Why do you dislike Arturia VSTs?

[fmr]

Although, if the cause were so simple as to be 'platform-specific', it boggles the mind as to how that could have possibly evaded Arturia's quality control testing, or how it could have been left to persist for so long. I mean, if the software performance was so contrasting from one another, just depending upon the platform being used, that would surely have set the alarms ringing even before product release, right?

It isn't platform specific. It may be something related to SOME specs in SOME machines. Do you really think Arturia and its beta testers would let something like this escape?

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Maybe you are using built-in graphics in your Windows machine?

No, not using built in graphics. Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB DDR6 graphics card.

So, no need for a Mac. BS. Windows is perfectly capable as well.

If you bothered to read the posts, you'd see I was asking for more people to test to try to confirm if it's a Mac/Win thing. We already ruled that out. That's why posting the results of various systems are helpful. So thanks for that! Even if you're being rude.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Although, if the cause were so simple as to be 'platform-specific', it boggles the mind as to how that could have possibly evaded Arturia's quality control testing, or how it could have been left to persist for so long. I mean, if the software performance was so contrasting from one another, just depending upon the platform being used, that would surely have set the alarms ringing even before product release, right?

It isn't platform specific. It may be something related to SOME specs in SOME machines. Do you really think Arturia and its beta testers would let something like this escape?

There's something going on. We don't know what yet. But it's real. The question is: what and how many systems are impacted? For all we know, some Windows testers experienced it and just didn't report it because they thought it was normal. Just because you don't experience it, doesn't mean no one does.

Does anyone with a Mac have slow load times? We've got 2 Windows users with fast load times (you and Vortifex) and 2 Windows users with SLOW load times. Only 1 set of Mac results (also me) but those were fast.

[Synthack]

.......

[zvenx]

The only Arturia Instrument plugin I have is Pigment. I can do it in a bit if you think that would help, but you did Jupiter which I don't have a license for (no please don't suggest I download the demo )

With regards to Pigment, though I don't use it much, I don't recall trying to use it and saying, my goodness why is this taking so long to load, and I do have other plugins I have had that experience with.

rsp

[Vortifex]

Edited

[Synthack]

.......

[vurt]

i don't have any
they managed to snare me with the free thing at xmas though.
and a key step.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Interestingly, Pigments still takes 27 seconds to load after a restart and has a vector-based GUI right? So while that's better than 36 seconds for Jup-8 V4, that's still really slow. So I don't think it's the graphic resources or VRAM causing the slowness. Because I'd think Pigments vector-based GUI would draw quickly. That also likely rules out 'maybe the HD is just slow loading all the bitmaps as a theory too.

Second instance of Pigments is 8 seconds. So same as the bitmap based GUI's.

Hopefully support reaches out to me in regards to the ticket I submitted and there's some kind of logging or additional troubleshooting that hones-in on the problem. Fast loading and plugin scanning times would solve about half of my complaints with Arturia plugins and make me much happier.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Could it be internet related due to the software centre phoning home? I have a decent fibre connection with my PC connected via ethernet.

I just ran a Speedtest and I'm getting 478mpbs down and 12mbps up with a 9ms ping time. 12mpbs up is pretty slow for transferring large files but should be plenty fast enough to quickly phone home. Unless it's sending a ton of data out. I doubt it's that.

[tactile_coast]

MY RESULTS

Here are mine:
Windows 10 x64, Reaper 6.46, AMD 3950x, ASROCK Creator X570 Mobo, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3600mhz, Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB DDR6 graphics card, 1TB MX500 SATA 6Gb/s SSD. Seems like a plenty fast modern system and efficient DAW right?

First Load of Jup-8 V4: 36 seconds!!!
Second Load of Jup-8 V4: 8 seconds (more reasonable)
Second Arturia plugin load (DX7V): 16 seconds

MY RESULTS

Here are mine:
Windows 10 x64, Bitwig 4.1.4 , I5 4690k, 8GB DDR3 RAM, Radeon RX 480 4GB graphics card, 1TB MX500 SATA 3Gb/s SSD.

First Load of Jup-8 V4: 5 seconds
Second Load of Jup-8 V4: 4 seconds
Second Arturia plugin load (DX7V): 6 seconds

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

MY RESULTS

Here are mine:
Windows 10 x64, Reaper 6.46, AMD 3950x, ASROCK Creator X570 Mobo, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3600mhz, Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB DDR6 graphics card, 1TB MX500 SATA 6Gb/s SSD. Seems like a plenty fast modern system and efficient DAW right?

First Load of Jup-8 V4: 36 seconds!!!
Second Load of Jup-8 V4: 8 seconds (more reasonable)
Second Arturia plugin load (DX7V): 16 seconds

MY RESULTS

Here are mine:
Windows 10 x64, Bitwig 4.1.4 , I5 4690k, 8GB DDR3 RAM, Radeon RX 480 4GB graphics card, 1TB MX500 SATA 3Gb/s SSD.

First Load of Jup-8 V4: 5 seconds
Second Load of Jup-8 V4: 4 seconds
Second Arturia plugin load (DX7V): 6 seconds

Thanks! Interestingly, we're both running Radeon's with 4GB of RAM. So I think that also lends some credence to my theory it's not the video card or VRAM.

Who doesn't love a mystery?

[Introspective]

Here are mine:
Windows 10 x64, Bitwig 4.1.4 , I5 4690k, 8GB DDR3 RAM, Radeon RX 480 4GB graphics card, 1TB MX500 SATA 3Gb/s SSD.

First Load of Jup-8 V4: 5 seconds
Second Load of Jup-8 V4: 4 seconds
Second Arturia plugin load (DX7V): 6 seconds

Holy smokes!

I WISH mine were that fast... and I've got better specs on my PC!

...How many Arturia plugins do you have installed, OOC? Is it maybe related to the number installed? I doubt it, just a thought. ...'cause that's a pretty radically different result.

[felis]

I think you guys may be on to something with the graphics.
I've got the crappy integrated graphics - Intel® UHD Graphics 620.

When I updated to Cubase to 11, both Elements and Pro, neither one would run or even load.
Spent quite a bit of time with Steinberg going over it,
and as soon as I removed videoengine.dll and videoenginepro.dll, both ran fine.

I did update the graphics, but I just checked in the Cubase 'components' folder and it appears that the videoengine.dll that I removed has been replaced with 'Video Codec-Apple-ProRes.dll',
and I'm on a pc - if that makes any sense to anyone.

[Introspective]

FWIW, I definitely have slow load times and I'm running a GeForce 3070.

I mean, that doesn't mean I don't have some weird DLL somewhere that's getting loaded and mis-used, but... if so, I wouldn't know how to check. I definitely keep all of my drivers up to date.