Tracktion Software

JohnEh · Post by **JohnEh** » Sat Jan 22, 2005 11:17 pm

Hi all. I am new to Tracktion and was wondering what I should expect in terms of performance on my older machine. I have tried some of the tweaks suggested on this forum and have also reformatted my hard disk and made my machine into a dedicated DAW for music. Even so the performance I am getting is spotty. I am trying to figure out if my machine is a lost cause or salvageable.

I find loading "Tesseract" my CPU starts at about 40% moves quickly up to 50-70%and spikes just over 90%. I have set my latency values pretty high (almost too high) to get these results.

Thanks in advance.

Pentium 3-1.0 ghz
256 mb ram
Windows XP sp2
M-Audio Ozone USB Audio/MIDI Controller (External) connected to a Belkon USB2 PCI card
Tracktion 1.6

IIRs · Post by **IIRs** » Sat Jan 22, 2005 11:33 pm

You might salvage it by doubling (at least) your RAM.

Depends what you want to do really. I recently used a similar box (slightly slower but more RAM, running Win2K) to record some classical sessions: Tracktion worked flawlessly, but all it was doing was recording three tracks (1 mono, 1 stereo) at 24 bit, with no effects, and with a latency that you would almost certainly consider "too high"

I mixed it at home though: I don't think that machine would have been too happy running SIR..

Having said that, my main DAW is only a 1.4GHz Athlon, and I get by ok. I think the RAM is your main problem, especially if you're running XP.

Anyway, to answer what I suspect is your real question (

) Tracktion is no less cpu efficient than any comparable apps and, with its freeze and render functions, will probably allow you to do more useful work on your slow machine than any others..

Lunch Money · Post by **Lunch Money** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 12:03 am

Agreed. It's not super CPU-intensive (in ANY host, a project's CPU usage will depend more on the number and type of plug-ins) but it likes RAM.

Greg

leeturne · Post by **leeturne** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 12:40 am

I seem to remember seeing the question asked before but the performance on both PC systems I've used it on have been much better than my G4 powerbook. One PC is a dual P3800 with 1GB of RAM the other a P4 2.4 with 512k. I tend to track at home then when I'm on the move program drum tracks and assign sounds on the Mac. However I have to either freeze some of the VSTis' or render them to audio to obtain some sort of performance on the G4. It's probably down to the audio interface (onboard) but has anyone else noticed a performance difference between the two platforms?

Isjtar · Post by **Isjtar** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:53 pm

no altivec support, which means you're running a G3... that said, it runs fine on my 1.5 Ghz pb with 1 gig ram. most important issue being setting up send racks for reverb and bouncing reaktor to audio -it's a bitch as a plug-in anyway.
i wouldn't expect a performance increase with an external soundcard btw.

my pb is slightly slower than my former 1.8 Athlon with 1gig and that's kinda normal as it's a laptop and the G4 thing...

headquest · Post by **headquest** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:08 pm

JohnEh wrote:Hi all. I am new to Tracktion and was wondering what I should expect in terms of performance on my older machine. I have tried some of the tweaks suggested on this forum and have also reformatted my hard disk and made my machine into a dedicated DAW for music. Even so the performance I am getting is spotty. I am trying to figure out if my machine is a lost cause or salvageable.

I find loading "Tesseract" my CPU starts at about 40% moves quickly up to 50-70%and spikes just over 90%. I have set my latency values pretty high (almost too high) to get these results.

Thanks in advance.

Pentium 3-1.0 ghz
256 mb ram
Windows XP sp2
M-Audio Ozone USB Audio/MIDI Controller (External) connected to a Belkon USB2 PCI card
Tracktion 1.6

Its also worth bearing in mind that some of the demos have *a lot* going on in them, Tesseract" being one of them.

If you "freeze" some of the tracks that have several filters on them, you will free up a surprising amount of CPU and at least be able to check out what *is* capable.

jules · Post by **jules** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:03 pm

no altivec support, which means you're running a G3... that said, it runs fine on my 1.5 Ghz pb with 1 gig ram.

..eh? Where did you get the idea there was no altivec support? It's used altivec for mixing ever since the very first mac release..

rpc9943 · Post by **rpc9943** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:09 pm

ouch.... !

RonC

Isjtar · Post by **Isjtar** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 7:18 pm

jules wrote:
no altivec support, which means you're running a G3... that said, it runs fine on my 1.5 Ghz pb with 1 gig ram.
..eh? Where did you get the idea there was no altivec support? It's used altivec for mixing ever since the very first mac release..

hmm several other mac users told me...
full appologies then...

now make it faster dammit!

bk · Post by bk » Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:14 am

JohnEh wrote:I find loading "Tesseract" my CPU starts at about 40% moves quickly up to 50-70%and spikes just over 90%. I have set my latency values pretty high (almost too high) to get these results.

I seem to recall someone (I think it was valley) saying that one of the mda plugs used in the demos has serious internal denormal issues on a P4 that can't be corrected. Safest bet would be to start disabling the mda plugs one at a time until the cpu spikes cease.

If that doesn't solve it then you are up against the ceiling of your computer system (the demos are fairly intensive).

Edit: Sorry, I'm a dumbass... I just noticed you're on a P3, not a P4.
nothing to see here...move along.

JohnEh · Post by **JohnEh** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:13 pm

Thanks everyone for the advice. It looks like I'm going to have to decide if I want throw good money at an old computer and upgrade the memory, or just start saving my pennies for a new machine. I doubt any memory I can buy now will go in a newer computer.

Thanks again.

leeturne · Post by **leeturne** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:03 am

It's always worth saving the old computer for other uses. I use a dual P3 800 with 1GB Ram to run VST instruments. There are now a couple of options to do this through ethernet so you don't even need a separate sound card in the other PC. The advantage for me of a separate card in the VST machine is dedicated instrument outs to the desk.

r- · Post by r- » Thu Jan 27, 2005 5:15 am

In my experience on a slower machine (iBook G3 700MHz), increasing the RAM made a big difference. As it stands now, with 640 MB of memory, I can play pretty much anything I throw at Tracktion if I just freeze the plug-in-intensive tracks.

By the way, I've only really tried demos of other programs, but I can tell you that the freezing feature of Tracktion is the only way I could get decent work done on a machine such as mine.

It seems like as soon as you buy a new computer, you should start saving for the next one. Sigh.

Ryan
www.r-blog.com

metamorphosis · Post by **metamorphosis** » Fri Feb 04, 2005 10:58 pm

JohnEh wrote:Hi all. I am new to Tracktion and was wondering what I should expect in terms of performance on my older machine. I have tried some of the tweaks suggested on this forum and have also reformatted my hard disk and made my machine into a dedicated DAW for music. Even so the performance I am getting is spotty. I am trying to figure out if my machine is a lost cause or salvageable.

I find loading "Tesseract" my CPU starts at about 40% moves quickly up to 50-70%and spikes just over 90%. I have set my latency values pretty high (almost too high) to get these results.

Thanks in advance.

Pentium 3-1.0 ghz
256 mb ram
Windows XP sp2
M-Audio Ozone USB Audio/MIDI Controller (External) connected to a Belkon USB2 PCI card
Tracktion 1.6

There was a post on this a while back- you may get spikes if you're playing the demos @ 24-bit/96k. The internal engine has to upsample many of the waves - which, in tracktion, takes power. Try playing @ low bitdepths/freq

Tracktion Software

KVR Audio

Tracktion Performance Expectations