KVR Audio

Sascha Franck · Post by **Sascha Franck** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 11:25 pm

A3ntar wrote: dogod, don't you think that this is a bit unfair towards IKMM?

No idea what dogod may think. But the Wikipedia description is spot on nonetheless.

A3ntar · Post by **A3ntar** » Mon Feb 27, 2006 11:57 pm

1991lespaul · Post by **1991lespaul** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:35 am

I wonder if AT2 will be as taxing on the CPU as GR2?

A3ntar · Post by **A3ntar** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:27 am

GR2 is not that taxing is you are in 44 and not using HQ. Most setups I made barely consume 8~10% CPU on a 3.6Ghz P4

Lunch Money · Post by **Lunch Money** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:54 am

10% on a 3.6 GHz isn't taxing?

And that's WITH limitations on yourself including switching off HQ?

Wow, we're very different in our perspectives.

dogod · Post by **dogod** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:15 am

A3ntar wrote:
dogod wrote:http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Amplitube2
dogod, don't you think that this is a bit unfair towards IKMM?

Hey, don't shoot the messenger

hehe

Original quote is from LarsErik, thx Lars for the laugh

I merely chucked it up on that wiki thingy to "add" to the joke and mess with Squidsy's head

heheheh.... MORE METAL SQUIDSY... Stick my Rifftest dry http://www.filegone.com/7hyb thru AT2 PLZ so we can compare

Thx

ps. Guesses for http://www.filegone.com/ch7q so far have been WRONG-O

Keep trying

daGuru (R.I.P)

Sascha Franck · Post by **Sascha Franck** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:31 pm

A3ntar wrote:GR2 is not that taxing is you are in 44 and not using HQ. Most setups I made barely consume 8~10% CPU on a 3.6Ghz P4

On my 1.86 Pentium M it's consuming quite a lot more.
But then, when working with it, I'm using Rig Kontrol at 2ms, which apparently adds quite a bit of CPU useage (no HQ mode though).
Also, it seems as if my patches are rather complexed.
Still, according to GR2s internal CPU meter, it's allready using up 5% with not a single module but the default ones loaded, XPs internal meter is even showing a tad more.

So, it's defenitely not efficient. Some patches are easily using up 30% (GR internal meter), not even in HQ mode (which I can't use at 2ms with Rig Kontrol, due to crackles appearing).
Things are getting quite a lot better when using my Indigo I/O, but CPU useage is still quite high.

I'm really wondering how much better AT2 will be - if it will be better at all.
Could be quite a factor when it comes to chosing the right tool, especially when working on rather fullblown guitar arrangements - something that seems to be impossible with GR2 without inbetween bounces.

As said before, I'm not planning to use these things as recording tools mainly, I'll rather use them live. But, they're promoted as recording tools, perfectly integrating into your DAW.
Hm... seems as if that perfect integration is only partially there, with a CPU consumption that high.

Sascha Franck · Post by **Sascha Franck** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:34 pm

dogod, no offense meant, seriously... but with that "rifftest" of yours, the first thing I'd do as a producer wouldn't be running it through whatever other amp, but rather asking the artist to play it again.
There's no amp sim in the world that would help with sloppy playing. And, as we all know, great amp sounds start in the hands of great players.

SJ_Digriz · Post by **SJ_Digriz** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:14 pm

dogod wrote:I merely chucked it up on that wiki thingy to "add" to the joke and mess with Squidsy's head heheheh.... MORE METAL SQUIDSY... Stick my Rifftest dry http://www.filegone.com/7hyb thru AT2 PLZ so we can compare Thx
(R.I.P)

Sounds like someone trying to play along to a Captain Beefheart song.

dogod · Post by **dogod** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:30 pm

Is that your guess?

... Next

SJ_Digriz · Post by **SJ_Digriz** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:43 pm

dogod wrote:Is that your guess? ... Next

guess of what?

dogod · Post by **dogod** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:54 pm

ps. Amp/ampsim/models guesses for http://www.filegone.com/ch7q so far have been WRONG-O

Keep trying

seamoss · Post by **seamoss** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:57 pm

has amplitube 2.0 been released yet?

SJ_Digriz · Post by **SJ_Digriz** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 2:08 pm

dogod wrote:ps. Amp/ampsim/models guesses for http://www.filegone.com/ch7q so far have been WRONG-O Keep trying

why would I want to guess about some terrible random plunking?

dogod · Post by **dogod** » Tue Feb 28, 2006 2:19 pm

Like I said.... NEXT

Amplitube 2 Jimi Hendrix RELEASED this month!!!