Could we be on the verge of SONAR 4 Producer Edition?

[Robert Randolph]

same here with tracktion and SAW as ttoz.

64-92 samples, 100% cpu not even slightly sluggish. Im spoiled.. why cant sonar do it!

What are you using to see your CPU usage? How can a computer be at 100% of its CPU and not be sluggish? If it is really at 100% then you have nothing left so if you do anything something has to give, no? I've never in my life used a computer that is maxing its CPU and still has plenty of zip left. It defies logic doesn't it? (no pun intended).

Windows shows it at 100%, so does software.


Have you ever played games by blizzard software? They are very responsive (and fun!), but take up 100% cpu always. Shown easily by the fact that Ive fried 3 athlons playing starcraft, and windows task manager shows 100% cpu as well. Games like unreal2K4 do it too... veyr responsive, and it's smacking gpu and cpu.

With proper thread management, custom graphics routines (which ironically, both tracktion and saw use), it's easy to remain stable and look solid to the user while your cpu is being utterly hammered.

[WillieJenkins]

And what about the audio stutters during midi editing (that is also reported on the Cakewalk forums)? And you can't add a synth without stopping the transport...

Luckily I don't have the audio stutter problem.

If thats something you'd want to do, then not being able to add a synth w/o stopping the transport would be a bother. I agree on that.

[LoRez]

same here with tracktion and SAW as ttoz.

64-92 samples, 100% cpu not even slightly sluggish. Im spoiled.. why cant sonar do it!

What are you using to see your CPU usage? How can a computer be at 100% of its CPU and not be sluggish? If it is really at 100% then you have nothing left so if you do anything something has to give, no? I've never in my life used a computer that is maxing its CPU and still has plenty of zip left. It defies logic doesn't it? (no pun intended).

At any rate I'm glad your system is working well for you. I'd rather see poeple working happilly than having hair-pulling sessions trying to create something.

Windows shows it at 100%, so does software.


Have you ever played games by blizzard software? They are very responsive (and fun!), but take up 100% cpu always. Shown easily by the fact that Ive fried 3 athlons playing starcraft, and windows task manager shows 100% cpu as well. Games like unreal2K4 do it too... veyr responsive, and it's smacking gpu and cpu.

With proper thread management, custom graphics routines (which ironically, both tracktion and saw use), it's easy to remain stable and look solid to the user while your cpu is being utterly hammered.

Hmm....well I am a game player, but I think something is amiss here. Maybe someone else can shed more light, but I still don't see how a machine at its max useage can still be responsive. Maybe the app is reserving 100% and/or reporting it but not actually using it. For instance, while rendering video or something in the foreground an appliction will use 100%...on any machine I use...this equals sluggish behavior. If you are really at 100%, and it requires some CPU useage to even move the mouse...doesn't something have to give? Otherwise you are not "really" using 100%. At any rate I'm glad your system is working well for you. I'd much rather see poeple working happilly than having hair-pulling sessions trying to do something creative.

[Robert Randolph]

Try starcraft. Easily using 100% cpu, not even reserving it... it's nuts. Ive seen badly cooled cpu's melt the socket while playing starcraft, it's BRUTAL.

It's just bad programming. That's all great game tho.


Perhaps sonar is just using every, last, little teeny bit of processor and not leaving anything else for important tasks like graphics. But I can hardly imagine that, because in sonar, similiar projects took a 1-2% more than in tracktion (which seems to have higher than normal cpu usage).

In either case, I really hope sonar 4 works. Ill be a very happy camper.

[WillieJenkins]

right, sonar eats up 100% as well, it reserves the cpu in case it needs it. Check your task manager when sonar is loaded. Thats another 'complaint' at the forums, theres a registry option to turn it on and off actually.

LoRez,

yeah, basically Sonar (or any other app) tells windows its using 100% of the cpu so other apps don't try and take any cpu cycles, that way it can scale w/o fighting other processes.

and pretty much all modern audio apps have multiple threads happening, one for audio, one for gfx etc etc. This can be seen when running a dual proc cpu. Most apps dedicate one cpu to audio/midi and another cpu to graphics. (Although Sonar actually spreads the load evenly IIRC).

-Eric

[LoRez]

Try starcraft. Easily using 100% cpu, not even reserving it... it's nuts. Ive seen badly cooled cpu's melt the socket while playing starcraft, it's BRUTAL.

