Multisampla

[Trancit]

Hi there,

I noticed, that multisampla is quite CPU hungry compared to VSTi's like for example Rapture...

I built up a Padsound with only three samples on C2, C3 and C4...played around with it: 10-12% CPU on Q6600 @2,4 GHz

Built up the same with Rapture: 5% CPU
Did the same with Wusikstation: 5% CPU

More than double CPU hit for playing some samples???

Other issue I noticed: longer Attack settings( I guess it's a linear shape) aren't often very usefull...doesn't sound right( I think it's the same with all Mulab instruments)...I personally like better, if with longer Attack settings, the sound comes in first faster than linear and then later (I don't know, if this is positive or negative exponential...(if you look at an egg: Attack like the left side of the egg ))

Release should be the opposite...

FR: Could you think about different shape settings for envelopes

One last: Did you plan a format for saving multisamples??? It's quite a lot of work to configure each sample over and over again because of no import function...sfz would be quite universal

Trancit

[MuTools]

I noticed, that multisampla is quite CPU hungry compared to VSTi's like for example Rapture...

I built up a Padsound with only three samples on C2, C3 and C4...played around with it: 10-12% CPU on Q6600 @2,4 GHz

Built up the same with Rapture: 5% CPU
Did the same with Wusikstation: 5% CPU

More than double CPU hit for playing some samples???

I tried downloading the Rapture demo but there seems to be a problem on the cakewalk site. So can't try Rapture

Then plugged in SFZ and the Wusik demo. I compared playing 24 samples simultaneously using SFZ, Wusik Demo, MultiSampla and a simple MuSynth patch with a Multisample player + ADSR + Amplifier i.e. the most simple form to play a multisample.

Wusik (simple): 9%
SFZ Q=draft (simple): 8%
SFZ Q=8 (simple): 13%
MuSynth Q=linear (simple): 12%
MuSynth Q=spline (simple): 14%
MultiSampla Q=spline (rich): 20%

(when doing tests make sure polyphony is not limited somewhere so all voices are effectively playing <-> wusik and sfz have editable polyphony limiters)

Now note that the comparison between Wusik (9%) and MultiSampla (20%) is unfair because MultiSampla has an active submodules e.g. filter + LFO +...
If you start enabling these modules in Wusik, you'll see the percentage rise.

So to be fair we have to compare the simple multisample MuSynth patch to Wusik.

Besides this important note i won't deny Wusik seems pretty optimized.
I'm not suprised about that as i'm aware there still is room to optimize the MUTOOLS modular system. That's one of the challenges for a next big update.

I also read that Wusik has multi-core support so that may explain the difference to MuSynth. Not sure about SFZ though. (test done on a dual core machine)

Please note that if you only need to play a multisample and don't need an LFO, filter etc on it, then you can spare CPU by playing the multisample via a simple MuSynth patch. Hope i explain well else let me know.

Other issue I noticed: longer Attack settings( I guess it's a linear shape) aren't often very usefull...doesn't sound right( I think it's the same with all Mulab instruments)...I personally like better, if with longer Attack settings, the sound comes in first faster than linear and then later (I don't know, if this is positive or negative exponential...(if you look at an egg: Attack like the left side of the egg ))
Release should be the opposite...

I know what you mean. It's on the wishlist!

One last: Did you plan a format for saving multisamples??? It's quite a lot of work to configure each sample over and over again because of no import function...sfz would be quite universal

Put the multisample in a (simple) MuSynth patch and save that.

Then you can load it in whatever session and if you only need the multisample setup itself it will be available too

[Trancit]

Wusik (simple): 9%
SFZ Q=draft (simple): 8%
SFZ Q=8 (simple): 13%
MuSynth Q=linear (simple): 12%
MuSynth Q=spline (simple): 14%
MultiSampla Q=spline (rich): 20%

What is Q=linear/spline(simple)/spline(rich)????

(when doing tests make sure polyphony is not limited somewhere so all voices are effectively playing <-> wusik and sfz have editable polyphony limiters)

But limiting polyphony would very usefull for your instruments as well

Now note that the comparison between Wusik (9%) and MultiSampla (20%) is unfair because MultiSampla has an active submodules e.g. filter + LFO +...
If you start enabling these modules in Wusik, you'll see the percentage rise.

So to be fair we have to compare the simple multisample MuSynth patch to Wusik.

Yes, you are right...did a test now with a single multisample OSC in MuSynth and CPU hit was much lower...

Besides this important note i won't deny Wusik seems pretty optimized.
I'm not suprised about that as i'm aware there still is room to optimize the MUTOOLS modular system. That's one of the challenges for a next big update.

