WTF Arturia?! 13.9GB and 670k files!!!?

VST, AU, AAX, etc. plug-in Virtual Instruments discussion
User avatar
KVRAF
10316 posts since 4 Jan, 2017 from Warsaw, Poland

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:29 pm

I was cleaning up space on the SDD & HDD of my laptop and - to my surprise - I noticed that Arturia's C:/ProgramData/Arturia folder is a whopping 13.9GB and almost 670 thousands files :o

This includes:
  • V6 Collection
  • FX Collection 2
  • Pigments3

Randomly I checked Modular V3 and it takes 600MB, out of which 530MB or 88% are ...bitmaps for various GUI sizes :dog:

I love their stuff, but this is just beyond stupid :(


Any other devs that show such disregard to our SDD/HDDs?
Music tech enthusiast
DAW, VST & hardware hoarder
My "music": https://soundcloud.com/antic604

KVRAF
8874 posts since 16 Aug, 2006

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:42 pm

antic604 wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:29 pm
I was cleaning up space on the SDD & HDD of my laptop and - to my surprise - I noticed that Arturia's C:/ProgramData/Arturia folder is a whopping 13.9GB and almost 670 thousands files :o

This includes:
  • V6 Collection
  • FX Collection 2
  • Pigments3

Randomly I checked Modular V3 and it takes 600MB, out of which 530MB or 88% are ...bitmaps for various GUI sizes :dog:

I love their stuff, but this is just beyond stupid :(


Any other devs that show such disregard to our SDD/HDDs?
Aturia is the absolute worst in the industry when it comes to how they handle their GUI's IMO and should be regularly called out for their inefficient graphic resource usage.

Instead of providing 200% size image resources and scaling down for smaller GUI's like U-he, they provide unique bitmaps for 60, 80, 100, 140, and 200% sizes. And to make matter worse, because of their 3D perspective nonsense, you'll have things like each individual key on their virtual keyboard having unique images. So, for example, Prophet V3 has 62 sets of unique key images, with 8 .bmp files inside each one, multiplied by the 5 images sizes I pointed out earlier. So that's 2,480 unique image files dedicated to a virtual keyboard. That's insane! And they'll do similar nonsense for knobs.

It's just wasteful, bad design IMO. My Arturia folder is 19.3GB. The vast majority of which are these graphics.
Last edited by Funkybot's Evil Twin on Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
KVRAF
3427 posts since 22 Aug, 2019

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:44 pm

Reminds me of a video experience I had yesterday: I wanted to watch a 4.5 minute video on the Global Times site, but it would not play right. I thought, maybe they have slow servers, so I tried to download it and the download manager said it was 336 MB :o I aborted the download right away...

User avatar
KVRAF
3427 posts since 22 Aug, 2019

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:47 pm

Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:42 pm
antic604 wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:29 pm
I was cleaning up space on the SDD & HDD of my laptop and - to my surprise - I noticed that Arturia's C:/ProgramData/Arturia folder is a whopping 13.9GB and almost 670 thousands files :o

This includes:
  • V6 Collection
  • FX Collection 2
  • Pigments3

Randomly I checked Modular V3 and it takes 600MB, out of which 530MB or 88% are ...bitmaps for various GUI sizes :dog:

I love their stuff, but this is just beyond stupid :(


Any other devs that show such disregard to our SDD/HDDs?
Aturia is the absolute worst in the industry when it comes to how they handle their GUI's IMO and should be regularly called out for their inefficient graphic resource usage.

Instead of providing 200% size image resources and scaling down for smaller GUI's like U-he, they provide unique bitmaps for 60, 80, 100, 140, and 200% sizes. And to make matter worse, because of their 3D perspective nonsense, you'll have things like each individual key on their virtual keyboard having unique images. So, for example, Prophet V3 has 62 sets of unique key images, with 8 .bpm files inside each one, multiplied by the 5 images sizes I pointed out earlier. So that's 2,480 unique image files dedicated to a virtual keyboard. That's insane! And they'll do similar nonsense for knobs.