It's just bad programming. That's all great game tho.


Perhaps sonar is just using every, last, little teeny bit of processor and not leaving anything else for important tasks like graphics. But I can hardly imagine that, because in sonar, similiar projects took a 1-2% more than in tracktion (which seems to have higher than normal cpu usage).

In either case, I really hope sonar 4 works. Ill be a very happy camper.

Okay, now you're making me want to go play games and go kill or conquer something...


Wish I didn't have any work to do

[blaster78]

right, sonar eats up 100% as well, it reserves the cpu in case it needs it. Check your task manager when sonar is loaded. Thats another 'complaint' at the forums, theres a registry option to turn it on and off actually.

no it doesn't, i've just checked and its using 1%

i have sonar loaded all the time and i've never seen it go above 65% in regular use.

and all this 3ms latency bollocks, i guarentee most people couln't tell the difference between 0ms and 15ms when blindfolded.

or perhaps i've just got a weird version of sonar and shit ears.


steve.

[WillieJenkins]

Well, when Sonar is fighting for CPU, it does exhibit gfx slowdown, in order to save the audio engine, which IMO is a good thing.

However, I will say that large multitask editing can get slow when usage is over 60-70% say, which is a definite PITA.

Also, my friend has Logic, and logic does seem to stay 'smoother under fire' than Sonar, but alas its mac only, and they have no PDC on auxes, and the interface was a bit quirky for me.

I'm certainly happy I'm in the majority of users who have excellent results with Sonar, but I could use Logic if my life depended on it . I should try SAW or Samplitude now that they actually decided to make the app 'user-friendly' heh. Last time I tried it I was having Windows 3.1 flashbacks

Too many great choices!!!

[WillieJenkins]

My mistake, looks like they took that out of the latest 3.0 release (Or maybe its been gone since 3.0)

[DevonB]

and all this 3ms latency bollocks, i guarentee most people couln't tell the difference between 0ms and 15ms when blindfolded.

I can easily tell the difference between 6ms and 12ms.

Devon

[blaster78]

and all this 3ms latency bollocks, i guarentee most people couln't tell the difference between 0ms and 15ms when blindfolded.

I can easily tell the difference between 6ms and 12ms.

Devon

most, not all

i was talking to rob about it and so can he, but i certainly can't.

steve.

[DevonB]

and all this 3ms latency bollocks, i guarentee most people couln't tell the difference between 0ms and 15ms when blindfolded.

I can easily tell the difference between 6ms and 12ms.

Devon

most, not all

i was talking to rob about it and so can he, but i certainly can't.

steve.

Trust me, it be nice if I couldn't notice, but I get no CPU advantage between 6ms and 24ms on my Pulsar II on my machine either. 3ms and 1.5ms make a big difference though, but 6ms is fast enough on my end for me.

Devon

[torhan]

Here's a response from Greg from Cakewalk:

I see what you mean.

But don't worry.

Hypothetically speaking: If SONAR 4 were to be announced September 1, and if this were a screen shot of that ... then it would give the wrong impression. This appears to be zoomed in on just part of a screen, emphasizing just one aspect.

By the way, any web site updates tomorrow aren't likely to happen before early evening, US Eastern time zone. That reminds me: Thank you to everyone who understood we meant 1 September 2004, not 9 January 2004, despite our bass-ackwards date custom here in the US. Seriously -- we are thinking of you and I believe we will meet your expectations on a couple issues that you told us you were unhappy about.

This was in reference to a screen shot on keyboards.de(?) website.

[7XL]

People ranting about a product that isn't even released yet

People constantly putting down things that don't work for them or the way that they want them to

Only on K-v-R.

[LoRez]

and all this 3ms latency bollocks, i guarentee most people couln't tell the difference between 0ms and 15ms when blindfolded.

I can easily tell the difference between 6ms and 12ms.

Devon

most, not all

i was talking to rob about it and so can he, but i certainly can't.

steve.

Trust me, it be nice if I couldn't notice, but I get no CPU advantage between 6ms and 24ms on my Pulsar II on my machine either. 3ms and 1.5ms make a big difference though, but 6ms is fast enough on my end for me.

Devon

I agree. For inputting anything rhythmic i really need 3ms at least. Playing most keyboard parts are fine for me 6ms. Anything above 10 is not really properly playable in my opinion.