KVR Audio

Passing Bye · Post by **Passing Bye** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:19 pm

kevvvvv wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:13 pm But still no proof to base your assumptions?
Just accusing him is all you're doing.
Is this fair?

What are you on about again, I made assumption about CPU usage, he started defending plugin like his job to do so, I never made this about him, he made that about him, asked him to back up his claims, he couldn't, but provided another proof that made my assumption actually truthful, thing is CPU hog, he could just say that, instead of all this, so much drama for nothing.

jens · Post by **jens** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:27 pm

Passing Bye wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:10 pm he provided no such an evidence, but the proof that thing is actually CPU hog, comparing it to another known CPU hog, all there is to this.

Not to mention that:

a) I would expect the CPU consumption to roughly double-up once he
actually engages the preamp

b) he had MJUC running in HQ mode

c) if you use MJUC on mono-sources such as (say) bass-guitar or vocals, you can switch it to mono
and it will use significantly less CPU cycles

kevvvvv · Post by **kevvvvv** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:33 pm

@jens
I agree with you.

I just googled AA reviews, and found they're:
- mostly all old (4-8 years old)
- all love the quality
- all remark on the cpu use.

But there is one Music Radar review of AA's preamp from 2 years ago

https://www.musicradar.com/reviews/acustica-audio-cream

The reviewer says (paraphrased) their full-on vintage channel strip on every mix channel will be heavy, but 1 preamp plug per channel should be okay.

The Noodlist · Post by **The Noodlist** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:49 pm

OK, hands up. I'm defending a resource heavy plug-in, I compared it against another CPU hog. Time to let it go.
I thought it was a reasonable CPU hit in S1
0.7% in Reaper.

pixel85 · Post by **pixel85** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:51 pm

I like AA plugins. Some have really awesome quality. But this one is meh. The preamp doesn't do anything to me, literally. I can't hear any difference that could defend the reasoning of turning it on. The EQ itself is ok but nothing that can't be done with almost every other EQ plugin (with next to 0 CPU consumption). It's one of the weakest AA plugins that I had opportunity to use.

Passing Bye · Post by **Passing Bye** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 2:21 pm

The Noodlist wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:49 pm OK, hands up. I'm defending a resource heavy plug-in, I compared it against another CPU hog. Time to let it go.
I thought it was a reasonable CPU hit.

Let's get this straight, It's totally other unrelated issue if that CPU hit is reasonable or not to you, nobody argued that, I made remark about CPU usage and you said "No much more than algorithmic plugins if any.", meaning not much more than another algorithmic Pultec emu and almost any algorithmic plugin in general, meaning it's average CPU consumer, if at all, like other average algorithmic stuff, than out of any of those you used one of most demanding algorithmic plugins on the market to prove yourself wrong. Don't know why you have the need to do all of this, but I don't appreciate this kind of BS, especially coming from someone who isn't even trying to sell anything.

The Noodlist · Post by **The Noodlist** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 2:29 pm

Yeah, it's free if you want it.

Passing Bye · Post by **Passing Bye** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 2:32 pm

Thanks for the info, appreciate it.

ramseysounds · Post by **ramseysounds** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:03 pm

So does anyone have any actual comments about the EQ itself or is it just a ridiculous conversation about CPU? It's free; let people download it and they can decide if it's too CPU heavy or not

Passing Bye · Post by **Passing Bye** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:04 pm

ramseysounds wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:03 pm So does anyone have any actual comments about the EQ itself or is it just a ridiculous conversation about CPU? It's free; let people download it and they can decide if it's too CPU heavy or not

Download it and see for yourself

jens · Post by **jens** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:07 pm

Yes that's too funny...

Pretty sure he was in no way aware of what he did...

an-electric-heart · Post by **an-electric-heart** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:20 pm

I opened Aquarius and started installing it... then canceled when I saw that it's 700mb, that's just too big one E.Q.

ramseysounds · Post by **ramseysounds** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:49 pm

Passing Bye wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:04 pm
ramseysounds wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:03 pm So does anyone have any actual comments about the EQ itself or is it just a ridiculous conversation about CPU? It's free; let people download it and they can decide if it's too CPU heavy or not
Download it and see for yourself

So you can't see that my question was in 2 parts? Of course I'll check it out myself; doesn't mean others won't have an opinion on the actual EQ

jens · Post by **jens** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 4:20 pm

So you can't see that your post nonetheless makes zero sense? People can check both the sound and the CPU consumption themselves and people can regardless of this still discuss both online. That's what these forums are for after all and there is no systematic difference between discussing either of these aspects here. Your post was simply nonsense. It may seem to make sense to you simply because you feel less confident in regards to making your own judgment concerning one of these two aspects than the other - but that's your personal issue then and certainly should not be a guidance for forum posting ethics...

VariKusBrainZ · Post by **VariKusBrainZ** » Wed Apr 01, 2020 4:21 pm

Compare it to Audified RZ062b Equalizer which is 18% on my system.

But most of the other 15 EQs I chose at random are using on average maximum 2% and are all low latency or zero latency except SlickEQ which is 4.1ms on my system.

Free Pultec-style, germanium-based EQ and preamp.