It's just wasteful, bad design IMO. My Arturia folder is 19.3GB. The vast majority of which are these graphics.
Wow, that sounds crazy :)

User avatar
KVRAF

Topic Starter

10316 posts since 4 Jan, 2017 from Warsaw, Poland

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:52 pm

Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:42 pm
Instead of providing 200% size image resources and scaling down for smaller GUI's like U-he, they provide unique bitmaps for 60, 80, 100, 140, and 200% sizes. And to make matter worse, because of their 3D perspective nonsense, you'll have things like each individual key on their virtual keyboard having unique images. So, for example, Prophet V3 has 62 sets of unique key images, with 8 .bmp files inside each one, multiplied by the 5 images sizes I pointed out earlier. So that's 2,480 unique image files dedicated to a virtual keyboard. That's insane! And they'll do similar nonsense for knobs.
Damn. I'm now trying to move those files from my primary SSD to secondary HDD (internal) and it's taking ages. I think I'll have to leave the computer running for the night :dog:
Music tech enthusiast
DAW, VST & hardware hoarder
My "music": https://soundcloud.com/antic604

User avatar
KVRAF
2475 posts since 31 Jan, 2003 from Ghent, Belgium

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:56 pm

Wasteful? Inefficient? Sure! But is it a problem?
It has never bothered me on my 2012 laptop with 256GB SSD - Matrix 12 CPU usage on the other hand.

KVRAF
29551 posts since 11 Apr, 2010 from Germany

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 2:14 pm

I hate it when you install stuff on your D: drive, and then realize that it's actually installing the ressource files, which really take the space, on the C: drive...

I already bought a 256 GB SSD, because my former 128 SSD provided too little space, and now I only have 60 gigs left on the 256 GB SSD. I get it, configuration files should be in AppData/Roaming, User/Documents, or similar, but, I'd really appreciate if developers installed the big stuff in the place I set to install the stuff.

Fortunately, it's not that much for me, from Arturia, "only" 1.85 GB. Still...
Plugins and a DAW. On an operating system. Which runs on a computer.

User avatar
KVRAF
2475 posts since 31 Jan, 2003 from Ghent, Belgium

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 2:23 pm

You can "move" the ProgramData (or any other folder) to a different drive:
https://www.howtogeek.com/howto/16226/c ... -or-linux/

I use DirLinker for this (pretty easy program, once you understand the concept):
https://www.softpedia.com/get/System/Fi ... nker.shtml

Many new laptops these days aren't very expandable - so pick one with enough SSD storage space (if you don't want to use an external drive for software).

User avatar
KVRAF

Topic Starter

10316 posts since 4 Jan, 2017 from Warsaw, Poland

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 2:37 pm

T-CM11 wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:56 pm
Wasteful? Inefficient? Sure! But is it a problem?
It has never bothered me on my 2012 laptop with 256GB SSD - Matrix 12 CPU usage on the other hand.
Yes,wasteful and inefficient - that's the problem.

I started using computers seriously in early 90s and computers at the time could run a full music software, office suite or full game out of RAM footprint that nowadays wouldn't fit an application icon. Nowadays devs don't optimise anymore (not all, but many) because the user can always throw more & newer hardware at the "problem" :(
Music tech enthusiast
DAW, VST & hardware hoarder
My "music": https://soundcloud.com/antic604

User avatar
KVRAF

Topic Starter

10316 posts since 4 Jan, 2017 from Warsaw, Poland

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 2:37 pm

T-CM11 wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 2:23 pm
You can "move" the ProgramData (or any other folder) to a different drive
I know. That's what I'm doing.
Music tech enthusiast
DAW, VST & hardware hoarder
My "music": https://soundcloud.com/antic604

