming and doesn't go with the flow of Live.
Anyhow...i'm waiting.
Me too on all those things.
A work around for recording parameters is to record to teh arramnge view and then drag the clip to the session view.

I've tried this before and it hasn't worked for me. The clip still plays without the automation. I have version 5.2.

John Vulich · Post by **John Vulich** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:19 pm

spaceman wrote:weird.. I'm checking some old sets and they DO use considerably less cpu

I'm not sure, but I think that there is a bit of extra processor overhead on a multi core system for the initial CPU usage. So you probably won't see any benefits till you put a greater load on it.

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:26 pm

John Vulich wrote:
spaceman wrote:weird.. I'm checking some old sets and they DO use considerably less cpu
I'm not sure, but I think that there is a bit of extra processor overhead on a multi core system for the initial CPU usage. So you probably won't see any benefits till you put a greater load on it.

you're right.. it goes up to 15-20% quickly but then you can stack up tracks without too much movement in the cpu meter

cool

Shane Sanders · Post by **Shane Sanders** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:40 pm

headquest wrote:
feyshay wrote: In an ideal world, I agree with you, Flipper. Unfortunately, if these programs worked your way, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place--about their deficiencies. I find Live's simplicity to be unmatched. And Cubase has incredible depth, but sometimes can be so copious.
I think that is why I am basically moving ever closer to using seperate programs for different specialisms. So Sibelius for notation (notation in SONAR, Cubase, etc is simply rubbish by comparrison), Audition for audio (none of the sequencers come close imo), Live for putting stuff together, Reason as an instrument rack (samplers/effects)...

Programmes like Cubase and even Sonar (which I have and think very highly of) try to acheive too much in a single environment, and that is what cripples them in terms of ergonomics. The user experience with Live, Sibelius, Audition, etc is superb by comparison, because you do not get bogged down with all the feature-bloat.

My hat is off to you if you can manage this because each certainly does have something to offer. It would completely destroy my productivity to do it this way. The only host that has been remotely tempting to me for attempting the same thing has been Live, though. But for now I'm sticking with FLS and Audition.

waveriderarts · Post by **waveriderarts** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:14 pm

Synthbuilder wrote:Yes, 6 doesn't appear to offer me what I wanted either.- all of which have been left off this update. That is:

Better midi editing

Better support of midi plugins

I am with you guys on this....
yeah they did not improve much the live musician's tools....
some workflow improvements, some like freeze that was not really implemented good in v5, not much as new midi plugins, no vst midi plugin capability, same old crap that needs a fix since v4...

they let me down...

but I will end up upgrading early next year I guess....

dronic · Post by **dronic** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:15 pm

I have a question, everyone is talking about the CPU improvements for dual core processors,kool! but what about regular processors, is there any CPU improvement for us? Did anyone who doesn t have a dual core compared?

lowercase · Post by **lowercase** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:34 am

Sorry, but the midi editing and arranging in Live is piss poor at best when it comes to ease. The ability to use the arranger like a beat slicer in live is really great, but the envelopes suck nut. And why the f@&@ should I get Cubase just to do this. Do I really need to buy some extremely expensive bloated ugly piece of shite just to do some arranging and detailed midi work? Come on now. How long as the concept of midi sequencers existed? Companies have just been passing us the same old crap for the past 15 years and bloating their software, even though hundreds of suggestions have been made.

Now talk about purpose, Video matching is a -live- feature? Right. I can see it now, I'll load up some crappy youtube clip and work on matching it up while the same old loop continues over and over and over with the same crap ass envelope being applied to the filter. It'll be the best show in town.

republik · Post by **republik** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:49 am

I'm using Live with energyXT running in it. (for midi work)

Live 6.0.1 is OUT!