why does Ableton only using one thread core? CPU overloading.

[EnGee]

Sorry to hear that! What’s your plan then?

i think i just took apart a perfectly good computer.

having same issues on old computer.

I am not sure its ether jbridger which lets you use 32 bit programs in live 9. or its just live 9 itself.

seems to be less clippy in live 7 but still sounds bad.

idk anymore, about to quit making music

Live 9 has two installers. One is for 32bit plugins and one is for 64bit plugins. I would choose either 32bit plugs or 64bit plugs if I were you. Bridges complicate things.

In case that you don't quit making music, then maybe you want to choose Gigabyte or Asus motherboard. It depends on luck anyway, but for me I have always had a good experience with those two and they last for many years without a problem, so good luck with your future build if you decide to do it

[zoogoo]

Sorry to hear that! What’s your plan then?

i think i just took apart a perfectly good computer.

having same issues on old computer.

I am not sure its ether jbridger which lets you use 32 bit programs in live 9. or its just live 9 itself.

seems to be less clippy in live 7 but still sounds bad.

idk anymore, about to quit making music

Live 9 has two installers. One is for 32bit plugins and one is for 64bit plugins. I would choose either 32bit plugs or 64bit plugs if I were you. Bridges complicate things.

In case that you don't quit making music, then maybe you want to choose Gigabyte or Asus motherboard. It depends on luck anyway, but for me I have always had a good experience with those two and they last for many years without a problem, so good luck with your future build if you decide to do it

could you elaborate? what do you mean 2 installers? when i scan the vst folder, only 64 bit vsts are allowed.

i might consider getting a better sound card, mine is like 12 years old.

idk.

[EvilDragon]

Yeah, getting a better audio interface should be the ticket...

[whyterabbyt]

could you elaborate? what do you mean 2 installers? when i scan the vst folder, only 64 bit vsts are allowed.

There's a 64-bit version of Live 9 and a 32-bit version of Live 9, and you have to use the appropriate installer.

FWIW, with regard to what he's suggesting (using a different version of Live 9 for 32-bit or 64-bit plugins, rather than using jbridge) I use jbridge with a small handful of legacy 32-bit plugins and havent had any significant problems.

[EnGee]

could you elaborate? what do you mean 2 installers? when i scan the vst folder, only 64 bit vsts are allowed.

You do have a legit one, right?

In your account you can see which version you download

Live 9 license.jpg

[zoogoo]

Yeah, getting a better audio interface should be the ticket...

what do you suggest?
i was looking for a pci or pcie

[zoogoo]

could you elaborate? what do you mean 2 installers? when i scan the vst folder, only 64 bit vsts are allowed.

You do have a legit one, right?

In your account you can see which version you download

Live 9 license.jpg

the 32 bit one doesnt make a difference. when i start running a lot of real time audio proccess, it starts to mess up again. same problem.

[Jax Pok]

Live spreads its tracks across cores so 3 tracks will only use 3 cores. Buffer size determines how much time your CPU gets to do it's thing, reducing the sample rate makes it easier for your CPU. I have i9 12 core and it is a bit disappointing in Ableton Live 10 although it does allow me to run at twice the sample rate that I could on my first gen i7 quad core.

[zoogoo]

Live spreads its tracks across cores so 3 tracks will only use 3 cores. Buffer size determines how much time your CPU gets to do it's thing, reducing the sample rate makes it easier for your CPU. I have i9 12 core and it is a bit disappointing in Ableton Live 10 although it does allow me to run at twice the sample rate that I could on my first gen i7 quad core.

yes from everything i understand when it comes to DAW there isnt much advantage to a super system like that. Its freaking like 2018, we are in the future and they cant make this technology any better then it was 15 years ago? I thought LIVE 10 would be better designed to work with up to date systems, but really its just the same shit, different box.
DAW technology is falling behind, gaming is excelling.

im still using a lot of vsts from 2005

honestly i thought id be able to run 100's of automated plugins by now, tapping into uncharted processing territory. Im really frustrated with all this.

if i do simple stuff still dont get the pops and cutouts, same thing. gota mix stuff down to continue.

this issue has to be addressed. all these companies making software, no one can make something designed as a powerhouse?

ether that or i am the most misinformed dummy on the net. which is actually very possible considering my luck.

[zoogoo]

im not sure what i did in these two links,
but something fixed the problem. so far as i can tell.
gona test some more.

https://bandzoogle.com/blog/20-ways-to- ... production

https://www.pro-tools-expert.com/studio ... studio-one

also i disabled the on board sound driver in BIOS.

[whyterabbyt]

DAW technology is falling behind, gaming is excelling.

Well, yeah, because the game gets offloaded to a dedicated parallelised processor optimised for the task (GPU) that can cost 2 or 3 times what your CPU does..

[Guenon]

Its freaking like 2018, we are in the future and they cant make this technology any better then it was 15 years ago? I thought LIVE 10 would be better designed to work with up to date systems, but really its just the same shit, different box.

Independent of possible issues with the actual computer build or possible Live 10 bugs: even when everything is working super smooth and there are no issues with the system or DAW software per se, note that sequential audio processes can't be parallelized in the same way than, for example, rendering in-game graphics. This isn't about designing a better system, it's literally impossible to calculate the result of a process that needs the result of an earlier process as an input, in parallel with said earlier process.

Resource utilization between actually parallel signal chains can of course be optimized, but there's inherently so much sequential processing in the audio realm (processing the result of an earlier process working on the result of an earlier process , you get the idea), with relatively few actually parallel units when compared to graphics processing (think of different channels running in parallel in the overall project signal chain, how many of those there are, and what sort of processing each of those channels hold, compared with the way areas of the image composed of individual pixels can be parallelized) that it's not possible to distribute such loads comparable to game graphics without supernatural technology.

[EvilDragon]

Yeah, getting a better audio interface should be the ticket...

what do you suggest?
i was looking for a pci or pcie

Forget about that and get a USB audio interface, perhaps a Focusrite. I'm not into the lower price range audio interfaces so I dunno which ones that are affordable have the best ASIO drivers of the lot. Steinberg's UR series might also be good (I mean, they invented ASIO...)

[DJ Warmonger]

ll these companies making software, no one can make something designed as a powerhouse

They can't.

Unlike you I developed some parellel projects and unfortunatelly real-time auudio processing app hosting arbitrary combination of 3rd party plugins is the least likely to be optimized for multicore processors. Better learn how it works and optimize CPU usage yourself.

[zzz00m]

Hate to point this out, but your old CPU will be better at single thread performance than your new Ryzen. Although your new CPU can run more threads, a lot of audio performance requires a single threaded operation per track (FX chains, etc.).

Ryzen 5 1600 is running at 3.2GHz (3.6GHz Turbo).

i7-3770 Processor - Processor Base Frequency = 3.40 GHz / Max Turbo Frequency = 3.90 GHz.