User avatar
KVRAF
2475 posts since 31 Jan, 2003 from Ghent, Belgium

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 2:57 pm

antic604 wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 2:37 pm
I started using computers seriously in early 90s and computers at the time could run a full music software, office suite or full game out of RAM footprint that nowadays wouldn't fit an application icon. Nowadays devs don't optimise anymore (not all, but many) because the user can always throw more & newer hardware at the "problem" :(
Nowadays? Where you asleep the last 20+ years? :hihi:
You say "problem"; but is it a problem? For you? Do you have a really small non-replaceable SSD? And what about that big amount of files? How is that problematic, from a usability POV? We're making music, right, not counting files.

edit: I just saw "VST hoarder" in your signature... ehm... I think I have nothing left to say :D

User avatar
KVRAF
11281 posts since 26 Jun, 2006 from San Francisco Bay Area

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 3:14 pm

Last time I said this I got attacked as a UI nazzi, but the truth is, it’s never a good idea to use resources unnecessarily, even if modern computers have a lot of memory. How does having a different key or knob graphic per identical UI element help the user? Not really at all. No one looks at their screen and says, “oh, is that really a Jupiter 8? Let me reach out and touch it… ow!” :lol: Not that I’m against skeuomorphic designs. Not by a long shot. I think in various situations using depth and a universal visual language (we all know how to use buttons, sliders and knobs… they’re literally on baby toys) is a great way to communicate functionality to the user in an intuitive way, but when you go so far it creates a ton of image resources that clutter your hard drive, consume RAM and crate long load times. Maybe I’m an old fart, but when I started doing computer UIs, memory was expensive and download times slow, so we learned to use every part of the buffalo. It’s still a good way to live. As my friend Don used to say, “touch the world lightly.”
Zerocrossing Media

4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~

User avatar
KVRian
598 posts since 11 Mar, 2010

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 3:34 pm

T-CM11 wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 2:57 pm
antic604 wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 2:37 pm
I started using computers seriously in early 90s and computers at the time could run a full music software, office suite or full game out of RAM footprint that nowadays wouldn't fit an application icon. Nowadays devs don't optimise anymore (not all, but many) because the user can always throw more & newer hardware at the "problem" :(
Nowadays? Where you asleep the last 20+ years? :hihi:
You say "problem"; but is it a problem? For you? Do you have a really small non-replaceable SSD? And what about that big amount of files? How is that problematic, from a usability POV? We're making music, right, not counting files.

edit: I just saw "VST hoarder" in your signature... ehm... I think I have nothing left to say :D
Sorry, but why do you have to be that rude with someone who is just giving his opinion?

User avatar
KVRAF
2475 posts since 31 Jan, 2003 from Ghent, Belgium

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 3:37 pm

zerocrossing wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 3:14 pm
Last time I said this I got attacked as a UI nazzi, but the truth is, it’s never a good idea to use resources unnecessarily, even if modern computers have a lot of memory. How does having a different key or knob graphic per identical UI element help the user? Not really at all. No one looks at their screen and says, “oh, is that really a Jupiter 8? Let me reach out and touch it… ow!” :lol: Not that I’m against skeuomorphic designs. Not by a long shot. I think in various situations using depth and a universal visual language (we all know how to use buttons, sliders and knobs… they’re literally on baby toys) is a great way to communicate functionality to the user in an intuitive way, but when you go so far it creates a ton of image resources that clutter your hard drive, consume RAM and crate long load times. Maybe I’m an old fart, but when I started doing computer UIs, memory was expensive and download times slow, so we learned to use every part of the buffalo. It’s still a good way to live. As my friend Don used to say, “touch the world lightly.”
I was just watching some Oberheim Xpander videos... that thing is huge! The (cost of the) physical space that synths took up in the 70s/80s/90s vs. a few gigabytes of SSD... well: perspective / first world problems /etc. ;-)
When I think about "the good old days", the word "unobtainium" comes to mind. :(

User avatar
KVRAF
2475 posts since 31 Jan, 2003 from Ghent, Belgium

Post Sat Jul 31, 2021 3:39 pm

Sinisterbr wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 3:34 pm
Sorry, but why do you have to be that rude with someone who is just giving his opinion?
I'm sorry if you interpreted anything I wrote as rude. It certainly wasn't intended as such.

Return to “Instruments”