is this normal with ACE on a quad core?

[synthmann]

Hi hello!

i'm trying the demo-versions of ACE and Zebra and am much impressed with the sound quality. Seriously thinking to buy ACE and Zebra maybe later. In zebra the DX7 addpadd sound is just wonderful!

but my question is this. in ACE i love the BT broad 'n smooth preset. is it normal that when I put it on 'accurate' that my computer starts to dropout and crackle when playing like a chord of 6 notes?

it's a quad 6600 at 2.4ghz, 4gb ram and RME fireface with 256 samples buffer size. happens both in sonar and reaper. win7 64 bit. funny thing is my windows resource monitor hardly registers any CPU usage while both sonar and reaper have one CPU going through the roof. how come windows resource monitor shows so much idle on all cpu's while still getting dropouts?

so I clearly read that ACE is CPU hungry but a chord can drop a quad core on its knees?? I kinda thought this was still a fast computer at which I could throw anything??

I know it's idiot to want to put everything on 'accurate' and maybe this is just normal and I need an i7 to play this way, but then any info on these CPU measuring issues would be great.

still plan on buying ACE!

[Dj Troy]

its a major cpu hog i have an i7 and it uses 38%cpu power on one patch sometimes...its crazy really just turn down the quality doesnt sound bad anyway

[mystran]

but my question is this. in ACE i love the BT broad 'n smooth preset. is it normal that when I put it on 'accurate' that my computer starts to dropout and crackle when playing like a chord of 6 notes?

My 2.8Ghz Core2 reports around 40% on that preset for "accurate" and 3 voices (not sure how old my demo is though), so 6 voices killing your processor sounds pretty much normal. However, I can actually clone that instance (in FL) and put another 3 voices on the other instance and still get that 40% so... I'd say ACE only runs on one core at a time (like most plugins). Your individual cores aren't that fast anymore and ACE is known to be VERY VERY VERY expensive on CPU especially when using "accurate" which I guess runs everything (including all control signals) with tons of oversampling.

[synthmann]

Thanks folks, i guess that answers my question, clock speed still matters then but i will use 'standard' then, sounds fine as well!

Would be helpful though if the windows task manager and resource monitor would also show this huge cpu load...

[Lotuzia]

The different quality modes can have a more or less drastic influence on the final sound. So this isnt true imho that the all patches will sound great whatever the quality settings. Most will.

For example if you intend to use some LFOs as additional oscillators, you should indeed use the best quality mode.

Also long release times will add to CPU stress in a very significant way.

This said ........ for the record and for example :

All the instruments of our ACE Steroids soundset will work on ....... an old PIV 3 Ghz SINGLE core computer.( you can play chords with the pads and keys, and the leads and basses will just rock your tracks)

The better quality modes were chosen when it was necessary (like on some leads, when certain LFOs were used as OSC aso ), and actually no compromise was made, except a few presets wich ate too much cpu werent included in the bank.

Additonally some more or less cpu intensive paths can be chosen to achieve the same results. Here again the choice of the different modules to perform a particular task can often be optimized. So there's certainly in a sense a kind of economic in Ace, but you'll soon realize that whatever the Cpu charge, its often well deserved and you'lkl be rewarded by the magnificent sound coming out.

LtZ

[pdxindy]

Thanks folks, i guess that answers my question, clock speed still matters then but i will use 'standard' then, sounds fine as well!

Would be helpful though if the windows task manager and resource monitor would also show this huge cpu load...

I often record my midi playing at standard and then render to audio at accurate if it is a preset that benefits from it. This workflow works fine for me.

[Steffen Fuerst]

so I clearly read that ACE is CPU hungry but a chord can drop a quad core on its knees??

It just drop a single core of your quad core on its knees, because a single plugin is never distributed between different cores. So in this case a dual core processor with a higher clock rate could maybe outperform your quad.

[pdxindy]

so I clearly read that ACE is CPU hungry but a chord can drop a quad core on its knees??

It just drop a single core of your quad core on its knees, because a single plugin is never distributed between different cores. So in this case a dual core processor with a higher clock rate could maybe outperform your quad.

I have saved a number of instrument racks in Live with 3 instances of ACE all with the same preset and the keyboard split. Mostly I have done this cause ACE is short of polyphony. Standard quality, stack of 3 and voices at 16 only gives 5 notes... so I have a number of strings presets set up like this so I can get more than 5 notes at a time... this is not a cpu issue... but the same thing works for the cpu and then the quad core comes in handy

[Urs]

just drop a single core

Hi Steffen,

Long time no speak!

Urs

[VicDiesel]

Core i7 iMac: 6 notes works, 7 overloads.

Victor.

[synthmann]

Thanks again, now that i know all of you experience this i'm very reassured that i don't want to invest in new computer hardware because i can load as many effect plug ins on as many audio or vst tracks as i want and the system handles everything with easy. Just this crazy me wanting to run this Ace patch at accurate and play some chord progression actually indeed the long sustain on this particular preset makes that it's actually calculating more notes than pressed when switching chords.