ACE a cpu-killer?

[goldenanalog]

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

I'm almost inclined to believe that the Poly-Ana UI was done as a joke!

It harkens back to the famous Monte-Python quote: 'And now for something completely different'....

Needless to say, I changed the skin early on....

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!

You're very welcome! And you're right! His blog is a good read; he shares what he has gone through...helps me appreciate hard-working, generous programmers like Urs....

ariston: When all is said and done, I *only* wish that Urs would let me precisely select ACE's run-time polyphony, so that I could tightly control ACE in a LIVE environment.

Regardless: It's still one h*ll of an achievement; no denying that.

-goldenanalog

[Urs]

ACE's CPU consumption is *clearly* a problem;

No, it's not.

The problem is, the cheapest synth that delivers what ACE does costs $3000+ second hand and is still monophonic. ACE is a cheapskate even if it means you have to buy a second computer to run it. My 3 year old model runs 24 ACEs without a problem, so hmmm... dunno...

Actually, if ACE was a cpu friendly fellow like Zebra or Helix, I would have priced it 790$, and I'm sure I would have also sold 10 times as my licenses by now. It is just how it is, computers are freakishly slow when it comes to sound quality.

[Urs]

I *only* wish that Urs would let me precisely select ACE's run-time polyphony

I'm contemplating that. It just means a hell of a lot of rewrite of code areas that have been tried and tested for years (where admittedly it wasn't much of a concern). Voice management after all is a major "voodoo" area of synthesizer design, and curing the side effects of a different system may be a time consuming and tedious process.

[Cyforce]

With mode normal and 4 stacks and 4 notes at on etime i get up to 20% cpu usage

What are the difference ind etail of the quality-modes? Only different rates of oversmapling or more?

[WMP]

I have to say to the people moaning on Kvr.......

You want your virtual analogs to sound....well...analog, then you have to pay the price with cpu.

Computers are still not fast enough to run the code needed to accuately emulate the simplist of real circuits so there have to be compromises. It looks like URS and Synth Squad are the first to break the mould and actually produce a synth that is far higher in quality than all that have gone before.

But the cost is Cpu! There is no way around it, you cannot fill a 1 litre jug with 2 litres of water it is just not possible.

I have yet to hear Ace but I have used Synth Squad as was impressed. As a 100% analog synth user I am clearly in the 'vsti's not sounding as good as the real thing....yet" club, but it would seem these two new products are getting us a lot closer.

[djsubject]

besides, the more CPU it uses the better it sounds





but its Quite simple's

if you want "that" sound it can only be done with cost

if this sound is not worth the price, don't invest in it,

PS, to the OP, on a Core2Duo @ 2.66 i get way more than 4 HQ voices @ a 256 buffer on one of my cores (i use XT2 witch still dose not support Multi core threading) so i would look at what is making your i7 so weak

Subz

[pdxindy]

I am fine with the CPU use of ACE. Plenty of patches can be played at the lower qualities settings and get plenty of polyphony and sound very good.

[pdxindy]

besides, the more CPU it uses the better it sounds





but its Quite simple's

if you want "that" sound it can only be done with cost

if this sound is not worth the price, don't invest in it,

PS, to the OP, on a Core2Duo @ 2.66 i get way more than 4 HQ voices @ a 256 buffer on one of my cores (i use XT2 witch still dose not support Multi core threading) so i would look at what is making your i7 so weak

Subz

He may have also been stacking voices

[djsubject]

He may have also been stacking voices

in that case he should learn math

4 stacked by 8 is 32 (what i would expect from a i7)

[goldenanalog]

No, it's not.

Yes, it is.

The problem is, the cheapest synth that delivers what ACE does costs $3000+ second hand and is still monophonic. ACE is a cheapskate even if it means you have to buy a second computer to run it. My 3 year old model runs 24 ACEs without a problem, so hmmm... dunno...

What? No, Urs, I don't think that there is a $3000+ 'second' hand monophonic synth that sounds like ACE; ACE sounds unique. Yes, it depends on DAC's and such things as nanosecond 'jitter' figures, but I would never argue that ACE doesn't sound good; I just can't use it in a live situation because I don't use ANYTHING that I can't tightly control.

Learned through experience, Urs. I'll leave it at that.