I also read that Wusik has multi-core support so that may explain the big difference to SFZ and MuSynth. (test done on a dual core machine)

You know I am a big fan of multi-core support for MuLab...so optimizations here are very wellcome

Other issue I noticed: longer Attack settings( I guess it's a linear shape) aren't often very usefull...doesn't sound right( I think it's the same with all Mulab instruments)...I personally like better, if with longer Attack settings, the sound comes in first faster than linear and then later (I don't know, if this is positive or negative exponential...(if you look at an egg: Attack like the left side of the egg ))
Release should be the opposite...

I know what you mean. It's on the wishlist!

Thx

One last: Did you plan a format for saving multisamples??? It's quite a lot of work to configure each sample over and over again because of no import function...sfz would be quite universal

Put the multisample in a (simple) MuSynth patch and save that.

Then you can load it in whatever session and if you only need the multisample setup itself it will be available too

Ok, that's a workaround, but anyway would be a simple import feature e.g. sfz for only the note mapping very usefull and a big timesaver...

Trancit

[MuTools]

Wusik (simple): 9%
SFZ Q=draft (simple): 8%
SFZ Q=8 (simple): 13%
MuSynth Q=linear (simple): 12%
MuSynth Q=spline (simple): 14%
MultiSampla Q=spline (rich): 20%

What is Q=linear/spline(simple)/spline(rich)????

Sorry for the cryptic report.

With Q i meant the resampling quality.

With simple/rich i meant that Wusik, SFZ and simple multisampler MuSynth are all 'simple' i.e. without filter, lfo etc. MultiSampla is 'rich' because it has an active filter/lfo etc.

Maybe in the future the MUTOOLS devices will get a more detailed GUI and then we can add specific switch buttons to enable/disable the submodules for CPU weight optimization.

One last: Did you plan a format for saving multisamples??? It's quite a lot of work to configure each sample over and over again because of no import function...sfz would be quite universal

Put the multisample in a (simple) MuSynth patch and save that.

Then you can load it in whatever session and if you only need the multisample setup itself it will be available too

Ok, that's a workaround, but anyway would be a simple import feature e.g. sfz for only the note mapping very usefull and a big timesaver...

I don't think it shouldbe qualified as a workaround, i think it's a good way of doing things because if you save a multisample as a patch, then it can also immediately be previewed etc.

ATOH, i do understand your FR about SFZ import/export. That's on the wishlist.

[Trancit]

Sorry for the cryptic report.

No problem...as far as you can explain it

Maybe in the future the MUTOOLS devices will get a more detailed GUI and then we can add specific switch buttons to enable/disable the submodules for CPU weight optimization.

What would be fine too, the ability to use the GUI of included components e.g. the mixer strip for designing the frontpanel to have not only those "boring" knobs ...in german, we a saying: "Das Auge isst mit!", which you can translate: "It tastes as good as it looks!"
For me, it would be as well easier for the eyes...

I don't think it shouldbe qualified as a workaround, i think it's a good way of doing things because if you save a multisample as a patch, then it can also immediately be previewed etc.

ATOH, i do understand your FR about SFZ import/export. That's on the wishlist.

I don't meant it in negative sense...I meant, anyway you have to import the multi files manually, which can be very timeconsuming with larger sets...
Imagine building up a GM drumset with 3-4 velocity layers per note...would take a whole days work I guess...

But you already said, it's on the wishlist and for me (what else) multicore support is still number one

But thx anyway for explaining...MuLab has the potential to replace energyXT 2 (at least the standalone) completely and more as I see how responsive you are and XT2 seems to be dead...
I wish for you, that many XT2 users will become acquainted with MuLab as a growing and living project...your project and your support are worthy of being more recognized. Thx again.

Trancit

[pquenin]

Hello, I have played around with Mulab 6 and the Mux, and I am surprised that the multi-samples are the only type of objects that you can't save/load, and find with the Browser at a location outside the current project.
It seems that you have to save a Multisampla preset, and load it in the project to see it but it's not very handy.
If you have a MuSynth opened and want to throw some multi-samples in it, you can't do it from the browser, you have first to find presets that have multi-samples (but it's not easy because you can't see by a preset's name if it's a MultiSampla preset), load the MultiSampla, drag and drop the multi-samples in the MuSynth, and then unload the MultiSampla.
Maybe you can preview the multi-samples by loading a MultiSampla under the hood...
And what about SFZ support ? Still not there in Mulab 6....

[MuTools]

I understand your point. Taken note on the wishlist.