Repro V1.1 Release Candidate Rev 6780

[Elektronisch]

i notice a small bug:

If i set in the browser a preset to favorite and the preset is in second column, the preset view jumps forward by 1 column.

Also im using I7 4790K CPU with 8 threads and 4 cores. Using 8 MC threads increase performance by 4%. Is it normal or too small increasment?

[Urs]

How about the U-he sound-designers create a dedicated preset that
everyone will use for cpu/core/thread discussions, comparisons,
and for testing the many numeric options?

Maybe call it 'HS SamePage.h2p'

Cheers

That might be a good start and we might need to do this in a separate thread.

However, I think we could also create a plug-in that automatically tests what performs best. Hmmm, we could even add a test procedure into the plug-in itself, which the spits out a recommendation.

In either case, there's always a chance that circumstances play a role. Host, project size (number of plug-ins), sample rate, mail program open or not. Hence, I don't think there's ever a way to give more than a rule of thumb, there won't ever be a "on this machine, this will always be the best setting".

[zvenx]

i notice a small bug:

If i set in the browser a preset to favorite and the preset is in second column, the preset view jumps forward by 1 column.

Also im using I7 4790K CPU with 8 threads and 4 cores. Using 8 MC threads increase performance by 4%. Is it normal or too small increasment?

Hopefully it is a bug. lets say I have a category with lots of presets so there are several columns, if I say favourite an item in column4 or 5 or so, that is I needed to scroll to get there, once I favourite it, it jumps back to the first column... very unproductive.

Yep, it's an annoying bug, sorry for that. It's already on our radar, and on the list of things to fix for the next update.

[u-he-william]

Also im using I7 4790K CPU with 8 threads and 4 cores. Using 8 MC threads increase performance by 4%. Is it normal or too small increasment?

Did you try other numbers of threads?
Also, Mac or Win?

[Amram]

i saw before in one of the posts/threads that urs said that one of u-he team working on prophet 5 syx connvertor to repro5 .
when this convertor app release?

[Urs]

2013 Mac Pro 6 core vader helmet RePro-5 overall cpu seems a bit lower now (4 core default), but core 1 peaking more than others (Logic 10.2.3/Sierra).

Therein lies the improvement. The one core that does a little more work is the core Repro-5 would be rendering on if Multicore wasn't enabled. We give that one an extra voice to render, and some housekeeping on the voices that don't need rendering. This ensures (more or less) that all other cores have finished their job before this one is done.

With the previous implementation we noticed that the main core had often been sitting idle, waiting for other threads to finish. That is part of the overhead I was talking about that cripples overall performance when too many instances have too many threads to work with.

You'll see a little more CPU on you DAW's meter than before but overall CPU increases far less, and very large spikes (e.g. when a mouse click or a UI draw blocks a thread for a millisecond or two) should be history now.

I spoke too soon. William just tells me voices are still distributed evenly... gosh... I could ahve sworn, but nevermind, we tried a lot of things. Seems that some other dynamic allocation model beat the model I just described, and I have no idea where the one core processing more comes from

[Urs]

i saw before in one of the posts/threads that urs said that one of u-he team working on prophet 5 syx connvertor to repro5 .
when this convertor app release?

Might happen next week as well, not sure. I guess it'll be a separate download and maybe it needs some more work.

[hakey]

What kind of database update times were you guys seeing at base?
thanks

I get about 20 secs for ~1800 presets on a Win 10 SSD.

[tasmaniandevil]

Actually now I have gone thru all 900 presets and tagged my favourites on the PC it takes like 23-26 seconds.
Certainly a workflow killer, for me anyway.

That's certainly not expected. Even the seven seconds you mentioned before already sounded weird. I will send your database to Frank, maybe he can spot if there is a problem with it. I'll contact you via support mail soon, so we can figure this out.
I made a few tests last night, used a very old (non-SSD) external hard disk connected via USB2, and placed my Repro-1.data folder on it. I gave favourite or junk tags to all the 900+ factory presets. And even on this old external hard drive, a refresh of the database took just a little over one second.

[Elektronisch]

Also im using I7 4790K CPU with 8 threads and 4 cores. Using 8 MC threads increase performance by 4%. Is it normal or too small increasment?

Did you try other numbers of threads?
Also, Mac or Win?

I am using Windows 10 FL Studio 64 bit

Yes i tried and it seems that 8 Thread option gives the best result

[u-he-william]

Also im using I7 4790K CPU with 8 threads and 4 cores. Using 8 MC threads increase performance by 4%. Is it normal or too small increasment?

Did you try other numbers of threads?
Also, Mac or Win?

I am using Windows 10 FL Studio 64 bit

Yes i tried and it seems that 8 Thread option gives the best result

Can you check a different host? I'm not sure what FL studio displays as "CPU load". And what CPU load do you get with and without MC?

[zvenx]

Actually now I have gone thru all 900 presets and tagged my favourites on the PC it takes like 23-26 seconds.
Certainly a workflow killer, for me anyway.

That's certainly not expected. Even the seven seconds you mentioned before already sounded weird. I will send your database to Frank, maybe he can spot if there is a problem with it. I'll contact you via support mail soon, so we can figure this out.
I made a few tests last night, used a very old (non-SSD) external hard disk connected via USB2, and placed my Repro-1.data folder on it. I gave favourite or junk tags to all the 900+ factory presets. And even on this old external hard drive, a refresh of the database took just a little over one second.

Interesting.

Thanks. I sent you updated email.....First load of the day took 46 seconds.

yikes.

rsp

[zvenx]

What kind of database update times were you guys seeing at base?
thanks

I get about 20 secs for ~1800 presets on a Win 10 SSD.

Ahh..... so it isn't just me

or did you mean 2 seconds?
you have made 900 presets already?
damn
Thanks
rsp

[Elektronisch]

Also im using I7 4790K CPU with 8 threads and 4 cores. Using 8 MC threads increase performance by 4%. Is it normal or too small increasment?

Did you try other numbers of threads?
Also, Mac or Win?

I am using Windows 10 FL Studio 64 bit

Yes i tried and it seems that 8 Thread option gives the best result

Can you check a different host? I'm not sure what FL studio displays as "CPU load". And what CPU load do you get with and without MC?

When i turn off Multicore synth CPU use shoots from 21% straight to 54%. This is on FL Studio 12.5.1

Now on Studio One 3.5 (with latest patch) same Patch SD Echocrush on same midi with MC on use 25% and with MC Off shoots up to 53%. Changing thread count in Studio One doesnt do much. For example going from 4 to 8 threads only changes by 1% increasment in perfromance.

EDIT: Apearently newer patch for SO3.5 just came out recently and with it CPU use with MC on is 20% and MC off 52%. Changing thread number from 4 to 8 makes 3% percent increasment.

[u-he-william]

When i turn off Multicore synth CPU use shoots from 21% straight to 54%. This is on FL Studio 12.5.1

Now on Studio One 3.5 (with latest patch) same Patch SD Echocrush on same midi with MC on use 25% and with MC Off shoots up to 53%. Changing thread count in Studio One doesnt do much. For example going from 4 to 8 threads only changes by 1% increasment in perfromance.

EDIT: Apearently newer patch for SO3.5 just came out recently and with it CPU use with MC on is 20% and MC off 52%. Changing thread number from 4 to 8 makes 3% percent increasment.

"Using 8 MC threads increase performance by 4%. Is it normal or too small increasment?"
What did you mean with that then? I thought the difference between MC off and MC on is 4%.