Actually, if ACE was a cpu friendly fellow like Zebra or Helix, I would have priced it 790$, and I'm sure I would have also sold 10 times as my licenses by now.

In this market? No way.

It is just how it is, computers are freakishly slow when it comes to sound quality.

Yeah, I'm somewhat aware of the math; but look at what's available, and how good some of it DOES sound!

I got Omnisphere in the middle of last year at about $350US (friendly sale); it does not sound like ACE, but it does sound just incredible, all hype aside.

Alchemy is another super synth; it can do a lot, and sounds superb.

Point being: We've already got some really good sounding 'multi-polyphony' software (and hardware!) available that's not terribly expensive; I JUST picked up a Nord Lead 2X (20-voice) on sale...it sounds great and has got a really intuitive UI, but it doesn't KILL my vsti's with it's sound.....some of my vsti's most definately compete!

Give me 'precision' selection of the polyphony Urs, that's all I would ask for. Like WOW does, with their 2600 emulation; the most accurate analog emulation that I have ever heard.

But if it's going to kill you to do it, believe it or not: then I swear that I would do my d*mnedest to talk you out of it; and additionally promise to keep any and all future criticisms of ACE to myself, instead of voicing them in a public forum.

-goldenanalog

[goldenanalog]

I'm contemplating that. It just means a hell of a lot of rewrite of code areas that have been tried and tested for years (where admittedly it wasn't much of a concern). Voice management after all is a major "voodoo" area of synthesizer design, and curing the side effects of a different system may be a time consuming and tedious process.

The more I think about this, Urs, the more that I wish that I hadn't posted.

Overall: It sounds like too much work (and risk).

-goldenanalog

[pdxindy]

No, it's not.

Yes, it is.

It may be a problem to you personally, but that does not make it a problem. ACE is what it is and lots of people will make great use of it.

btw, I would also like to have more voicing options, both for ACE and for Zebra. For example, I have a patch in ACE with stack at 3. Currently, max polyphony is 5 even though my cpu could handle more easily. Kinda frustrating to be limited not by the cpu but by an arbitrary limit in the synth. However, I got around it by using 2 instances and splitting the keyboard and now polyphony is 10...

You can use ACE all day in monophonic or duophonic mode and not worry about cpu. Even just for that use it is worth the price... and of course some presets have plenty of headroom due to lower quality settings.

[Echoes in the Attic]

If cpu is a problem, then use draft or standard quality setting. Sometimes draft sounds just fine. When it doesn't sound as good, then 90% of the time standard is just fine. When either are used, the cpu usage is pretty much in line with most other decent VA's out there.

[hakey]

TimewARP - great VA, particularly for its time - aliases with some audio rate modulation.

Audio examples from WOW's TimewARP website:

Real Arp 26000 - PWM Sweep

TimewARP 2600 PWM Sweep

The aliasing in the TimewARP is fairly obvious (to my ears).

Polyana, if you get past the truly atrocious, worst UI in the entire history of UI design, has a really nice sound. But the last time I tried it it definitely had aliasing issues.

NI's Massive, AFAIK, doesn't do any audio rate modulation.

ACE does audio rate mod and, to my ears, does so without audible aliasing. I tried the aboveArp/TimewARP PWM sweep test (using OSC2 to sweep OSC1 PWM) using the A.C.E. demo and got an alias free signal even at the highest freqs.

@ the OP - did you try the demo before buying, did you read Urs' warning about CPU use? If yes to either, sorry, but you really haven't got any room to complain - caveat emptor...

[Urs]

I don't think that there is a $3000+ 'second' hand monophonic synth that sounds like ACE

I didn't mean the sound. I'm fully aware that nothing sounds like ACE and vice versa.

What's bought by ACE's cpu load is the fun that is patching anything into anything else. No more no less. The only thing you can currently buy that delivers the same experience (at an even lower pain level, to be fair) IMHO is the Cwejman semi modular synth, or a fully loaded module rack plus a giant bank of multiples and VCAs. And this doesn't do supersaw either, at a much higher cost of ACE + PC.

Answering a previous post, the quality settings are indeed mostly about oversampling, but also about evaluating frequency modulation (LFO/VCO/VCF frequency, including cross modulation) only every single or sixteenth sample, as compared to e.g. 4 times a sample. Everything else is still evaluated on a 1:1 basis.

Urs