Tracktion demo songs slow @96khz (fix'd)+ Montana is a troll

[No1234]

What I would find really useful would be test results of tracktion vs other apps - at 96khz.
Then I'll be able to find out for certain whether or not it's tracktion's internal engine or the plugins that are at fault, in this case-
m@

[M'Snah]

...

[No1234]

I tried some of the songs at 96kHz, and the CPU load after loading the plugins is at 30-40% now, and both Tesseract and Gard du Nord are over 50% with some red flashes (80-90%)...

btw. this was the first time I ever did something at 96 kHz

--HansM

See:) Told you it wasn't just me! I'm normal dammit! Thanks for the input HansM

[Montana]

""Not to put down anybody who's trying to help here - thank you, by the way - But I know all of this stuff. ""


then why are you running everything on one drive?
Obviously you don't know too much.


""
If I say my system is fast, it is - and I would like to repeat that I haven't had any performance problems with any other apps... ""


I dont know anyone elsewho has problems with Tracktion so it's liklely your settings and your fault.


""
therefore any problems I'm having with tracktion are either tracktion-specific or something to do with the motu ""


more likely you.


""
- I'm gonna figure out what it is, in the meantime can we stop this thread from turning into a generic tweaking thread or worse a 'my os rocks, yours is bullshit' thread. BTW: ""


lol. Next time someone spends time teaching you how to setup your computer, act thankful for one second.

""USB does not make a difference unless you're running something intensive on the peripheral device (ie external harddrives). ""

B.S.

[M'Snah]

...

[djsubject]

Montana is having a bad day i think

[IIRs]

Montana is having a bad day i think

Didn't get his leg over last night, I reckon.

fwiw I tend to stick to 44.1KHz.. I need a faster cpu before I start going any higher.

[valley]

after all, 96k being slightly more than double 44k, surely the processor usage should be slightly higher than double? WRONG.

not quite:

when doubling the sample rate, did you also double the ASIO buffer size? If not, you are not comparing like for like.

When you double processor rate, you are doubling the rate that the ASIO buffer is emptied. This means that function calls to each VST (which are heavy on the CPU, and blow the CPU cache) will be happening twice as often. You can't optimise around this either.

[Kit]

I tend to find that if you are working with a sample rate different from the sample rate that the clips were recorded at, that has a big impact on the CPU. For instance if play back a 44.1k clip at 96k it uses much more CPU than playing back a 96k sample at 96k.

Presumably this is due to the resampling it's doing, which if you're interested is part of JUCE so you can see the code. It's a five point linear interpolation, which isn't especially optomised. If this is the same code that's doing the pitch shifting it probably explains why people are always complatining about that!

[audiobot202]

""Not to put down anybody who's trying to help here - thank you, by the way - But I know all of this stuff. ""


then why are you running everything on one drive?
Obviously you don't know too much.

""
therefore any problems I'm having with tracktion are either tracktion-specific or something to do with the motu ""
more likely you.


lol. What an ungrateful pice of crap. Next time someone spends time teaching you how to setup your computer, act thankful for one second.

That's just rude.

[Montana]

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't.

Perhaps you were rude as well, audio bot?

[audiobot202]

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't.

Perhaps you were rude as well, audio bot?

Ok. It stops right here. Lets get back on topic. If I was rude Montana...I'm sure you can quote me so I can then apologise.

Now...regarding the system specs, I see no reason why Tracktion should not work very smoothly on your system matt_bentley.
Have you yet discovered the problem?

[d2]

The answer to Matt's problem was hardly obvious or an RTFM, issue.

Treating someone like an idiot - when they ARE an idiot - is unkind, but it's at least consistant with reality.

Treating someone like Matt - who is clearly NOT an idiot - as though he were an idiot is beyond rude.

[djsubject]

yea wot d2 said



verry well put

[No1234]

then why are you running everything on one drive?
Obviously you don't know too much.
lol. Next time someone spends time teaching you how to setup your computer, act thankful for one second.

You're a moron - I said thank you several times. I know more than you about this, obviously, because setting up with data on one drive and host on the other only makes a smallish difference in loading times _if_ you have a large number of files - setting up your virtual mem on another drive _Only_ makes a difference if you end up using a lot of virtual mem - which I don't. And it sure as hell doesn't make a difference to pure cpu processing times (which is the issue I'll remind you), unless the drive is horribly defragmented and has to search for large data chunks. So F*ck off and take your opinions to another thread - perhaps a 'lets all bash matt' thread -
NOW thats rude.